This Time Around, Will Biden Get What The Arab World Is Saying? (Daled Amos)

By Daled Amos

Following the news of Israel's peace agreement with the UAE and Bahrain, we had a laugh at John Kerry's expense when we watched the 2016 video of Kerry assuring his audience that peace between Israel and the Arab world without first resolving the Palestinian question just wasn't possible.

And Kerry knew this because he had, even a week earlier, spoken to "leaders of the Arab community."

It would be interesting to know just what Kerry said to those Arab leaders -- and what exactly they said to him in response.

Did he misinterpret what they said to him?

Did those leaders intentionally mislead Kerry?

It certainly wouldn't be the first incident of an apparent 'miscommunication" between Arab leaders and a member of the US government.

In a recent post, Judean Rose asks: Joe Biden’s First Meeting with Golda Meir: Did it Lead to the Yom Kippur War? The basis for the question is a Twitter thread by Nadav Eyal, Chief International Correspondent for Reshet News.

Once again, Arab officials apparently misled a US politician as to what they were thinking about Israel.

Joe Biden (YouTube screencap)

But apparently, this is not limited to US politicians.

As a matter of fact, Arab leaders have been known to mislead other Arab leaders as well.

In his book The Arab Mind, Raphael Patai tells a story from the eve of the 1948 Israeli War of Independence:

Musa Alami, the well-known Palestinian Arab leader, made a tour of the Arab capitals to sound out the leaders with whom he was well acquainted. In Damascus, the President of Syria told him:

I am happy to tell you that our Army and its equipment are of the highest order and well able to deal with a few Jews; and I can tell you in confidence that we even have an atomic bomb...Yes, it was made locally; we fortunately found a very clever fellow, a tinsmith...(p. 53-54) [emphasis added]

Patai gives another example, this one from the Six Day War, when on the first day (June 5, 1967) the commander of the Egyptian forces in Cairo sent a message to the Jordanian front:

that the Israeli air offensive was continuing. But at the same time, he insisted that the Egyptians had put 75 per cent of the Israeli air force out of action. The same message said that U.A.R. bombers had destroyed the Israeli bases in a counter-attack, and that the ground forces of the Egyptian army had penetrated into Israel by way of the Negev! (p. 109)

If Egypt had been honest with Jordan from day 1, Hussein might not have entered the war, and Jordan would have retained control of Judea and Samaria -- and the Kotel.

But behind these examples of miscommunication, there are issues of Arab culture. 

For example, the story about the tinsmith is pure exaggeration, what Patai refers to as the "spell of (Arabic) language," namely the "prediliction for exaggeration and overemphasis  [which] is anchored in the Arabic language itself" (p. 55)

As for Egypt's deception of Jordan, Patai describes it as wajh, or an attempt to avoid loss of face. In fact, Patai blames King Hussein's years in England for his failure to see this for what it was:

Had Hussein not lost, during his formative years spent in England, the ear for catching the meaning behind the words which is an indispensable prerequisite of true communication among Arabs, he would have understood that a real victory over Israel would have been announced by Amer and Nasser in a long tirade of repetitious and emphatic assertions, and that the brief and for Arabs, totally unusual factual form of the statement betrayed it for what it actually was: a face-saving device, a reference not to a real, but to an entirely imaginary victory. [emphasis in original] (p. 112-3)

But what about Biden and Kerry?

Again, without knowing what each side actually said, it is impossible to know what went on.

But their misunderstanding of their Arab hosts might be due to the Arab concept of shame.

Patai distinguishes between shame, which is "a matter between a person and his society," and guilt which is "a matter between a person and his conscience" -- or as he puts it: "A hermit in a desert can feel guilt; he cannot feel shame."

One of the important differences between the Arab and the Western personality is that in the Arab culture, shame is more pronounced than guilt...What pressures the Arab to behave in an honorable manner is not guilt but shame, or, more precisely, the psychological drive to escape or prevent negative judgement by others. [p. 113]

We tend to associate the Arab concept of shame/honor with of 'honor killings,' but there are implications on a national level too.

In his preface to the 1976 edition of his book, Patai writes that although Egypt lost the Yom Kippur War, the fact that they caught Israel by surprise and were able to initially gain the upper hand, allowed the Egyptians to perceive the war as a victory, and cleared the way for peace negotiations:

A manifestation of this new Arab self-confidence is the willingness to enter into disengagement agreements with Israel. It is, in this connection, characteristic that it is precisely Egypt, the country that won what it considers a victory over Israel, which has embarked on the road of negotiation with her....It is quite clear that the feeling of having demonstrated strengh is for an Arab state a psychological prerequisite of discussing adjustments and reaching understanding with an enemy. [emphasis added] (xxiii - xxv)

How would shame/honor manifest itself in discussions between Arabs and Westerners?

In his 1989 book, The Closed Circle: An Interpretation of the Arabs, David Pryce-Jones writes about

Kenneth Pendar, an American intelligence officer whose task it was to persuade Moroccans to side with the Allies during the last war, expressed the difficulties of conducting a negotiation in which he expected a yes or a no from people unable to commit themselves to either, because they could not tell who would win the war and acquire honor or who would lose and be shamed. [emphasis added] (p. 45)

 Pryce-Jones goes on to quote Henry Kissinger, who complained of the difficulty of negotiating with the Saudis because of their style that was "at once oblique and persistent, reticent and assertive" based on the allocation of honor or shame.

Based on this, one can imagine that Kerry and Biden could each have easily misinterpreted what they heard in accordance with what they wanted to pass on to their respective audiences.

Interestingly, when Patai writes about the confidence the Yom Kippur Was instilled into the Arab world in 1973, he contrasts Egypt -- which considers the Yom Kippur War a victory -- with other Arab countries that either cannot make such a claim or have never fought Israel, and are therefore opposed to negotiation.

That would seem to rule out Jordan and Sudan, on the one hand, and the UAE and Bahrain on the other.

But King Hussein making peace with Israel is not surprising, considering his tenuous control over his country, the majority of whom are Palestinian Arabs. There was leverage the US could apply, even if the peace treaty itself could cause trouble for Hussein at home.

Considering the leverage that the US applied to Sudan, that country also had a lot to gain. But both Egypt and Jordan have a cold peace with Israel and the Arabs in both countries have expressed their hatred of Jews and Israel. It's not clear that the situation in Sudan is any better.

What about UAE and Bahrain?

Some have belittled the Abraham Accords because those 2 countries have never actually been involved in a war with Israel.

But maybe that is the point.

Egypt and Jordan fought against Israel, and whatever the considerations on the government level -- on a national level, Israel remains an enemy in the eyes of the Egyptian and Jordanian people, regardless of the benefits Israel has to offer and are nowhere near normalizing relations. There is an absence of a state of war, but the mood of belligerence persists.

Not so with UAE and Bahrain, which has never fought Israel. 

The intent of the Abraham Accords is not to bring peace in order to end a state of war -- instead the point is to normalize relations, a goal that is conceivable for UAE and Bahrain, but not for Egypt and Jordan, which still cannot go beyond a 'cold peace,' let alone a full, real peace.

