Thursday, December 29, 2016

Fwd: Legal Consequences of THE ABANDONMENT OF JUDEA AND SAMARIA by the Govt of Israel? Other Jews are then within their Constitutional rights based on Law of Return, to establish an Independant State of Judea and Samaria. By Howard Grief ob"m

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: "Paul Eidelberg" <>
Date: Dec 29, 2016 11:18 PM
To: "kedar tour" <>





by Howard Grief


May 24, 2010

The core thesis of my book, The Legal Foundation and Borders of Israel under International Law, is that de jure sovereignty over all of Eretz-Israel was vested in the Jewish People, i.e., world Jewry, as a result of the adoption of the San Remo Resolution of April 25,1920 by the Principal Allied Powers of World War I (Britain, France, Italy and Japan), a coalition of nations that defeated and dismembered the Ottoman Turkish Empire and then allotted those lands to various national beneficiaries.

In 1920, there was of course no State of Israel, but the Zionist Organization (now called the World Zionist Organization) represented the national aspirations of the Jewish People to bring about a future independent Jewish State. In 1929, a second representative body was formed: the Jewish Agency for Palestine (now: the Jewish Agency for Israel) — in accordance with Article 4 of the Mandate for Palestine. It was these two Jewish-Zionist bodies that were instrumental in the eventual rebirth of the Jewish State of Israel, that officially came into existence on May 15,1948. In point of law, de jure sovereignty over the land of the Jews was devolved or transferred from the Jewish People via the Zionist Organization and the Jewish Agency to the State of Israel as of that date. However, the devolution of sovereignty was exercisable — in a de facto sense — only over those areas of the Land of Israel that were at that time in the actual physical possession of the State of Israel, while other integral areas of the Jewish National Home remained under illegal Arab control in 1948.

The situation was drastically changed by the Six-Day War of June 5-10, 1967 when eastern Jerusalem, Judea, Samaria, Gaza, the Golan Heights and Sinai were all liberated from foreign Arab occupation by the Israel Defense Forces. The astounding Israeli victory in the war was, however, accompanied by a legal farce perpetrated by the legal advisers of the Eshkol National Unity Government, chief among whom was the then-Military Advocate-General Meir Shamgar, the future Attorney General and President of the Israel Supreme Court. Instead of applying Israeli law to the liberated territories, as required by the then-existing Israeli constitutional law, the Eshkol Government — acting on Shamgar's misguided advice — shortsightedly and unconstitutionally applied international law (i.e., the laws of war, embodied in the Hague Regulations of 1907 and the Fourth Geneva Convention of 1949), thus creating the harmful world-wide impression that Israel was henceforth an Occupying Power of "foreign lands" belonging to Arab states. That is the only reason why Judea, Samaria and Gaza came thereafter to be called "occupied territories", both inside Israel and abroad, a misnomer that persists universally today, even among Israel's friends and institutions, such as the Israeli Supreme Court.

Under Israeli constitutional law that existed at the outset of the Six-Day War, the government of Israel was legally obliged to apply the law of the State of Israel — and not international law — to the liberated territories. This obligation was inherent in the 1948 law known as the Area of Jurisdiction and Powers Ordinance and the two Proclamations issued under its provisions, namely, the Jerusalem Proclamation of August 2, 1948 and the all-embracing and open-ended Land of Israel Proclamation of September 2, 1948. These enactments had one purpose only: to extend the area of the Jewish State beyond its narrow borders as recommended in the UN General Assembly Partition Resolution of November 29, 1947 in order to embrace and incorporate into the State all other areas of the Land of Israel in Arab hands that had been re-possessed by the Israel Defense Forces. To achieve precisely that, it was in fact this law and the two proclamations that were invoked in 1948 by Prime Minister and Defense Minister David Ben-Gurion. This legal mechanism paved the way for cities such as Nahariya, Nazareth, Ramle, Lod, Beersheba, Ashdod (Isdud), Ashkelon (Majdal) and other places that were not yet part of the State of Israel on May 15, 1948 — to be brought within its boundaries. It may surprise many to know that the 1948 Ordinance and the Land of Israel Proclamation are still very much in force, and can even be invoked again, without new Knesset legislation, if the Government of Israel so desires, in order to incorporate Judea, Samaria and Gaza into the State of Israel.

