The Pretended -and False- Premises of the "peace Process" & Lies Contributing to It

The whole so-called "peace process" is rife with fraud, if it deserves at all to be called a "peace process." Shmuel Trigano for one suggests that the very term "peace process" does not fit what is really going on.

Here are some of the "peace process" frauds:
1) There is an ancient people called "Palestinians," somehow separate and distinct from the Arabs as a whole, who deserve a state. The notion of a "palestinian people" is a crude lie. But this does not hold back the diplomats. False history is very much in vogue. Just look at how UK and US misinformation organs, like the BBC, have been able to keep hidden the real history of Bosnia and Kossovo. That is, they have managed to erase the centuries-long oppression of Serbs in Bosnia and Kossovo by Bosnian Muslims and Kossovo Muslim Albanians, encouraged by the Ottoman Empire when it ruled those areas. Further, the more recent enlistment by many Bosnian and Kossovo Muslims in German Nazi SS units [the Handschar (= khanjar) and the Skanderbeg] has been officially and unofficially erased by Western communications media. Likewise, Arab-Nazi collaboration has been officially forgotten, particularly Palestinian Arab collaboration in the Holocaust in the person of Haj Amin el-Husseini [Husayni]. Coincidentally, Husseini helped organize the Bosnian Muslim Handschar SS division & the Kossovo Albanian Muslim Skanderbeg SS division.
The "palestinian" Arabs themselves did not speak of a "palestinian people" until the 1960s, under the guidance of Western psywar specialists.

2) that "peace processes" in general, or the so-called Arab-Israeli or "palestinian-Israeli" "peace process" in particular, can bring peace or are even meant to bring peace. The "peace process" with the so-called "palestinians" has been going on for many years and has brought more war than peace, mass murder bombings, euphemistically called "terrorism," rocket attacks on civilians, etc. The "peace" in the "peace process" is Peace of Mind for Antisemites.
Yet, Terje Larsen, the Norwegian diplomat and first rank "peace processor," lied a few years ago when he claimed [in an op ed column in the Judeophobic International Herald Tribune] that Israel had benefitted from the "peace process" in the form of a reduction of violence and terrorism. This is not merely a lie but a very gross lie, so far is it from the truth.

3- All Mideastern problems are because of Israel. This one is a favorite in London. Tony Blair himself has said it. Of course, a lot has to do with how one defines "Middle Eastern problem." When the Barbary Pirates of North Africa were attacking the shipping and maritime trade of European nations and the new United States for several centuries up till the French conquest of Algeria in 1830 [stealing cargo and enslaving crew and passengers], was that a "problem" for Britain?? Maybe not since the Mediterranean countries suffered more than Britain did. When the Ottoman Empire was massacring Armenians in the late 19th century, apparently that was a British problem, since British and other European diplomats at the Congress of Berlin [1878] demanded a change in Ottoman treatment of the Armenians. However, there was no State of Israel at that time nor was there a Political Zionist movement. Zionism was limited to Jews returning to the Land of Israel and accepting Ottoman rule. Likewise, the tribal-dynastic struggles on the Arabian peninsula between the Saudis and the Rashids in the Nejd [central Arabia] and the conflict between Hashemites and Saudis over the Hijaz [NW Arabia] up to 1925 were not motivated by Israel or Zionism.

4- Israel is occupying Arab land or "palestinian" land. Further, the settlements are "illegal" according to the usual suspects, such as the BBC. See this BBC report.
The lie about Jewish settlements in Judea-Samaria being illegal is one of the false bases of the so-called "peace process" and of the recent racist event at Annapolis, euphemistically called "a peace conference." This lie is based on two other lies, first, that Judea-Samaria & Gaza are or were "occupied" by Israel; second, that Geneva Convention IV forbids settlement in "occupied territory." However, Geneva IV forbids an occupying power to "transfer" parts of its population to occupied territory. Needless to say, the Jews who went to live in Judea-Samaria [& Gaza up to 2005] were not "transferred." They went to live in Judea-Samaria & Gaza voluntarily, even eagerly. So even if those areas were "occupied," which they are not, it would not be against international law for Jews to go live in those places. Let's look at the situation historically.

