Israeli Deputy Minister Slams Possible Involvement of Martin Indyk in Peace Talks, Calls for ‘Honest Broker’

Israeli Deputy Minister Slams Possible Involvement of Martin Indyk in Peace Talks, Calls for ‘Honest Broker’

JULY 22, 2013

Algemeiner Staff

Media reports that former United States Ambassador to Israel Martin Indyk has been selected by the Obama administration to lead new negotiations between Israel and the Palestinian Authority announced Friday, have elicited strong opposition, including from an Israeli deputy minister, The Algemeiner has learned.

Deputy Defense Minister Danny Danon penned a letter to Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu opposing a scenario whereby Indyk would take on the pivotal role in the talks, citing the veteran politician’s chairmanship at the New Israel Fund, an organization which has been criticized for supporting organizations that seek to harm the Jewish State.

“The former ambassador, Mr. Martin Indyk, is the Chair of the International Council of the New Israel Fund which provides funding to anti-Zionist organizations that accuse Israel of war crimes,” wrote Danon in the letter.

“I request that you ask the American administration for an honest broker for these negotiations,” he demanded.

“The fact that he it is a board member of the New Israel Fund makes him an inappropriate person to be the point man of the United States for the peace talks,” said Ronen Shoval, Founder and Chairman of Im Tirtzu, a major Israeli Zionist organization that has been active in opposing the work of the NIF, “being as he (Indyk) is known to the Israeli public as someone that is related to the New Israel Fund which supports anti-Israeli organizations.”

“We call on this administration to appoint someone who is not known to have a relationship with an organization that is known as an anti Israeli organization,” he requested, adding, ”We are sure that there are plenty of worthy candidates that are not connected to the New Israel Fund.”

Shoval explained why his organization has opposed the NIF saying, “They supported organizations that falsely blamed Israel for war crimes in the Goldstone report. They are funding organizations that are trying to get Israeli soldiers and officials arrested in certain countries, and they are supporting organizations that are active in the BDS movement and Israel apartheid week.”

“We also call on other organizations that are deeply worried about the future of middle east peace to call on the administration to replace Martin Indyk,” Shoval concluded.

Earlier today State Department Spokeswoman Jen Psaki “denied that any decision on negotiators or envoys has been made,” reported The Times of Israel. “Psaki said that Secretary of State John Kerry is still ‘putting together the right combination of players,’ but denied that any decision on negotiators or envoys has been made,” the paper wrote.

Reached on the phone by The Algemeiner, Gail Chalef, Director of Communications for the Brookings Institute where Indyk is currently vice president and director, foreign policy declined to comment, saying that Indyk’s involvement or lack thereof had yet to be determined.

On Friday U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry announced the resumption of direct-negotiations between Israel and the Palestinian Authority, and said the two sides would meet in Washington in the coming weeks.

The last round of direct peace talks between Israel and the PA broke down in 2010.

I The European Union tests Israel’s resolve and desire to survive II Israel/US Letting their Guard Down

I The European Union tests Israel’s resolve and desire to survive II Israel/US Letting their Guard Down

I European Sanctions Against Israel

By Ambassador (ret.) Yoram Ettinger

“Israel Hayom” (Israel’s most widely read daily paper)
July 19, 2013,

There are no free lunches in personal and national struggles, especially when it comes to the Jewish people, and certainly not in the Middle East.

Successful struggles require defiance of pressure, which has been an integral part of the Jewish people and the Jewish State from time immemorial. In fact, defiance of pressure has ensured the survival of Judaism and the Jewish people.

During the last 65 years, Israel benefitted significantly by resisting pressure, stronger than that imposed by the European Union: the effective US military embargo and the threat of economic embargo in 1948, suspension of the transfer of advanced US military systems and joint military exercises, etc.

