Arab Homes Demolished! More To Be Demolished!

No. Not by Israel.

Egypt demolishes 1,020 Rafah homes for Gaza buffer zone
17/03/2015 
CAIRO (Ma'an) -- The Egyptian army demolished 1,020 houses in the border city of Rafah as part of the second stage of the establishment of a buffer zone along the border with the Gaza Strip.  Egyptian security officials told a Ma'an reporter in El-Arish city on Tuesday that 200 more houses would be demolished to create a no-go zone extending 500 meters from the border fence. 

Families evacuated from the properties have already been reimbursed, the official said, adding that the Egyptian government had paid some 150 million Egyptian pounds ($19.7 million) in compensation to evacuated families.  The governor of the North Sinai district, Abd al-Fattah Harhour, said in January that each family would receive 1,500 Egyptian pounds ($209) to rent apartments for three months, in addition to 1,200 pounds ($167) for every square meter of cement and 700 pounds ($97) per square meter of the demolished home based on the bearing wall system.

A solution to terror?

Did the White House react?

J Street? 

Peace Now?

^

Netanyahu Corrected

From Jodi Ruderon's piece

Mr. Netanyahu now explains his building initiatives as an inevitable accommodation to natural growth and says they have not materially affected the map, only added, as he put it, “a few houses in existing communities.” He rebuts any suggestion that settlements are the core of the conflict, noting that Arabs and Jews were fighting in this land long before they existed.

“From 1920, when this conflict effectively began, until 1967, there wasn’t a single Israeli settlement or a single Israeli soldier in the territories, and yet this conflict raged,” he said in a May interview with Bloomberg View. “What was that conflict about? It was about the persistent refusal to recognize a Jewish state, before it was established and after it was established."

Let's refine that.

A)  Since Israel didn't exist until 1948, he should have the word "Jewish".

B)  Actually, there were in 1920 over 20,000 Jews in my estimation and perhaps more in those areas, mainly in Jerusalem's Old City but in Hebron, Gaza, Shchem and later many hundreds in the agricultural communities of Gush Etzion (4), Atarot, Neveh Yaakov, Bet Haarava, etc.

C) But he is correct in the final analysis - Arabs opposed Jewish presence everywhere.

^

Egypt Better Than Israel

In the field of operating animals and fowl and fish for nefarious ends.

There was that shark story 

Shark 'sent to Egypt by Mossad'
An Egyptian official has claimed that a shark that killed one person and left four others injured in Egypt could have been placed there by agents from Mossad, the Israeli spy agency.

and the bird story from Saudi Arabia

Saudi Arabia 'detains' Israeli vulture for spying
Saudi Arabian officials have "detained" a vulture on accusations of being a spy for Israel, media reports say.  The griffon vulture was carrying a GPS transmitter bearing the name of Tel Aviv University, prompting rumours it was part of a "Zionist plot".

Israeli wildlife officials dismissed the claims as ludicrous and expressed concern about the bird's fate.

There are a few others.

Now, meet the Egyptian pelican

Hungry pelican filmed attempting to eat woman’s arm and even nibbling at her FACE at Egyptian holiday resort
The woman appears to try and feed the pelican a piece of banana
But the long-beaked bird attempts to bite the woman's arm instead

A video of a pelican attempting to eat a Russian women on holiday in Hurghada, Egypt has appeared online and it’s rather surreal.  Approaching the long-beaked bird with what appears to be a piece of banana in her hand, the woman crouches down and attempts to feed it.
At first the pelican doesn't seem to be interested, but it eventually turns towards her and instead of going to eat the bit of food goes about trying to fit the lady's whole arm into its mouth.  The pelican decides that it isn't interested in banana and instead has a bit of the woman's face

And you thought the Middle East was a place of rational logic.

^

Churchill's Comment in GraphicZionism Portrayal

And, yes, he did express himself so:

I always had in my mind the hope that the whole ques­tion of the Mid­dle East might have been set­tled on the largest scale on the mor­row of vic­tory and that an Arab Con­fed­er­a­tion, com­pris­ing three or four Arab States—Saudi-Arabia, Iraq, Tran­sjor­da­nia, Syria and the Lebanon—however grouped, pos­si­bly united amongst them­selves, and one Jew­ish State, might have been set up, which would have given peace and unity through­out the whole vast scene of the Mid­dle East. As to whether so large a pol­icy could have been car­ried into being I can­not be sure, but a set­tle­ment of the Pales­tine ques­tion on the basis of par­ti­tion would cer­tainly have been attempted, in the clos­est pos­si­ble asso­ci­a­tion with the United States and in per­sonal con­tact with the Pres­i­dent, by any Gov­ern­ment of which I had been the head. But all this oppor­tu­nity was lost. (Churchill by Him­self, 176-77)

And since it were the Arabs who scuttled that partition, obviously it was a no-solution. 