In fact, much real estate in Judea-Samaria & Gaza was recognized as Jewish property before 1939, when the British Empire forbid Jews to buy real estate in most of Judea-Samaria and in Gaza by the notorious "Palestine White Paper," a ban implemented in 1940. This policy was found illegal by the League of Nations Permanent Mandates Commission. It was part of Britain's contribution to the Holocaust. Today's British anti-Zionists might take pride in it if they knew about it. In fact, the Jewish National Home principle encouraged Jews to settle in the heart of the ancient Jewish homeland, the Jewish National Home designated by the San Remo Conference [1920] and the League of Nations [1922], confirmed by the UN charter [article 80]. Hence, the claim commonly made that Judea-Samaria are "occupied" by Israel is false, as is the claim that Geneva Convention IV forbids Jews to voluntarily go live in Judea-Samaria, even if they are "occupied," which they are not. Again, no real international law forbids Jewish settlement in Judea-Samaria, the heart of the ancient Jewish homeland and the internationally designated Jewish National Home. Only racist, Judeophobic laws enacted by Judeophobes could forbid Jewish settlement, Judeophobes like the EU Commission and EU parliament, the UK, the US State Department, and the Arabs. On the Land of Israel's international law status see here & here & here. Readers of French can look for articles on this matter by Prof David Ruzie', perhaps on the Association France-Israel website. The US State Department's opposition to Jews living in Judea-Samaria & Gaza is racism, even if the secretary of state belongs to a previously discriminated against group.
Of course, the EU countries that share that position have not even that fig leaf excuse, since they traditionally restricted Jewish residence rights in their countries.

5- The major powers promoting the "peace process" want peace. But how could they really want peace if they continue to disregard the Nazi-like jihad indoctrination in the "palestinian authority" schools, mass communications media, controlled mosques, etc., and continue to fund this criminal entity with ever more billions after the previously supplied billions had been mainly used either for terrorism purposes or to line the pockets of the PA insiders?

The peacemakers --such as Tony Blair, Kofi Annan, George Bush II, the Norwegian govt, etc-- supposedly want to make peace. If they want peace, then why are they so eager to finance PA security forces and security agents who so very often join terrorist groups where they apply their Western training and expertise to very evil terrorist deeds??? Why did Norway openly establish relations with the avowedly genocidal Hamas regime in Gaza?

The last international donors conference for the palestinian authority came up with pledges of 7.8 billion dollars, more than requested. What is the real aim of giving this money if not Judeophobia? Likewise, how can these powers be seen as wanting peace if they continue to fund the anti-peace United Nations?

6- Most Israelis support establishment of a "palestinian" state or "palestinian" Arab state. This claim has been made variously by convicted sex offender, Hayim Ramon, olmert's favorite deputy prime minister, by Shim`on Peres, who helped bring us the Oslo tragedy, and by Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice. However, the claim has been shown up as false by this recent public opinion poll in Israel [posted on IMRA].

7- Israel is an apartheid state or jimcrow state. This claim was made by US secretary of state Rice at a meeting at Annapolis after the main meeting. Rice said that the so-called "palestinians" suffered as she had as a child in the American South, forbidden to use water fountains reserved for whites and forbidden to eat in restaurants with whites---this article appeared Thursday morning -Israel time-- and was apparently removed on Friday after Annapolis so as not to alarm the Jews about Condi and not embarass Condi with her own words.