In November 2017, Mordechai Kedar wrote The Ten Commandments for Israeli negotiations with Saudi Arabia, which he described as "immutable principles" for negotiating with Saudi Arabia "and any other Arab nations who wish to live in peace with the Jewish State."

One of those principles is the need for normalizing relations as opposed to just making peace:

10. Peace with the Saudis must entail more than just a ceasefire with an attached document ("Salaam" in Arabic) . Israel agreed to that in the case of Egypt and Jordan as a result of the ignorance of those running the negotiations on Israel's side.

Israel must insist on complete normalization ("sulh" in Arabic), which includes cultural, tourist, business, industrial, art, aeronautical, scientific, technological, athletic and academic ties and exchanges, etc. If Israel participates in international events taking place in Saudi Arabia, the Israeli flag will wave along with those of other countries, and if Israel is the victor in any sports competition in Saudi Arabia, the Hatikva anthem will be played, as it is when other countries win medals. Israeli books will be shown at book fairs, and Israeli products officially displayed at international exhibitions taking place in Saudi Arabia.

An economic document, whose details I am not in a position to elaborate, but which must be an addendum to the agreement, is to be based on mutual investments and acquisitions as well as a commitment to non- participation in boycotts. [emphasis added]

This is what we are seeing now.

A foreshadowing for what is possible is in another comment by Patai, where he addresses the "Arab street" that today we are told is supposedly ready at any moment to rise up in protest, yet whose anger Trump has somehow been able to avoid these past 4 years:

The volatility of Arab reaction to the October War was paralleled four years later by the rapid evaporation of Arab wrath over President Satat's initiative in establishing direct contact with Israel. This was observed by Fuad Moughrabi, professor of political science and co-editor of the Arab Studies Quarterly, in 1980:

The Arab world reacted strongly and passionately to Sadat's visit to Jerusalem. But contrary to what many had expected, the intensity of the reaction was not followed by any concrete, effective steps to neutralize the conseqauences of the visit. Sadat did the unthinkable and got away with it. (p. 339)

Moughrabi wrote this in 1980.

Sadat was assassinated in 1981 -- by the extremist Muslim Brotherhood.

Back then, Arab opposition to Sadat was not directed against the idea of peace, but against the Camp David Accords themselves, which removed Egypt as a participant in the war against Israel -- a war which was supposed to benefit the cause of the Palestinian Arabs.

Today, with the Arab support for the Palestinian Arab cause at its lowest ebb, there are genuine prospects for continuing what the Trump administration started.

That is, assuming that this time around Biden actually listens to what the Arab leaders are saying.

---

---

We have lots of ideas, but we need more resources to be even more effective. Please donate today to help get the message out and to help defend Israel.

Read More

The Price of Aliyah? “Non, je ne regrette rien.” (Judean Rose)

Shirley Kopelman Meyers, January 10, 1927-November 8, 2020

I like to tell people I made aliyah when I was young and stupid and that that’s the way to do it. When I made aliyah at the age of 18, I wasn’t thinking about what it would be like to have an aging parent far away, and not be able to help. I didn’t think about how, someday, in middle age, I would long to care for my mother, as I only I would have cared for her had I been there. But I was not there, except in fits and starts, two-week visits that were somehow never enough for either of us. And now she’s gone.

In the middle of the morning, the message came: “Our mother went to the true world this morning.”

I was not even surprised. I had seen it coming. She was 93. She was fading. This was Sunday morning, and she had fallen asleep in the middle of our last phone call, on Thursday night.

I watched her funeral on Zoom. Which was a blessing. I always knew I would not be going to the States for her funeral, as she had forbidden me to do so, some years ago.

A child of the Great Depression, my mother was practical. She didn’t see the point of me spending all that money on a ticket when she wouldn’t even be there to see me. Never mind that in some respects, the rituals are for those who remain. My mother had made her wishes clear, and I was stuck with respecting those wishes, and her.

Because of the Depression, she couldn't go to college. But at age 46, widowed with 4 children, she became a student at the University of Pittsburgh. It took her 8 years, but she got her degree in journalism. 

Had there not been a pandemic, perhaps no one would have thought to set up that Zoom funeral I got to see, so at least I had that: the beautiful chill autumn day, some red and gold leaves still on the trees in the Beth Shalom Cemetery, in Millvale, Pa. 

We visited my dad a few years ago. Now she is next to him.

On the other hand, had there not been a pandemic, I might have been able to see her one last time. But I was terrified at the thought of picking up the virus during my travels and that I might somehow, unwittingly, bring it to her, when I loved her almost as much as life itself. The thought of making her sick was paralyzing, in its most literal meaning. That thought kept me here in place in Israel, and far away from her.

And I think that was difficult for her. Knowing that I wasn’t going to be there that one more time. Perhaps—at least a little—she gave up hope that I would ever come again. It was not going to happen: a thing that made life worth living when she could no longer walk, see or hear, a visit from her baby.

It hurts that I hurt her that way. And it hurts that I lost my mom. But in spite of the terrible pain of losing my mother—of missing out on being able to care for her as only I would have cared for her—in spite of depriving her of my presence at the end, and missing her funeral, I do not regret making aliyah. “Non, je ne regrette rien.”

I regret nothing.

Is aliyah a selfish act? In some ways, no doubt, it is.

There’s no doubt it was excruciating for my mother not to have me with her all these years, when she loved and needed me so. It was I who picked up and left Pittsburgh to make aliyah to Israel. I who made the decision, and simply did it—made aliyah—when I was young and stupid, and unaware of what the future held. It was painful for my mother to not be close by my children, her grandchildren, whom she loved so dearly.

I put out photos of my mother in the shiva house, and there was one photo where you could see just the edge of her face, and she was glowing with love for a newborn grandchild she held, and you could see it, that love, though much of the picture was in shadow, including the object of her love, obscured. How it must have hurt her, to be so far away from them, her grandchildren, whom she would have loved to have cuddled and loved and known.

As evening fell on the day my mother died, Z”L, my rabbi’s wife came to my house to help me do kria, to help me tear my shirt just over the heart, as one does for a mother. “This is the price of aliyah,” I said to her, and she knew what I meant: that I hadn’t been there to care for my mother or be with her at the end, that I was observing the rituals from a distance: that I wasn’t there.

It was all a part of the price: the price of aliyah.

She issued no bromides or platitudes, my rabbi’s wife. My rabbi’s wife, who is wise, said something I’ve held onto, during the past two weeks, through my shiva and the days that followed. “Look,” she said in her quiet voice. “That’s Lech Lecha. You did Lech Lecha.”

This was a reference to the Torah portion not long past, Lech Lecha, in which God directs Abram to leave his native land and all that he knew, for a “land that I will show thee.”

Now the LORD said unto Abram: 'Get thee out of thy country, and from thy kindred, and from thy father's house, unto the land that I will show thee.’ Genesis 12:1

One can only imagine the depth of Abram’s faith, leaving his father’s house like that with no second thoughts. But I was no Abram. The repercussions of the act were not clear to me at the time of the act: It is not an easy thing to leave a mother, or to leave all that I knew. I gave up one life for another, yet the shock and the pain of it all, came on only over time. It was a gradual sinking in.

And now that I’ve experienced this loss, I think that had I known how painful this all would be—the not being there—the enormity of this thing, I might not have made aliyah, at all.