It was Israel’s defiance of pressure which facilitated the establishment of Israel in 1948; the annexation of western Jerusalem and parts of Tel Aviv, the Galilee and the Negev in 1949; the reunification of Jerusalem and construction of Jewish neighborhoods in eastern Jerusalem in 1967; the destruction of Iraq’s nuclear reactor in 1981; the application of Israeli law in the Golan Heights in 1981; the settlement of 375,000 Jews in Judea & Samaria and 250,000 Jews in eastern Jerusalem since 1967; etc.

Resisting pressure has secured the survival of the Jewish State, the bolstering of Israel’s posture of deterrence, the enhancement of Israel’s role as a unique strategic ally of the US, which can be trusted on a rainy day.

From 1948 through 1992, Israeli Prime Ministers, usually, fended off US pressure to make “painful concession,” and therefore enhanced respect toward Israel, dramatically expanding US-Israel strategic cooperation. Sixty-five years of independence have demonstrated that numerous forms of pressure on Israel have just been hurdles on the road to globally unprecedented growth: economically, militarily, technologically, scientifically and demographically.

A government that sacrifices strategic goals in order to avoid pressure strays away from the legacy of Israel’s Founding Fathers. A government which fails to defy pressure and assume a tactical, short-term, limited cost, required to retain independence of political/diplomatic action and to advance strategic, long-term, essential goals, forfeits the trust of its citizenry and the respect of its allies and the international community.

Succumbing to European pressure would radicalize the Palestinian position, generate further pressure and reduce the slim chance for peace. This would ignore the post World War II European precedent of Land-for-Peace, with belligerent Germany being punished by transferring land to its victims: France, Poland and Czechoslovakia. In 2013, Europe is eager to punish the intended victim, Israel, by transferring land to the belligerent Arabs, hence rewarding and encouraging belligerence.

Giving in to European pressure would reward “Better Red than Dead” Europe, which violates economic sanctions against Iran, while imposing sanctions on Israel, the only democratic, capable, reliable and unconditional ally of the Free World.

Retreat in the face of European pressure would ignore the implications of the stormy, chaotic Arab winter, and overlook the unprecedented surge in hate-education, terrorism and non-compliance since the conclusion of the 1993 Oslo Accords. This retreat would transform Jerusalem into an enclave connected to the coastal plain by a 2-4 mile wide corridor. It would reduce Israel to a 9-15 mile sliver along the Mediterranean, over-towered by the Judea & Samaria mountain ridges, which dominate Tel Aviv, Ben Gurion Airport and 80% of Israel’s population and infrastructure.

It would relegate Israel from a national security producer to a national security consumer, depriving the US of Israel’s unique national security contributions.

Shabbat Shalom and have a pleasant weekend,

II Israel Is Letting Its Guard Down

Wall Street Journal, JULY 19, 2013

By MARK HELPRIN

If finally compelled to do so, Israel is able to destroy the Iranian nuclear-weapons program, even if at breathtaking risk. Whether or not Israel succeeds on that front, it faces yet another existential military problem, less immediate and on a different register, in regard to which it has made the wrong choice.

Though history may never repeat itself exactly, it does have affection for certain themes. One of these is that of a nation suicidally disarming because it rests upon the laurels of the past, or believes in the satisfying delusion that by intellectual formulation it can safely predict the future intentions and capabilities of rivals and enemies. (Not unlike the US) jsk

Prior to the Yom Kippur War of 1973, Israel was so intoxicated by its brilliant victories in 1967 that (substituting excessive confidence for military prudence) it was very nearly destroyed. After shattering Israel’s defenses, the Egyptian army halted only because of Israel’s nuclear deterrent, after which the tide of war turned only because of an extraordinary American resupply effort authorized by President Nixon, something that would hardly have been a certainty with a President Obama.

