The Jordan Valley

Arlene from Israel

Motzei Shabbat (After Shabbat)

From multiple sources I am picking up considerable concern regarding the broad implications — diplomatic and security — with regard to any relinquishment by Israel of full control of the Jordan Valley.

Credit: theWe.biz

Apologies that this map says “West Bank” and not, properly, Judea and Samaria. It is the best I could find in order to clearly illustrate the location of the Jordan Valley — the lowland that abuts the bank of the Jordan River.

I wrote the other day about the expectation (“demand”) voiced by Kerry that Israel remove all Jewish communities in the Valley. There might be some IDF forces stationed for a period of time in the Valley, but they would subsequently be replaced by international (US?) forces. An unmitigated disaster.

Credit: wikipedia


I’m pleased to see, now, that the Jordan Valley Regional Council, representing 21 permanent Jewish communities, is up in arms about this proposal.
Says Council head David Elhayani:

“The communities of the Jordan Valley will not sit silently in the face of the recent reports regarding a change in the Jordan Valley’s status, at least in the Americans’ eyes.”

Residents are planning a campaign “to explain the importance to security of the Jordan Valley communities, to explain that this is important to the entire nation of Israel,” he said.

“We want the position that the Jordan Valley needs to be under Israeli sovereignty to have overwhelming support, so there will be no question mark hanging over the Jordan Valley’s future.”



Put simply, only residence by Israeli citizens ensures the permanence of an Israeli presence. If the communities are gone, and only a military presence exists in the area, it can be (it would be) dismissed. That presence is seen as a bulwark against invasion from the east, across the Jordan River.

Defense Minister Moshe Ya’alon certainly sees it this way:

“He…stated earlier this month that he opposed the dismantling of the settlements there [in the Jordan Valley], since, he said, a civilian presence was critical to the viability of maintaining security control.” (Emphasis added)

In fact, a number of Likud ministers feel so strongly about this that they are promoting legislation to annex the area and its access roads. This effort, spearheaded by Miri Regev, is expected to advance just so far and no further.



If the legislation had the full blessing of the prime minister, it would succeed. But Netanyahu, while insisting on a continued military presence in the Valley, has been less definitive about a continued civilian presence. He’s not saying what his defense minister is saying — he’s leaving it to Ya’alon. The reason is fairly obvious: this would put Netanyahu in direct and public conflict with Kerry.

I cited a knowledgeable source on this the other day: Netanyahu, it is being surmised, will hold tight on Jerusalem, and his position will constitute a deal-breaker. Thus, as Netanyahu apparently sees it, it would be unnecessarily confrontational for him to insist on an Israeli civilian presence in the Valley, as there will be no deal.

But there comes a time when standing on our rights is something that must be done. Period.

It goes without saying that our very foolish chief Israeli negotiator, Tzipi Livni, is adamantly opposed to this. We don’t want to interfere with the “peace process,” after all.


With regard to the Jordan Valley, Yigal Alon, Deputy Prime Minister from 1967-69, proposed what was known as the Alon plan.

An interesting bit of history (see the map). This was right after Israel had acquired (liberated) Judea and Samaria from the Jordanians in a 1967 defensive war. Alon suggested that a large part of the area – in yellow – be returned to the Jordanians with a corridor from that area leading back into Jordan. (There was no talk of a “Palestinian state,” folks.) His plan, however, called for retention of the Jordan Valley as part of Israel.

Credit: Jewishvirtuallibrary

While it has long been discredited as inadequate with regard to safeguarding Israel, even this plan proposed a row of settlements along the Jordan River. This was in order to safeguard strategic control of the area, which was considered of prime importance. The first of the modern Israeli communities to be built in the area was established in 1968.

Now along comes Kerry, who knows better. Or knows nothing.


Aside from security issues, it is an outrage to the families of these communities to suggest they be evacuated. This was the area, my friends, where Joshua entered the Promised Land. Could it be much clearer: This is Jewish by heritage and right. We must keep saying this.

Some 60% of the population here is involved in agriculture — either directly, or via related services. These are very permanent communities.

What their removal would do, aside from everything else, is set a horrific precedent: Well, see, it was OK to remove communities from the Jordan Valley, so why not remove them from Samaria, as well?


So, please, raise your voices on this issue:

Contact Prime Minister Netanyahu and urge him to stand strong at all cost against Kerry’s Jordan Valley “security” plan:

E-mail: [email protected] and also [email protected] (underscore after pm) use both addresses

Remind him that there are both security issues and more basic issues of Israel’s rights — and that as prime minister he needs to stand for all of this. Implore him not to consent to the dismantling of civilian communities in the Jordan Valley. Be brief (no lectures), and be polite.


