What exactly was going on outside the Church of the Holy Sepulcher on Easter Sunday? I’m not sure. Even so, I know some of the signatories to this declaration, and I know that they are not brash or inflammatory people. Further, this list seems comprehensive! It seems that all the Christian leaders of Jerusalem are united over this!
It would appear that the Israeli government is trying to make life in the ‘Holy Land’ as uncomfortable as possible for Christians. This makes sense in terms of the goal of maintaining Israel as a Jewish state. The problem is that such actions potentially do enormous damage to the country’s traditional religious support base – American Evangelical Christians!
Father Dave
source: www.facebook.com…
A Statement from the Patriarchs and Heads of Churches inJerusalem, concerning the Israeli police measures on Holy Saturday- May 2013
We, the Heads of Churches in Jerusalem, watched withsorrowful hearts the horrific scenes of the brutal treatment of our clergy,people, and pilgrims in the Old City of Jerusalem during Holy Saturday lastweek. A day of joy and celebration was turned to great sorrow and pain for someof our faithful because they were ill-treated by some Israeli policemen whowere present around the gates of the Old City and passages that lead to theHoly Sepulcher.
We understand the necessity and the importance of thepresence of security forces to ensure order and stability, and for organizingthe celebration of the Holy Fire at the Church of the Resurrection. Yet, it isnot acceptable that under pretext of security and order, our clergy and peopleare indiscriminately and brutally beaten, and prevented from entering theirchurches, monasteries and convents.
We urge the Israeli authorities especially the Ministry ofInterior and the police department in Jerusalem, to seriously consider ourcomplaints, to hold responsibility and to condemn all acts of violence againstour faithful and the clergy who were ill-treated by the police. We deplore thatevery year, the police measures are becoming tougher, and we expect that theseaccidents will not be repeated and the police should be more sensitive andrespectful if they seek to protect and serve.
We also denounce all those who are blaming the churches and holdingthem responsible of the Israeli measures during Holy Week celebrations. On thecontrary, the Heads of churches in Jerusalem condemn all of these measures andviolations of Christians’ rights to worship in their churches and Holy Sites.Therefore, we condemn all measures of closing the Old City and urge the Israeliauthorities to allow full access to the Holy sites during Holy Week of bothChurch Calendars.
The Heads of Churches of Jerusalem
- +Patriarch Theophilos III, GreekOrthodox Patriarchate
- +Patriarch Fouad Twal, LatinPatriarchate
- +Patriarch Norhan Manougian,Armenian Apostolic Orthodox Patriarchate
- +Fr. Pierbattista Pizzaballa, ofm,Custos of the Holy Land
- +Archbishop Anba Abraham, CopticOrthodox Patriarchate, Jerusalem
- +Archbishop Swerios Malki Murad,Syrian Orthodox Patriarchate
- +Aba Fissiha Tsion, Locum Tenensof the Ethiopian Orthodox Patriarchate
- +Archbishop Joseph-Jules Zerey,Greek-Melkite-Catholic Patriarchate
- +Archbishop Moussa El-Hage,Maronite Patriarchal Exarchate
- +Bishop Suheil Dawani, EpiscopalChurch of Jerusalem and the Middle East
- +Bishop Munib Younan, EvangelicalLutheran Church in Jordan and the Holy Land
- +Bishop Pierre Melki, SyrianCatholic Patriarchal Exarchate
- +Msgr. Joseph Antoine Kelekian,Armenian Catholic Patriarchal Exarchate
Filed under israel and palestine conflict by on May 17th, 2013. Comment. 
The following is an extract from an article by Thomas Friedman’s concerning John Kerry’s potential role as US Secretary of State.
The article appeared last week in the New York Times and it advocates (amongst other things) the US pursuing a solution to the Israel/Palestine deadlock and uses all the politically acceptable language to make a case for a two-state solution.
