–
Gideon/GPO)
———
In this handout photo provided by the Israeli Government Press Office, Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu meets former U.S. President Bill Clinton, on November 8, 2010 in New York City. | Getty
Bill Clinton with former Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon in 2000; Donald Trump with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on March 25. Photo illustration by Slate. Photos by Thomas Coex/AFP/Getty Images; Drew Angerer/Getty Images.
/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_image/image/45777608/GettyImages_460494092.0.jpg)
Zack Beauchamp is a senior correspondent at Vox, where he covers ideology and challenges to democracy, both at home and abroad. Before coming to Vox in 2014, he edited TP Ideas, a section of Think Progress devoted to the ideas shaping our political world.
Then opposition leader Benjamin Netanyahu greets US President George W. Bush in the Knesset.
Vice President Joe Biden meets with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu at the annual General Assembly of the Jewish Federations of North America in New Orleans on Nov. 7, 2010. | Gerald Herbert/AP Photo
BIBI THOUGHT PRESIDENT LIKED HIM PERSONALLY BUT LATER EVENTS MADE HIM POSSIBLY DOUBT THAT
Back during our first visit to Washington, Vice President Al Gore held a big reception for us, attended mostly by leaders of the American Jewish community. “Bibi,” Gore announced to the guests, “I’ve done some research on you. I found that on your high school soccer team you played left forward,” he said, eliciting a burst of laughter. “That’s right, Al,” I retorted, “but I always kicked to the right!” More laughter. While I was briefing congressional leaders, Clinton invited Sara to a tour of the Oval Office. Throughout his meetings with me he appeared cordial and friendly. I later learned that he took offense at some of the things I said or the way I said them at our joint public appearances. He felt I wasn’t deferential enough. “Who’s the f-ing leader of the free world?” he is said to have complained to his aides. I certainly didn’t want to offend the president and in retrospect I wouldn’t change the substance of anything I said. But I may have overreacted in my tone to the White House campaign of political pressure that preceded and accompanied the visit.
‘Squad’ Members Were Boosting Hamas Long Before It Beheaded Babies
Congress has turned a blind eye to the far left’s dangerous and inappropriate partnerships with Hamas front organizations.
In the wake of a brutal terrorist attack on Israel, members of the ultra left-wing “Squad” in the U.S. House released public statements calling for a “ceasefire” in Israel, after terrorists went door-to-door on Oct. 7 indiscriminately murdering families and collecting hostages. Statements from the Congress members, many of whom have pandered to pro-Hamas groups in the U.S., effectively deny Israel’s right to defend itself and suggest that the atrocities are part of a larger tit-for-tat “cycle of violence.”
In other words, Israel had it coming, and it should lay down and “de-escalate” in the face of a terrorist invasion by land, air, and sea — even as Israeli hostages are paradednaked and bleeding through the streets of Gaza.
Such callous expressions represent the latest and most heinous in a series of statements and political maneuvers from the far-left wing of the Democrat Party, which has sought for years to single out and demonize the Jewish state of Israel. The same outspoken leftists have patronized radical anti-Israel groups, showing favor to Islamist organizations identified in U.S. courts as possible fronts for Hamas.
Reps. Ilhan Omar, D-Minn., Rashida Tlaib, D-Mich., Ayanna Presley, D-Mass., Cori Bush, D-Mo., and Jamaal Bowman, D-N.Y., each published press releases and personal statements in response to the early morning raid by Hamas terrorists that took the livesof more than 1,200 Israelis, including 25 Americans, and resulted in more than 3,000 wounded. In each case, their comments began with empty platitudes for the violence experienced on both sides, before they turned to casting blame on Israel and justifying Hamas violence.
Perhaps the most damning statements came from Omar and Tlaib, who share the privilege of being America’s first Muslim women elected to Congress. Tlaib, who is of Palestinian heritage, said Sunday that a peaceful solution “must include lifting the blockade, ending the occupation and dismantling the apartheid system that creates the suffocating, dehumanizing conditions that can lead to resistance.”
Anti-Israel “activists” and militants alike often use the term “resistance” to describe violent activity aimed at their perceived oppressors, from throwing stones to targeting civilians in suicide bombings.
