Category Archives: Uncategorized

Israeli Bees to Help Save Japanese Crops

Israeli bees are flying to the rescue in Japan in order to help pollinate their crops.

 


Israeli bumblebees are on the way to Japan to help make up for a lack of bees there caused by the increased use of pesticides in rice fields, Israel Hayom reports.

The Israeli bees are receiving “first class” treatment on their way to Japan and are being sent inside spacious hives, each of which contains an impregnated queen bee and 50 worker bees that supply her needs.

These special bees were raised and engineered by the Bio Bee firm, based at Kibbutz Sde Eliyahu in the Jordan Valley.

The bees will be deployed throughout Japan, where they will work busily to pollinate the produce, a process vital to ensure a good harvest, which in many instances cannot succeed without bees. As the bees suck up nectar from a flower, they shake it, which helps distribute the pollen.

bees

(Pixabay)

Bio Bee’s mass-produced earth bumblebees (Bombus terrestris) are created for pollination purposes only. They have been uniquely bred to carry out their mission even when the temperature drops, as well as in rainy, cloudy weather, when bees do not naturally work and prefer to huddle up in their warm hives.

This method has been successfully used in Israel for years. Israeli farmers are also affected by the global decline in the honeybee population. The advantage of these particular bees is that they tend to stay inside the closed greenhouse, rather than flying out to cultivate other people’s fields.

There has been a general drop in the global bee population, but the situation in Japan is especially acute because of the pesticide spraying of rice crops there. Many bees died after they ingested the poisoned nectar.

By: United with Israel Staff

shutterstock_196518893

Subscribe to Our FREE Newsletter for More Great Stories Like This One

United with Israel publishes stories like this every day. We believe that our work allows a more balanced view of Israel to emerge. With so much anti-Israel media bias out there from outlets like CNN and the BBC, helping the Holy Land means getting our message out to as many people as possible.

You can help.

Subscribe to our free newsletter to ensure that you get the latest and best stories from United with Israel. Together we can make a difference, and it starts with communication.

CLICK HERE TO SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER

Israel: Arab States Seeking Nuclear Weapons Against Iran

Israel has picked up signs of the beginning of a nuclear arms race in the Middle East as Arab states seek nuclear weapons to counter Iran, Israeli Defense Minister Moshe Ya’alon warned.


Moshe Ya’alon said Sunni Arab nations were not reassured by last year’s nuclear deal between Iran and six world powers and were making their own preparations for nuclear weapons.

According to a report in The Telegraph, Israel has picked up signs of the beginning of a nuclear arms race in the Middle East as Arab states seek nuclear weapons to counter Iran, Ya’alon warned.

 

 

 

 

 

“We see signs that countries in the Arab world are preparing to acquire nuclear weapons, that they are not willing to sit quietly with Iran on brink of a nuclear or atomic bomb,” Ya’alon said.

Israel, Turkey, Russia and Egypt by Shoshana Bryen

  • In 2011, the UN Palmer Commission Report found the blockade of Gaza — jointly administered with Egypt — to be legal, and said Israel owed Turkey neither an apology nor compensation.

  • Lifting the Israel/Egypt embargo on Gaza would empower Hamas, and thereby the Muslim Brotherhood, Iran and ISIS — which would seem an enormous risk for no gain.

Turkish sources assert that Turkish-Israeli governmental relations are about to come out of the deep freeze. But this is a reflection of Turkey’s regional unpopularity and glides over Turkish demands for Israel to end the blockade of Gaza. To meet Turkey’s condition, Israel would have to abandon the security arrangement it shares with Egypt — which has increased Israel’s security and has begun to pay regional dividends. To restore full relations between Israel and Turkey would irritate Russia, with which Israel has good trade and political relations, and a respectful series of understandings regarding Syria. Israel’s relations with the Kurds are also at issue here.