But is there really any justice in this conventional wisdom. Father Labib raises some questions below.
source: www.nytimes.com…
An extract From Break All The Rules
by Thomas L. Friedman
New York Times
January 23, 2013
On Israel-Palestine, the secretary of state should publicly offer President Mahmoud Abbas of the Palestinian Authority the following: the U.S. would recognize the Palestinian Authority in the West Bank as the independent State of Palestine on the provisional basis of the June 4, 1967, lines, support its full U.N. membership and send an ambassador to Ramallah, on the condition that Palestinians accept the principle of “two states for two peoples” — an Arab state and a Jewish state in line with U.N. General Assembly Resolution 181 — and agree that permanent borders, security and land swaps would be negotiated directly with Israel. The status of the refugees would be negotiated between Israel and the Palestine Liberation Organization, which represents all Palestinians inside and outside of Palestine. Gaza, now a de facto statelet, would be recognized as part of Palestine only when its government recognizes Israel, renounces violence and rejoins the West Bank.
Why do this? Because there will be no Israeli-Palestinian breakthrough unless the silent majorities on both sides know they have a partner — that Palestinians have embraced two states for two peoples and that Israelis have embraced Palestinian statehood. Neither Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu nor President Abbas have shown a real commitment to nurture these preconditions for peace, and our secret diplomacy with both only plays into their hands. We need to blow this charade wide open by trying to publicly show Iranians, Israelis and Palestinians that they really do have options that their leaders don’t want them to see. (Israel’s election on Tuesday showed that the peace camp in Israel is still alive and significant.) It may not work. The leaders may still block it or the people may not be interested. But we need to start behaving like a superpower and forcing a moment of truth. Our hands are full now, and we can’t waste four more years with allies (or enemies) who may be fooling us.
Father Labib writes:
· "…send an ambassador to Ramallah” (why Ramallah, it is not the capital of the Palestinian State it is Jerusalem)
· “on the condition that Palestinians” (already with preconditions… why preconditions on the Palestinians and not on the Israeli Government)
· “who accept the principle of “two states for two peoples” — an Arab state and a Jewish state in line with U.N (why a Jewish State, he does not say a Muslim State, why not an Israeli State as he says Arab State, do we accept in the USA to form a Catholic State, a Baptist State and a Mormon State in any of our United States?, and what are the UN line, the 181 Resolution speaks about 1948 and not 1967).
· “General Assembly Resolution 181 — and agree that permanent borders, security and land swaps would be negotiated directly with Israell” (He calls then to the returning of Peace Process between Israel and Palestine, these negotiations became process for many years and did not give peace, If he speaks about Two States, then they should have already recognized borders as of resolution 181, so why again negotiations on borders.)
· “The status of the refugees would be negotiated between Israel and the Palestine Liberation Organization, which represents all Palestinians inside and outside of Palestine” (Why ALL Jews have the right of RETURN after 2000 years and Palestinian should negotiate their RIGHT of RETURN after few years when all Palestinians have the keys of their homes and documents of their belonging of their houses and lands) .
· “Gaza, now a de facto statelet, would be recognized as part of Palestine only when its government recognizes Israel, renounces violence and rejoins the West Bank.” (Why not asking the same from Israel first, I mean to recognize the State of Palestine… and why he does not say anything about the many settlements…, Amazing how journalists uses us to think their way and ABUSE out intelligence).
Filed under Israel and Palestine, israel and palestine articles, israel and palestine conflict by on Jan 28th, 2013. Comment.
Father Roy writes: One must never misunderestimate the persuasive skills of Israel’s current Prime Minister. Indeed, Bibi has mastered "The Devil’s Art" (spin). How reliable are polls? Actually, it depends on whom one asks. The highlights in JPost’s report are mine. Israel’s elections are scheduled for Tuesday, January 22. On that day the people of Israel will choose the calibre of leader they want for the future. For all the world to see. According to Ha’aretz, Netanyahu is "riding to the ballots on a wave of militarism, and divisions among the other parties will give him the freedom to play one off against the other. What more could he ask for?" Peace, Roy
source: www.jpost.com…
Poll: Majority of Israeli Jews pessimistic about peace
By ARIEL BEN SOLOMON
Israeli Jews are becoming more skeptical about a peace agreement with the Palestinians, with 83 percent saying a withdrawal to the pre-1967 borders and the division of Jerusalem would not end the conflict.