“The failure to recognize the violent reality of living under siege, occupation, and apartheid makes no one safer,” Tlaib wrote, pushing a theory that Israeli civilians invited the atrocities experienced on Oct. 7.
In a lengthy social media thread, Omar declared, “Palestinians have few recourses for justice and accountability,” suggesting that the massacre of innocents was an acceptable course of action. She pointed to “lifelong psychological and physical trauma” experienced by Palestinians,” whom she claimed live under “occupation and systemic apartheid.”
Although Israel maintains external control of Gaza, the military occupation ended in 2005. The following year, Palestinians elected Hamas, a hardline terrorist government that fired thousands of rockets at Israeli population centers and launched countless terrorist attacks in Jewish towns and cities.
Along with her colleagues, Omar warnedagainst perpetuating “a cycle of violence,” an offensive cliche that implies Saturday’s intentional attack on innocent civilians was a morally equivalent answer to past Israeli military operations, equal in scale to the ferocious savagery exhibited by Hamas.
In reality, the Israeli Defense Forces (IDF) take great pains to avoid civilian casualties, following strict rules of engagement and punishing negligence. Conversely, Hamas uses human shields, fires rockets from launch sites in schoolyards and hospitals, and tunnels underneath residential neighborhoods.
Omar, Tlaib, and Bush each called for ending vital U.S. military aid to Israel at a time when it needs the funding more than ever. Since Israel’s founding, the U.S. has provided more than $270 billion in assistance so that its closest Middle Eastern ally maintains a military advantage over its Arab neighbors, which have collectively invaded Israel multiple times in recent history.
Reactions to this week’s killings from Pressley and Bowman were only slightly more restrained. Pressley, who has accusedIsrael of “oppression and apartheid,” called for “an immediate ceasefire and de-escalation,” while Bowman focused on ending “the blockade of Gaza.”
Anti-Israel commentary from House progressives earned immediate bipartisan condemnation. One of several moderate Democrats to condemn their colleagues’ anti-Israel statements, Rep. Josh Gottheimer, D-N.J., balked at calls to cut off funding to Israel.
“It sickens me that while Israelis clean the blood of their family members … they believe Congress should strip U.S. funding to our democratic ally and allow innocent civilians to suffer,” Gottheimer told Axios.
Rep. Mike Lawler, R-N.Y., said Omar was “out of [her] mind and unfit to serve in the House of Representatives,” for accusing Israel of “a war crime” and calling to cut military aid to Israel. “This is why you [Omar] were removed from the Foreign Affairs Committee,” Lawler demurred.
For too long, House Democrats have tolerated efforts to vilify and demean Israel for the benefit of Hamas. More alarmingly, Congress has turned a blind eye to the far left’s dangerous and inappropriate partnerships with Hamas front organizations.
From supporting anti-Israel boycotts and opposing Israel’s admission in the Visa Waiver Program, to rejecting funding of Israel’s life-saving missile defense system and referring to Israel’s founding as a “catastrophe,” Squad members have relentlessly pushed to demonize and weaken the Jewish state through legislation.
By pushing anti-Israel legislation, radical leftist legislators are pandering to an unlikely constituency: America’s pro-Hamas lobby. Organizations such as the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) and American Muslims for Palestine (AMP) publicly endorse Squad-sponsored bills and statements critical of Israel.
In return, Omar and Tlaib are regulars on the CAIR speaking circuit, despite the Islamist group’s documented links to Hamas. In a July 1, 2009, ruling, Judge Jorge Solis determined, “The Government has produced ample evidence to establish the associations of CAIR … with Hamas.”
The judge’s ruling came after CAIR was listedas an “unindicted co-conspirator” in a terror finance trial involving Hamas. In 2009, Ghassan Elashi, a senior CAIR official, was sentenced in the same case to 65 years in prison for funneling millions of dollars to Hamas.
Despite the courtroom evidence, the opinions of federal judges and prosecutors, and warnings from federal law enforcement, Omar and Tlaib continue to champion CAIR, appearing at the groups’ fundraisers and holding legislative meetings.
Their patronage provides the Hamas lobby with an alarming foothold in U.S. Congress. When American Congress members react in such a way to the savage execution of children and elderly, and the subsequent desecration of their corpses, it only encourages Hamas and other jihadists to repeat these reprehensible acts.