8- The so-called "palestinian people" have always been oppressed by the Jews & Zionists, so they need a state for that reason. This is a total lie. Since the Arab Conquest of the 7th century, Arabs/Muslims have been oppressing, exploiting, and humiliating Jews in the dhimmi status. Even in the period of the Conquest itself, Arab forces massacred and deported Jews and other conquered peoples, and seized their real estate, as described in earlier posts on this site. Jews have always suffered an inferior, oppressed status in Arab/Muslim society, including in the Land of Israel, including in Jerusalem, as reported in earlier posts at Emet m'Tsiyon. Certain Western governments do not shrink from falsifying history through their propaganda organs --such as the BBC-- as they have also done recently against the Serbs, in order to set up Muslim states in both Bosnia & Kossovo.
- - - - - - - - -
More to come on frauds and lies contributing to and of the essence of the "peace process." -- Peace follies, propaganda, Jews in the Land of Israel, etc.

BBC & Obama: Pretense and Imposture, Fakery, Phoniness, Propaganda & PsyWar

UPDATINGs 2-17 & 2-20-2008 see at bottom

Molière's Don Juan asks his valet, Sganarelle:
DJ: What? Do you take what I have just said for
the genuine article, and do you believe that
my mouth is in agreement with my heart? . . .
DJ: . . . if I said that I wanted to correct my
behavior and enter into an exemplary way of
life, it was a design that I had formed as a purely
politic measure, a useful stratagem, a necessary
facial expression. . .
DJ: . . . There are so many others like me. . .
who use the same mask in order to deceive the world!
DJ: . . . hypocrisy is a fashionable vice, and all
fashionable vices are taken for virtues.
The character of a decent man is the best of all
roles that one can play today, and the profession
of hypocrite has marvelous advantages. It's an
art of which the imposture is always respected. . .
nobody dares say anything against it.
[Molière, Dom Juan, Acte V, Scène II]

Parlant à Sganarelle, Dom Juan demande:
Dom Juan: Quoi? tu prends pour de bon argent
ce que je viens de dire, et tu crois que ma bouche
étoit d'accord avec mon coeur? . . . .
Dom Juan: . . . . si j'ai dit que je voulois corriger
ma conduite et me jeter dans un train de vie
exemplaire, c'est un dessein que j'ai formé par
pure politique, un stratagème utile. une grimace nécessaire. . .
Dom Juan: . . . . Il y en a tant d'autres comme
moi . . . qui se servent du même masque pour abuser le monde!
Dom Juan: . . . l'hypocrisie est un vice à la
mode, et tous les vices à la mode passent pour
vertus. Le personnage d'homme de bien est le
meilleur de tous les personnages qu'on puisse
jouer aujourd'hui, et la profession d'hypocrite
a de merveilleux avantages. C'est un art de qui
l'imposture est toujours respectée; . . . on n'ose
rien dire contre elle. [Molière, Dom Juan, Acte V, Scène II]

US Senator Barack Obama is now ahead in the contest for the Democratic Party nomination for candidate for US president in 2008. His campaign shows how theater, pretense, and fakery can go very far in American politics, especially if the so-called "news" media cooperate. The BBC has been in the fake news business for many many years. Their coverage of the execution --or assassination, if you like-- of `Imad Mughniyyah, one of the world's most skillful terrorist saboteurs, demonstrates their skills and techniques, and reveals their chief enemy. First Obama.

Senator Obama claims over and over to be against "Washington," different from "Washington," to be representing something "new." He shamelessly takes this line as if he himself were not part of "Washington," as if Zbigniew Brzezinski, a diamond-hearted, cold-blooded war planner, a Washington veteran from way back, were not one of his --Obama's-- advisors.