I don’t think I could have done it, though I regret nothing, “Non, je ne regrette rien.”

It was the right thing to do, to make aliyah, and I’m glad, every day, that I did.

I didn’t know what I was doing at the time. I only longed and yearned to be here in Israel and I made it happen. But there was a cost to aliyah that makes Israel and my living here, all the more dear to my heart. I put my people ahead of myself, and even my own dearest mother, z"l, by moving to Israel. And how can I regret the chance to play a part in this noble project, the building of our national home, making Israel stronger, just by dint of being here?

“Non, je ne regrette rien.”

I wish that things had been different. I wish that my mother hadn’t fit into Pittsburgh the way I wished I fit Israel: like a glove. Because then she might have come here and I could have taken care of her. She would have had the chance to really know her Israeli grandchildren and great grandchildren, growing up under a different sun, proud and free in the Jewish State. 

Instead of snatching a few weeks here, a few weeks there, for a birth or a bar mitzvah.

But it was understood: my mother was a Pittsburgher, born and bred, and she would never live anywhere else. It was who she was.

And the truth is, it is who I was, and the last several times I visited there, I found myself touching the trees, and the buildings, the low walls and soaring yellow street lights, and would shed a tear or two as I said goodbye, over and over again. The smells of that place! The sight of that curb, that hill, this tree! A sensory experience that reached down to me, toward some primal place, an essence.

But Israel had called, had always called, that nobler cause from afar, from when I was little. This too, was me. Perhaps the ultimate me, the place I had to grow into. The place I had to earn.

Yes, I was young and stupid when I made aliyah. I hadn’t seen the cost. But no. From afar, from this distance, I regret nothing.

“Non, je ne regrette rien.”

I regret nothing in part because I live in a wonderful community that embraced me in my sorrow, came to sit with me, talk with me, cook for me. The people here know they are my family, since my family cannot be here. And they try hard to fill the breach. They know that I gave up my real family to be here with them in our land. And that makes them my family, in some ways more even than the real family I knew as a girl.

But community cannot replace my mother. It is hard to lose a mother. It hurts: another one more installment on the price of aliyah, which I continue to pay in ways and amounts I never anticipated, back when I was 18, young, and stupid. I think I never could have done it—made aliyah—if I’d known the price, how much it would cost, how much it would hurt.

It’s the kind of knowledge—well, it’s better not to know, to be young and stupid: to dare to just do the thing without knowing what’s ahead, the repercussions of the act. Did Abram know what was ahead, the trials and tribulations? Can anyone really make an informed aliyah, for instance know loss of this sort without having been in it, away from a mother they love, so far away?

Now I can say I’ve been there. I’ve dwelt in the country of my loss and I know the price of aliyah.

And still, I am here.

Today, and hopefully for a long time, I am here in Israel. And I do not and will not regret that.

“Non, je ne regrette rien.”

---

---

We have lots of ideas, but we need more resources to be even more effective. Please donate today to help get the message out and to help defend Israel.

Read More

Shannon Nuszen is working to expose the mission of evangelical Christians in Israel—Jews are trying to shut her down

Shannon Nuszen is coming up against Jewish opposition to her work at Beyneynu, which is all about exposing the true nature of Christian missionaries inside Israel. These evangelical Christians are careful not to use overt language in describing their mission to the Jewish Israelis they meet and work with. But Nuszen captures the truth by way of videos created by the Christians for their supporters abroad, in which their mission is stated in explicit terms. And the truth is that these Christians are in Israel for the express purpose of converting Jewish Israelis to Christianity.

Why would any Jew not want this truth exposed? It’s not a mystery: money talks, nobody walks. Evangelical Christians give a lot of money to Israel, and they’re very nice people. No one wants to believe they have any underlying, hidden purpose in being here. The Jews don’t want to believe these Christians are anything other than what they purport to be: nice people who support the Jews and the Jewish State.

Jews are tired of being hated. When someone shows them a bit of love, they drink it up. They are like Sally Fields at the Oscars gushing, “You like me! You really like me!”

via GIPHY

They need to believe these Christians don’t have an ulterior motive. They need it for their self-esteem. And of course, there’s the money. Lots and lots of it. And a lot of these Christians are working the vineyards of Samaria, for free. Which is as good as financial support, right?

So we have a situation where Shannon Nuszen, through her organization, Beyneynu, is distributing videos to Jewish journalists in which Christians expose their true purpose on camera. And Jews are going around behind the scenes and sometimes, shamelessly, right in front of Nuszen, casting aspersions on her work.

These Jews tell the journalists and anyone else who will listen that Shannon is disturbed, that because of her past, she has a vendetta—that these Christians are REALLY NICE PEOPLE who have told them, the Jews, that converting the Jews is the furthest thing from their sweet little innocent minds. These Christians LOVE the Jews, say the Jews, and only want to help and support them.

Would that all that were true. But it’s not. And Shannon is only curating words said by these very same Christians—words which clearly have no other context—that is, if one is being honest about this stuff. The Christians are in Israel for one sole purpose. They want to bring the Jews to Jesus.

They’ll swear up and down it isn’t so. But the videos say otherwise, if you can get past all the Jews out to destroy the messenger, Shannon. To them I say, “Methinks thou dost protest too much.”

The Jews know on which side their bread is buttered. And it’s actually a really shameful thing to witness how they grovel to those trying to convert them while speaking out against their own: Shannon. But you know what? Let’s give Shannon a chance to explain it all in her own words. And then you can decide whom to believe: Shannon, or the Jewish naysayers who benefit from these Christians and work behind the scenes to deride their fellow Jew:  

Varda Epstein: Can you tell us a bit about your background?

Shannon Nuszen: I was born and raised in Evangelical Christianity. My father was a minister, and for many years I was a missionary myself with a tremendous love for Israel and a focus on the Jewish people.

In 2005 I visited Israel for the first time and returned home more determined than ever to prove to myself and every Jew I knew that Jesus was indeed the messiah prophesied in the bible.

However, homing in on that one issue and fully immersing myself in learning about the fulfillment (or lack thereof) of these prophecies did not result in any reaffirming of my faith, or in me perfecting my arguments for bringing Jews to Jesus. The opposite happened, and through learning the Jewish perspective, it became clear that everything I knew and believed in was false.

Long story short, I ended up converting to Judaism and have been living as an Orthodox Jew ever since. I now live in Israel.

Varda Epstein: Why did you decide to focus on exposing and fighting missionaries in Israel? Is this really a significant presence or threat to the Jews of Israel?

Shannon Nuszen: I was on the other side. I was one of those missionaries. I understand better than most how aggressive and unyielding these missionaries are. Most Jewish people, though they may have encountered these missionaries, really do not understand the full scope and danger they present to our people. We are not just dealing with Christians trying to convert Jews. It’s worse than that and more insidious because they are playing word games.

The missionaries misappropriate Jewish symbols, icons, and traditions in order to evangelize the Jews. They are portraying Christianity in a Jewish way to get Jews to believe in Jesus. I know this because I was one of those people. As a result, I feel a heavy responsibility, almost a burden, to alert the Jewish community to the problem that confronts them.