After the 2010 Mavi Marmara flotilla — in which Turkey supported the Hamas-related Turkish organization, the IHH, in its effort to break the blockade of Gaza — Turkey made three demands of Israel: an Israeli apology for the deaths of Turkish activists; a financial settlement; and lifting the Gaza blockade, which Turkey claimed was illegal. The last would provide IHH with the victory it was unable to achieve with the flotilla.

The Turkish-owned ship Mavi Marmara took part in a 2010 “Gaza flotilla” attempting to break Israel’s naval blockade of Gaza, which is in place to prevent the terrorist group Hamas from bringing arms into Gaza. (Image source: “Free Gaza movement”/Flickr)

In 2011, however, the UN Palmer Commission Report found the blockade of Gaza — jointly administered with Egypt — to be legal, and said Israel owed Turkey neither an apology nor compensation. In 2013, at the urging of President Obama and to move the conversation off the impasse, Prime Minister Netanyahu did apologize for the loss of life and agree to discuss compensation. While President Obama was pleased, Prime Minister Erdogan repaid the gesture by denigrating Israel on Turkish television and announcing he would force the end of the blockade. Israel’s condition — that the office of Hamas in Ankara be closed — was ignored.

Nevertheless, in February 2014, Turkish Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu told Turkish television that Israel and Turkey were “closer than ever” to normalizing relations.” In December 2015, it was more of the same. And in February 2016, there was yet another announcement of imminent restoration of government-to-government ties. In March, Kurdish sources said Turkey was demanding weapons from Israel, but that Israel wanted to ensure that Turkey would not use them against Kurdish forces.

Israel finds itself

Israel, Gaza and “Proportionality” by Louis René Beres

  • It appears that several major Palestinian terror groups have begun to prepare for mega-terror attacks on Israel.
  • The authoritative rules of war do not equate “proportionality” with how many people die in each side of a conflict. In war, no side is ever required to respond to aggression with only the equivalent measure of force. Rather, the obligations of proportionality require that no side employ any level of force that is greater than what is needed to achieve a legitimate political and operational objective.

  • Under pertinent international law, the use of one’s own people as “human shields” — because such firing from populated areas is intended to deter Israeli reprisals, or to elicit injuries to Palestinian civilians — represents a codified war crime. More specifically, this crime is known as “perfidy.” This is plainly an attempt to make the IDF appear murderous when it is compelled to retaliate, but it is simply a Palestinian manipulation of legal responsibility. Under law, those Arab residents who suffer from Israeli retaliations are incurring the consequences of their own government’s war crimes.
  • International law is not a suicide pact. Instead, it offers a universally binding body of rules and procedures that allows all states to act on behalf of their “inherent right of self-defense.”

Already, calls from various directions have begun to condemn Israel for its recent retaliatory strikes in self-defense at Gaza.[1] The carefully-rehearsed refrain is all-too familiar. Gazan terrorists fire rockets and mortars at Israel; then, the world calls upon the Israel Air Force (IAF) not to respond.

Although Israel is plainly the victim in these ritualistic cycles of Arab terror and required Israeli retaliations, the “civilized world” usually comes to the defense of the victimizers. Inexplicably, in the European Union, and even sometimes with the current U.S. president, the Israeli response is reflexively, without thought, described as “excessive” or “disproportionate.”

Leaving aside the irony of President Obama’s evident sympathies here — nothing that Israel has done in its own defense even comes close to the indiscriminacy of recent U.S. operations in Afghanistan[2] — the condemnations are always unfounded. Plainly, Hamas and allied Arab terror groups deliberately fire their rockets from populated areas in Gaza at Israeli civilians. Under pertinent international law, this use of one’s own people as “human shields” — because such firing from populated areas is intended to deter Israeli reprisals, or to elicit injuries to Palestinian civilians — represents a codified war crime. More specifically, this crime is known as “perfidy.”