Jimmy Carter, widely considered by Americans who lived through his disastrous four years in the White House to be the worst president ever, also campaigned against "Washington" in 1976. Zbig B, among other things a professor at Columbia University, was Carter's national security advisor [or national insecurity advisor?]. Besides the shameful personal behavior of Carter and his brother, Billy, while Carter was president, his Administration perpetrated several disasters having worldwide impact. Israel, one of Zbig's pet hates [Zbig spent much of his childhood in Nazi Germany], was induced to give up the Sinai desert with its oil resources in exchange for a piece of paper called a "peace treaty." The Sinai was surrendered to Egypt, where the majority then and now was/is imbued with Muslim fundamentalist ideology [in the Muslim Brotherhood --Ikhwan al-Muslimin-- version] and where the government leaders, such as Sadat himself, were Nazi sympathizers. Sadat in fact conspired with German Nazi agents to help Nazi Germany win World War 2. He later blamed the foiling of the plot on Egyptian Jews, going on to claim that Germany had lost the war because of them [see Sadat's book, Revolt on the Nile, in French Revolte sur le Nil].

An equally great triumph for Zbig was helping Khomeini take over Iran, taking rule there away from the Shah who was accused of "human rights" abuses, which of course pale in the face of the Khomeini regime's human rights abuses. This means that ahmadinejad --the spiritual child of Khomeini, a probable participant in the 1979 hostage-taking of US embassy personnel in Teheran-- is also the result of Zbig's destructive policies. Then there was Zbig's buildup and training of Muslim fanatics in Afghanistan to fight the Soviet Union. Hence, Zbig helped Osama bin Laden get started too.

On February 12, 2008, the day that Mughniyyah was removed from our suffering, Zbig B was supposed to be in Syria to "engage" with the bosses of the Syrian dictatorship. I don't know if the trip to Damascus came off after all, or if he had arrived before the execution of Mughniyyah, but left when the execution became known, since I haven't seen any press notices about it. Anyway, if Zbig did successfully "engage" with Damascus, perhaps he can consummate the engagement with a same sex marriage between himself and Bashar Assad.

Elliot Engel, a US congressman [Dem-NY], has been good enough to remember Zbig's role in Khomeini's rise:

Mr. Engel yesterday said he was not a particular admirer of Mr. Brzezinski's, though he praised his intelligence. He said the former Carter administration official addressed Democratic lawmakers last month at a retreat at Williamsburg, Va., on America's policy toward Iran. "I remember thinking, 'Why are we listening to him?' He was the national security adviser for Jimmy Carter 30 years ago. He proceeded to talk to us about Iran, and I said, 'Let me see, didn't the ayatollahs come to power, didn't we have this problem when you were in the White House?'" [New York Sun, 2-12-2008]

Another of Obama's advisors is Samantha Power. She's a prof at Harvard who specializes in "human rights." As we know "human rights" means excessive rights for some [for example Arabs in general and palestinian Arabs in particular], including the right to abuse the rights of others [such as Jews]. Samantha indicated a few years ago that she believed in the Jenin Massacre Myth propagated by arafat, sa'eb erikat, and the rest of the PLO, PA gang. I'm not sure that she still believes in that hoax but I'm sure that she still believes that Jews don't have rights, such as the right to life, especially if they are too Jewish [that is, Zionist]. As noted, "human rights" as a political tool and pretext was used by Zbig during the Carter administration against the Shah. So Barack Obama, far from representing something new, in fact represents something old, ugly, and grotesque, the misuse of humanitarian rhetoric for inhumane and immoral purposes.
- - - - - - - -

Now, how did the BBC, the world's premiere psywar propaganda purveyor, treat the execution of mass murderer `Imad Mughniyyah??? The BBC asserted that Jerusalem and Washington were happy over the execution, as if no else had reason to be happy about it --not France, not Argentina, not Lebanon. The BBC did not mention the slaughter of 58 French paratroopers in Beirut in 1983, in a bombing perpetrated by Hizbullah, at that time called The Party of God. The BBC did mention the bombings of the Israel embassy and a "Jewish center" in Buenos Aires. Apparently, the BBC did not want to properly call the AMIA a Jewish community and cultural center. Calling it a cultural center might get people to think that Jews have a culture or that they are a community or people. Though the bombings in Argentina were mentioned, the BBC did not show film of the bombed buildings or of victims, nor did the BBC give numbers of victims, as France24 did, for instance. Nor did the BBC mention the likelihood that Mughniyyah was involved in planning the truck bomb murder of Rafiq Hariri in Beirut on 14 February 2005, or any of the other murders of anti-Syrian politicians and journalists generally believed to have been perpetrated by Syria in Lebanon since the attempted murder of Marwan Hamadi in late 2004.