The pressing question that arises at this point is what would happen if, instead of incorporation or annexation, the Israeli Government decides to abandon or cede Judea, Samaria to the Arabs as indicated by the Road Map Peace Plan and the Two-State Solution. In this respect it should be noted that what was done to the Jewish inhabitants of the Gaza district and northern Samaria was a violation of the 1950 Law of Return, an infringement that the Supreme Court ignored in its decision approving the legality of the Disengagement Implementation Law of 2005. The discussion here will therefore be limited to the fate of Judea and Samaria.

The sovereignty now vested in the State of Israel over Judea and Samaria, but which is inexplicably neither asserted nor even recognized by the Israeli Government, can, in my opinion, be exercised by the 300,000 or more Jewish residents of Judea and Samaria in the event and only in the event that the Government of Israel withdraws completely from this territory and leaves it once again to the mercies of Arab terrorists. As a matter of law, it should always be remembered that the State of Israel acts only in the role and capacity of agent and assignee of the Jewish People, and simply has no legal authority to renounce the right or rights that legally belong eternally to the Jewish People as a whole, not only of this generation but also of all future generations, as Ben-Gurion noted at Basel in 1937. Thus if the State acts contrary to its power as agent and assignee of the Jewish People who are directly and adversely affected by its renunciation of the right of sovereignty over Judea and Samaria and its transfer of de facto control over the land to an Arab entity, i.e., to the "Palestinian Authority" or the "Palestine Liberation Organization", then the right of sovereignty reverts back to the Jewish People, the original and implied sovereign of Palestine under the San Remo Resolution, and as a result other representatives of the Jewish People can legally act in its place and stead. This applies particularly to the Jews of Judea and Samaria who are part and parcel of the Jewish People in whom sovereignty over all areas of Eretz-Israel ultimately vests, who presently implement Israel's de facto sovereignty over Judea and Samaria and who would suffer great injury by any decision of the Government of Israel to cede Judea and Samaria to foreigners.

The Jews of Judea and Samaria would, in fact and in law, be well within their constitutional rights to remain living in those territories under the most significant law of the State of Israel, the Law of Return, that enshrines in its provisions the two-thousand-year-old Jewish Right of Return and, assuming Government abandonment, to take the necessary steps to govern themselves in an independent State of Judea and Samaria.


The late Howard Grief was an eminent international lawyer and author of "The Legal Foundation and Borders of Israel under International Law."


Huckabee: Defund UN; Use Money to Help US Veterans | Fox News Insider

Fwd: Open Letter to Pres. Trump from Yossi Baumol Gush Etzion

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: "Makor Chaim" <>
Date: Dec 29, 2016 7:39 AM
Subject: Open Letter to Pres. Trump from Gush Etzion
To: "Jay & Robin" <>

An Open Letter to President Trump from Gush Etzion
View this email in your browser
An Open Letter to President Trump from Gush Etzion
(Please share and support!)

Dear President Elect Trump,

My wife and I have lived in Gush Etzion for 34 years and have raised 9 children here who are all American citizens. Our home and the homes of our about two dozen grandchildren throughout Judea have just been declared "illegal" by the UN, by President Obama and Secretary Kerry. We chose to live here in Judea because we trace our family's roots back to King David and the tribe of Judah. Another reason we chose this area is because members of our extended family lived here in Gush Etzion prior to 1948 and gave their lives trying to defend their homes.

In addition to the extensive Jewish history here, we purchased our homes which were built by a Jewish government on "waste lands". According to the 1917 Balfour Declaration, the 1920 San Remo Accords, the 1922 League of Nations "Mandate for Palestine" (retained as law by UN Charter Article 80), US Congress Resolution # 360 signed into law by President Harding, and other provisions of international law, these "waste lands" were specifically reserved for Jewish settlement before the King of Jordan illegally occupied and annexed the area and distributed some of these lands to his cronies. The US government has never recognized this illegal Jordanian occupation and since 1993 even Jordan has given up any claim to this area. In addition, the Oslo Accords specifically stipulate that the permanent status of the area will not be changed unless both sides agree.

The US government and the UN Security Council have just illegally acted against all of the above provisions of US and international law and have called into question our very right to live here. I trust that once you are in office, you will employ your wisdom, honesty and common sense in dealing with these issues, just as you have demonstrated your unique approach in other areas such as the US economy, education, legal system, etc.