“Perfidy” is plainly an attempt to make the IDF appear murderous when it is compelled to retaliate, but it is always simply a Palestinian manipulation of true legal responsibility. Hamas’s intent might be to incriminate the Israelis as murderers of Gaza’s civilians. Legally, however, the net effect of Arab perfidy in Gaza is to free Israel of all responsibility for Arab harm, even if it is Israeli retaliatory fire that actually injures or kills the Gazan victims. Under law, those Arab residents who suffer from Israeli retaliations are incurring the consequences of their own government’s war crimes. Palestinian suffering, which we are surely about to see again in stepped-up, choreographed Arab propaganda videos, remains the direct result of a relentlessly cruel, insensitive, and criminal Hamas leadership.

Significant, too, although never really mentioned, is that this Hamas leadership, similar to the PA and Fatah leadership, often sits safely away from Gaza, tucked away inconspicuously in Qatar. For these markedly unheroic figures, “martyrdom” is allegedly always welcomed and revered, but only as long as this singular honor is actually conferred upon someone else.

Moreover, the authoritative rules of war do not equate “proportionality” with how many people die in each side of a conflict. In war, no side is ever required to respond to aggression with only the equivalent measure of force. Rather, the obligations of proportionality require that no side employ any level of force that is greater than what is needed to achieve a legitimate political and operational objective.

If the rule of proportionality were genuinely about an equivalent number of dead, America’s use of atomic weapons against Japanese civilians in August 1945 would represent the greatest single expression of “disproportionality” in human history.

It appears that several major Palestinian terror groups have begun to prepare for mega-terror attacks on Israel. Such attacks, possibly in cooperation with certain allied jihadist factions, could include chemical and biological weapons of mass destruction. Over time, especially if Iran, undeterred by the July 2015 Vienna Pact, should agree to transfer portions of its residual nuclear materials to terror groups, Israel could then have to face Palestinian-directed nuclear terrorism.

One message is clear. If Israel, pressured by outside forces, allows Palestinian terror from Gaza to continue unopposed, the state could become increasingly vulnerable to even greater forms of Arab aggression.

Also important to keep in mind is that nuclear terror assaults against Israel could be launched from trucks or ships, not only from rockets and missiles.

What about Israel’s active defenses? In its most recent defensive operations, Protective Edge and Pillar of Defense, Israel accomplished an impressively high rate of “Iron Dome” interceptions against incoming rockets from Gaza. Still, it would be a mistake to extrapolate from any such relatively limited successes to the vastly more complex hazards of strategic danger from Iran. Should Iran “go nuclear” in ten years or sooner, that still recalcitrant Islamic regime could launch at Israel missiles armed with nuclear warheads.

In its most recent defensive operations, Israel accomplished an impressively high rate of “Iron Dome” interceptions against incoming rockets from Gaza. Still, it would be a mistake to extrapolate from any such relatively limited successes to the vastly more complex hazards of strategic danger from Iran. (Image source: IDF)

Sun Tzu, the ancient Chinese military thinker, already understood — long before the nuclear age — that too great a reliance on defense is always misconceived. Today, Arrow, Israel’s core ballistic missile defense (BMD) interception system, would require a 100% rate success against offensive nuclear missiles. At the same time, such a rate is impossible to achieve, even if enhanced by Rafael’s new laser-based defenses. Israel must therefore continue to rely primarily on deterrence for existential nuclear threats.

Although unacknowledged, Israel has always been willing to keep its essential counterterrorism operations in Gaza consistent with the established rules of humanitarian international law. Palestinian violence, however, has remained in persistent violation of all accepted rules of engagement — even after Israel painfully “disengaged” from Gaza in 2005.

Both Hamas and the Palestinian Authority still speak indignantly of “the Occupation?” But where, precisely, is this “occupation?” After all their agitated umbrage about Israeli “disproportionality,” shouldn’t the Palestinians and their allies finally be able to answer that core question? There are no Israelis in Gaza.