The stress of the story was on Mughniyyah's great talents as a terrorist saboteur --thus, trying to depict him as a hero-- and on alleged jubilation in Washington and Israel over the execution [yes, there was satisfaction in Israel over the killing]. The whole impression was that Mughniyyah was an enemy of Israel and US imperialism, that is, an "anti-imperialist," whereas no one else had a reason to celebrate [since his French and Lebanese victims were not mentioned]. To be sure, there were some facts in the BBC TV narrative. The BBC's main propaganda techniques here are that of the significant omission and the misplaced moral focus. Now, the BBC's imposture consists in the fact that it is an arm of the British Foreign Office, thus it itself is an imperialist agency [if we are permitted to call the UK imperialist]. The report can be considered a blend of truth and falsehood.

For the record, the AP report on execution of Mughniyyah follows the BBC line of falsification.

UPDATINGS 2-17-2008: Even a journalist protested the BBC's pro-terrorist editorializing. A journalist who had had a gun put to his head in Beirut by Hizbullah operatives in the 1980s, while his partner journalist was kidnapped, objected to the BBC's calling both Mughniyyah and Rafiq Hariri "great national heroes" in the same sentence.-- 2-20-2008 more on Zbig & Obama.
- - - - - - - - - - -
Coming: Peace follies, propaganda, psywar, Jews in Jerusalem, Hebron, the rest of the Land of Israel, etc.

"Peace in the Middle East -- An impossibility," quoth Moshe Sharon

Professor Moshe Sharon has clearly asserted the impossibility of peace in the Middle East. I would amend this to say that under present and foreseeable circumstances peace between the Arabs and Israel is impossible. As Sharon points out the main obstacle to peace is the Arab-Muslim attitude toward non-believers, especially the Jews whom they have oppressed as dhimmis for more than a thousand years. Their religion commands the Arabs/Muslims to make perpetual war against non-Muslim states --with truces allowed when this is for the ultimate benefit of the Muslim war machine, to give it time to rearm and regroup-- until the whole world is brought under the rule of Islam. The name that Muslims give to war for conquering the lands of non-believers [kuffar] is jihad. When non-believers are overwhelmingly militarily superior to the Muslims and are perceived by the Muslims as willing and able and ready to use that military superiority against them, then the Muslims can be very peaceful.

Sharon shows up the fatuity or the cynicism of the "peace processors" and "peacemongers" of varied and sundry stripes. Here are Sharon's words:
In the present situation in the Middle East:

On one hand, they [the Arabs] arm themselves well and get ready for war. On the other hand, they speak about "peace" and even publish "peace plans" every so often, which are meant to turn Israel into a narrow, indefensible piece of land, which can be conquered in a single offensive.
Various Israeli governments and the American State Department which is influenced by the Saudis, backed up by misled communications media, lacking information and defeatist, have convinced themselves and the public for years that the moment that the Arabs sign an agreement, whether a "peace treaty" or any other agreement, they will of necessity also honor it. While doing so, they [the Arabs] have always demanded that Israel pay for such pieces of paper with territory that is vital for its [Israel's] defense. But the Arabs have proven again and again that they only fulfill the clauses of an agreement that they choose to fulfill and only as long as it is worthwhile for them to fulfill them [such clauses].
. . . . .
Not much remains of the "peace treaty" with Egypt beyond a piece of paper which represents a continuing cease fire, much like the ones that existed between 1956-1957, 1968-1973, and 1973-1979.
Egypt takes first place in the world in antisemitic publications and their distribution. This is only one of the crude violations of the peace treaty with Israel. Even Jordan --the very existence of which is dependent on the protection that Israel grants it-- does not fulfill all of the clauses of the peace treaty that it signed, and its communications media spread anti-Israel poison. [Nativ, January 2008]
[MORE TO COME]