This, too, is indicative:-

PALESTINE (JEWISH SETTLEMENT).

HC Deb 16 March 1922 vol 151

§26. Captain Viscount CURZON asked the Prime Minister whether it is the intention of His Majesty's Government to establish a national home for the Jews in Palestine; if so, whether, before such a decision was arrived at, the cost of such an undertaking received consideration; what is the direct cost to this country of such a policy to-day; and whether, in all the circumstances, this policy can be reconsidered in the interest of economy?

§Mr. CHURCHILL This question should be addressed to me. The reply to the first part of the question is in the affirmative. The policy of the Government, as the House is aware, was laid down in the letter addressed to Lord Rothschild in November, 1917, by my right hon. Friend the Lord President of the Council. The question of the grounds that led to the adoption of that policy is not one that can be dealt with by question and answer. I am not prepared to reconsider the policy that has been adopted... 

_____________

P.S.

For those asking about borders, here:

PLEDGES TO ARABS.HC Deb 11 July 1922 vol 156

23. Mr. LESTRANGE MALONE asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether, in view of the continual misinterpretations of our pledges to the Arabs, he will publish the letter of 24th October, 1915, from Sir Henry McMahon to the Sheriff of Mecca in full or the whole correspondence of which that letter formed one item?
§Mr. CHURCHILL No, Sir; it would not be in the public interest to publish one or all of the documents comprising the long and inconclusive correspondence that took place with the Sheriff of Mecca in 1915–16. I am dealing with the question of the alleged pledges to the Arabs in my reply to the hon. Member for North Stafford.
§31. Mr. ORMSBY-GORE asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies what pledges, if any, were made to the Palestine Arabs in the year 1915; whether the Sykes-Picot agreement, negotiated between the Governments of France and Great Britain before the Arabs entered the War as Allies, provided that in the event of Allied victory Palestine west of the Jordan was to be a separate international State with the exception of Haifa, which was to be British territory; and whether the Balfour declaration of November, 1917, was preceded by any pledges or promises regarding the future of Palestine?
§Mr. CHURCHILL No pledges were made to the Palestine Arabs in 1915. An undertaking was given to the Sheriff of Mecca that His Majesty's Government would recognise and support the independence of the Arabs within certain territorial limits, which specifically excluded the districts of Mersina and Alexandretta and the portions of Syria lying to the west of the districts of Damascus, Horns, Hama and Aleppo. It was also stipulated that the undertaking applied only to those portions of the territories concerned in which Great Britain was free to act without detriment to the interests of her Allies. His Majesty's Government have always regarded and continue to regard Palestine as excluded by these provisos from the scope of their undertaking. This is clear from the fact, to which the hon. Member refers, that in the following year they concluded an agreement with the French and Russian Governments under which Palestine was to receive special treatment.
So far as I am aware, the first suggestion that Palestine was included in the area within which His Majesty's Government promised to recognise and support the independence of the Arabs was made by the Emir Feisal, now King of Iraq, at a conversation held in the Foreign Office on the 20th January, 1921, more than five years after the conclusion of the correspondence on which the claim was based. On that occasion the point of view of His Majesty's Government was explained to the Emir, who expressed himself as prepared to accept the statement that it had been the intention of His Majesty's Government to exclude Palestine.

When I assumed responsibility for Middle Eastern affairs, I went carefully into the correspondence referred to, and my reading of it is the same as that of the Foreign Office, as was recently stated in the declaration of British policy in Palestine which has been published and laid before the House. I am quite satisfied that it was as fully the intention of His Majesty's Government to exclude Palestine from the area of Arab independence as it was to exclude the more northern coastal tracts of Syria.