International law is not a suicide pact. Instead, it offers a universally binding body of rules and procedures that allows all states to act on behalf of their “inherent right of self-defense.”[3] When terrorists groups such as Hamas openly celebrate the “martyrdom” of Palestinian children, and when Hamas leaders unhesitatingly seek their own religious redemption through the mass-murder of Jewish children, unfortunately these terrorists retain no legal right to demand sanctuary.

In response to endless terror attacks from Gaza, Israel, with countless leaflets, phone calls, “knocks on the roof,” and other warnings to its attackers, has been acting with an operational restraint unequaled by any other nation and according to binding rules of war. In these obligatory acts of self-defense there has not yet been the slightest evidence of disproportionality.

Louis René Beres is Emeritus Professor of International Law at Purdue University. His just-published new book is titled Surviving Amid Chaos: Israel’s Nuclear Strategy.

Israel’s Public Relations: The Problem and the Solution by Bernhard Lazarus

  • It is worth noting that the Jewish State was effectively created through the efforts of the countries of the world in San Remo and Geneva years prior to the Holocaust.


  • Jerusalem, except for fewer than 200 years in the 11th and 12th Centuries, when it was the capital of a short-lived Crusader State, has only been a capital city under Jewish rule. At other times since the Roman conquest it was not even considered by Muslims, or anyone else, a provincial city of consequence.
  • In the War of 1948-49, Jordan illegally seized Jerusalem, ethnically cleansed its Jewish inhabitants, destroyed all the synagogues and on top of the ancient sacred Jewish cemetery on the Mount of Olives, after taking ancient Jewish headstones to use as the floor of latrines, Jordan built a hotel.
  • The aggression by Egypt, Syria and Jordan in June 1967 was overturned by Israel. Israel liberated Jerusalem, took control of the Golan Heights, from which Syrians had been shooting down at Israeli farmers, and entered the West Bank, which was under illegal Jordanian occupation.
  • Anti-Apartheid movements in South Africa wanted equal political and other democratic rights for all — irrespective of race — but never advocated the destruction of South Africa.
  • Israel currently has no Minister of Foreign Affairs, and the post of Minister of Information does not exist. This creates the message, as former Israeli Prime Minister Golda Meir put it, of being the “prime minister of six million prime ministers”.
  • An even more urgent condition is that Israeli authorities refuse to deal with the considerable number of renegade Israeli academics (and others) harming Israel on the international scene, presumably for their personal reasons.

“War is the continuation of politics by other means,” said by General Carl von Clausewitz nearly 200 years ago, has now morphed into: “Politics is war by other means”.

Enemies who are inferior militarily have understood this; hence, from the height of admiration after the Six Day War, Israel has hit bottom, sharing the position with the likes of North Korea.

How and why is this?

A knowledge of history is essential; therefore it is the first thing one’s enemies try to destroy. If one can falsely claim that biblical places such as Rachel’s Tomb, the Cave of the Patriarchs, the Temple Mount or even Jerusalem are Islamic, even though Islam did not, historically, exist until hundreds of years later, one can consequently claim that there never was a Jewish connection to the land – so then why should the Jews have it?

If you do not know where you come from, you cannot know who you are or what values are worth defending. Shulamit Aloni, as Israel’s Education Minister in 1992-1993, probably to accommodate the peace Israelis hoped wild come after the Oslo accords, purged Israel’s history textbooks of anything that might be deemed “politically incorrect”. Although she undoubtedly meant well, she did the Israelis a major a disservice. The result was as if the U.S. government were to erase George Washington, the Federalist Papers and Abraham Lincoln from its textbooks and the ability to know one’s past.

It is therefore essential that those who challenge Israel’s right to exist and try to destroy Israel economically are met by historical reality. It is only through presenting facts rather than “narratives” that we can succeed in the media war. Israel should bring the old textbooks back — immediately.