Sharon correctly mentions the US State Department as a problem, which he sees as stemming from its susceptibility to Saudi pressure. But he apparently does not see the State Dept as representing a much more major and central problem than he realizes. Furthermore, he attributes the State Dept's problematic nature to Saudi influence. This does not explain why the State Dept was hostile to Jews before the Holocaust in the 1930s and during the Holocaust from 1939 to 1945. In that period, Saudi oil was just beginning to be developed and the Saudi royal family had nowhere near the wealth that it possesses today, and indeed the kingdom was fairly new as kingdoms go, having been established only in 1925, as the kingdom of Nejd & Hijaz, with British approval. The Saudis modestly applied their dynastic name to the kingdom in 1932, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, but their influence was very minor before King `Abdul-`Aziz ibn Sa`ud met with President Franklin Roosevelt in early 1945 on his way home from the Yalta Conference.

Sharon is professor emeritus of Islamic & Middle Eastern Studies at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem.
- - - - - - - - - -

New Discovery in Old Jerusalem Supports Biblical History

UPDATING 2-6-2008

A new discovery of an ancient stone seal or bulla helps confirm Biblical history for the period of the Return to Zion from Babylonia.

This is a picture with an inscription in the Old Hebrew alphabet [similar to Canaanite]. The three-lettered inscription says: Temekh or, unvoweled: TMKh. The Temekh family is mentioned in a Biblical book as servants in the Temple in the First Temple period [Book of Nehemiah, 7:46, 7:55] --up to the Babylonian Exile when they were exiled to Babylonia-- and as having returned to Zion, that is, to Jerusalem and the Land of Israel [Nehemiah 7:6]. Curiously, the illustration on the bulla shows two priests at an altar with the symbol of the Babylonian god Sin above it [see Jerusalem Post, 1-17-2008]. So we have a bulla found in Jerusalem, in the City of David area, now outside and south of the walls of the Old City, with an inscription in the Old Hebrew alphabet of the name of a family known as Temple servants in a Biblical book, plus a Babylonian symbol. The object was found in an area known to have been the center of worship and administration.

The caption to the photo is somewhat misleading. It says that the seal belonged to "a servant in the First Temple." It would be more correct to say that it belonged to a member of a family that had served the First Temple. The Temekh family likely renewed their service in the Temple [that is, the Second Temple] after the Return to Zion. The Babylonian symbol on the seal indicates that it likely belonged to someone who had come back from Babylonia to Jerusalem. The Temple that was restored after the Return is known as the Second Temple. The presence of a Babylonian symbol may indicate a syncretistic religious attitude on the part of the seal's owner.
- - - - - - - - - - -
UPDATING 2-6-2008
Other experts have studied the inscription on this seal stamp and have reached the conclusion that the inscription should be read Shlomit, also a name known in the Bible from the same time period --the Return to Zion-- as had been previously ascribed to it. This is a woman's personal name, not a family name. The archeologist whose team discovered the seal stamp, Eilat Mazar, has accepted the new reading. Her error was caused by reading the inscription from right to left, which is usual in Hebrew. However, this is a stamp which produces a mirror image impression of itself on the material that it is pressed on, and therefore it should be read left to right. See Solomonia's discussion and links [here]. A woman named Shlomit was the daughter of Zerubabel --a grandson of the last independent king of Judah-- who led Jews coming back from Babylonia to Zion [see I Chronicles 3:19 דברי הימים א]. An archeologist and epigrapher [expert in inscriptions], Ryan Byrne, dates the seal stamp to the First Temple Period:

Byrne suggested that a date in the late seventh or early sixth century was more probable, noting that scene was typical of the Iron Age Levant. . . . [Jerusalem Post, 2-4-2008; updated on JPost website on 2-5-2008].