This is a quick summary of the Bible’s reliability by a famous and well-respected former atheist. Please check out his website (http://www.leestrobel.com) for hundreds of FREE high quality videos investigating the critical aspects of our faith.
Todd Tyszka
www.toddtyszka.com
The Bible and Archaeology – Is the Bible from God? (Kyle Butt 42 min)
You want some evidence that indicates that the Bible is true? Here is a good place to start and that is taking a closer look at the archaeology of the Old Testament times. Is the Bible historically accurate? Here are some of the posts I have done in the past on the subject: 1. The Babylonian Chronicle, of Nebuchadnezzars Siege of Jerusalem, 2. Hezekiah’s Siloam Tunnel Inscription. 3. Taylor Prism (Sennacherib Hexagonal Prism), 4. Biblical Cities Attested Archaeologically. 5. The Discovery of the Hittites, 6.Shishak Smiting His Captives, 7. Moabite Stone, 8. Black Obelisk of Shalmaneser III, 9A Verification of places in Gospel of John and Book of Acts., 9B Discovery of Ebla Tablets. 10. Cyrus Cylinder, 11. Puru “The lot of Yahali” 9th Century B.C.E., 12. The Uzziah Tablet Inscription, 13. The Pilate Inscription, 14. Caiaphas Ossuary, 14 B Pontius Pilate Part 2, 14c. Three greatest American Archaeologists moved to accept Bible’s accuracy through archaeology.,
My favorite “fake” “unconfirmed” quotes are those beginning with “Jesus said,” followed by anything enclosed in quotation marks, since the earliest gospel was written between 70 and 117 years after his supposed death and there were no eye-or-ear-witnesses to any of it.
But no matter. That’s what “faith” is all about. Unquestioning acceptance of hearsay as fact. And viciously attacking all who won’t play along with that pretense.
I responded with this:
I wanted you to know that the gospels were all finished before 100 AD. Patrick Zukeran of Probe Ministries reports:
The Rylands Papyri that was found in Egypt that contains a fragment of John, and dates to A.D. 130. From this fragment we can conclude that John was completed well before A.D. 130 because, not only did the gospel have to be written, it had to be hand copied and make its way down from Greece to Egypt. Since the vast majority of scholars agree that John is the last gospel written, we can affirm its first century date along with the other three with greater assurance.
A final piece of evidence comes from the Dead Sea Scrolls Cave 7. Jose Callahan discovered a fragment of the Gospel of Mark and dated it to have been written in A.D. 50. He also discovered fragments of Acts and other epistles and dated them to have been written slightly after A.D. 50 (Norman Geisler, Baker Encyclopedia of Christian Apologetics, (Grand Rapids, Mich.: Baker Books, 2002), 530.)
I also earlier mentioned on another post about William Ramsey’s findings concerning the historical accuracy of the Book of Luke. Of course, two of the most amazing finds are the Ossuary of Caiaphas and the Pilate Inscription. Both were very instrumental during the original Easter week.
Ossuary of Caiaphas
Did this ossuary contain the bones of Caiaphas, high priest during the time of Jesus?
This beautifully decorated ossuary found in the ruins of Jerusalem, contained the bones of Caiaphas, the first century AD. high priest during the time of Jesus.
On the side (as seen above) and the back of the ossuary is inscribed Caiaphas’ name (“Yosef bar Caifa”).
(see Matt 26:3, 57; Luke 3:2; John 11:49; 18:13-14, 24, 28; Acts 4:6; Josephus, Ant. 23.25, 39). It was a custom in ancient Israel to store the bones of the dead in ossuaries. They gathered the bones about a year after burial.
Caiaphas, who’s name means “searcher” was appointed high priest (after Simon ben Camith) by the procurator Valerius Gratus, under Tiberius, 18 A.D.. He continued in office from A.D. 26 to 37, when the proconsul Vitellius deposed him. He was the president of the Jewish council (Sanhedrim) which condemned the Lord Jesus to death, Caiaphas declaring Him guilty of blasphemy.
Caiaphas was the official high priest during the ministry and trial of Jesus (Matt 26:3, 57; Luke 3:2; John 11:49; 18:13, 14, 24, 28; Acts 4:6).