Successive Israeli governments, in a combination of indolence, over-confidence and general neglect, have ignored this reality. Rectifying this overwhelming problem has often been left to underfunded and only partially-informed, if well-meaning, private individuals and NGOs.

Not so, however, in the Muslim world. Since the “oil crisis” and the start of Palestinian terrorism in the 1970s, the Muslim world, in concert with many European leaders, led by those in France, has fully occupied the media battlefield. They have using whatever fabricated, inaccurate arguments they and their public relations firms dream up. Meanwhile, despite much howling and crying foul, the Israelis have not met this information deficit with perceptible positive action.

Israel — the Jewish State

Israel, one of the world’s smallest states, roughly the size of New Jersey, has, since its inception, been under constant attack, physically, academically and in the media — most destructively from its own citizens. They claim the right of “free speech” and often even seem to enjoy watching the fatal results, as if needing to confirm a need for malignant power.

The establishment of the Jewish State was Theodore Herzl’s answer of turning the messianic dream of millennia into a political reality. After World War I, the victors dismembered the Ottoman Empire and created a number of new Arab states as well as Mandates, one of which was Britain’s Mandate for Palestine. Palestine at that time was a geographic term only, invented by the ancient Romans in a still earlier attempt, by renaming Judea, to strip the land of its Jewish roots.

Britain’s Mandate to create “a national home for the Jewish people in Palestine” was confirmed, in 1922, by all 52 member states of the League of Nations. Its heir, the United Nations, in 1947, by two-thirds majority, confirmed the establishment of a much-reduced Jewish State, as the bulk of the territory originally mandated to the Jews had been handed over to the independent kingdom of Transjordan.

It is worth noting that the Jewish State was effectively created through the efforts of the countries of the world in San Remo and Geneva years prior to the Holocaust.

Population

In 1882, an Ottoman census showed 141,000 Muslims in the country; in 1906, of the 60,000 inhabitants of Jerusalem, 40,000 were Jews. Jerusalem, except for fewer than 200 years in the 11th and 12th Centuries, when it was the capital of a short-lived Crusader State, has only been a capital city under Jewish rule. At other times since the Roman conquest it was not even considered by Muslims or anyone else, a provincial city of consequence.

In the War of 1948-49, Jordan illegally seized Jerusalem, ethnically cleansed its Jewish inhabitants, destroyed all the synagogues and on top of the ancient sacred Jewish cemetery on the Mount of Olives, after taking ancient Jewish headstones to use as the floor of latrines, Jordan built a hotel, overlooking dead Jews.

During the British Mandate, which lasted until May 14, 1948, while the 1936 British White Paper restricted Jewish immigration into Palestine to 75,000 over a five-year period, Arabs from all the neighboring territories were allowed to flood, unrestricted, into the country.

The aggression by Egypt, Syria and Jordan, in June 1967, was overturned by Israel. Israel liberated Jerusalem, took control of the Golan Heights, from which Syrians had been shooting down at Israeli farmers, and entered the West Bank, which was under Jordanian occupation. Jordan’s King Hussein, promised by Israel that his country would be left if peace if it did not attack, instead, presumably worried that he might miss out on the spoils, entered the war. If one initiates aggression, one should be prepared to lose. Never in history has the victorious victim in a defensive war been requested to return territory to the aggressor. Germany, as the aggressor, lost thousands of square miles to Poland, as would be expected.

In 1979, Israel returned all Egypt’s land, held since1967, in exchange for peace. In 1994, a peace agreement was also signed between Israel and Jordan.

Meanwhile, in the West Bank, the Arabs demanded their own independent state – a demand not made when occupied by Jordan.

As to charges that there are Palestinian refugees and that Israel is an “Apartheid State,” the sad fact is that Palestinian refugees were caused by Israel’s neighbors themselves through starting a war against the new state in 1948. Arabs were told by their Arab brethren to leave the area to make it easier to defeat the Jews — after which, the Arabs were promised, they could return to their homes. Arabs fled to neighboring territories, where to this day they are basically incarcerated for Arab political reasons.