Because Israel is understandably tired of war and wants to tend its vineyards, and because its military, like America’s, has come down with a potentially fatal case of think-tankitis, the government believes that, as recently expressed by Defense Minister Moshe Yaalon, “Wars of military versus military—in the format we last met 40 years ago in the Yom Kippur War—are becoming less and less relevant.” Accordingly, Israel plans to cut its already diminished defense budget by more than one dollar in 20; release a large proportion of career officers; and reduce further the numbers of its planes, tanks and warships. The military will be shaped to fight Hamas, Hezbollah, and intifadas rather than the armies of Egypt, Syria, and whoever might join them.

The fallacy of this course is that, despite persistent internal troubles and external conflicts, the Arab confrontation states have coalesced at unlikely times and in unlikely circumstances. In 1948, obsessed with throwing off European domination and asserting independence, they nonetheless combined to make war on a nascent Israel, nearly wiping it out. In 1967, war hysteria from the Atlantic to the Persian Gulf reached such a frenzy of self-actualization that virtually no observers were confident that Israel would prevail—until it did. In 1973, against nearly all expectations, Egypt (always at the verge of bankruptcy) and Syria (always engaged in repression) nearly put an end to the Jewish state.

Although the divisions and travails of the Arab world retard coordinated action against Israel, the Arab world at times addresses these very problems by going to war against Israel. Egypt’s army is now preoccupied, but hardly exhausted or depleted. If the Syrian regime holds, its army will be lean, habituated to action and endowed with advanced Russian weapons. And other Arab and Islamic states, their militaries swelling and at rest, cannot be excluded from the strategical calculus.

Were Turkey to become sufficiently Islamist, which it may, its vast and modernizing armed forces would be a nightmare for now overconfident Israeli planners. Saudi Arabia’s air force (soon 380 combat aircraft, primarily F-15s) is rapidly gaining on Israel (441 combat aircraft) in quantity and quality. Were the Saudis to take a Muslim-solidarity time-out with Iran and join Egypt, Syria and perhaps even Turkey to defeat Israel in an air war, it would mean Israel’s death?

Yes, Israel’s adversaries know of its nuclear weapons. But if the Iranian nuclear program succeeds? If Saudi Arabia, in reaction, develops its own nuclear weapons? Or if jihadists take over Pakistan and its substantial nuclear arsenal? Then, having stalemated Israel’s nuclear deterrent, the confrontation states—if they could achieve air superiority—would need only gnaw on Israel with ground forces for as long as it might take. Is it therefore time for Israel to slow the growth and development of its air force?

The diminution of Israel’s tanks is nothing new. Ten years ago it had 4,000 in active inventory, now 480. Supposedly, nowadays only retrograde armies have them. Britain and France, for example, have token forces of 227 and 254 respectively, whereas Syria has 5,000. This is because “smart” weapons carried by infantrymen, light vehicles and aircraft can make quick work of tanks. However, with air dominance, such weapons cannot be launched at one’s tanks by enemy planes. With appropriate heavy artillery, also much out of fashion, and tanks equipped with anti-personnel ammunition, infantry is similarly disempowered. Thus freed, the tank is an agile combination of mobile artillery, armored fighting vehicle and personnel carrier able to execute the broad strategic movements that win conventional wars. This is especially true in the deserts of the Middle East or on the plains of Central Europe, where the field of maneuver is hospitable to quick and decisive strokes.

Israel’s leadership is canny, as the country’s survival attests, but it doesn’t always know best. Prior to the near-defeat of 1973, a number of Israeli analysts had strong indications of impending catastrophe. Among those who refused to heed correct and timely advice were David Elazar, the Israeli military’s chief of staff at the time, Moshe Dayan, minister of defense, and Golda Meir, the prime minister.

After the war, Elazar was forced to resign, Dayan suffered a nervous breakdown, and Meir’s government fell, because so nearly did Israel. In relying upon beliefs of the moment and conceptualizing away the threat, they had foresworn the extra margin of safety that was their duty to uphold. Forty years later, Israel must not make the same mistake.

Mr. Helprin, novelist, senior fellow at the Claremont Institute, and graduate of Harvard’s Center for Middle Eastern Studies, served in the Israeli infantry and air force. His latest novel is “In Sunlight and In Shadow” (Houghton-Mifflin Harcourt, 2012).