^

Chances of Right-Wing Bloc in Poll

From the latest Peace Index Poll

and also this comment:

Two weeks before the elections, 61% believe the right-wing bloc’s chances are greater (compared to 59% who thought so in January and 60% in December). Assessments of the center-left bloc’s chances were less stable, with a downward trend—22% in the latest survey compared to 27.5% and 24% in the previous ones, so that in the last month the gap in favor of the right-wing bloc (39%) was the largest. However, on the question “Which bloc would you want to form the government after the upcoming elections?” a different tendency emerged. Over the past three months the gap between the two blocs has diminished considerably, from 22% favoring the right-wing camp in December to 15% in January and 13% in February. In other words, while the gap has indeed narrowed, when it comes to the preference of the Jewish public the scale still tips rightward, and with so little time remaining before the elections the chances of a dramatic change in the center-left’s favor are small. Interestingly, the largest share of the Arab public (43.5%) goes to those unable to assess which bloc—right or center-left—has the better chance to form a government. Meanwhile there is a clear preference here for a government headed by the center-left: 48% compared to only 11% who would rather see a right-wing government.

Do you read Haaretz for its rational and intellectual discourse?

Do you?

1.

Exorcising Netanyahu out of office

The election pits Bibi vs. Netanyahu, Groucho Marx against the face looking out at him from the mirror, with defeat on the way for both candidates.

By Amir Oren

2.

On March 17, it will be a mitzvah to vote against Netanyahu the Toxic

Nine years into his rule, Benjamin Netanyahu has poisoned his country. Israel is broken and battered and weak with fear. He's taken serious problems, and made them into a miserable nation.

By Bradley Burston

3.

Netanyahu owes a hearty thanks to ISIS

The Israeli prime minister is about to win another term thanks to the rise of Islamic terror — and the paralysis of the center-left.

By Carlo Strenger

4.

A lifetime achievement – destruction of the State of Israel

Netanyahu the coward is sometimes even more dangerous than the diligent fool. After all, his speech to Congress showed he has the ‘courage’ to endanger Israel-U.S. relations.

By Niva Lanir

5.

Netanyahu's regime has turned into a massive whale

This deep sea monster sometimes beaches itself in efforts against Washington, sometimes beats its tail in the Golan Heights. One thing is clear: Its democratic awareness has sunken to the bottom of the sea.

By Uri Misgav

My question was rhetorical, of course.

^

On Jews Hating Jews

Source

^

David Grossman Wasn't Interviewed in Hebrew

He was interviewed in Italian in Italy's La Repubblica:

Penso che Netanyahu abbia individuato correttamente il modo maldestro e direi persino ingenuo con cui gli Stati Uniti conducono le trattative. Dimostrando un'ingenuità addirittura delittuosa nel tentare di capire la complicazione medio-orientale: hanno fallito gravemente in Egitto, in Siria, in Iraq. Hanno fallito e continuano a fallire di fronte all'Iran. Netanyahu ha ragione quando sostiene che dopo dieci anni in cui gli Usa hanno preteso di mettere alla prova l'Iran, non esiste nessuna sanzione che impedisca a quel paese di diventare una potenza nucleare. E su questo in Israele non ci sono differenze fra destra e sinistra, non ci può essere tolleranza".

La sua sembra una condanna senza appello.
"L'Iran è un paese che da mattina a sera proclama di aspirare ad annientare Israele, in cui ancora ieri il Parlamento si è levato in piedi per gridare "Morte ad Israele", un paese che lentamente ma sicuramente si impadronisce di altri paesi del Medio Oriente, a partire da Libano per mezzo di Hezbollah, passando per la Siria e che ha rapporti persino con i sunniti di Hamas a Gaza, per non parlare poi dello Yemen. Sta cercando di allargare il suo ambito di influenza, alleandosi e sfruttando gli elementi più militanti e fondamentalisti di quei paesi. E quando un paese del genere sarà in possesso di armi atomiche, cambierà completamente anche il modo di comportarsi. Ciò deve preoccupare non solo Israele, non solo l'Arabia Saudita o l'Egitto, che saranno costretti ad entrare in una corsa agli armamenti atomici, ma anche il mondo intero ".

Le parole di Netanyahu cambieranno lo stato delle cose?
"Non lo so e nessuno può sapere quali influenze avrà quel discorso. Può darsi che non avrà alcuna influenza e può darsi che Netanyahu abbia fatto un errore tragico: per il modo manipolatore e conflittuale con cui ha agito, può darsi che abbia perduto l'occasione di influenzare l'andamento delle cose nella maniera in cui avrebbe potuto e dovuto. Devo tuttavia ripetere che le critiche che io ed altri abbiamo nei confronti di Netanyahu le abbiamo già espresse, e quello che ora è sul piatto della bilancia è molto più fatale dell'errore che ha commesso e su questo io vorrei attirare l'attenzione. È molto facile cadere nella trappola di interessarsi solo del "come", senza prendere in considerazione i contenuti: credo che nessuno abbia il diritto di trascurare i contenuti. Se servirà a qualcosa non lo so, ma è un bene che queste cose siano state dette".

