Copied from the sermon notes of Pastor Don Elmore

June 2, 2024

Scripture Reading: Deuteronomy 7:6:

6) “For thou art an holy [separate] people unto the LORD thy God: the LORD thy God hath chosen thee to be a special people unto Himself, above all people that are upon the face of the earth.”

Who is this written about? It can’t be everyone who is alive in the world, for the LORD, the God of these people said, that He has chosen them“to be a special people unto Himself.”And if the LORD God chose a people to be special unto Himself, wouldn’t there be other peoples who are “un-special” unto Him?

One can learn much about God’s character by studying His various names. One of these names is “the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob.” Early in the Scriptures, one can realize that God is a God of people and relationships. Understanding God’s covenants is critical to understanding God’s plan for Israel, His “special people unto Himself.”

The first thing worth mentioning about the Abrahamic Covenant is the fact that God ratified it with Abram alone. Even though Abram was the recipient of the Covenant and the representative of the Israel nation, he did not actively participate in the actual walking between the slain animals.

Abram was told to gather three specific animals which were cut into two pieces and two birds which were killed with one put on one side and the other on the other side of the walkway. A small path of slain animals was formed.

• A three-year-old heifer,
• A three-year-old female goat,
• A three-year old ram,
• A turtledove, and
• A young pigeon.

Both parties would pass together along the path as they swore to uphold the end of the contract lest they receive the fate of the animals for any breech of that Covenant for which they would be responsible. After Abram prepared the animals and made a path, when the moment came for God to ratify the covenant, the LORD God put Abram into a deep sleep; and only He went through the path of the dead animals.

The second thing one should notice of the Abrahamic Covenant is the fact that since God was the only one to walk between the slain animals when He ratified the Covenant with Abram, and since God never changes His mind, the Abrahamic Covenant is everlasting. It only depends on God fulfilling His part and not on Abram and his descendants fulfilling their part. It has been in effect for about four millenniums.

Some of the benefits the recipients of this Covenant received were:

• Abram was to be the father of a great nation,
• Abram was promised a land for this nation,
• Abram was to be greatly blessed,
• Those who blessed Abram would be blessed,
• Those who cursed Abram would be cursed,
• Other nations, other than Israel, would come from Abram,
• All Adamic nations on the earth would be blessed.

When God called Abram, the LORD God was party of the first part, while Abram and his family--Isaac and Sarah, were the party of the second part. It should be noted that God chose Abram, not that Abram chose the LORD God.

Nehemiah 9:7:

7) “Thou art the LORD thy God, who didst choose Abram, and broughtest him forth out of Ur of the Chaldees, and gavest him the name of Abraham;”

When we examine Scripture, Abraham’s covenant descendants went eventually through Isaac and Jacob; not through Ishmael or the six sons of Keturah or Esau. Abraham had every concern over who his son with Sarah, Isaac,would marry. Isaac couldn’t marry anyone who was on the earth.If Isaac married someone who was not his kin, that would disqualify him from the covenant. And since he was the only inheritor, the everlasting covenant wouldn’t be everlasting, but would cease to exist,if he had children who were mixed breed.

Genesis 24:1-4:

1) “And Abraham was old, and well stricken in age: and the LORD had blessed Abraham in all things.

2) And Abraham said unto his eldest servant of his house, that ruled over all that he had, Put, I pray thee, thy hand under my thigh:

3) And I will make thee swear by the LORD, the God of heaven, and the God of the earth, that thou shalt not take a wife unto my son of the daughters of the Canaanites, among whom I dwell:

4) But thou shalt go unto my country, and to my kindred, and take a wife unto my son Isaac”.

A generation later, Esau had total disregard for this, and his mother (Isaac’s wife) made certain that it cost him his share in the inheritance of the Covenant. Esau had married Canaanite wives, who lived nearby,which was forbidden for him to marry.

Genesis 27:46:

46) “And Rebekah said to Isaac, I am weary of my life because of the daughters of Heth[Canaanite]: if Jacob take a wife of the daughters of Heth, such as these which are of the daughters of the land, what good shall my life do me?”

This was what Esau had done. He married several Canaanite wives, and he was not going to repent. What if Jacob did the same thing? The covenant would have been short-lived. It would have ended after one generation.

To this we see Isaac’s response:

Genesis 28:1, 2:

1) “And Isaac called Jacob, and blessed him, and charged him, and said unto him, Thou shalt not take a wife of the daughters of Canaan.”

2) Arise, go to Padanaram, to the house of Bethuel thy mother’s father; and take thee a wife from thence of the daughters of Laban thy mother’s brother.”

So, the patriarchs, and the matriarchs, Abraham, Sarah, Isaac, Rebekah, Jacob,Leah,and Rachael were not diverse, multiculturalists—they were racists. They did not believe in racial intermarriages. They were not like Esau, who was a fornicator; a man who despised the Abrahamic covenant.

Both the chief servant of Abraham and Jacob traveled over 500 miles to visit a place where both their father and mother had roots. There were no airplanes, trains, or automobiles available, for they only had donkeys, camels, horses, and, of course,they could travel on foot for that distance. It is like going to Hilton Head Island, South Carolina from where we live today. How long would that take? The servant of Abraham, who looked for a wife for Isaac, traveled by camel. Camels can average about 40 miles a day. So, the trip would take almost two weeks. Since they had not met any of their kin who lived there, it would be a disastrous journey if they failed to find a wife.

But they, Isaac and later Jacob, were the only recipients of the Abrahamic covenant. But one thing was certain: they couldn’t die being single or die never having any children. They had to have success in finding a wife of the same kind as they were and they had to have children to carry on the covenant.God was faithful and the covenant continued.