Middle East Conflicts Wall Memorial honors our unsung, as usual, departed heros

A huge thank you to Illinois Valley Cellular Telephone Company for establishing this memorial.

Middle East Conflicts Wall Memorial honors our unsung, as usual, departed heros

On June 19th, 2004 a Granite Memorial Wall was dedicated commemorating the servicemen and women who have lost their lives in worldwide conflicts since 1979. The project was conceived by Jerry Kuczera and Tony Cutrano and built with donated material and labor and is the first of its kind, in the History of the United States, to give honor to our fallen by name while a conflict is ongoing. It took 20 years to Honor our Vietnam Veterans. Almost 60 years to Honor our World War II Veterans. The names on the wall represent our fallen heroes from such diverse locations as Panama, Lebanon, the Balkans, Grenada, Somalia, Haiti, USS Cole, USS Stark, Terrorist attacks in Italy, Greece, Scotland, and the current conflicts in the Middle East.
The Wall is located at 200 Riverfront Drive in Marseilles, Illinois.

The Purpose of the Illinois Motorcycle Freedom Run is to show our brave Servicemen and Women, and their Families, that we support them, and to Honor Fallen Heroes. The route is lined with Americans waving American Flags and paying tribute. In the past we have had 10′s of thousands of participants. The money raised through you generous donations is used to update and maintain the Memorial, and to put this wonderful event together.

The first Memorial we erected was in the small town of St Anne Illinois. the hometown of Capt. Ryan A. Beaupre, one of Illinois first casualties in the war against terror. We have donated Memorials to all of the Veteran Homes and Hospitals in The State of Illinois in Honor of all our Veterans , Past and Present. We Have assisted many of our Fallen Heroes Children, with funds for their education, in hopes that through education, they will learn to diplomatically resolve their problems.

With parade, pomp and patriotism, the Marseilles community — helped by La Salle County area families and friends — wrapped their arms around nearly 60 soldiers who returned home from Afghanistan to a hero’s welcome Saturday afternoon. Hundreds of people lined both sides of the yellow ribbon-decorated Main Street with flags, signs and salutes for the troops from Company A of the 33rd Brigade Special Troops Battalion. The soldiers exited their buses to walk in formation through town as crowds cheered.

Escorted by screaming police cars and fire engines, the parade was short, yet felt long by anxious relatives waiting to personally greet their returning loved ones. Names were shouted from the crowd as the soldiers marched by proud and tall.”There’s Uncle Mike!” screamed four-year-old Aiden Schneider with his younger brother Jaxon as Staff Sgt. Mike Filipiak of La Salle came into view. The boys’ mother, Kristie Schneider of La Salle, beamed as she saw her brother in the formation. Filipiak had been deployed for 11 months.

Tears welled in the eyes of Rosemary Therriault as she caught sight of her son, Adam Therriault, of Wedron, as he passed down the street. The Yorkville mother said she was “excited, happy and very relieved” to know her son was home safe after his second deployment overseas. She said Adam had previously told her he wanted “a big fat burger” after he got home and she was going to see that he got one. Adam was employed as a painter for the family business, LeCuyer Painting and Decorating in Sandwich, before his mission began last winter.

Bobby Kaminski of BoominDJ of Marseilles played loud patriotic music as the parade moved south. Climbing back aboard the buses, the troops were followed by a procession of vehicles to a brief ceremony at the Marseilles Illinois National Guard Armory.
“The Illinois National Guard is proud of these soldiers and the state of Illinois should be proud of these men and women as well,” said Maj. Gen. William Enyart, adjutant general for the Illinois National Guard.

Prayers were given for the nine soldiers within the battalion, which included Sgt. Chester W. Hosford who last lived in Ottawa, who were killed in Afghanistan.