Before you take office, I have a personal favor to ask from you because your family has a personal connection to our family. Your late father Fred helped build and support  the Beach Haven Jewish Center founded by my late father-in-law, Rabbi Israel Wagner (see more here).

We are involved in the construction of the new campus of the Makor Chaim Jewish Center here in Gush Etzion in memory of the three young men who were kidnapped and murdered by terrorists in the summer of July 2014. Two of them, Gilad Shaer and Naftali Fraenkel (a US citizen), studied at Makor Chaim.

I understand you are planning on dismantling the "Trump Foundation" in advance of taking office. Wouldn't it be appropriate for you make a substantial contribution to this worthy cause? If you are criticized for doing so, you can respond that even President Jimmy Carter declared at this very spot that "This particular settlement area is not one I ever envision being abandoned or changed over into Palestinian territory." 

I hope that you and anyone else who identifies with what I have written here will go to the website to make a donation and stand up for Israel now!

Sincerely yours,
Yossi Baumol
Copyright © 2016 Makor Chaim Institutions, All rights reserved.
You've been in contact with me before

Our mailing address is:
Makor Chaim Institutions
Educational Center
Kfar Etzion 90912

Add us to your address book

Want to change how you receive these emails?
You can update your preferences or unsubscribe from this list

Fwd: From Israel: A Saga of Bitterness and Hope. Arlene Kushner reflections on UN Resolution aftermath

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: "Arlene Kushner" <>
Date: Dec 29, 2016 7:37 AM
Subject: From Israel: A Saga of Bitterness and Hope
To: "A Kushner" <>

December 28, 2016
"A Saga of Bitterness and Hope"
Regrettably, I encountered a transmission problem of significant proportions when I sent out my last posting, "Anger, and Not Panic," written in response to the Security Council Resolution 2334 which passed because of Obama's decision to abstain.  It was a brief piece, providing reassurance as to the limits of the damage from this perfidy.  But somewhere between one-third and one-half of my readers never received it.
The problem is not solved, although I hope it will be by some time next week.  There may be some delay in your receiving this, but know that I am doing my best and mighty frustrated.
I will not rerun what I last sent because I want to move on.  Those who want to see it, can find it on my website:

But I also highly recommend an analysis that has just come out from Alan Baker, Director of the Institute for Contemporary Affairs at the Jerusalem Center and the head of the Global Law Forum.  I think you will find this article highly informative and considerably reassuring.

Credit: JCPA


The bitterness?  It's palpable. There's a sense of betrayal, of being knifed from multiple directions. 

That is because of Obama's stance, which is a reversal of US policy and former commitments. In his 2011 address to the UN he said repeatedly that a genuine peace can be achieved only via direct negotiations between Israel and the PA. "Peace will not come through statements and resolutions at the United Nations," he declared.  This rather confirms that his motivation for his current stance is not "peace" at all, but sticking it to Israel.  Not that this comes as a surprise.

And because no other nation on the Council stood with Israel (I'll come back to this). 

And because the resolution itself is so shockingly one-sided – lacking perspective and anything resembling justice, relying instead on a gross distortion of historical reality:

[] It refers to all Israeli presence beyond the Green Line as "a flagrant violation of international law."  This means the Kotel and Har HaBayit and much, much more, including the Mount of Olives, where Jews have been buried for 3,000 years.

[] It refers to all territory beyond the Green Line as "occupied Palestinian territory" and demands that Israel cease "all settlement activity" – which is Israel's "legal obligation."


These are facts that refute the position of this resolution:

[] The British Mandate for Palestine of 1922, passed unanimously by the League of Nations, was an article of international law.  It recognized the Jewish historical connection to the land, and conferred upon Britain responsibility for establishing a Jewish homeland in Palestine.  Britain was to "encourage...close settlement by Jews on the land."  (This was in ALL of Palestine.)

[] The partition plan of 1947, which proposed dividing Palestine into two states carried no weight legally because it was merely a recommendation by the UN General Assembly.  In any event, the Arabs rejected it.  The Mandate stood.

[] Israel declared independence on a portion of Palestine in 1948. The remainder remained unclaimed Mandate land.  There is a principle in customary international law that when a new state is founded, its borders follow the borders of the administrative entity that existed prior.

[] As soon as (actually, even before) independence was declared, the Arab states declared war. 