Contact your representatives in Congress, as well, and protest this initiative by Kerry, pointing out the critical importance of permanent Israeli communities in the Jordan Valley.

Explain that it is Jordan as well as Israel that has serious concerns about Palestinian Arab control of the Jordan Valley.

Khaled Abu Toameh wrote in September (emphasis added):

“It is no secret that the Jordanians have long been worried about the repercussions of the presence of Palestinians on their border.

“In a recent closed briefing with a high-ranking Jordanian security official, he was asked about the kingdom’s position regarding the possibility that Palestinians might one day replace Israel along the border with Jordan.

“‘May God forbid!’ the official retorted. ‘We have repeatedly made it clear to the Israeli side that we will not agree to the presence of a third party at our border.’

“…Jordan’s opposition to placing the border crossings with the West Bank under Palestinian control is not only based on security concerns.

“Of course, Jordan’s security concerns are not unjustified, especially in light of what has been happening over the past few years along the border between the Gaza Strip and Egypt.

“The Egyptians are now paying a heavy price for neglecting their shared border with the Gaza Strip over the past few decades. This lapse has seen Sinai emerge as a hotbed for Al-Qaeda-linked terror groups that are now posing a serious threat to Egypt’s national security.

“Besides the security concerns, the Jordanians are also worried about the demographic implications of Palestinian security and civilian presence over the border.

“Their worst nightmare, as a veteran Jordanian diplomat once told Israeli colleagues during a private encounter, is that once the Palestinians are given control over the border, thousands of them from the future Palestinian state would pour into Jordan.

“…Although the Jordanians are not part of the ongoing peace talks between the Palestinian Authority and Israel, they are hoping that Israel will not rush to abandon security control over its long border with the kingdom. Understandably, the Jordanian monarchy cannot go public with its stance for fear of being accused by Arabs and Muslims of treason and collaboration with the ‘Zionist enemy.

“The Egyptians today know what the Jordanians have been aware of for a long time — that a shared border with Fatah or Hamas or any other Palestinian group is a recipe for instability and anarchy. The Egyptians surely miss the days when the Israel Defense Forces were sitting along the border between Egypt and the Gaza Strip.”



Never miss an opportunity to educate your elected representatives on these issues. There is a great deal that passes them by.

For your Congresspersons:


For your Senators:



And while you’re at it, spread the word on this issue, which is not well understood, in other venues. Share this posting, write letters to the editor, post on Facebook and websites. Let people know the facts.


In my last posting I had alluded to an increase in terror attacks lately. Within the last week we’ve seen:

[] A bomb exploded on a bus in Bat Yam after an alert passenger noticed it and averted a disaster by helping the other passengers get off safely just in time. Echoes of a horrendous time. Baruch Hashem tragedy was averted here.

[] A day after, a rocket was fired from Gaza at southern Israel.

[] A police officer was stabbed in the back at a checkpoint near Adam.

[] And a sniper from Gaza killed an Israeli, Saleh Abu Latif, a 22-year-old Israeli Defense Ministry worker doing repairs on the fence at the Gaza border.

Israeli officials, particularly concerned about a reduction in deterrence, responded with an attack inside of Gaza. “This is a very severe incident and we will not let it go unanswered,” said Netanyahu.


It is broadly understood that the terror attacks are initiated by radical groups trying to subvert “the peace process.” There is, you see, typically, an increase in terror when we are negotiating.

The aforementioned very foolish Livni made a statement about how we won’t let this stop us from negotiating.

But this is not clear-headed thinking. (Has Livni ever been clear-headed?) If “peace” negotiations invite violence, then obviously a “peace” agreement would invite major efforts to undo it. That is, peace, true peace is not possible. It would only be possible if all factions of the Palestinian Arabs were on-board for a comprehensive peace, and this is not remotely the case.

What is more, it is my own suspicion that blaming only terrorist groups in Gaza is simplistic. I strongly suspect that elements in Fatah (the majority party of the PA/PLO) endorse such attacks, as they hope this will make us more amenable to concessions. Hamas and Islamic Jihad, it should be noted, spoke in praise of the bus bombing but did not take credit for it.