Company A was one of several troop units from from the 33rd Battalion to return to Illinois over the weekend. Other units arrived in Litchfield, Machesney Park and Marion. Remaining soldiers from the combat team are expected to return stateside during the next few weeks.The battalion of 700 soldiers was the largest overseas deployment of the Illinois National Guard since World War II. Their missions throughout Afghanistan included security operations, police mentoring duties and embedded training team missions to instruct local Afghan troops.

When asked if there were any other Marseilles area relatives in the crowd waiting for returning family members, Patti Smith, Illinois River Area Chamber of Commerce executive director, said, “Today, in a way, we’re all relatives.”

Video of Wall:

Critique of the Judge at the Zimmerman trial

Judge Presiding Over Zimmerman Trial Repeatedly Put Thumb On Scales

http://israel-commentary.org/?p=6998

INVESTOR’S BUSINESS DAILY
July 12, 2013

Injustice: There are biased judges, and then there’s Debra Nelson, who’s presided over what can only be called a kangaroo court in the George Zimmerman trial.

The bias of Nelson, Florida Circuit Court judge and a lifelong Democrat, in favor of the prosecution and its efforts to railroad Zimmerman as a racist murderer has been palpable throughout the case. Her actions, which have actively aided the state, could poison jurors and factor into future litigation.

Her shameful rulings and behavior, therefore, are worth cataloging, and include:

•Suppressing exculpatory evidence recovered from the (double-password-protected) cell phone of Trayvon Martin that reveal deleted texts of the 17-year-old bragging about street-fighting with friends and relatives and photos showing him brandishing guns, gangsta-style. This evidence supports Zimmerman’s claim he feared Martin and shot in self-defense.

•Disallowing Martin’s criminal background, including arrests by Miami-Dade school district police for drugs, theft, graffiti and other delinquent behavior. (Martin, in fact, had been suspended from school the week he jumped Zimmerman inside his gated townhouse complex, after police found stolen jewelry and burglary tools inside his backpack.)

•Excluding any testimony from audio experts who could definitively ID Zimmerman’s voice screaming for help on 911 calls as Martin bashed his head against a concrete sidewalk.

•Allowing, conversely, the last-minute request of plainly desperate prosecutors to have jurors consider an alternative lesser charge of manslaughter to try to secure some kind of conviction, any kind of punishment, in the complete absence of a sound murder case.

•Never sanctioning the prosecution despite Zimmerman’s lawyers justifiably filing no fewer than six formal complaints against the state for withholding exculpatory and other evidence from them in violation of discovery rules.

•Yet repeatedly overruling — at times even reprimanding — Zimmerman’s lawyers when they objected to the underhanded tactics of the prosecution.

•And even, in one of the most bizarre interventions by a judge many court watchers have ever observed in a criminal case, directly grilling defendant Zimmerman not once, but three times about his intentions to personally testify — while scolding his lawyers not to counsel him in what seemed to many to be an attempt by the court to bully him into taking the stand.

Seeing prosecutors losing the case, Nelson jumped into the ring to give them a direct shot at Zimmerman in a last-ditch attempt to make him look guilty in front of the jury.

Even former prosecutors slammed Nelson for her obnoxious impartiality. Andrew C. McCarthy, a former U.S. attorney who has prosecuted major criminal cases, called the trumped-up Zimmerman case a “travesty” of justice from start to finish. Any other judge would have thrown the case out as the garbage it was.

“In presiding over the trial of George Zimmerman, Judge Debra Nelson has made some awful rulings — none worse than failing to direct a verdict of acquittal on the preposterous second-degree ‘depraved mind’ murder charge,” McCarthy wrote.

“The state’s evidence that Zimmerman had the necessary criminal intent is non-existent, much less sufficient to meet the ‘beyond a reasonable doubt’ standard,” he explained. “Compelling evidence, moreover, establishes that Zimmerman acted in self-defense, a claim the state has not come close to refuting.”