Pensa che sarà possibile migliorare i rapporti con gli Stati Uniti, anche se Netanyahu dovesse ancora guidare il nuovo governo?
"La mia impressione è che finché Netanyahu e Obama rimarranno ai loro posti, non sarà possibile ritornare ai vecchi rapporti. Ma Israele gli Stati Uniti hanno moltissimi interessi in comune. Hanno strutture molto simili e condividono, almeno dichiaratamente, molti valori. Per quanto, osservando ciò che accade in Israele negli ultimi anni, non posso affermare che i valori eccelsi di uguaglianza e libertà di cui ci facciamo vanto siano veramente applicati. Ciononostante, c'è ancora molta simpatia per Israele negli Stati Uniti e Israele dipende ancora in modo totale dagli Stati Uniti".

La febbre elettorale cresce in Israele, per la prima volta da anni c'è una alternativa credibile a sinistra al governo del Likud...
"Spero davvero molto che Netanyahu non vinca le elezioni e spero anche che colui che avrà la responsabilità dei rapporti con gli Stati Uniti sia una persona molto più moderata, pertinente ed equilibrata ".


and in English:

I think Netanyahu has correctly identified the clumsy way, and I would even say naive with which the United States lead the negotiations. Demonstrating a naivety even criminal in groped to understand the complication Middle East: they failed badly in Egypt, in Syria, in Iraq. Have failed and continue to fail in front of Iran. Netanyahu is right when he says that after ten years in which the US has demanded to test Iran, there is no sanction that prevents the country from becoming a nuclear power. And on that in Israel there are no differences between left and right, there can be no tolerance.

Its seems like a sentence without appeal.
"Iran is a country that from morning to night proclaims to aspire to annihilate Israel, where only yesterday Parliament stood to shout" Death to Israel ", a country that is slowly but surely takes hold in other countries Middle East, from Lebanon through Hezbollah, via Syria, and even that has relations with the Sunni Hamas in Gaza, to say nothing of Yemen. He is trying to expand its sphere of influence, and allying leveraging more militant and fundamentalist elements of those countries. And when such a country will possess nuclear weapons, will completely change the way we behave. This must worry not only Israel, not only Saudi Arabia or Egypt, which will be forced to enter into a nuclear arms race, but also the whole world. "

The words of Netanyahu will change the state of things?
"I do not know and no one can know what influences will have that talk. It may not have any influence, and it may be that Netanyahu has made a tragic mistake: for how manipulative and conflicted with which he acted, he may have lost the ' opportunity to influence the course of things in the way that could and should have. However, I must repeat that criticism that I and others have against Netanyahu we have already expressed, and what is now on the side of the scale is much more fatal who committed the error and on this I would like to draw attention. It is very easy to fall into the trap of an interest only "how", without considering the content: I believe that no one has the right to disregard the contents. If you serve something I do not know, but it is good that these things have been said. "

Think it will be possible to improve relations with the United States, even if Netanyahu were to still lead the new government?
"My impression is that as long as Netanyahu and Obama will remain at their posts, you can not return to the old conditions. But Israel, the United States has many interests in common. They have very similar structures and share, at least openly, many values. As, observing what is happening in Israel in recent years, I can say that the lofty values ​​of equality and freedom that we take pride are really applied. Nevertheless, there is still a lot of sympathy for Israel in the United States and Israel still depends totally from the United States. "

^

New Fantastic Archaeological Find

Yes, Jewish history in the Land of Israel as related by Jewish sources is correct.

As now released:

A Cache of Rare Coins and Silver and Bronze Objects from

2,300 Years Ago was Discovered

This is about another find of a cache of rare coins and silver and bronze objects 2,300 years old, in a cave in northern Israel. Three spelunkers lowered themselves down the stalactite cave, and the youngest member forced his way into one of the narrow niches when he suddenly caught sight of a shining object. 

The Israel Antiquity Authority announced:

There he discovered two ancient silver coins which it later turned out had been minted during the reign of Alexander the Great who conquered the Land of Israel at the beginning of the Hellenistic period (late fourth century BCE). Several pieces of silver jewelry were found alongside the coins, among them rings, bracelets and earrings, which were apparently concealed in the cave, together inside a cloth pouch some 2,300 years ago.

