Inside Israel 10:27 AM
Defense/Security 7:36 AM 4/17/2014
Inside Israel 12:40 PM
The Jay Shapiro Hour
Yisrael Medad is a revenant resident of Shiloh, in the Hills of Efrayim north of Jerusalem. He arrived in Israel with his wife, Batya, in 1970 and lived in the renewing Jewish Quarter, eventually moving to Shiloh in 1981.
Currently the Menachem Begin Center's Information Resource Director, he has previously been director of Israel's Media Watch, a Knesset aide to three Members of Knesset and a lecturer in Zionist History. He assists the Yesha Council in it's contacts with the Foreign Media in a volunteer capacity, is active on behalf of Jewish rights on the Temple Mount and is involved in various Jewish and Zionist activist causes. He contributes a Hebrew-language media column to Besheva and publishes op-eds in the Jerusalem Post and other periodicals.
Ir David, the project to rejuvenate the City of David, is doing tremendous work. Repopulation, construction, archeology, conferences and tourism.
Here's their latest advertisement, promoting a Selichot walk:
Something caught my attention in the above ad. The map. Let me enlarge it:
You can see marked off the Kotel Ma'aravi. And Mount of Olives. And the City of David.
And the Temple Mount?
The Selichot event takes places in the national park adjacent to Ir David, according to the advert. So one can't say that you visit all three places. And even I am mistaken, and if the tour does go to all three locations, even if they believe Jews shouldn't ascend the Mount, therefore it isn't represented on the map, neverhteless, it could be labeled.
The map, after all, is entitled "Ancient Jerusalem". The Temple Mount surely belongs in that category. Even if to identify it so that people shouldn't mistake the area for a soccer pitch - and the Muslims do play football up there - they could, and should, have notated it.
The Temple Mount is important. Very much so. Within that triangle is a crucial piece of real estate, and it the reason we are here in Zion, in Eretz-Yisrael. It is our past and our future.
It shouldn't be missing.
Can someone explain this absurdity?
In a "Letter to the Editor" in Friday's New York Times, Morton Sobell who stood trial with the Rosenbergs clarifies aspects of his previous admission about his spying and stated
As for me, I helped an ally (admittedly illegally) during World War II. I chose not to cooperate with the government in 1950. The issues are now with the historians. Morton Sobell, Bronx, Sept. 12, 2008
To help you out, I will remind you that Sobell was arrested in August 1950 and in April 1951 was sentenced to 30 years imprisonment for the crime of spying for the Soviet Union (then in 1951 an enemy of the United States but not during the war), of conspiracy to commit wartime espionage, by handing over to his handlers sensitive military material. In 1969, Sobell was released from jail. He did not cooperate with the trial proceedings and never testified, either against or for the Rosenbergs or himself. He never spoke at the trial.
The total time he spent behind bars: 19 years.
As regards the Rosenbergs, their death sentences resulted because of the Espionage Act of 1917, which imposes death as a maximum penalty for espionage in wartime. If they had spied in peacetime, the maximum penalty would have been twenty years' imprisonment.
Now, consider this -
Jonathan Pollard was arrested in late 1985 and sentenced to life imprisonment in March 1987 for a crime commited on behalf of an ally, aiding Israel, and not during wartime. He had entered into a plea agreement, cooperating fully with the prosecution yet his life sentence, with a recommendation that he never be paroled was in violation of the plea agreement he had reached with the government.
Jonathan Pollard was never indicted for harming the United States nor was he ever indicted for compromising codes, agents, or war plans or charged with treason in that he ever spied for an enemy state in time of war.
Jonathan Pollard was indicted on only one charge: one count of passing classified information to an ally, without intent to harm the United States.
Court of Appeals Judge Stephen Williams called the case "a fundamental miscarriage of justice" and wrote that he would have ordered that Pollard's sentence be vacated.
So, tell me, why is Jonathan Pollard still in jail 21 years after being sentenced?
What is the difference in the leniency granted Sobell and the cruelty displayed to Pollard?
What am I missing here?
Ehud Olmert's remarks in referring to the anti-terror protest at the Arab village of Aasira Al-Qabaliya on last Shabbat as a "pogrom" were not only incorrect but stupid. They were incorrect because the actions taken by the civilians threatened with murder and arson were a response to a mini-pogrom that has been going on for the past few years invarious degrees of anti-Jewish violence. Olmert did indeed note that but went ahead with his own verbal violence. The media, his main and only support group, chimed in and as has been reported here and at other Hebrew-language sites presented biased and misleading information about the incident itself and the background to it.
According to my information, the terrorist actually was observed not only as he entered the Jewish residential area, with the IDF soldiers presuming that he was a worker - on the Shabbat?! - but that he was seen fleeing and that they took no measures since he was (are you ready for this?) unarmed.
I wrote above that Olmert was stupid for using the term "pogrom". In the first instance, since many many people think that what Israel did in South Lebanon two years ago was illegal, they can now call it a "pogrom". After all, if Olmert refers to what happened near Yitzhar as such, then surely what Omert did two years is at least that. Secondly, what the Arabs of ShfarAm did to a suspected Jewish terrorist two years ago, when the man was killed, has been defended by left-wing and Arab legislators and they have refused to term that a "pogrom". Moreover, I don't think Olmert himself referred to that act of violence but if I am wrong, I invite Mr. Olmert to correct me.
Of course, Olmert knows what a "pogrom" is. He initiated one. At Amona. What he had done at Amona cannot be compared to what was done at Asira Al-Qabaliya.
At Amona, as we all recall, hundreds were injured, some quite seriously and at least one a near-death casualty. At Amona, official security personnel - police, Yassam, Border Police, mounted calvary, etc., - were ordered to bash heads. And those were, in one way or another, Olmert's orders.
That was a pogrom, a real one.
My good friend and former partner in anti-Oslo demonstrations, Alex King, is an enthusiastic bicycle rider. He rides everywhere.
And he decided to bike ride all the way to Kever Rachel.
He didn't get there.
He had to leave his bicycle behind. Only motorized vehicles, that is, things that move with engines, could cross the IDF's security checkpoint.
Is this harrassment? Is Condi Rice going to get involved? Will the EU's humanitarian concern be displayed?
I doubt it.
If you have any good ideas about getting Alex to Rachel's Tomb on his bicycle, let us know please.
And keep those wheels spinning.
Here's a Reuter's story, straight from Dani Dayan, Yesha Council Chairman.
There's been much discussion, some of it irrational and flaming, about the Council, so let's open it up again.
Read the story and comment.
And if that doesn't interest you, does a Bob Dylan interview and story from 1987? If so, then go here.
Would you like to read about the talk I gave to UC at Irvine students, Muslims, Jews and Christians?
And you did read about the Biden-Begin contretemps back in 1982? And how I proved that Marty Peretz of The New Republic was wrong. If not, go here.