When the War of Independence was over in 1949, armistice lines were drawn.  THIS was the Green Line. To Israel's east, the armistice line was between Israel and Jordan.   There was no mention of "Palestinians."  The armistice agreement signed between Israel and Jordan stated specifically that the armistice line (i.e. the Green Line) was only a temporary line that would not prejudice a permanent border, to be determined via negotiations.  At that point, Jordan occupied Judea and Samaria and eastern Jerusalem illegally – it acquired the area in an offensive war and its occupation of the area was recognized by only two states in the world.

[] During the Six Day War of 1967, Jordan broke its armistice with Israel by joining in attack.  By the end of the war, Israel had liberated Judea and Samaria, and east Jerusalem.  This was Mandate land.  What is more, Israel's right to it was strengthened by the fact that it was secured in an defensive war. 

[] Within months, the Security Council had passed Resolution 242. It did NOT call for Israel to return to the Green Line.  It recognized that this line did not constitute a secure border for Israel, something to which all nations are entitled.  It said that the final border would be determined via negotiations.  Again: the negotiations were to be with Jordan; there was no mention of "Palestinians." 

[] In 1994, Jordan and Israel signed a peace treaty. The border determined by this treaty followed the border of the Mandate. In the area of Judea and Samaria, this is the Jordan River.

[] In 1995, the Interim Accord of Oslo was signed (and was witnessed by US President Bill Clinton). It divided Judea and Samaria into three administrative areas.  Area C is under full Israeli civil and military control.  There is NOTHING in Oslo that prohibits Israel from building in C. 

Under Oslo – which actually does not speak specifically of a Palestinian "state" – a final status resolution was to be determined by negotiations between Israel and the PA. 

As Dore Gold, President of the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs notes, The Palestinians themselves agreed in the 1995 Interim Agreement that the issue of Israeli settlements in the West Bank should be addressed as an item for negotiation between the parties.


Please note that in none of the above is there a legal prohibition on Israeli building in Judea and Samaria, or now, at a minimum, in Area C. 

There is absolutely no indication in "international law" that Israel belongs only behind the 1947 armistice line.  Be aware that the Palestinian Arabs and their supporters invoke "international law" as it suits them.

There is no international law that prohibits an Israeli presence in any part of Judea and Samaria, that is, that determines that it is all "occupied Palestinian land."

The Palestinian Arabs have done a superb job of promoting falsehoods that are now adopted by a bulk of the world's nations, without regard for justice or historical reality.


A quick word about Israel's alleged "occupation" of Judea and Samaria.  First, a nation cannot "occupy" its own land, and this is Israeli land according to the international law of the Mandate. 

Occupation occurs only when the army of one sovereign state moves into the territory of another sovereign state.  But Judea and Samaria was not the territory of any other sovereign state: Jordan was there illegally. 

The Geneva Convention does not apply to this situation, although is sometimes claimed.


I spoke above about Obama's reversal of US policy, and his decision to abstain.  But, as has now been revealed, he actually helped to craft the resolution and pushed it vigorously behind the scenes.

Israeli Ambassador to the US Ron Dermer has told CNN that there is solid evidence of Obama's orchestration of the resolution.

"We will present this evidence to the new administration through the appropriate channels. If they want to share it with the American people they are welcome to do it."  As Dermer put it, Obama was behind the "ganging up" on Israel at the Security Council.

According to Netanyahu spokesman David Keyes, the solid information comes from Arab countries and others in the international community.


On Sunday night, Netanyahu went to the Kotel to light the second Chanukah candle. Standing there, he declared:

"I ask those same countries that wish us a Happy Chanukah how they could vote for a U.N. resolution which says that this place, in which we are now celebrating Chanukah, is occupied territory

"The Western Wall is not occupied.  The Jewish Quarter is not occupied." (Emphasis added)

Credit: prime minister's office

Our prime minister is very very angry, and with excellent reason.  Yesterday, he declared that Israel will not "turn the other cheek."


US Ambassador to Israel Dan Shapiro was called in for a 45 minute dressing down by Prime Minister Netanyahu.  I wish I could have been a fly on the wall for that meeting.  Other ambassadors were also called in, but Netanyahu met only with Shapiro, because of the expectations of US friendship that had been so severely dashed.

Credit: matzav


As to the other nations on the Security Council: five permanent members, China, France, the Russian Federation, the United Kingdom, and the United States, and ten non-permanent members elected for two-year terms by the General Assembly: Angola, Egypt, Japan, Malaysia, New Zealand, Senegal, Spain, Ukraine, Uruguay, and Venezuela...

