What made this announcement even more troubling was the fact that it was made a matter of hours after The Jerusalem Post reported that "Israeli officials dismissed on Tuesday a Palestinian Authority demand for an international inquiry into the death of Palestinian detainee Arafat Jaradat as a 'predictable' maneuver and part of a larger strategy to bring the international community into the conflict whenever possible." It is difficult to see how Aharonovitch's statement cannot be interpreted as hasty Israeli capitulation to Mahmoud Abbas's strident demand, issued at the the PLO Executive Committee meeting in Ramallah on Tuesday, "for an international commission of inquiry to find out how Jaradat was assassinated in prison.
Israeli leaders need to realize that the litmus test of good diplomacy is not to get the world to applaud your compliancy and capitulation, but to accept your pursuit of national interests and imperatives.
Definition of "sovereignty": Supreme power or authority; the authority of a state to govern itself; complete power to govern a country; the state of being a country with freedom to govern itself. - The Oxford Dictionary
Our hope a hope 2,000 years old will not be lost: To be a free people in our land, the land of Zion and Jerusalem - From the national anthem, "Hatikva"
You can take the Jews out of the ghetto, but you can't take the ghetto out of the Jews - A disparaging dictum of uncertain origins
Just over a year ago, I wrote a column in this series titled "Surrendering sovereignty" (December 2, 2011), which I commenced with very similar introductory excerpts.
In it, I severely criticized the government's reversal of its decision to replace the Mughrabi Bridge, linking the Western Wall and the Temple Mount.
The wooden bridge, built in 2007, which provides the only access for non- Muslims to the Temple Mount complex, and was always intended to be a temporary structure, was deemed to be in a state of dangerous disrepair in 2011.
However, when confronted by shrill and wildly unfounded accusations from various Islamic sources that the construction of a new, permanent and structurally safe bridge was intended to cause the collapse of the Dome of the Rock (almost half a kilometer away from the planned ramp), together with threats of violence in Israel, and warnings of instability in various Arab states, the government backed down.
The following is from that article: "It is easy to downplay the significance of the decision; to present it as giving precedence to prudence over pride. That would be a mistake.
"For it is yet another symptom of the insidious spread of an ongoing malaise, gnawing away at the foundations of the Jewish national ethos. It is a malaise that if not soon confronted, will have perilously corrosive consequences... By its actions... the government has in effect conferred the status of force majeure on Muslim rage an inevitable force of nature which can only be avoided by Israeli capitulation..."
This week we were given by means of a seemingly minor event a disturbing reminder that this malignant malaise is just as virulent as ever.
This was the announcement on Wednesday to the Knesset by Public Security Minister Yitzhak Aharonovitch that Israel is contemplating the participation of an international investigator in the inquest regarding Arafat Jaradat, the Palestinian detainee, who died in Israeli custody, after being arrested for hurling stones and a Molotov cocktail at Israeli troops.
What made this announcement even more troubling was the fact that it was made a matter of hours after The Jerusalem Post reported that "Israeli officials dismissed on Tuesday a Palestinian Authority demand for an international inquiry into the death of Palestinian detainee Arafat Jaradat as a 'predictable' maneuver and part of a larger strategy to bring the international community into the conflict whenever possible."
It is difficult to see how Aharonovitch's statement cannot be interpreted as hasty Israeli capitulation to Mahmoud Abbas's strident demand, issued at the the PLO Executive Committee meeting in Ramallah on Tuesday, "for an international commission of inquiry to find out how Jaradat was assassinated in prison."
While many agree that the affable Aharonovitch is perhaps not the sharpest knife in the governmental drawer, he is nevertheless a minister responsible for a vitally important sphere of state activity that impinges on the lives of the entire population.
It is more than a little disconcerting that he apparently has such a poor grasp of the basic do's and don'ts entailed in the exercise of national sovereignty.
For whether intentional or not, Aharonovitch's announcement can only ≠ and inevitably will be seen as a clear expression of no-confidence in the competence and integrity of the Israeli authorities to investigate misdeeds allegedly committed by official organs of the state.
Whether he meant it or not, it will be seen as endorsing those who wish to cast the gravest aspersions on Israel and its credibility.
In so doing he has unwittingly or otherwise shown disrespect and disregard for the professional capabilities and the moral standing of his country, implying that it cannot be trusted without outside supervision. The unbecoming alacrity with which he embraced the Palestinian demands makes him willfully or not complicit with the efforts of Israel's most hostile adversaries' efforts to demean, demonize and delegitimize it.
It seems to indicate that even after almost seven decades of political independence, the Jewish people has not managed to internalize the cognizance of the inalienable rights that accrue to, and the indispensable duties that are demanded of, a people who wish to maintain and administer their national sovereignty.
It is patently preposterous to suggest that Israel is not capable of conducting a credible inquiry into the Jarafat incident without international accompaniment.
More than any other country, Israel has proved itself able to conduct exceedingly some might say, excessively harsh investigations into allegations of malfeasance perpetrated by official organizations and individuals no matter how prominent or senior.