It was Caiaphas who, unknowingly, made the incredible prophecy concerning God’s plan of sacrificing Jesus for the sins of the nation and even the whole world:
John 11:47-54 “Then the chief priests and the Pharisees gathered a council and said, “What shall we do? For this Man works many signs. If we let Him alone like this, everyone will believe in Him, and the Romans will come and take away both our place and nation.” And one of them, Caiaphas, being high priest that year, said to them, “You know nothing at all, nor do you consider that it is expedient for us that one man should die for the people, and not that the whole nation should perish.” Now this he did not say on his own authority; but being high priest that year he prophesied that Jesus would die for the nation, and not for that nation only, but also that He would gather together in one the children of God who were scattered abroad. Then, from that day on, they plotted to put Him to death.”
Matthew 26:3-5 “Then assembled together the chief priests, and the scribes, and the elders of the people, unto the palace of the high priest, who was called Caiaphas, And consulted that they might take Jesus by subtilty, and kill him. But they said, Not on the feast day, lest there be an uproar among the people.”
Matt 26:57-68 And those who had laid hold of Jesus led Him away to Caiaphas the high priest, where the scribes and the elders were assembled. But Peter followed Him at a distance to the high priest’s courtyard. And he went in and sat with the servants to see the end. Now the chief priests, the elders, and all the council sought false testimony against Jesus to put Him to death, but found none. Even though many false witnesses came forward, they found none. But at last two false witnesses came forward and said, “This fellow said, ‘I am able to destroy the temple of God and to build it in three days.’ ” And the high priest arose and said to Him, “Do You answer nothing? What is it these men testify against You?” But Jesus kept silent. And the high priest answered and said to Him, “I put You under oath by the living God: Tell us if You are the Christ, the Son of God!” Jesus said to him, “It is as you said. Nevertheless, I say to you, hereafter you will see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of the Power, and coming on the clouds of heaven.” Then the high priest tore his clothes, saying, “He has spoken blasphemy! What further need do we have of witnesses? Look, now you have heard His blasphemy! What do you think?” They answered and said, “He is deserving of death.” Then they spat in His face and beat Him; and others struck Him with the palms of their hands, saying, “Prophesy to us, Christ! Who is the one who struck You?”
John 18:19-24 “The high priest then asked Jesus about His disciples and His doctrine. Jesus answered him, “I spoke openly to the world. I always taught in synagogues and in the temple, where the Jews always meet, and in secret I have said nothing. Why do you ask Me? Ask those who have heard Me what I said to them. Indeed they know what I said.” And when He had said these things, one of the officers who stood by struck Jesus with the palm of his hand, saying, “Do You answer the high priest like that?” Jesus answered him, “If I have spoken evil, bear witness of the evil; but if well, why do you strike Me?” Then Annas sent Him bound to Caiaphas the high priest.”