Israeli security has announced a new terrorist threat in Judea and Samaria (not Gaza, note): The rise of al-Qaida-inspired Salafi-jihadi terrorist cells:

“Salafi-jihadi cell, armed with guns and explosives, set out from the Hebron area to carry out a series of attacks…

“…the cell’s first intended step was to kidnap IDF soldiers and to carry out shooting and bomb attacks on Israelis.

“…Israeli intelligence sources say, the movement is first and foremost an ideology which appears to be gaining some ground, thanks to a power vacuum in the West Bank.


While this was kept under control because of the vigilance of Israeli security, which tracked and then apprehended these terrorists, I invite you to imagine what the situation would be if Israel were no longer permitted to operate in the area.

And please note the reference to a “power vacuum” in Judea and Samaria (i.e., in PA controlled areas): The PA is not up to governing, no how.


What we’re about to see — on December 31 — is the release of more terrorists as part of Netanyahu’s commitment to release 104 in total over the course of the nine months of “negotiations” with the PA. The majority of the nation is against this, although our prime minister, insisting that he had to keep his word, intends to go ahead.

There are multiple reasons why this is a horrendous idea:

[] It subverts justice, allowing murderers of Israelis who have been properly tried to go free before their sentences are complete. This fosters a disrespect for the justice system and weakens the motivation of those responsible for apprehending such terrorists.

[] It is an act of moral failure with regard to sensitivity to the families of those killed by terrorists. A betrayal of this country’s commitment to them to punish those responsible for their loved ones’ deaths.

[] It encourages terrorism because potential perpetrators of terrorism are led to believe that they will be able to find their way out of prison if they are caught. Netanyahu and Ya’alon are worried about “deterrence,” but this weakens that deterrence.

[] It invites additional terrorism because there is a high rate of recidivism among those released: they return to terror or abet terror.


And so why did Netanyahu agree to this? Because Kerry and Obama pushed for it, as Abbas had made it a condition for coming to the table.

Doesn’t mean Israel had to agree.

At the time the conditions were spelled out, there was talk about our having to either agree to this or to a building freeze — with Netanyahu deeming this the less objectionable choice. “Having to” is a seriously questionable phrase, but I do not for a moment make light of the pressure put on our prime minister. What he fears, I think is being accused within the international community of being the stumbling block to “peace.”

There is a vast responsibility for this unacceptable situation to be laid at the feet of the US administration.


A ministerial committee for this purpose will be determining the precise terrorists to be released, and their names won’t be made public until the last moment. The release is scheduled to take place late at night in an effort to mute publicity.

One issue of particular concern: A handful of those that the PA is demanding we release are Israeli Arabs. This would be abhorrent twice-over. Bad enough that the PA wants “their” people released, when they are convicted murderers. But to seek the release of Israeli citizens raises a host of other issues. Right now I do not know if they will be included.


At the time that the first two releases were done, the government simultaneously announced building in Judea and Samaria — reportedly to appease right-wingers angry about the releases. In the face of accusations from the US and the PA that this was “undermining the peace process,” government officials indicated that all parties understood up front that this was going to happen.

Recently the EU leveled threats at the Israeli government, warning that there had better not be more building announced when more prisoners are released, or there would be “repercussions.” Uh oh, I thought. Would this intimidate Netanyahu?

And so I was pleased to see that this was not the case, for it is essential that the EU not be permitted to dictate to us in any respect: It was announced this week that the process towards more building would be advanced when the next group of terrorists was released.


And yet, this is not a satisfactory situation. The government should not be announcing building in Judea and Samaria in retaliation for something, or to appease a part of the Israeli electorate.

The government should be building routinely because we have the right: We have legal grounds. This is what must be said, and said, and said, until the international community begins to get it.


Zlatans dangerous words

Hans Erling Jensen:

In these days the Swedish papers have been filled with rage over something Zlatan Ibrahimovic said.

According to the news he have said something like: “I give a f**k in women soccer players, I am a man”! In Sweden you can’t say that.

So for three days the entire Swedish press has focused on what a football player said — while they totally neglected the outrageous genocide escalating in the middle east — that hundreds of Christians once again are being bombed burned and slaughtered just because they are Christians and wants to celebrate the birth of Jesus Christ!

Swedish media really know how to prioritize — and then they don’t understand why their editions are diving like rocks in the water and why they all soon have to face bankruptcy!

I can tell you I understand — and I agree with Zlatan here. Women football — “soccs”!