In the opinion of archaeologists at the Israel Antiquities Authority, “The valuables might have been hidden in the cave by local residents who fled there during the period of governmental unrest stemming from the death of Alexander, a time when the Wars of the Diadochi broke out in Israel between Alexander’s heirs following his death. Presumably the cache was hidden in the hope of better days, but today we know that whoever buried the treasure never returned to collect it”.

...The IAA inspectors...believe they have found artifacts in the cave that first date to the Chalcolithic period c. 6,000 years ago; from the Early Bronze Age c. 5,000 years ago, the Biblical period 3,000 years ago and the Hellenistic period approximately 2,300 years ago. Numerous pottery vessels were also discovered in the cave...

Photographic credit: Shmuel Magal, courtesy of the Israel Antiquities Authority.

So satisfying. 

Jewish narrative justified.

^

Where's The Green Line?

From a World War II mobilization poster to encourage Jewish residents of Mandatory Palestine to enlist in the British Army:

That's right.  

No Green Line.

All of the territory from the sea to the river (the area beyond was categorized as 'postponed') was to be 'closely settled' by Jews.

^

Sidra Does Esther - and Netanyahu

Sidra DeKoven Ezrahi identifies herself as Professor Emerita of Comparative Literature at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem and a Guggenheim Fellow. She's the wife of far-out Leftist Bernard Avishai who republished her and termed the Netanyahu speech as "conceived as a political stunt". She has written for the radical Tikkun, attacked Elie Weisel in the Int'l Herald Tribune and lied there or was woefully ignorant about Muslims residing in West Jerusalem.  I seem to recall some controversy about her first work but as I cannot now find the proper reference, I'll skip that.

She now has published an op-ed in - of course, Haaretz - which analyzes the Biblical reference of Binyamin Netanyahu to the Book of Esther and claims

By invoking Purim, Netanyahu calls for a preemptive strike on Iran
The Israeli prime minister conveniently ignores the first eight chapters of the Book of Esther, recruiting only the revenge tragedy part to justify his agenda.

She introduces her literary deconstruction so:

The Netanyahu approach ignores the first part of the Purim narrative, which is a comedy, and reflects only on the second part, a revenge tragedy, recruiting the popular version of the story to justify his militant position against Iran...Parody, masque, commedia dell‘arte: what this text reflects in its early chapters is the comic impulse...[of the Jews who lived in the Babylonian, Persian and even the Hellenistic diaspora]...the Book of Esther is a fantasy...

Then, she gets angry:

...comedy has turned into revenge tragedy, an explosion of blood-curdling violence — not by Persians against innocent Jews, but by Jews against innocent Persians.  Esther...is granted permission to preemptively slaughter all who have received the order to kill the Jews. There is no textual hint that these Persians ever took up arms – “no one dared to stand up against them, out of the fear that they instilled” [9:2]. Yet the Jews go ahead and slaughter 500 innocent people in the satrapies that belong to the King. Then sweet Esther, the beguiling descendant of Babylonian exiles, wife of the clueless Ahasverus – whom little girls will emulate in gauzy costumes for centuries to come – asks for, and is granted, another day of slaughter: in the capital city of Shushan alone, 300 people are slaughtered, and in the surrounding satrapies 75,000 are slaughtered 

Like, this is so wrong. 

First of all, she could have written that Bibi should send a female agent into someone's bed. That would have been at least commensurate with spy literature.

Secondly, there actually was excellent diplomacy until the taking up of arms. 

Third, the killing was indeed of "enemies".  Here's Chapter. 9. verses 5-6,

And the Jews smote all their enemies with the stroke of the sword, and with slaughter and destruction, and did what they would unto them that hated them. And in Shushan the castle the Jews slew and destroyed five hundred men.

Fourth, a preemptive strike on Iran's nuclear capabilities isn't really a bad idea.

Fifth, Secretary of State Kerry is, reportedly, willing to promise a nuclear umbrella so maybe he is willing to kill some innocents.

Six, to borrow a phrase from the Obama White House, does she present a viable alternative?

________________________

P.S.

After a night's rest and after a fourth reading of the Meggilah (here in Shiloh, as we are in doubt whether indeed a wall existed around the site of the Tel at the time of Joshua bin Nun, we celebrate two days - imagine how perverted our little girls must be), besides the throwaway reference to the King's sanctioning of the defensive attack on the enemies of the Jews, there are other aspects I think needs be stressed.