It is shocking. It is a stage four cancer, and there is no stage five. These missionaries have managed to infiltrate and become a part of the highest echelons of the Israeli government and its leadership. Because of their financial and political support for Israel these evangelicals have managed to blind Israelis to the inherent dangers of their mission. Evangelical support comes at an extremely high price, and I understand why Israeli leaders and many ordinary Israelis and Israeli businessmen turn the other way. We have many enemies, and therefore we are willing to work with anyone, even when it comes at a very dangerous price.

Varda Epstein: Would you tell us about some of the people and organizations you’ve worked with on the issue of missionaries in Israel?

Shannon Nuszen: In my quest to research and supply information about specific missionary groups that are active in Israel, I have worked with and continue to work with every organization I know of in this field. In an official capacity I began this work 13 years ago in Houston, countering local missionaries in a grassroots effort with Rabbi Stuart Federow. During this time, I also worked for Outreach Judaism for a span of a few years. Most of my work in this field, however, has been with Jewish Israel, as their North American liaison.

Varda Epstein: Tell us about Beyneynu. Why did you decide to found this organization and what is its purpose?

Shannon Nuszen: Beyneynu is a nonprofit organization that monitors missionary activity in Israel and works with government and community leaders to create proper boundaries in their partnerships with faith-based organizations.

Are we against Christian support for Israel? No! We simply draw the line at missionary efforts, and do not believe Jewish organizations should be forming alliances or partnerships with those who have as their agenda the desire to bring Jews to faith in Jesus.

I do not consider myself a “counter missionary,” and Beyneynu is not another counter missionary organization. Our focus is on alerting the Jewish community to missionary efforts, and to help the Israeli leadership to identify those who threaten the Jewish character of the State of Israel.

Varda Epstein: You’ve released some shocking videos of missionaries in Israel and abroad. How are these videos created?

Shannon Nuszen: These videos are created the same way news publications produce videos. They scour hours of videos and take the most germane elements they find and broadcast them to the public. This is critical to this effort.

Most videos put out by the missionaries are over an hour long. The Jewish community needs to know about the elements in these videos that specifically speak about their intentions in regard to the Jewish people of Israel.

It’s important to understand that if these missionary groups—based as they are inside of Israel—were self-sustaining, they wouldn’t take the risk of discussing these topics in videos, but all their financial support comes from abroad, from outside of Israel. The videos are created precisely for this audience: evangelical Christians who live beyond the borders of Israel. Virtually nothing comes from native Israeli missionaries, therefore they must convey to evangelical Christians abroad the work that they are doing, and that is “winning Jewish souls for Yeshua.”

These people all, without exception, use language that serves as dog whistles for their followers. None of them would ever come straight out and use the term “convert Jews to Christianity” to describe their mission. That type of language is no longer used among the Jews because Jewish people translate “convert to Christianity” as losing their Jewish identity (and they’re right).

This was clear in another video Beyneynu released not long ago where the CEO of God TV, Ward Simpson, clearly stated “We don’t want Jews to convert to Christianity, we simply want them to accept Jesus as their messiah.”

Varda Epstein: There have been some accusations that you are selectively editing these videos to show something that isn’t really there. They say you have a vendetta, because you were one of them, and have now converted to Judaism. What would you say to your accusers?

Shannon Nuszen: The accusers are not bystanders. They are the same activists who repeatedly carry water for these evangelical Christian groups by repeating their talking points, because they work with them and depend on them for their financial support. They have a vested interest in protecting these missionaries.

The real question for these accusers (or perhaps “handlers” is a better word) is: Do these Christians believe it is their obligation to carry out “The Great Commission?” Matthew 28:19 “. . . to make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit.”

In our latest video, these Christians are clearly speaking of this obligation to their followers, if not in so many words. If the naysayers cannot answer to the charge or prove that it’s not the case, then the only tactic left for them is to attack the messenger: me.

As far as having a vendetta, I would say the opposite is true. Just as much as I feel it is an obligation to warn fellow Jews of this danger, I would love to be able to demonstrate to Christians the pain their actions inflict on the Jewish people in order to foster some understanding.

Varda Epstein: Why are so many Jews against your work, and speaking out against this work and even you, personally? What do they stand to gain by allying with Christians, and working against you, a fellow Jew?

Shannon Nuszen: I do not think even our most fierce opposition opposes the goal of our work. This is the one issue that Jews across the spectrum agree on. The entire Jewish world is against efforts to convert Jews. They just refuse to believe that the Christians who give them financial support, and who support their programs, could possibly have any missionary agenda. It becomes for them a very personal issue.

The information we present, however, is not our opinion. We are not quoting out of context or interpreting what these Christians are saying. Our only aim is to inform.

Varda Epstein: Is there anything else you would like to say to your accusers?

Shannon Nuszen:  I try not to focus on the negative attention or answer those who are aligning themselves with missionaries. They have their reasons for what they do, and they will have to answer for that. My focus is on the effect of these missionaries on Jewish communities worldwide.

Varda Epstein: Can you give us some examples of things these missionaries have said for which the context is undeniable, and cannot possibly be explained away by selective editing?

Shannon Nuszen: The undeniable issue that cannot be disputed is “The Great Commission,” which you’ll find being preached in each of the videos we have curated, and is common to all missionaries. “The Great Commission” is the commandment given by Jesus himself “. . . to make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit.” Those who teach this concept are fully committed to living by this commandment and everything they say and do is by way of fulfilling this obligation.

The methods and language used to explain this in ways that won’t offend Jews are many, but the bottom line is that they do not believe they are exempt from this commandment or that they should refuse to participate in its fulfillment. They see this commandment, “The Great Commission,” as their primary goal, and crucial factor in the “restoration” (you’ll hear them say that word a lot) process that in their belief, serves as preparation for the second coming of Jesus.

Varda Epstein: Where are you and Beyneynu going with this work? What can we expect to see coming up next?

Shannon Nuszen: Beyneynu’s efforts are primarily behind the scenes working with government and Jewish leadership to understand the dangers of partnering with missionaries. With the tremendous outpouring of love and support coming from the Christian world, it is important that we understand who we can and cannot trust.

Sometimes our efforts include informing the public of problematic events or relationships that require their help to demand action. This was the case with God TV. Even though they had already secured a contract with the cable provider, and had been licensed by the Israeli government to broadcast this programming, it was public outcry that brought about the complete reversal of this state of affairs and caught the attention of the world.

That is the message that every organization looking to partner with us should understand. We appreciate the support for Israel, but we must draw the line when it comes to missionary activity.

---

---

We have lots of ideas, but we need more resources to be even more effective. Please donate today to help get the message out and to help defend Israel.

Read More

Some American Jews Are Considering Their Exit Plan, None of Them Thought About Israel (Judean Rose)

It happens every election: celebrities—and just generally spoiled people (cough cough)—swear that if their candidate doesn’t win, they’re leaving. But author Lauren Ariel Hoffman decided to write about leaving America from a Jewish perspective. Hoffman describes her own Orange Man trauma and exit plan, comparing it all to an escape from the Nazis. She then quotes a few Jewish friends on their own plans for fleeing the country. The odd thing is, not one of them considers Israel as a viable option for relocation, and in fact, Israel is not mentioned in this article at all.