Yet Nelson prevented jurors from hearing all that evidence. Over and over again, she ruled as inadmissible key facts and data that could have reinforced Zimmerman’s plea of self-defense.

PS “The reason that Trayvon was not in school at that time was because he was suspended for robbery: he had jewelry and, I believe, a computer which were stolen. The reason that he was not arrested was that the administrator in charge of the investigation wanted to prove to the public that the number of robberies committed by students was down. Therefore, he or she described his crime as a disciplinary action instead.”
Eddie (Auberg@aol.com)

Finally, Evidently, Nelson has higher ambitions, having twice applied for open seats on Florida’s supreme court. Let’s hope for the sake of impartial justice the governor continues to pass her over. She really has no business sitting on any bench.

William Kristol’s (Editor, Weekly Standard) evaluation of our State of the Union, July 4, 2013

William Kristol’s (Editor, Weekly Standard) evaluation of our State of the Union, July 4, 2013

The Spirit of ’76
BY WILLIAM KRISTOL
The Weekly Standard, JUL 8, 2013

“For ourselves, let the annual return of this day forever refresh our recollections of these rights, and an undiminished devotion to them.”

So wrote Thomas Jefferson, in what turned out to be the last words he set to paper, in a June 24, 1826, letter to Washington, D.C., mayor Roger Weightman. Jefferson was regretfully declining an invitation to travel to the nation’s capital to celebrate the 50th anniversary of American independence with the District’s citizens as well as with “the small band, the remnant of that host of worthies, who joined with us on that day, in the bold and doubtful election we were to make for our country, between submission or the sword.” Jefferson explained he couldn’t travel because of “circumstances not placed among those we are permitted to control.” He died at home a few days later—on July 4.

Jefferson had been 33 when he served as the principal author of the Declaration. His fellow member of the drafting committee, John Adams, also died on July 4, 1826. He had been 40 in 1776. The man who was at different times Jefferson’s and Adams’s adversary, arguably the greatest of the Founders, Alexander Hamilton, as a 20-year-old in 1775, admonished his countrymen that “The sacred rights of mankind are not to be rummaged for, among old parchments, or musty records.” He then while in his early 20s served as General George Washington’s chief of staff during the Revolution, was at age 33 one of the two primary authors of the Federalist Papers, and at age 34 became secretary of the Treasury.

The Founders were young. That doesn’t mean they weren’t respectful of the wisdom of the ages. “Experience must be our only guide,” John Dickinson instructed his fellow delegates to the Continental Congress. And today, too, as the 237th annual return of Independence Day refreshes our recollection of our rights and an undiminished devotion to them, experience has its claims. Experience, after all, teaches the price of weakness abroad and of bloated government at home. Experience also provides guidance for remedying these problems. The lessons of Reagan and Thatcher aren’t so distant as to be inaccessible nor so difficult as to be inapplicable.

But sober experience won’t be enough to remedy our ills. We’ve never been so weak while facing such dangerous circumstances abroad. We’ve never run up this kind of debt except when engaged in a world war. We’ve never had to repeal and replace a program like Obamacare. We’ve never had to deal with the near-dissolution of the family among sectors of our society. We’ve rarely had elites so out of touch with middle America and, in some ways, with reality.

So the remedies can’t simply be based on experience. They will have to be bold and will necessarily be doubtful. They will have to be of the kind characteristically chanced by the young. This includes the young in spirit, of course. Chronology is not destiny. In 1980 the 69-year-old Ronald Reagan was more youthful in attitude than all the earnest 30-year-old establishment wannabes. In 1940 the 65-year-old Winston Churchill was more youthful in spirit than all the world-weary appeasers born decades after him.

In the 2014 elections, the fading appeal and dogmatic rigidity of reactionary liberalism will be nicely embodied by the Democrats’ congressional leaders, the septuagenarians Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi. Within the executive branch, a septuagenarian vice president and sexagenarian secretaries of defense and state are fronted by a young president with old ideas, tired views stubbornly impervious to change, and an increasingly cranky temperament.