The four that sponsored the resolution after Egypt withdrew were Malaysia, New Zealand, Senegal and Venezuela. Israel does not have diplomatic ties with Venezuela or Malaysia. The ambassadors to New Zealand and Senegal were recalled for consultations. 

The situation with Senegal was particularly disappointing.   Israel has been providing agricultural technology to small farmers, and through Israel's Agency for International Development Cooperation 4,000 farms were being supported.

Netanyahu has now ordered a cut-off of all assistance to Senegal, as well as the cancellation of the upcoming visit of the Senegalese foreign minister.  The message: you cannot accept Israel's outstretched hand, gladly taking the assistance offered, and then actively promote a resolution that is destructive to Israel.

Similarly, has assistance to Angola been terminated.


As to the other nations, some were a lost cause, of course.  But in other instances, a different response might have been expected. 

Theresa May, new prime minister of the UK, speaks in very pro-Israel terms, at least part of the time.  The UK, as a permanent member of the Council, could have cast the necessary veto, but voted for the resolution. Netanyahu has now cancelled a planned meeting with May at the sidelines of the Davos World Economic Forum. May declares herself "disappointed."

And the Ukraine, which is traditionally considered a friend of Israel, voted for the resolution anyway.  Netanyahu has now cancelled the visit of Ukrainian Prime Minister Volodymyr Groysman, who was due here next week. Ukrainians at first were miffed about this cancellation, and expressed surprise at Netanyahu's anger. "The text of the resolution is balanced," said the Ukrainian foreign ministry, which subsequently spoke about expectation that warm ties would endure.

(It is being charged, by the way, that V.P. Biden placed a call to the Ukraine that "encouraged" support on the resolution.)


Netanyahu has been criticized in some quarters for what is seen as an over-reaction.  I see it otherwise.  Time to hold our heads up in an attitude of self-respect: Don't claim friendship with us and knife us in the back when it suits.  Some of Netanyahu's positions will undoubtedly mellow over time, but it's not bad to deliver a new message now.

Look at this: Ukrainian MP Alexander Feldman, who is Jewish, has announced on his Facebook page that he intends to submit a bill for moving the Ukrainian embassy to Jerusalem.  He hopes this will bring the Ukrainian-Israeli relationship to a whole new level.

Doesn't mean this proposal will succeed – it flies directly in the face of the resolution. But would Feldman even have suggested this if not for Netanyahu's anger?


Netanyahu is also evaluating Israel's relationship with the UN. 


Defense Minister Lieberman has instructed COGAT [Coordinator of Government Activities in the Territories] to have no interaction with the PA except on security matters.  See more on what this entails here:

The simple fact of the matter is that the PA is behind this resolution. Their current gloating is obscene.  This has been their intention all along: to achieve ends without negotiations and without compromise.

This is a cartoon that Fatah put on its Facebook page after the resolution passed.  The Arabic is the list of nations that supported the vote.  It suggests an international endorsement of terrorism.


Lieberman also had something to say about France: The French, ludicrously, are planning a "peace conference" on January 15, five days before Obama leaves office. He has called it a "modern day Dreyfus trial. There's only one difference, this time, instead of the defendant being one Jew, it will be the entire nation of Israel and the State of Israel.

"This summit's entire purpose is to undermine the State of Israel's security and tarnish its good name." (Emphasis added),7340,L-4898780,00.html

(The Dreyfus affair, at the end of the 19th century, was a French scandal during which an innocent Captain Alfred Dreyfus, a Jew, was convicted of treason. Anti-Semitism was at work in France then, and now.)


My readers can rest assured that Israel has no intention whatsoever of halting building in Judea and Samaria, and eastern Jerusalem.  Quite the contrary.


As I complete this and prepare for transmission, I am aware that Secretary of State Kerry is scheduled to give a speech outlining his vision of a "comprehensive peace" between Israel and the PA.  I'm sure it will be chock full of untenable ideas and outright lies that seek to further the damage to Israel.  There is nothing but nothing he could say that would be constructive or original.  How much damage this will do remains to be seen.  I must deal with this in my next posting.

Recently, Kerry sent out a "Happy Chanukah" message. 

One blogger replied, "Go choke on a latke." On that note, I close.


© Arlene Kushner. This material is produced by Arlene Kushner, functioning as an independent journalist. Permission is granted for it to be reproduced only with proper attribution.   