The obvious one is that no one had smartphones or Internet connection then and sending messages around on horseback was a communcations system that would assure that Jews would be killed if any Jew simply depended on some called either Esther or Hadassah told them they could safely walk the streets. That the Persians were afraid does not mean they weren't intending to kill the Jews and Ezrahi should know that fear is a great motivator to kill.


Moreover, the Hebrew text uses two terms "enemies" (אויבים) but also "haters" (שונאים) [see verse 1, 5 & 16 in that chapter 9].  That is an irrational and emotional state that cannot and, at that time, would not dissipate overnight and they'd probably disbelieve the retraction order.  These persons were surely proper targets.  Incidentally, the Leket Tov comments that the phrase that the Jews congregated in their cities indicated many had fled to the hills and distant villages from fear and I presume that they knew their neighbors better than Ezrahi (and Netanyahu knows the Iranians better than her, as well).

All in all, this is a corruption of the text and I will not pass judgment whether the story is historically true.

^

Harf Barf

we didn’t hear any – certainly any new ideas today, but more importantly, didn’t hear one single concrete alternative in today’s speech from the Prime Minister about how we could get to a double-digit duration, push breakout time to a year, and cut off the four pathways Iran could have – use to get to missile – excuse me, fissile material for a nuclear weapon.So the Prime Minister, I think, kept referring to what a “better deal” could look like in some generic terms but did not lay out at all what that “better deal” might be. It was sort of a hypothetical that he put out there, really all rhetoric and nothing more.

Marie Harf

Deputy Spokesperson
Daily Press Briefing

Washington, DC

March 3, 2015

^

Netanyahu in Washington - GraphicZionism

^

Letter on Kristoff Not Published

I sent this letter to the NYTimes but they didn't publish it (as usual):-

In one of two recent articles on Israel, Nicholas Kristoff writes that American politicians need to remember "which Israel to support" ("The Two Israels, Mar. 1) after to talking with agitprop activist Asher Ascherman but in another ("The Human Stain", Feb. 26) admits that he "could have talked to settler children traumatized by Palestinian violence", but didn't.  That is an admission of unethical journalism.  His lack of professional standards also leads him to believe, and publish, claims of an Arab farmer from Sinjil, where I live, that "settlers" cut down "5,000 trees last year...with shears or uprooted them” with no further substantiation or reaction from the "guilty" or an official Israeli agency.

Those claims, as many others in his columns, are fabricated and are weapons of propaganda engagement employed by Arabs to enchant visiting media people. Their purpose is to undercut American support for Israel to which his hand and keyboard has been extended.  Facts would better serve all but there were little in his pieces.  I live there and I know but Mr. Kristoff had no time or inclination to get the full story.

^

Netanyahu and Politically-Correct Language

I spotted this in a GPO press release communicated from the Prime Minister's Office:

Schedule for PM Netanyahu's Address

(Communicated by the Prime Minister's Media Adviser)

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu will, tomorrow (Tuesday, 3 March 2015), address a joint session of the US Congress. The schedule of events is as follows (all times US Eastern Standard Time):

...10:25 – Meet with US House of Representatives Speaker John Boehner (R-OH). Speaker Boehner will present PM Netanyahu with a head sculpture of Winston Churchill with an inscription of the PM's name and the date of his address. 

"Head sculpture"? 

I was taught that the term is a "bust".

"bust [buhst]
noun
1.
a sculptured, painted, drawn, or engraved representation of the upper part of the human figure, especially a portrait sculpture showing only the head and shoulders of the subject"

^

Netanyahu Mulling His Speech

.

Some "GraphicZionism".

^

Temple Mount Removal

Don't get excited.

The headline means that there was a removal at and from the Temple Mount, not that itself was removed:

The source claims tree branches and other weather damage remains.

^

The Anti-Susan Rice Ad

.

^

The Incoming But No Warning Map

Based on the map that was used during Operation Protection Edge this past summer to warn the populace of in-coming rockets/missiles, this map was created which is the one that would be used if, as presumed, Hamas comes to rule Judea and Samaria once Israel retreats/withdraws:

The legend, at the top left reads:

Immediate
15 Seconds
30 Seconds
45 Seconds
One Minute
A minute and a half
Three minutes

Everthing clear?

(thanks to GS)

^

Netanyahu's Nazi-like Screenshot

How to turn a Zionist calling for Jews to come home after being threatened and killed in countries who seem lax to protect the Jews into a ... Nazi?

(thanks to LR)

^