Defense minister Ariel Sharon was forced from office (1983) by the all-Israeli Kahan Commission's inquiry into the events relating to massacres conducted by Christian Phalangist forces in the Palestinian camps of Sabra and Shatilla.
The head of the Shin Bet (Israel Security Agency), Avraham Shalom, along with several other senior members of the organization, was dismissed following the killing of two terrorists (1984), belonging to the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine after their attempt to hijack a busload of civilians was foiled. True, the investigation process was torturous and flawed, and some might find the presidential pardons granted those involved questionable (although they were upheld by the High Court), but the truth regarding the events was largely exposed without any international intervention.
Finance minister Avraham Hirchson was convicted (2008 ) and imprisoned for embezzlement. One year earlier, justice minister Haim Ramon was convicted for sexual misconduct. In 2010, Tzachi Hanegbi, who held numerous important ministerial and parliamentary positions, was convicted of perjury. The president of Israel, Moshe Katsav, was tried and convicted (2011) for sexual transgressions, including rape, and is serving a sevenyear sentence.
Prime minister Ehud Olmert was forced to step down following a series of charges brought against him. He was convicted of breach of trust (2012) and is facing additional bribery charges.
So while there might be those who feel that the punitive measures handed out in the above-mentioned incidents were not sufficiently severe (and others that they were overly severe), Israel has proved itself willing to pursue investigations/inquiries into claims of any wrongdoing, no matter how senior the alleged perpetrator or how embarrassing/ damaging the alleged transgressions.
I do not know if anything untoward occurred during Jaradat's incarceration or what in fact led to his demise. However, based on precedent, there can be little doubt that whatever (if any) penalties are eventually meted out, an all-Israeli inquiry will ferret out the truth.
Israel need take no lessons from anyone in investigating suspicions of malfeasance by any organizational entity or individual. Accordingly, the Palestinian demand for international intervention into the Jaradat affair is not a genuine quest for the facts but much like the ludicrous Turkish demand for an apology over the Mavi Maramra affair ≠ little more than a transparent attempt to show that it can coerce Israel to submit to its will.
This is precisely why Aharonovitch's inappropriately accommodating declaration entails potentially perilous consequences.
Indeed, it could open up a veritable floodgate of initiatives, aimed at neutralizing any autonomy in Israeli decision- making, investigation and inquiry.
License to second guess
In effect, it could comprise a license for any alien entity to second-guess every decision taken or conclusion drawn by Israeli authorities. For if international participation is called for to accompany the Jaradat affair, why should it not be called on for every other investigation? And if Israeli decisions or verdicts are not sufficient to satisfy foreigners, why should they be so for Israelis? Why should any Israeli citizen, who sees him/herself wronged by some judicial or administrative decision taken by an Israeli institution, not demand that it be reviewed by some international entity to ensure its credibility/fairness? Aharonovitch may have inadvertently or otherwise sown the seeds of an "ethos of expectation" in which continual Israeli concessions and compliance with the demands of others no matter how outlandish become the norm, from which no divergence is to be brooked.
Let's not forget the context
The death of Arafat Jaradat should be fully and fairly investigated. Any improper conduct toward the unfortunate detainee must he unflinchingly addressed. However, in doing so, we should not lose sight of the context.
While we might well sympathize with his young children, who lost their father, he was after all, according to numerous sources including the BBC and Al Jazeera, a member of the murderous Al-Aksa Brigades, which have chalked up a long and chilling list of bloody atrocities in which many Israeli civilians were butchered.
The acts he was arrested for are grave.
Stones are lethal weapons. Molotov cocktails indisputably are. Both can and have killed Israelis. Hurling them at soldiers should not be lightly dismissed.
Indeed, it should be considered an act of attempted homicide. The ineffectiveness of the attempt should not be a mitigating factor in assessing the gravity of the intent.
Those involved in such activities should expect to be treated harshly, perhaps even to sustain injuries when being apprehended. In such circumstances, Israel has every reason to doubt the impartiality of international participants even under the assumption that they may have no inherent bias against it. For example, foreign media representatives have been threatened with physical retribution for disclosing the truth as witnessed by the fate of journalists who dared to attempt recording the brutal lynching of two Israeli reservists in Ramallah (2000).
Talkbackers get what government doesn't
While the government seems oblivious to the impact its response to the demands in the Jadarat affair could have on the nation's sovereign status, the same certainly cannot be said of the general public or at least segments thereof such as readers of the Post.
Consider the reaction by some talkbackers to the report on Aharonovitch's announcement, who with variable degrees of courtesy, finesse and grammatical rigor, expressed the follow astute perspectives:
Frank Adam: "Israel will have submitted to the Arab aim to prove Israel [has] only partial or limited sovereignty."
Boris: "israel needs to stop being so insecure. if it wants to survive. it needs to stop having something to prove. like its right to exist"
Evil Zionist: "It will be a dangerous precedent and undermine our sovereignty"
iCry: "Next experts will need to be called in to "prove" Israel didn't poison the original Arafat.... Arabs can make Israel jump like a trained seal."