Danger, Danger Phil Robertson! Do Not Kiss Jackson’s Ring

By: Lloyd Marcus

For the sake of America, please, please Phil do not surrender. We have seen this scenario played out on countless occasions; the left launching a shock-and-awe gang media assault on someone who dared to publicly challenge political correctness. The target of their wrath is bludgeoned into submission; overwhelmed with daily hit pieces filled with exaggerations, distortions and even lies about the target’s original comment and intent.

I am black. In his GQ mag interview, I felt no “evil or racist” intent in Phil Robertson’s comments about the blacks he knew in his youth. And yet, Phil’s intention is irrelevant to the left. Like sharks smelling blood in the water, they pounced on an opportunity to “trap” Phil; branding him a racist and a hater of homosexuals for simply quoting the Bible.

The left reminds me of the pious, arrogant and elitist Pharisees in the Bible. They hated Jesus for doing good works, miracles and connecting with the people. So, they launched a campaign of word games designed to “trap” Jesus into saying something that would help them to brand Jesus a lawbreaker and blasphemer. The left employs very similar tactics.

These people on the left are despicable. They are not about fairness or truth. They are about furthering their liberal socialist progressive agenda by any means necessary. So if dividing the country along racial lines helps their cause, so be it.

They say the best predictor of future behavior is past behavior. Thus, it does not take a genius to know how the left’s war on Phil Robertson, which is really a war on traditional America, will play out.

Phase one is their tsunami of published hit pieces and media pundits branding Phil Robertson a sexist, racist and homophobic. Phase two is to have the whole bowl of left-wing alphabet soup (NAACP, GLAD and NOW) attack Phil from all sides.

Phase three is Sharpton or Jackson demanding that they “get paid” and the offender kiss their ring. In the case of the Duck Dynasty controversy, master exploiter and extortionist Jesse Jackson has taken the lead, demanding that A&E and Cracker Barrel meet with him. http://bit.ly/1g4Qenx

Whether or not A&E and Cracker Barrel bows down to worship Jackson remains to be seen. My plea to Phil Robertson is that he please, please, please do not surrender. Do not on bended knee kiss Jackson’s ring and beg for forgiveness. It would be a mortal blow to the tremendous example he had set inspiring Americans to push back against the tyranny of political correctness.

In every incident of a slip of the tongue or misinterpreted comment by a conservative or a Republican, the left’s political correctness police bludgeons them within inches of their political life. The targeted person humbly surrenders and begs for forgiveness; all of which empowers the left, furthers their agenda and adds another notch on their gun.

To my knowledge, Phil Robertson is the first to push back against political correctness with the support of a vast majority of the American people. Thus, to Brother Phil I offer a few pearls of wisdom. In case of a near death experience, do not go to the light. As told to Luke Sky-walker, “Stay away from the dark side”; and when unjustly accused of being a racist, do not kiss Sharpton or Jesse (where’s the camera) Jackson’s ring.

Phil, surrender would break our hearts. Good folks across America are praying for you.

Lloyd Marcus, Proud Unhyphenated American
Chairman: Conservative Campaign Committee


ATF Agent Sends Shockwaves Across Internet With Explosive Allegations About ‘Fast and Furious’ and Brian Terry’s Death


John Dodson, the federal agent who blew the lid off the Justice Department’s “Fast and Furious” gun-walking scandal, claims the FBI had ties to the men who killed U.S. Border Patrol Agent Brian Terry in 2010 near Nogales, Ariz. In fact, Dodson says the Mexican bandits who gunned down Terry were working for FBI operatives and had been sent to the border to do a “drug rip-off” using intelligence gathered by the DEA.

Dodson, a special agent with the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, said he doesn’t think the FBI was part of the rip-off crew, but the agency was “directing the rip crew.” The explosive claims were made in an interview with The Arizona Republic this week and are already creating some waves across the Internet.

The allegations are also found in Dodson’s recently released book, “The Unarmed Truth,” which chronicles his role as a whistleblower during Operation Fast and Furious. The Obama administration unsuccessfully tried to block the publication of his book.

Read more at TheBlaze…


NSA Helped Target Communist Terrorists

By: Cliff Kincaid
Accuracy in Media

While NSA traitor Edward Snowden was preparing his “alternative” Christmas message—in which he posed as a friend of the privacy rights of children from his refuge in Moscow—The Washington Post was disclosing that the NSA has played a key role in destroying communist terrorism in Colombia.

The Post disclosed that the Cuban-backed FARC, once the largest and most effective terrorist organization in Colombia and South America, has been decimated because of “substantial eavesdropping help from the National Security Agency” to the government of Colombia.