Hoffman’s article was featured in Alma, which—no surprise—also includes articles on such subjects as, “Why Does My Interfaith Relationship Disqualify Me From Rabbinical School?” and “Now’s the Perfect Time to Teach Your Non-Jewish Partner All About Judaism." So perhaps it's not quite the right place to discover love and loyalty for the one Jewish State. You'd think, nonetheless, that in an article about fleeing the country, a Yid might consider Israel.

Never heard of Lauren Ariel Hoffman and her epigenetic intergenerational trauma? Neither had I, but her byline was linked to this handy dandy author’s blurb:

Lauren Ariel Hoffman (she/her) is a photojournalist from Royersford, Pennsylvania. Her coverage includes stories relating to chronic illness, medical injustice, and human interest.

Well there you have it. Perhaps Israel, as a subject for liberal Jews, is somewhat beyond human interest.

But back to the article: Hoffman, it is clear, wants to celebrate her distress in a Jewish way. But the closest thing she can get to kosher-style anguish is by referencing the Holocaust and her family roots in the Ukraine:

It is not 1939, and yet the police are still slaughtering unarmed Black men and women in the name of “justice,” still separating refugee families at the border and putting their children in cages, still performing medical experiments on female-bodied prisoners.

Sound familiar?

My recurring nightmare of Nazis breaking into my house and capturing me is becoming more tangible, but now it’s informed and comprehensive and absolutely terrifying. And while I’m a fan of Quentin Tarantino’s Inglorious Basterds, I don’t think I’ll be knocking Nazi skulls anytime soon. I’m more prepared to find myself in a police-state wherein me and my loved one’s basic liberties will be stripped and some of our lives taken, along with members of every other oppressed group in America.

I am not going to back down from this fight, mainly because I have nowhere else to go — as a descendant of Ukrainian Jews, my ancestor’s recent homeland does not exist anymore.

Which is odd, because last I looked, the Ukraine still exists. Or so Google says:

Ukraine is a large country in Eastern Europe known for its Orthodox churches, Black Sea coastline and forested mountains. Its capital, Kiev, features the gold-domed St. Sophia's Cathedral, with 11th-century mosaics and frescoes. Overlooking the Dnieper River is the Kiev Pechersk Lavra monastery complex, a Christian pilgrimage site housing Scythian tomb relics and catacombs containing mummified Orthodox monks. 

But I don’t blame Lauren for not wanting to go back to the Ukraine. I wouldn’t want to go back there, either. It was bad enough the first time.

Still, to say she has nowhere else to go—why not go back to the place her family came from in the first place—before they were expelled and forced to wander? Why not go back to Israel, where today there is a flourishing Jewish State? But no, it’s not on Hoffman's radar. Nor was it apparently on the radar of her Sephardic friend Rebecca Brier:

Rebecca Brier, 37, who asked to use an alias, feels differently. She and her husband are in the process of getting Portuguese citizenship for themselves and their two young children.

“If there’s one thing I’ve learned from my family, it’s that it’s okay to be the first one to go,” she said. “It’s harder with kids. We speak Spanish, but Spanish is not Portuguese.”

Brier said she is mainly torn between leaving her family behind in the Bronx or figuring out how to get them all to Portugal.

“We’ve set up our lives around our support system, our family. If we left, would we be that anchor again? At some point, flight becomes easier, because if I fly, at least I still have my family.”

On the other hand, if she would only make Aliyah to Israel, the Briers would have new family everywhere they turned. As new immigrants they would be embraced and surrounded by fellow Jews, living proud and free in their indigenous territory. But no, Brier instead prefers to return to the land of the Inquisition, where Jews were tortured for their beliefs, forced to go underground with their observance, and slaughtered if they refused to convert. Somehow this is, to Brier, infinitely preferable to moving to the Jewish State. 

“But not everyone has the luxury of leaving,” continues Hoffman:

Aviva Davis, 21, is a biracial Jew whose ancestry is more closely linked to slavery than the Holocaust. They feel it is a luxury that white Jews are able to consider leaving at all.

“I would love to have an escape plan, but it’s not a viable option for me,” they said. “Where would I go? My ancestors were carted over here as slaves — white Jews can trace citizenship back to their ancestors. It’s very frustrating for me to feel like I have nowhere to go.”

Leaving aside the odd use of the pronoun "they," um. Where would "they" go? To ISRAEL. Where Jews of every color of the rainbow live full, satisfying, Jewish lives.

But no. These people are stuck in a time warp of pogroms, auto-da-fé, and slavery:

As Brier said, “Do we become Jews lighting candles in the closet in Spain? Or do we flee to the Ottoman Empire? I’m not sure who did it right. But the trauma is still there.”

As I write this piece, no one knows who will win the 2020 presidential election. But one thing I know for sure: Israeli Jews did it right. They left the trauma and the ghettos behind to build a beautiful, shining new world, where anything is possible, and dreams can come true.

H/T Ardie Geldman

---

---

We have lots of ideas, but we need more resources to be even more effective. Please donate today to help get the message out and to help defend Israel.

Read More

Khaled Abu Toameh, Veteran Israeli Arab Journalist, Wins Victory in Israeli Courts (Judean Rose)

Khaled Abu Toameh won a victory in a small Jerusalem courtroom this week when Ted Belman at last agreed that his defamatory articles, social media posts, and newsletters were factually baseless. Belman is now required to make public apology to Abu Toameh within 14 days. If Belman again defames the award-winning Israeli Arab journalist and distinguished senior Gatestone fellow, he will have to pay 5000 shekels per defamatory item published, in compensation to Khaled.

By way of disclaimer, there was a personal victory here as well, as Belman’s countersuit against Abu Toameh, this author and Bat-Zion Susskind-Sacks was rejected out of hand by the court. The interesting thing about this is that I was approached by the 86-year-old Belman in court on Monday. “Who are you?” Ted asked me. “Are you the enemy?”

He was suing me, but didn’t even know me.

Here we must go back and explain why Ted was suing me. Ted Belman, you see, asserted that Khaled was running a spy ring in Israel for the Jordanian king, and that I was one of his operatives, the other being Bat-Zion Susskind Sacks. Well goodness I’m relieved. An Israeli court has rejected a lawsuit accusing me of working on behalf of His Majesty, King Abdullah of Jordan. Not guilty! Acquitted.

But I digress. The main thing is that all three of us—me, Batzi, and of course, Khaled—are victorious.

So ends this courtroom saga that began in late 2017, when Abu Toameh had finally had enough of the defamatory campaign of words and memes waged against him since at least 2013. Readers of this column will recall my exposé of self-proclaimed “putative prime minister of Jordan” Mudar Zahran (see for instance, HERE, HERE, and HERE). Zahran, banned from entering Israel as a security risk, tried to enlist me in his smear campaign against Khaled Abu Toameh. I refused, but Ted Belman apparently did not.

What followed was an endless campaign of baseless defamation, an ongoing attack that lasted seven full years. Articles were published in numerous publications, all smearing Khaled. The defamation of Khaled was an ongoing theme in newsletters, Belman's personal website, and on Facebook, too. The worst part of this defamation, of course, is that Khaled Abu Toameh is a fine person: the only Israeli Arab journalist I know of who writes the honest truth about Israel and the Middle East.