Liberalism’s standard-bearer in 2016 will most likely be Hillary Clinton, who has maneuvered through four decades in American public life manifesting that characteristic combination of today’s liberalism—a keen attention to personal grasping and advancement along with the profession of glittering generalities and the adoption of fine-sounding policies regardless of actual real-world consequences. About these Bourbons of elite liberalism, one can only echo Talleyrand: They have learned nothing and forgotten nothing.

Against them will stand the American people, resisting as best they can the depredations of modern liberalism, led by whom? With all due respect to Mitch McConnell and John Boehner, theirs can’t be the spirit of 2014. And the spirit of 2016 can’t be the spirit of the recent presidential nominees, John McCain and Mitt Romney. The animating Republican spirit in these crucial elections has to be more like that of the young Jefferson of the Declaration and the young Hamilton of The Federalist. And of the 23-year-old Abraham Lincoln, who, in his first run for elective office, wrote to his fellow citizens that he had no ambition so great “as that of being truly esteemed of my fellow men, by rendering myself worthy of their esteem.”

So, to the young and ambitious who are stirred by the admonition that, “It is better to be impetuous than cautious, because fortune is a woman. And one sees that she lets herself be won more by the impetuous than by those who proceed coldly. And so always, like a woman, she is the friend of the young, because they are less cautious .  .  . and command her with more audacity”—to the young in either body or spirit, we say: Run, baby, run.

The Founding Fathers dedication to Moses and the Jewish Holiday of Passover

Revised from an Israel Commentary article of April 2012

By Ambassador (ret.) Yoram Ettinger

http://israel-commentary.org/?p=3171

Published in “Israel Hayom” (Most read daily newspaper in Israel)

March 30, 2012

Passover, and especially the legacy of Moses and the Exodus, has been part of the American story since the seventeenth century, inspiring the American pursuit of liberty, justice and morality.

The special role played by Passover – and the Bible – in shaping the American state of mind constitutes the foundation of the unique relations between the American People and the Jewish State. As important as are the current mutual threats and interests between the US and Israel, the bedrock of the unbreakable US-Israel alliance are permanent values, principles and legacies, such as Passover.

In 1620 and 1630, William Bradford and John Winthrop delivered sermons on the “Mayflower” and “Arbella,” referring to the deliverance from “modern day Egypt and Pharaoh,” to “the crossing of the modern day Red Sea” and to New Zion/Canaan as the destination of the Pilgrims on board.

In 1776, Thomas Paine, the author of Common Sense (which cemented public support for the revolution), referred to King George as the “hardened, sullen tempered Pharaoh.”  Upon declaration of independence, Benjamin Franklin, the most secular Founding Father, John Adams and Thomas Jefferson, the second third American Presidents, proposed a Passover theme for the official US seal: the Pillar of Fire leading Moses and the Israelites through the Red Sea, while Pharaoh’s chariots drown in the Sea. The inscription on the seal was supposed to be: “Rebellion to Tyrants is Obedience to God,” framing the rebellion against the British monarchy as principle-driven. The lessons of the Jewish deliverance from Egyptian bondage reverberated thunderously among the Rebels, who considered the thirteen colonies to be “the modern day Twelve Tribes.”

The 19th century Abolitionists, and the Civil Rights movement from the 1940s to the 1970s, were inspired by the ethos of the Exodus and by the Bible’s opposition to slavery. In the 1830s, the Liberty Bell, an icon of American independence, was adopted by the Abolitionists, due to its Exodus-inspired inscription: “Proclaim liberty throughout all the Land unto all the Inhabitants thereof” (Leviticus 25:10).  Harriet Beecher Stowe, the author of Uncle Tom’s Cabin (1852), and her husband, Calvin Ellis Stowe (“The Little Rabbi”) were scholars of the Bible and the Exodus.  Harriet Tubman, who escaped slavery in 1849 and freed Black slaves on the Underground Railroad, earned the name “Moses.” The 1879/80 Black slaves who ran away to Kansas were called “the Exodusters.”  The most famous spiritual, “Go Down, Moses” was considered the National Anthem of Black slaves.