And finally, NormanF: "The Israeli government's default mode is to surrender to Arab blackmail, threats and intimidation. It can't say "no" and uphold Jewish sovereignty... Any other country on earth would never accept for themselves the "international observer" nonsense Aharonovitch peddled before the Knesset. It would reject outright all attempts to compromise its independence. What his statement proved again in the face of escalating global anti-Semitism, is that its easy to take the Jew out of the ghetto but its very difficult to take the ghetto out of the Jew!"
The hallmark of good diplomacy
I found it difficult to disagree.
Until the leaders of the Jewish state realize that the litmus test of good diplomacy is not to get the world to applaud your compliancy and capitulation, but to accept your pursuit of national interests and imperatives, we will not be able to say we have truly extricated ourselves from the clutches of the ghetto mentality.
Martin Sherman (martinsherman.net) is the founder and executive director of the Israel Institute for Strategic Studies.
These days, final preparations are being made for the fourth Sovereignty Conference, which will be held on Sunday, the 16th of Tevet, February 12th, in conjunction with the periodical Basheva (and will be broadcast live on Arutz 7). In this conference as well, in which ministers, members of Knesset and public figures will take part, the various ideas of how to promote sovereignty will be presented. However, in contrast to previous conferences, in this conference, Matar and Katsover intend to outline a plan that will offer a first response to the challenges of sovereignty.
Palestinian leaders preach nonstop hatred of Jews and continually incite murderous violence against them. Palestinian schools teach children of every age that suicide martyrdom must be their highest goal. These attitudes are deeply ingrained in their culture, and getting their own state wonít change them. In fact, any Palestinian state would almost certainly be taken over by Hamas, whose charter explicitly calls for the death of all Jews everywhere.
The government of Israel has evacuated Amona Ė Does the Left or the world like us any better? Do they respect us more? Isnít it better to apply the law in Judea and Samaria, to absorb exactly the same condemnations that we get in any case, but to do it to rescue the Land of Israel and Amona as part of it?
Former US ambassador to the UN John Bolton, who reportedly had been a candidate for deputy secretary of state, published a poignant article in The Wall Street Journal last month in which he dubbed the two-state solution a deadend vision. Bolton claims that such an imaginary state with zero economic viability will harm not only Israel, but also the Palestinians themselves.
An Israeli public opinion poll, released on the eve of President Trumpís Inauguration, shows an overwhelming majority of Israelis are ready for sovereignty Ė now. The vast majority of the Israeli population would like to see Israeli sovereignty being applied over Judea and Samaria. Only seven percent of the public is interested in establishing a Palestinian state in these areas.
Given the new American Presidentís desire to actually cause the USA to prosper, and given the number of calls for breaking the regulatory strangle hold that some political bodies have on business and the community, I thought it might be worthwhile republishing this litte tale.
The point in providing these videos on behalf of the Clarion Project is to hopefully assist in getting the word out that the extreme liberal progressive ideology does not represent REALITY when dealing with the politically motivated fundamentalist Islamist plan.
Since 2004 he has been writing academic articles, social commentaries and photographic 'Stories from China' both here at KingsCalendar, and formerly as a contributing columnist at Magic City Morning Star News (Maine USA) where from 2009 to 2015 he was Stand-in Editor. He currently has a column at iPatriot.com and teaches English to Business English and Flight Attendant College Students in Suzhou City Jiangsu Province People's Republic of China.)
BenDedek originally created the site to publicize his research results into the Chronology of Ancient Israel. Those results were published under the title: 'The King's Calendar: The Secret of Qumran.' Whilst there have been many attempts to solve the chronological riddle of the Bible's synchronisms of reigns of the kings of Israel and Judah and their synchronism with other Ancient Near Eastern Nations, no other research is based on a simple mathematical formula which could, if it is incorrect, be disproved easily. To date, no one has been able to dismiss the mathematical results of this research.
Free to air Academic articles set forth Apologetics for and results of his discovery of an "artificial chronological scheme" running through the Bible, Josephus, the Damascus Documents of the Dead Sea Scrolls, and Seder Olam Rabbah. Check the Chapter Precis Page to see details of each chapter and to gain access to the Four Free to Air Chapters
(The Download book does not contain a section on Seder Olam)
Definition: King's Calendar Chronological Research
The Premise: Between the 5th and 3rd centuries BCE (but continuing down to at least 104 BCE), Sectarian redactors transcribed the legitimate 'solar year' chronological records of Israel and Judah, into an artificial form, with listed years as each comprised of 12 months of 4 weeks of 7 days, or 336 days per year, thus creating a 13th artificial year where 12 solar years existed.
When the Synchronous Chronological Data provided in the Books of Kings and Chronicles for the Divided Kingdom Period are measured in years of 336 days, the synchronisms actually align. [Refer to Appendix 5. to see how it synchronises the Divided Kingdom Period]