Khaled is one of the good guys. And everyone on our side knows this. Which is why Khaled Abu Toameh has won plaudits and numerous awards by distinguished bodies. From Wikipedia:

Recognition and awards

·         Abu Toameh received the 2014 Daniel Pearl Award. Abu Toameh shared Israel Media Watch's 2010 award for media criticism with the satirical Israeli website Latma.

·         On 10 May 2011, Khaled Abu Toameh won the Hudson Institute Award for Courage in Journalism.

·         Canada's Toronto Sun columnist Salim Mansur praised Abu Toameh for his courage and knowledge of the politics of the Arab world.

·         Abu Toameh is the 2013 recipient of the Emet award given by the Committee for Accuracy in Middle East Reporting in America (CAMERA).

·         He was chosen on the Algemeiner Journal's 2013 list of The Top 100 People Positively Influencing Jewish Life.

All during this trying time, while Khaled was being smeared, important people came to the fore to defend the embattled journalist. People like Caroline Glick, Lori Lowenthal Marcus, Ruthie Blum, and Harold Rhode, couldn’t offer enough praise for Khaled. And still, this creep Zahran spread horrible lies about Khaled to all and sundry through anyone he could rope into his web.

Well, all’s well that ends well, and in that small Jerusalem courtroom on October 26, 2020, justice won out with victory on many counts:

1. Ted Belman finally admitted that he has no evidence to support the libelous publications.

2. Ted Belman agreed to publish an apology and retraction, admitting that what he published was factually baseless.

3. Ted's main witness, the Jordanian fraudster Mudar Zahran, who is banned from Israel for security reasons, never got a chance to testify before the court, not even by video.

4. Ted's counterclaim against Khaled Abu Toameh, Varda Meyers Epstein, and Bat-Zion Susskind-Sacks, was rejected.

5. The court ruled that if Ted republishes the same material against Khaled Abu Toameh, he will pay 5000 shekels in compensation per piece.

After three years of refusing to do so, Ted will finally apologize and admit that what he published about Khaled Abu Toameh was factually baseless. Assuming Ted fulfills his promise to the court, he now has 14 days to issue the apology and retraction. This is good because Ted’s own lawyer admitted in court that Belman had no proof to back up any of the nasty things he published about Khaled. It’s icing on the cake that Belman’s counterclaim was rejected. And if he tries to republish the defamatory items, he’s going to get slapped with a fine of 5000 shekels per article. Pretty nifty.

Judge Moriah Cherka, addressing Belman, said that what he did was unethical and against journalistic standards, because Ted never sought Khaled's response before publication. Judge Cherka also noted that Khaled Abu Toameh is a renowned and respected journalist, therefore it is inconceivable that his credibility should be questioned or harmed.

Nadav Haetzni, representative for the plaintiff, Khaled, said, "At long last, this grievous smear campaign against one of Israel's leading journalists is over. This was a campaign aimed at destroying this man's reputation; it caused him great damage and suffering, but in the end, this was a victory and we hope others will learn from it."

“For me,” said Khaled Abu Toameh, “The lawsuit was never about money, but about getting Belman to publicly admit that every bit of what he published about me was factually baseless. I initiated the lawsuit as a matter of principle, to defend ethical standards in journalism, and to serve as a deterrent to others,” said Khaled.

The judge made a point of rebuking Ted Belman in court, for behaving in an unethical manner. Which is as it should be. Journalists, and bloggers like Ted Belman, need to check the facts before they publish, to ascertain the truth, and to seek a response from the person in question, when preparing to publish something that might be defamatory.

Let us hope that this lawsuit will underscore this point for anyone who takes to the blogosphere to randomly and without proof, trash-talk and damage others. This is wrong and should not be countenanced in a country ruled by law. And on Monday, in that small Jerusalem courtroom, a judge did in fact, determine that such baseless defamation would not be countenanced in Israel.

---

---

We have lots of ideas, but we need more resources to be even more effective. Please donate today to help get the message out and to help defend Israel.

Read More

Joe Biden’s First Meeting with Golda Meir: Did it Lead to the Yom Kippur War?

Joe Biden had his first meeting with an Israeli leader, Golda Meir, on the eve of the Yom Kippur war, right after meeting with officials in Cairo. During the then junior senator’s meeting with Meir, Biden suggested that Israel make a unilateral withdrawal from settlements for peace, criticizing the settlement policies of the Labor Party, and suggesting they represent a form of “creeping annexation.” Though Biden assured Meir that Egyptian officials were convinced of Israel’s military superiority, 40 days later, Sadat initiated a surprise attack against Israel.

This is the gist of a bombshell tweet from Israel’s Channel 13 reporter Nadav Eyal containing excerpts from a classified memo from an Israeli official who attended that fateful meeting. While it may have been the first meeting between Biden and an Israeli prime minister, it was certainly not the last. In subsequent meetings with Israeli prime ministers, Biden threatened Menachem Begin with withholding U.S. aid, and publicly upbraided Benyamin Netanyahu because it had been announced in a town council meeting that 1600 homes were to be built in future in the Jewish Jerusalem neighborhood of Ramat Shlomo (more about this here).   

Here is the tweet:

1/Golda Meir and Joe Biden, the Israeli memo.
By far, the story Biden most frequently tells about his relationship with Israel leadership is his first meeting with Golda as a young senator. Here's Biden describing the encounter and Golda's punch linehttps://t.co/UsroQHRwog

— נדב איל Nadav Eyal (@Nadav_Eyal) October 15, 2020

Here is the content of Eyal's tweet, edited for readability:

Golda Meir and Joe Biden, the Israeli memo.

By far, the story Biden most frequently tells about his relationship with Israel leadership is his first meeting with Golda as a young senator. Here's Biden describing the encounter and Golda's punch line:

I've published this evening a classified memo documenting the meeting, made by a senior Israeli official present in the room. A fascinating meeting.

Biden comes from Egypt, some 40 days before Sadat ordered a surprise attack which will become the Yom Kippur war. He tells the Israeli PM that all the officials he met in Cairo assured him that they accept "Israel's military superiority.” Of course, they lied (not [Biden’s] fault, of course. Israel was misled by its own intelligence community). 

American Politics.

Biden criticizes the Nixon administration for being "dragged by Israel" [into supporting Israeli policies]. He says, according to this government memo, that there is no debate in the Senate about the Middle East because the Senators are "afraid" to say things that Jewish voters will dislike. (He SAYS THAT TO GOLDA)

He criticizes the Israeli labor platform arguing that it’s leading to a creeping annexation of the occupied territories. Considering Israel's military dominance, Biden suggests it will initiate a first step for peace by unilateral withdrawals. This will be done from areas with no strategic importance—not the Golan.

Golda responds with a long speech about the history of the Zionist movement from its very establishment. The instability of Arab regimes, the unfairness of Supreme Court decisions.

Golda rejects Biden comments on the Labor platform, rejects his offers of unilateral withdrawal and continues to argue that Israel can make no major mistakes considering the situation of the Jewish people after the Holocaust. The official making the notes remarked that Biden was full of respect to the PM yet his "enthusiasm as he spoke" signaled his lack of experience in the diplomatic field.