If it is reproduced and emphasis is added, the fact that it has been added must be noted.

See my website at  Contact Arlene at
This material is transmitted by Arlene only to persons who have requested it or agreed to receive it.  If you are on the list and wish to be removed, contact Arlene and include your name in the text of the message.


Fwd: Secretary of State John Kerry has violated International Law by Prof. Paul Eidelberg

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: "Paul Eidelberg" <>
Date: Dec 29, 2016 7:18 AM
Subject: Secretary of State John Kerry has violated International Law
To: "Temlakos" <>

Secretary of State John Kerry has violated International Law 

By Prof.  Paul Eidelberg 


Granting the right under international law for Jews to settle anywhere in western Palestine - the area between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean Sea

Cindy's Corner Radio Show 12/28 by Open Rebellion Radio0 | News Podcasts Preparing for Redefining the Union under President Elect Donald Trump. Defunding the UN.

Greenfield: How George Soros Destroyed the Democratic Party | Truth Revolt

RARE PHOTO: Trump's Father Donated Land for a Cheder - Hidabrut

Wednesday, December 28, 2016

If You Behave Casually (Kerry) With Me...Biblical Curses...


Whatever Kerry says the opposite is true...Curses if you go with Kerry and Blessings if you go With Hashem!

FYI Fabulous CNN article by Mark Goldfeder proving that the UN Resolution is both WRONG AND INEFFECTUAL! UM-SHMUM..Please fwd...Protest Today Wednesday at US Mission to UN!



FYI Fabulous CNN article by Mark Goldfeder proving that the UN Resolution is both WRONG AND INEFFECTUAL!  Israel has exclusive title and sovereignty; from an international law perspective... This CNN journalist writes that this is not an Occupation.  This Resolution is not binding! The new resolution condemning the settlements was actually adopted under Chapter VI, which simply authorizes the Security Council to issue non-binding recommendations dealing with the peaceful settlement of disputes.
  דרורה קלמנט Sent by

My Additional Comments to the amazing well documented and researched article above!  

This UN Resolution is a blatant annulment of the Torah and is nonbinding for this reason alone! The Legal arguments stated above article, strengthens and provides International legal standing for Israel to finally annex East Jerusalem inclusive of Temple Mount and all of Judea and Samaria and finally put an end to the  2 State Solution option which has proven to bring the opposite of peace! 
עת לעשות לה' הפירו תורתיך (תהילים 119:126)...  אחינו בית ישראל.... על תעמד על דם רעיך!
Plain and simple.  We must stand up for Torah.    See First Rashi of Breishis! 

Ait Laasot LaHashem, Hefeiru Toratecha /Tehillim 119, 126.  It is time to do for Hashem for our Torah has been pushed aside, annulled

מעוז צור
נְקֹם נִקְמַת דם עֲבָדֶיךָ מֵאֻמָּה הָרְשָׁעָה  In the last stanza of Maoz Tzur we ask Hashem to exact revenge on the evil Nation (UM). BTW UM in Hebrew is the acronym for the United Nations.  Very timely prayer for this UNG-dly resolution to happen right around Chanuka!!!

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Um-Shmum (Hebrewאו"ם שמום‎, where um is the Hebrew acronymic pronunciation for "U.N.",[1] and the "shm"-prefix signifies dismissal, contempt or irony) is a phrase coined by the Israeli Minister of Defense (and former Prime MinisterDavid Ben-Gurion on 29 March 1955 during a debate within the Israeli cabinet regarding his plan to take the Gaza Strip from Egypt in response to the increasing fedayeen terror attacks. This utterance towards the United Nations is an expression that reflects, even as to date, the way many Israelis feel about the institution.

ACTION ALERT: Protest the United Nations TOMORROW for its shameful anti-Israel resolutions
Zionist Organization of America | New York | 212.481.1500 |

Want to change how you receive these emails? 
You can update your preferences or unsubscribe from this list


Robin Ticker

Israel Advocacy Calendar (
Activist emails sent to my list  are L'Ilui Nishmat Yisrael ben David Aryeh ob"m (Izzy - Kaplan) and Howard Chaim Grief great activists and lovers of Eretz Yisroel, Am Yisroel and the Torah. Yehi Zichronum Baruch.  May their memories serve as a blessing. 

Most of these emails are posted on 

Personal emails to individuals will not be posted to my blog.