The Jewish High Priests from 200 B.C to the Reign of Herod the Great
1. Simon II the Just, 220-190 B.C.
2. Onias III, 190-174 B.C.
3. Jason/Jeshua,175-172 B.C.
4. Menelaus, 172-162 B.C.
5. Alcimus, 162-156 B.C.
6. Jonathan, 153-142 B.C.
7. Simon, 142-135 B.C.
8. John Hyrcanus I, 134-104 B.C.
9. Aristobulus I, 104-103 B.C.
10. Alexander Jannaeus, 103-76 B.C.
11. Hyrcanus II, 76-67 B.C.
12. Aristobulus II, 67-63 B.C.
13. Hyrcanus II, 63-40 B.C.
14. Antigonus, 40-37 B.C.
The Jewish High Priests from Herod the Great to the Destruction of Jerusalem
15. Ananel, 37-36 B.C. (Appointed by Herod the Great)
16. Aristobulus III, 35 B.C.
17. Jesus, son of Phiabi, ? -22 B.C.
18. Simon, son of Boethus, 22-5 B.C.
19. Matthias, son of Theophilus, 5-4 B.C.
20. Joseph, son of Elam, 5 B.C.
21. Joezer, son of Boethus, 4 B.C.
22. Eleazar, son of Boethus, 4-1 B.C. – (Appointed by Herod Archelaus)
23. Jesus, son of Sie, 1 – 6 A.D.
24. Annas, 6-15 A.D. (Appointed by Quirinius)
25. Ishmael, son of Phiabi I, 15-16 A.D. (Appointed by Valerius Gratus)
26. Eleazar, son of Annas, 16-17 A.D.
27. Simon, son of Kamithos, 17-18 A.D.
28. Joseph Caiaphas, 18-37 AD.
29. Jonathan, son of Annas, 37 A.D. (Appointed by Vitellius)
30. Theophilus, son of Annas, 37-41 A.D.
31. Simon Kantheras, son of Boethus, 41-43 A.D. (Appointed by Herod Agrippa I)
32. Matthias, son of Annas, 43-44 A.D.
33. Elionaius, son of Kantheras, 44-45 A.D.
34. Joseph, son of Kami, 45-47 A.D. (Appointed by Herod of Chalcis)
35. Ananias, son of Nebedaius, 47-55 A.D.
36. Ishmael, son of Phiabi III, 55-61 A.D. (Appointed by Herod Agrippa II)
37. Joseph Qabi, son of Simon, 61-62 A.D.
38. Ananus, son of Ananus, 62 A.D.
39. Jesus, son of Damnaius, 62-65 A.D.
40. Joshua, son of Gamal iel, 63-65 A.D.
41. Matthias, son of Theophilus, 65-67 A.D.
42. Phinnias, son of Samuel, 67-70 A.D. (Appointed by The People)
Some dates cannot be known for certain.
I went to see the movie “The Conspirator” the other night and I really enjoyed it. Since then I have been digging up facts about the trial and the people involved in the trial.
The southern widow’s Maryland house was a crucial stop on the escape route for assassin John Wilkes Booth the night he shot the president.
Rick Warner’s review of “The Conspirator” is below:
As she mounted the gallows on a broiling summer day in 1865, Mary Surratt was shaded from the sun by an umbrella. She and three men, all convicted of conspiring to kill President Abraham Lincoln, were about to be hanged in a prison courtyard in Washington, D.C.
The umbrella is one of many fascinating details in Robert Redford’s “The Conspirator,” which focuses on the trial of the first woman executed by the U.S. federal government.
Director Redford and screenwriter James Solomon deserve credit for making a historical drama that largely sticks to the facts. The depiction of Surratt’s trial by a military tribunal is based on Solomon’s exhaustive research into the court transcripts and other written accounts of the trial.
Accuracy, however, doesn’t always produce a stirring story. “The Conspirator,” which is being released on the 146th anniversary of Lincoln’s death, is a talky, often ponderous film that’s better suited to the History Channel than your local multiplex.
The movie offers a sympathetic portrayal of Surratt, a widow who owned the Washington boarding house where John Wilkes Booth and his fellow conspirators plotted to kill Lincoln, Vice President Andrew Johnson and Secretary of State William Seward.
The case against Surratt was relatively weak, mostly based on her son John’s involvement with Booth and the fact that the conspirators met under her roof. She denied knowing anything about the Lincoln plot and refused to turn against her son, who fled the country after the assassination. But the military court — Gitmo analogies are sure to be made — wanted a swift, sure resolution.
Ford’s Theatre
Surratt is played with quiet dignity by Robin Wright, looking as stern as a Sunday school teacher. The other central character is her unlikely attorney, Frederick Aiken (a bearded, studious James McAvoy), a Union war hero who reluctantly agreed to defend a Southern sympathizer accused of plotting to kill the president.
Redford quickly sets the stage with cross-cut scenes of Booth shooting Lincoln at Ford’s Theatre, co-conspirator Lewis Powell savagely stabbing Seward in his bed (he survived) and their partner George Atzerodt getting drunk and failing to carry out his assignment to murder Johnson. The momentum stalls during the courtroom scenes, which are robotically enacted like a 19th- century version of “Law & Order.”
The period costumes and setting (the film was shot in Savannah, Georgia) are first rate, and Redford gets solid supporting performances from Tom Wilkinson and Evan Rachel Wood.
“The Conspirator,” from Roadside Attractions, opened yesterday across the U.S. Rating: **1/2
The Daily Hatch 
Leave a comment