In 1865, following the murder of President Lincoln, most eulogies compared him to Moses.  Just like Moses, Lincoln liberated slaves, but was stopped short of the Promised Land. France paid tribute to the martyred Lincoln by erecting the Statue of Liberty, featuring rays of sun and a tablet, just like the glaring Moses descending from Mount Sinai with the Two Tablets of the Ten Commandments.

In 1954, Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. compared the Brown v. Board of Education Supreme Court decision to desegregate public schools to the parting of the Red Sea.  In 1964, upon receiving the Nobel Peace Prize, Dr. King proclaimed: “Oppressed people cannot remain oppressed forever. The yearning for freedom eventually manifests itself. The Bible tells the thrilling story of how Moses stood in Pharaoh’s court centuries ago and cried, ‘Let my people go.’”

President Reagan mentioned (Reagan at Westminster, 2010) Exodus as the first incident in a long line of Western resistance to tyranny: “Since the exodus from Egypt, historians have written of those who sacrificed and struggled for freedom – the stand at Thermopylae, the revolt of Spartacus, the storming of the Bastille, the Warsaw uprising in World War II.”

In July, 2003, President Bush stated, in Senegal, “In America, enslaved Africans learned the story of the exodus from Egypt, and set their own hearts on a promised land of freedom.”

In March, 2007, President Obama said in Selma, Alabama that the civil rights pioneers were the “Moses generation” and he was part of the “Joshua generation” that would “find our way across the river.”

(What Chutzpa!  Obama as Joshua! More confirmation of Obama’s classic narcissism and grandiose posturing) jsk

In 2012, the statue of Moses stares at the Speaker of the House, another statue of Moses towers above the seats of the Supreme Court Justices, a Ten Commandment monument sits on the ground of the Texas State Capitol and a similar monument will be shortly erected on the ground of the Oklahoma State Capitol.

In 2012, the leader of the Free World and its sole soul ally in the Mid-East, Israel, are facing the most lethal threat to liberty since 1945 – conventional and non-conventional Islamic terrorism. Adherence to the legacy of Passover, marshaling the conviction-driven leadership of Moses, and demonstrating the Joshua and Caleb courage and defiance of odds, will once again facilitate the victory of liberty over tyranny.

 

Ambassador (ret.) Yoram Ettinger, “Second Thought: US-Israel Initiative”

Addendum Comments:

On Apr 1, 2012, at 12:12 PM, cody flecker wrote:

Actually Uriah P Levy was the first Commodore in the US Navy serving in the war of 1812. His nephew was Jefferson Monroe Levy, and it was he who bought the run down home and estate of Thomas Jefferson (Monticello) at an auction. Jefferson Monroe Levy while not a religious Jew was at best an observant Jew. He was one of the founders of the American Jewish Congress, after the pogroms started in Russia in the latter part of the 19th century. The Admiral that you are referring to was Admiral Rickover who was the father of the modern nuclear fleet.

Also, Your article failed to mention that Judah P Benjamin was the highest elected Jew in the Confederacy 100 years before those honors were again bestowed upon a Jew (Henry Kissinger)

Regards,

Cody Flecker

Thanks and …  How about Benjamin Cardoza, Supreme Court Justice (Benjamin Nathan Cardozo (May 24, 1870 – July 9, 1938) was a well-known American lawyer and associate Supreme Court Justice and actually the first Hispanic  on the Court well ahead of the present Far Left Justice Sonia Sotomayer  that erroneously declared for that honor. 

Haym Solomon was the guy that financed George Washington through the American Revolution. Admiral Hyman RICKOVER, FATHER OF US NUCLEAR NAVY, developed nuclear powered submarine, died 1986

And, I am sure that are hundreds if not thousands of others of whom we can all be very proud.