- - - - - - - - - - - - -end of updating- - - - - - - -

There have been several significant discoveries in that area [City of David] where excavations have been going on for some 18 years, more or less. Several names of persons and families known in Biblical books referring to the late First Temple Period have turned up on these finds, particularly bullae. Here is our earlier report [search for City of David on this post] on one of them. Here is more about discoveries in the City of David [search for City of David on this post].

The City of David area, south of the Temple Mount, was the original Jerusalem built on a narrow ridge with the Qidron Stream or Creek on its eastern side. The ridge comes down from the Temple Mount --originally called Mount Zion, now sometimes called Mount Moriah, and not to be confused with today's Mount Zion which takes its name from the Byzantine church of Nea Sion [= New Zion] now in ruins adjacent to today's Zion Gate. The original Mount Zion became the Temple Mount. The original Jerusalem was the Jebusite city on the ridge described above and now called City of David, since David made his capital there, having transferred it from Hebron, his first capital. The ridge making up the City of David comes down from the Temple Mount to the Pool of Shilo'ah, where the ridge ends.

Bullae, seals, and coins are especially helpful in making connections with ancient events and persons, since these objects are 1) more likely to be well preserved than buildings and other structures; 2) often carry inscriptions mentioning persons and events that may be known from written records that have come down to modern man; 3) often bear symbols and illustrations that also identify them with particular places, cultures, events and persons. The inscriptions on these objects can also supply information about the language, its forms and vocabulary used at the time of their creation.

Here are three books that supply more information --with photographs and drawings-- on seals, bullae, and coins from Israel and nearby areas that sometimes present the names of persons and families known in the Bible.

Nahman Avigad, Hebrew Bullae from the Time of Jeremiah: Remnants of a Burnt Archive (Jerusalem: Israel Exploration Society 1986).

Y [Yaakov] Meshorer, TestiMoney (Jerusalem: Israel Museum 2000). This book covers a longer historical period than Avigad's book, and contains photos and drawings of artifacts of Jewish, Roman, Greek, and Christian provenance.

Ruth Hestrin and Mikhal Dayagi-Mendels, Seals from the First Temple Times: Hebrew, Ammonite, Moabite, Phoenician, and Aramaic (Jerusalem: Israel Museum 1978). This book, full of photos and scientific annotations on actual findings, is available in English and Hebrew editions. I have translated the English title used here from the Hebrew:
רות הסטרין ומיכל דייגי-מנדלס, חותמות מימי בית ראשון: עבריים, עמוניים, מואביים, פיניקיים וארמיים
(Jerusalem: Israel Museum 1978).
I am using the Hebrew edition and am not entirely sure of the English title as published by the Museum.

UPDATING 2-12-2008 --announcement of this discovery from the sponsors, Shalem Center:
"First Temple Seal Discovered in Shalem City of David Excavations
"A black stone seal, bearing the name "Shlomit" has been found in the Area G section of the third phase of the City of David excavations by Shalem Senior Fellow Dr. Eilat Mazar. The unexpected find was reported on the front page of the Jerusalem Post on January 17, and was then thought to bear the name "Temech." Further scholarly review determined that the correct reading is more likely “Shlomit” and may possibly refer to the daughter of Zerubbabel, a grandson of King Jehoachin and leader of the first band of Jews returning from the Babylonian captivity. According to Mazar, the seal which contains Babylonian cultic images was produced in Babylon between 538-445 BCE and belonged to a woman of stature."
Click here for more details from Shalem.
- - - - - -
Coming: Peace follies, the "peace process" and its lies, propaganda, Jews in Jerusalem, Hebron, and the Land of Israel, etc.