REMARKS: Biden warning to the PM on the eve of the war that Israel must make some concessions is   prophetic. Some historians argue that Golda's refusal to consider Egyptian diplomatic initiatives led to war. Biden's suggestion that Israel make unilateral concessions is interesting. The only time Israel opted for such a move is in 2005 when Ariel Sharon as PM initiated Israel's withdrawal from the Gaza strip. Much more to say. 

Part of the original Hebrew document from the unnamed Israeli official:

It is important to note that it was the Labor Party that initiated the policy of settling all parts of Jewish indigenous territory, including Judea and Samaria. From the Jewish Virtual Library:

In the past, Labor was more hawkish on security and defense issues than it is today. During its years in office, Israel fought the 1956 Sinai War, the Six-Day War and the Yom Kippur War. Labor agreed to UN Resolution 242 and the notion of trading land for peace. Nevertheless, successive Labor governments established settlements in the disputed territories and refrained from dismantling illegal settlements, such as those established in 1968 at Qiryat Arba in Hebron by Rabbi Moshe Levinger, and others set up by Gush Emunim. By 1976, more than thirty settlements had been established on the West Bank; however, their population was fewer than 10,000.

Joe Biden paints that early meeting with Golda as something precious that cemented in his mind how important Israel is to the Jewish people. It is clear, however, that Joe Biden has always been against the Jewish people settling their indigenous territory. The very thought of Jews planning to build homes in Jerusalem makes him furious. Therefore, contrary to the love fest with Golda he has often described, Biden used the first chance he had to meet with an Israeli prime minister to broach the subject of unilateral concessions.

One wonders how much clout the young senator wielded at that time. Not to mention the timing of subsequent events, with the surprise attack on Israel by Egypt occurring just 40 days after Biden’s meeting with Meir. Is it possible that Golda Meir incurred wider U.S. displeasure by refusing to entertain Biden's suggestion of unilateral concessions? Was Egypt perhaps emboldened by this state of affairs to attack Israel without fear of American intervention?

---

---

We have lots of ideas, but we need more resources to be even more effective. Please donate today to help get the message out and to help defend Israel.

Read More

Enthusiastic Crowds at Trump Rallies a Contrast to the Hate of the Mainstream Media (Judean Rose)

President Donald Trump, if you believe the media spin, is the most reviled person ever walk the earth. A search for “Trump” in Google News overwhelmingly generates negative headlines. A more nuanced search, however, suggests that voter enthusiasm is for Trump, while the response to the Biden Harris ticket is somewhere between lackluster and nonexistent.

Here are the first seven results generated in a search I did for “Trump” on October 13, 2020, all negative:

I next turned to some work-related research on the creative use of cars during the pandemic. Here, too, the election figured large in the search results. It seems that cars in the 2020 election cycle have been enlisted as a safe way for people to rally for their preferred presidential candidates while adhering to social distancing standards. But this time, when I did my search, the shoe was on the other foot. The search results were mostly positive, and they were mostly about Trump. 

The rallies with the largest, most enthusiastic turnouts were clearly for Trump. Similar rallies held for Biden, by contrast, yielded fewer attendees, and sometimes none, as happened in the battleground state of Arizona.

Biden and Harris hold a campaign event in Arizona and the local news can’t believe that not one supporter showed up! pic.twitter.com/JKj0fPi6Jj

— David Croom - (ツ) (@dailycallout) October 11, 2020

Only one week earlier, an Arizona rally with Vice President Pence drew a large crowd:

Here is a view of the crowd and line as we are a few minutes from the Vice President Pence’s arrival. #12News pic.twitter.com/kb96IdeK8A

— Michael Doudna (@MichaelDoudna) October 8, 2020

Here's a tweet from Jenna Ellis, senior legal adviser for the Trump campaign, noting that the crowds turned out to see her and other lesser Trump campaign figures, including Trump Campaign Director of Strategic Communications Marc Lotter, and Senior Trump Campaign Adviser John Pence, compared to NO people, whatsoever, turning up to see presidential candidate Joe Biden himself, in the flesh.

This is embarrassing. 100x more people showed up just to see @Marc_lotter, @jepence, and me on our @TeamTrumpOnTour!! 😂 https://t.co/ceNW1kbhVE

— Jenna Ellis (@JennaEllisEsq) October 11, 2020

A drive-in event in Toledo, at which Biden spoke, appeared to have just six Biden supporters in attendance, sitting in their cars. 

.@JoeBiden brings his economic message to Toledo, Ohio where how main message besides selling his “Build Back Better” plan to union members gathered at the drive-in is promising to never turn his back on them like Pres. Trump has in the last several years. pic.twitter.com/P9UrRCVcaa

— Marianna Sotomayor (@MariannaNBCNews) October 12, 2020

There were more Trump supporters in attendance than Biden supporters.

Dozens of Trump supporters were loudly chanting a mix of “Four more years,” “Trump” and “USA” throughout the event, growing louder anytime @JoeBiden mentioned the president. pic.twitter.com/7M0iZWdmRf

— Marianna Sotomayor (@MariannaNBCNews) October 12, 2020

Trump rallies, it is clear, generate large cheering crowds. Biden rallies, by comparison, are poorly attended. Hundreds of cars decorated with American flags, Make American Great Again signs, and Trump posters, for example, made up a rolling caravan that ran all the way from Plymouth, Massachusetts to Nashua, New Hampshire.

A Vietnamese family decking out their van with Trump posters and flags. Apparently there’s a contest to see who has the most swagged out car.

Rally goers say they’re not here to change people’s views—just to voice their support for the President. #WBZ pic.twitter.com/glBGnHbNrV

— Tiffany Chan (@TiffanyChanWBZ) October 3, 2020

By contrast, 70 cars came out for Biden in Des Moines, in September.

Next stop in Cedar Rapids: a drive-in campaign rally with @DrBiden and @DouglasEmhoff. Here’s my view. @FoxNewsMMR pic.twitter.com/gIJYKlSi4C

— Mitti Hicks (@MittiMegan) September 26, 2020

In the Little Havana neighborhood of Miami, some said as many as 30,000 cars took part in a Trump rally on October 10, waving American and Cuban flags. There were so many cars that police officers had to come direct traffic. Biden may think the Latino community is incredibly diverse, but they appear to have a single-minded preference for Trump.

The same day the “incredibly diverse” were cheering for Trump in Miami, a “Trump Train” made of cars took over an oversized parking lot in St. George, Utah, before setting out in support of President Trump. This time, hundreds of people lined the streets for blocks, straining for a glimpse of the event, already an hour before it was slated to begin. The crowds had put aside the danger of contagion in favor of showing support for their favored presidential candidate, Donald J. Trump. People said the “train” of cars seemed to go on forever.

The mainstream media has left no doubt as to what it thinks you ought to think about Trump. You should hate him with every fiber of your being, and do everything you can to make him lose the election. For the media, it’s not about generating love for Biden and his running mate Kamala Harris. Especially since neither of them are especially loveable. Instead, this election cycle has been all about hate—in particular, about hating President Trump.

The good news is that it’s not working. People would rather love than hate, especially when the object of that feeling is the holder of the highest office in the land, the president of the United States. The people have made their choice and they choose veneration over hate. So the crowds turn out for Trump. And they turn out with enthusiasm.