As Israel has absorbed 600,000 Jewish refugees expelled from Arab countries, surely Arab countries, with their vast wealth and territory, can absorb what was originally 600,000 refugees — who chose to leave Israel of their own free will. The Arabs who remain are full-fledged citizens of Israel with full equal rights, all job opportunities, their own political parties, judgeships on Israel’s Supreme Court, and full membership in Israel’s parliament, and make up about 20% of the population.

As Germany absorbed millions of refugees after World War II, and more than 14 million people are estimated to have been transferred during the difficult birth of India and Pakistan, there should be no problem unless one wants there to be one.

Anti-Apartheid movements in South Africa wanted equal political and other democratic rights for all — irrespective of race — but never advocated the destruction of South Africa. The promoters of the current so-called “anti-Apartheid” movement against Israel are, in fact, openly striving for its destruction.

Peace with Israel’s neighbors

Most Muslim countries, in direct contravention of U.N resolution 181, do not recognize the State of Israel. To this day, their outspoken aim is the destruction of the county; hence a two-state solution and peace are impossible as long as the following reality exists:

  • Palestinian National Charter: Extract Article 19: “The Partition of Palestine in 1947 and establishment of the State of Israel are entirely illegal regardless of the passage of time”.
  • Fatah Constitution: Extract Article 12: “Complete liberation of Palestine and the eradication of Zionist economic, political, military and cultural existence.”
  • Hamas Charter: Extract Article 13: “Initiatives, the so-called peaceful solutions — are all contrary to the beliefs of the Islamic Resistance Movement…There is no solution to the Palestinian problem except by Jihad”.

It is obvious that one cannot negotiate until Israel’s neighbors rescind their destructive resolutions and show a genuine willingness for peace, in particular by educating their publics for peace instead of murder, and when everything can be put on the table for discussion.

It is also important to note that the UN Security Council Resolution 242, after 1967 war rejecting the word “the” before “territories” to be returned. Resolution 242 anticipated that Israel cannot be expected to go back to the 1949 armistice lines. Lord Caradon, one of the architects of the resolution, in a letter to The Times of London, explained:

“It would have been wrong to demand that Israel return to its position of June 4, 1967, because these positions were undesirable and artificial and just happen to be the places on the day the fighting stopped in 1948”.

The French, however, in their translation of the text of 242, inserted the “the”; since then, the English version has incorrectly inserted it as well, creating the totally false impression — “fake news” — that all territories are to be returned.

In Conclusion

Two other major problems in Israel have developed, which need most urgent attention.

Israel currently has no Minister of Foreign Affairs, and the post of Minister of Information does not exist. Presumably the former is handled by the Prime Minister when he has the time, whilst the latter falls between the cracks of other ministries. This creates the message, as former Israeli Prime Minister Golda Meir put it, of being the “prime minister of six million prime ministers”.

Israel has a diplomatic budget of approximately 0.15% of GDP — the lowest of all developed countries, although its needs are greater than any other. Canada, for instance, spends 0.25%; Germany 0.4% and the UK spends 0.75%.

An even more urgent condition, needing immediate attention, is that Israeli authorities refuse to deal with the considerable number of renegade Israeli academics (and others) harming Israel on the international scene, presumably for their personal reasons. It is incomprehensible how Israel’s government and universities allow the claim of “abuse of ‘academic freedom'” to justify those who support the openly anti-democratic forces advocating the destruction of the only democratic state in the Middle East. Never have the words of Abraham Lincoln in 1859 been more appropriate: “Those who deny freedom to others deserve it not for themselves”.

As former Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu summed it up in a 2006 Knesset speech, “if the Arabs lay down their arms there will be no more war, but if Israel lays down its weapons there would be no more Israel.”

Translate »
Skip to toolbar