The poll was the third in a series conducted since 2005 by Dr. Mina Tzemach on behalf of the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs. The findings are based on 500 telephone interviews conducted at the end of November with adult residents of Israel.
According to the findings, 71% of the Jewish respondents opposed giving up all of the east Jerusalem neighborhoods outside the Old City, and 79% felt it was important for the Palestinians to recognize Israel’s right to exist as a Jewish state – but only 27% believed this would happen.
A summary of the findings concludes that Israeli Jews overwhelmingly support the demand that the Palestinians recognize the State of Israel as a Jewish state. It also mentions that evidence in other surveys shows similar support for the demand that the PA renounce the right of return.
Taken together, these results show that only a third of Israeli Jews believe that the Palestinians would agree to these two stances – which are clearly understood to be demands that Israel would make before any final agreement.
Moreover, 77% of the Jewish respondents thought that both Fatah and Hamas were incapable of ending the conflict.
This pessimistic attitude seems to have been aggravated by recent violence, as a majority of the Jewish respondents thought the developments called for holding onto vital territories.
When asked, “What is preferable – defensible borders or a peace agreement?,” 61% of the Jewish respondents said defensible borders.
This represents a huge shift from the 2005 poll, where only 49% chose defensible borders. In a related question, 72% of the Jewish respondents said that strategic depth had security value, while 23% said it had none.
On Jerusalem, 78% of the Jewish respondents said they would vote for another party if the one they intended to vote for expressed willingness to return land in the capital.
On Iran, 75% of the Jewish respondents thought that sanctions would not stop Iran’s nuclear weapons drive.
And in a key question relating to a possible unilateral attack on Iran by Israel, 60% said Israel could not rely on the US, while 53% said they supported an attack against Iran
Filed under Israel and Palestine, israel and palestine articles, israel and palestine conflict by on Jan 3rd, 2013. Comment.
Thank God for Jimmy Carter. He continues to shine out like a light in dark the world of international politics.
What Carter says is what everybody already knows, of course – that the current Israeli government has no intention of granting the Palestinian people their own state. The fact though that Carter and the Elders are saying it openly is of great significance.
Having said that, how many people will listen? And will Obama be one of them?
Father Dave
Jimmy Carter: Israel not committed to two-state solution
Former US President Jimmy Carter on Monday said the Israeli-Palestinian peace process had reached a crisis point and that Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu’s government was not pursuing a two-state solution.
“That policy of promoting a two-state solution seems to be abandoned now and we are deeply concerned about this move towards this catastrophic so-called one-state choice … this is a major concern,” Carter told a news conference.
Carter helped forge Israel’s peace deal with Egypt in 1979, the first between the Jewish state and an Arab country but has been a strong critic of Israeli settlement policy in the occupied West Bank and East Jerusalem.
“Every (Israeli) prime minister that I have known has been a pursuer of the two-state solution and I don’t know that (US President Barack) Obama has found that Prime Minister Netanyahu has been willing to go that route,” Carter added.
He spoke during a visit along with other members of “The Elders”, a group of former world leaders, to Israel, the West Bank and Egypt.
“All indications to us is that this two-state solution has basically been abandoned and we’ve had a moving forward towards a ‘greater Israel’ which I think is contrary to the two-state solution concept,” Carter said.
Netanyahu has voiced support for a two-state solution, but has said a future Palestinian country must be demilitarized and accept an Israeli military presence along the Jordan River, its likely eastern frontier.
Filed under Israel and Palestine, israel and palestine conflict, map of israel and palestine by on Oct 23rd, 2012. Comment.
Recent Comments