This, of course, is good news for Israel, where an October 12 poll found that 63.3% of Israelis favor Trump over Joe Biden for president. Maybe this has to do with the way Biden upbraided two Israeli prime ministers. Or maybe it’s because Biden plans to reinstate the JCPOA. What we know for sure: Israel won’t be naming any city squares or neighborhoods for Joe Biden Jr., at any near point in time, and probably not ever. Because Joe Biden hasn’t shown much love for Israel. And like the people of America ignoring the hate-filled spin of the media in favor of flocking to those rallies for Trump, Israelis choose love over hate.

Joe Biden is no friend to Israel, which means he’s no friend to the Jews, which is why Israelis are glad that when it comes to presidents, Americans would rather choose love over hate. 

---

---

We have lots of ideas, but we need more resources to be even more effective. Please donate today to help get the message out and to help defend Israel.

Read More

How Come Christian Missionaries are allowed to Enter Israel during the Lockdown, But Most Jews May Not? (Judean Rose)

Christian missionaries, whose explicit goal is to convert Jews in Israel to Christianity, are entering Israel when most Jews cannot, through a loophole in Israeli government-mandated regulations for the country’s latest coronavirus lockdown. The lack of government sensitivity and response to this issue, when queried, suggests that the loophole was purposefully created. It seems someone wants these missionaries here badly, perhaps the farmers in Samaria, whose vineyards these missionaries toil for free, as they swear up and down that converting the Jews is the furthest thing from their minds. No doubt they are told it is permitted to lie for this purpose. The loophole is that international volunteers are allowed in, while thousands of Jews trying desperately to get to Israel, are not.

The following photo shows Dean Bye’s Return Ministries group arriving in Israel. Return Ministries shared the photo on Facebook as an announcement of the loophole for missionaries, the year-long volunteer visa, during the coronavirus lockdown:

This was shared by Tommy Waller, of HaYovel who remarked that this had opened the way for others. Such as his group of missionaries. And that of Bishop Glenn Plummer and his wife, Dr. (Ruth) Pauline Plummer.

Longer version with Hebrew subtitles:

It is the belief of Glenn and Pauline Plummer that they are "grafted" onto the Jewish people through Jesus. The two are in Israel specifically to target the Ethiopian community. Bishop Plummer believes God’s promise to bring the people out of Egypt/Africa includes those of African descent. He also believes Martin Luther King was not being at all metaphoric in his mountaintop speech when he referenced being allowed to reach the Promised Land. It wasn’t suburbia to which MLK was describing, from Plummer’s perspective, but a scenario in which African Americans belong to the actual physical land of Israel and must return.

Judy Maltz of Haaretz has previously looked at Tommy Waller and Hayovel, wondering who gave them visas during a lockdown when Jews are barred. Now she has addressed the issue of Bishop and Dr. Plummer claiming to make aliyah. Maltz, being that she writes for Haaretz, made sure to underscore the point that it is the settlers who benefit from the work of the Christian “volunteers.”

In August, the Interior Ministry announced that 12,000 yeshiva students and another 5,000 foreign exchange students and participants in Masa educational and social programs, aimed at young Jewish adults, would also be allowed into the country.

As reported in Haaretz several weeks ago, an exception was also made for a group of 70 volunteers from a U.S.-based evangelical organization, known as Hayovel. The volunteers obtained special government permission to enter the country so they could help with the grape harvest on West Bank settlements.

Event poster announces Bishop Glenn and Dr. Pauline Plummer in Jerusalem

At the same time, Maltz made one small, incidental mention of proselytization only at the end of her piece, as if to minimize the importance of the issue.

Asked to address concerns that COGIC had set up a presence in Israel in order to persuade Jews to convert to Christianity, Plummer said: “That’s not our mission. I, as a Christian believer and Christian leader, am fully convinced that Yeshua, Jesus, is the messiah. I believe that with every fiber in me. But I’m not going to try to convince you to believe that. If you ask me why I believe that, though, of course I’m going to tell you.”

This, of course, is a lie. Let’s look at what Bishop and Dr. Plummer themselves said in the video (earlier in this piece), regarding their purpose in coming to Israel, and in fact, their purpose in life:

What is the church called to do? In my humble opinion, it rests on two things. One is to win souls and the second is to make disciples. Disciple-making is really a big call.

That's exactly the call and the mission and the goal of the church. "Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the father, and of the son, and of the holy ghost.”

We lead people to the lord. The church is commissioned. The church is called to go forth and teach, to instruct all nations, to do as Jesus did and make disciples. We are called to tell people everywhere about Jesus.

Facebook about page

Tweet after participating in a congressional caucus on black and Jewish relations

Mission as declared on the website of Bishop and Dr. Plummer

A colleague who lives in Samaria, where so many evangelicals are residing while working the vineyards for free, when he heard my concerns about Bishop Plummer commented, “Just you should know, there are highly-placed individuals who have known him for decades who will make sure he understands the situation he is in and if you want, I can try to ask him specifically not to reach out to you.”

It is not, of course, my concern that these people will reach out to me personally. My concern is that they are here to “win souls” and “make disciples.” I find this sort of proselytization highly offensive. The Jewish people did not survive the Inquisition, the Crusades, the Muslim Conquest, pogroms, terror, and the Holocaust in order to have missionaries infiltrate the Jewish State of Israel to rob our children of their souls, in order that the settlers of Samaria benefit from free labor to harvest their grapes.

Plummer: first "bishop of Israel in the 112 year history of the church"

The focus of the work of Bishop and Dr. Plummer in Israel: outreach to Ethiopian Jews

It sure does look as though the one sure way to get into Israel right now is to be Christian and committed to converting the Jews. It's a definite exception to the otherwise unusually severe lockdown measures mandated by the Israeli government. And it worked great for Bishop Glenn and Dr. Pauline Plummer. But it also worked for Return Ministries, manned by Dean Bye and Chaim Malespin. The entire group of their evangelical volunteers received one-and-a-half-year visas.

It's important to note that evangelicals do not qualify to live in Israel under the Law of Return, despite the claim of Dr. Plummer that she and her husband are not in Israel to be tourists, but have actually made aliyah. When asked about this by Judy Maltz at Haaretz, a spokeswoman from Israel’s Interior Ministry, responsible for issuing visas to the Plummers and the other evangelicals, said only that she, “wasn’t at liberty to discuss individual cases because of privacy issues.”

All we really know is that Israel is in the middle of a pandemic lockdown in which thousands of Jews cannot get into the country, but the government has announced this loophole that mainly serves evangelical Christians. 

It’s not a good look. 

Breaking Israel News is calling this loophole for international volunteers the fulfillment of the prophecy that “strangers,” or “Christians,” have been allowed into Israel to harvest: 

Strangers shall stand and pasture your flocks, Aliens shall be your plowmen and vine-trimmers; Isaiah 61:5.

This prophecy, the missionaries see as both literally and metaphorically true. For while so many Jews cannot visit Israel during the holidays or see family, the strangers are here for the harvest. They're here for the grapes and the souls.

(h/t Shannon Nuszen of Beyneynu)

---

---

We have lots of ideas, but we need more resources to be even more effective. Please donate today to help get the message out and to help defend Israel.

Read More