William Scoggins, counternarcotics program manager at the U.S. military’s Southern Command, called the NSA’s help a “game changer.”

At least two dozen leaders of communist terrorist movements in Colombia have been killed as a result.

Meanwhile, Judge William H. Pauley III, of the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, ruled on Friday that the National Security Agency’s terrorist surveillance program is lawful.

The December 21 Washington Post article by Dana Priest, “Covert action in Colombia,” wasn’t intended as sympathetic to the NSA. She is known as someone who wants to score points exposing U.S. intelligence operations. But the end result was to buttress the case made by those defending the embattled agency.

The story begins: “The 50-year-old Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC), once considered the best-funded insurgency in the world, is at its smallest and most vulnerable state in decades, due in part to a CIA covert action program that has helped Colombian forces kill at least two dozen rebel leaders, according to interviews with more than 30 former and current U.S. and Colombian officials.”

The second paragraph reads: “The secret assistance, which also includes substantial eavesdropping help from the National Security Agency, is funded through a multibillion-dollar black budget. It is not a part of the public $9 billion package of mostly U.S. military aid called Plan Colombia, which began in 2000.”

The lengthy article revealed how the CIA, working with the NSA and the Pentagon, helped Colombian President Alvaro Uribe manage a very successful war against the communist terrorists in the country. “Voice intercepts from radio and cellphone communications were decrypted and translated by the National Security Agency,” the article noted.

The paper added, “Most every operation relied heavily on NSA signal intercepts, which fed intelligence to troops on the ground or pilots before and during an operation.”

The NSA also “increased its monitoring” when U.S. and Colombian forces were close to locating three captured Americans.

However, the current Colombian President, Juan Manuel Santos, is negotiating with the terrorist movement in Havana and opening the door to their participation in the political process. The FARC even has a website on their devotion to “peace.”

Not surprisingly, Snowden’s Moscow backers were outraged by the revelations about the NSA’s effectiveness. Sam Sacks of the Moscow-funded Russia Today (RT) propaganda channel questioned the legality of the anti-terrorist operations.

Sacks provides another example of how Moscow and American progressives are still working together, despite the end of the Cold War.

Sacks is identified by most liberal websites carrying his material as a “progressive commentator and former Democratic staffer on Capitol Hill” who serves as senior producer of the show “The Big Picture with Thom Hartmann,” also on RT.

You may recall that Hartmann physically tried to grab my flip camera and censor me when I was filming and questioning him about his payments from Moscow.

On his website, Sacks discloses that he worked for Democratic Rep. Allen Boyd from January 2008 to October 2010. Boyd was defeated for reelection in the 2010 election, when the Tea Party helped Republicans gain control of the House. Boyd called outgoing Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi “The face that defeated us.”

“During the height of the Tea Party movement,” Sacks said, “I managed a constituent mail operation of over 5,000 letters a month for a Democratic Member of Congress, responding promptly to the fomenting masses.”

In addition to RT, his bio says Sacks has also contributed to, Truthout.org, Alternet.org, and Hustler, the pornographic magazine. Currently, he says he’s the founder and editor of The DC Sentinel at DCSentinel.com. His latest entry is “Crisis of Capitalism Explained.”

Edward Snowden, giving his Christmas message from Moscow, never hinted that the NSA may be involved in monitoring America’s enemies. Instead, he talked about children growing up without privacy rights.

The “alternative Christmas message,” sponsored by Britain’s Channel 4, was delivered in 2008 by Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, the then-president of Iran who became notorious for saying Israel would be wiped off the map.

“If Christ were on earth today, undoubtedly He would stand with the people in opposition to bullying, ill-tempered and expansionist powers,” he said. “If Christ were on earth today, undoubtedly He would hoist the banner of justice and love for humanity to oppose warmongers, occupiers, terrorists and bullies the world over.”

Snowden said to “…remind the government that if it really wants to know how we feel, asking is always cheaper than spying.”

For his part, Russian President Vladimir Putin, calls Snowden “noble” and says, “Thanks to Snowden, a lot has changed in the minds of people around the world, including politicians.”

At the same press conference, a reporter asked who the second most important politician in Russia is, and whether Putin has a successor. Putin talked about Gennady Zuganov, the leader of the Communist Party, supposedly a relic of the Cold War.

Cliff Kincaid is the Director of the AIM Center for Investigative Journalism and can be contacted at [email protected]. View the complete archives from Cliff Kincaid.