Remember, who was the only One who walked through the path of slain animals that sealed the covenant?      It was the LORD God; it was not Abram. If the covenant failed, God failed. If the covenant failed, it wasn’t everlasting. Therefore, Isaac and Jacob/Israel had to find wives who were of their same kin. It didn’t matter how far they had to travel. It didn’t matter how impossible the job seemed. God would not fail.God still will not fail.The covenant will never fail.

Terah had three sons and one daughter with two different wives. With one wife, Yona, he had the following two sons:

• Abraham, and
• Nahor,

with another wife, Tehevita, he had one son and one daughter:

• Haran, and
• Sarah.

Abram married his half-sister.They both had the same father but a different mother.

• Abraham had eight sons, but he only had one son with Sarah.
• Isaac
• Haran,half-brother of Abraham, had three children,
• Milcah,
• Iscah, and
• Lot.
• Nahor, brother of Abraham, married his half-brother, Haran’s daughter, his niece—Milcah, and they had eight children. One son who was named,
• Bethuel

Bethuel had two children,

• A daughter named Rebekah and
• A son named Laban.

The chief servant of Abraham traveled about 500 miles to find a wife for Isaac. He did and Isaac married Rebekah, who was the granddaughter of Abraham’s brother—Nahor, and the daughter of Bethuel, Nahor’s son.

Laban had two daughters.

• Leah
• Rachael

Isaac had two sons,

• Esau
• Jacob

Esau married a couple of nearby Canaanite wives, later married an Ishmaelite, in the seed line of Abraham and Hagar.

Jacob traveled about 500 miles to the family of Laban, whose father was Bethuel and whose grandfather was Nahor, and married Leah and Rachael, daughters of Laban, who was brother to his mother. So, Jacob went to his uncle Laban and married his two daughters, who were his cousins. He had 12 sons and one daughter.

WHO ARE THE DESCENDANTS OF JACOB?

We can know for a certainty this unconditional Covenant by the LORD
God was directed only toward the descendants Isaac and Jacob-Israel, for it is recorded in Genesis 15, verses 13 and14, where it refers to Israel’s sojourn in Egypt.

Genesis 15:13, 14:

13) “And He said unto Abram, Know of a surety that thy seed shall be a stranger in a land that is not theirs, and shall serve them; and they shall afflict them four hundred years;

14) And also that nation, whom they shall serve, will I judge: and afterward shall they come out with great substance.”

Here is a timeline showing dates from God’s promises to Abraham to the exodus from Egypt. Israel was in Egypt for a little over 200 years.

Patriarch: Age	Event	Passage	Years from Promise	Years to Exodus
Abraham: 75	God makes the promise to Abraham and he leaves Haran.	Genesis 12:1–4	0	430
Abraham: 75-85	God tells Abraham his descendants “will be sojourners in a land that is not theirs and will be servants there and they will be afflicted for 400 years.”	Genesis 15:13; Acts 7:6	0–10	420–430
Abraham: 85	Abraham has lived in Canaan for 10 years and takes Hagar as his wife and she conceives Ishmael.	Genesis 16:3–4	10	420
Abraham: 86	Ishmael is born.	Genesis 16:15–16	11	419
Abraham: 100 Ishmael: 14	Isaac is born.	Genesis 21:5	25	405
Abraham: 105 Isaac: 5 Ishmael: 19	Isaac is weaned and Ishmael mocks/persecutes Isaac.	Genesis 21:8–9; Galatians 4:29	30	400
Abraham: 140 Isaac: 40	Isaac marries Rebekah.	Genesis 24:1–67; 25:20	65	365
Abraham: 160 Isaac: 60	Esau and Jacob are born.	Genesis 25:26	85	345
Abraham: 175 Isaac: 75 Jacob: 15	Abraham dies.	Genesis 25:7	100	330
Isaac: 151 Jacob: 91	Joseph is born.		176	254
Isaac: 168 Jacob: 108 Joseph: 17	Joseph is sold by his brothers and taken to Egypt.	Genesis 37	193	237
Isaac: 180 Jacob: 120 Joseph: 29	Isaac dies.	Genesis 35: 28–29	205	225
Jacob: 121 Joseph: 30	Joseph is made second in command by Pharaoh.	Genesis 41:46	206	224
Jacob: 130 Joseph: 39	Joseph reveals himself to his brothers two years into the famine with five years left. Jacob meets Pharaoh.	Genesis 45:4–6 Genesis 47:9	215	215
Jacob: 147 Joseph: 56	Jacob dies.	Genesis 47:28–49:33	232	198
Joseph: 110	Joseph dies.	Genesis 50:26	286	144
	Only 64 years pass from the time Joseph dies to when Moses is born.	Exodus 6:16–20
Moses: 3 months	Moses is placed in a basket and adopted by Pharaoh’s daughter.	Exodus 2	350	80
Moses: 80	Moses and Aaron speak to Pharaoh beginning the exodus from Egypt.	Exodus 7:7; Exodus 12:40,41;	430	0

None of Abraham’s other children fit the criteria of being a stranger in a land that was not theirs, so, we are assured beyond all doubt, this Covenant was for Jacob/Israel.The covenant wasn’t for Ishmael, or any of the six sons of Keturah, or Esau, the elder brother of Jacob.

Therefore, all of Abraham’s full-blooded descendants through Isaac and Jacob fall under this contract, which is a covenant in perpetuity. This Covenant the LORD God signed, sealed, and witnessed with Abram, His friend. Once ratified, it could not be abolished; it was to be in effect forever.

All of Jacob/Israel’s descendants, from the time they took their first breath, found themselves under a binding legal obligation coming from their ancestors which they could not, in any way, annul. All members of this group must abide by the contract which affects every major phase and many of the decisions of their life. There is only one group of people in the entire world who are born with this obligation.

And, as much as anyone might want to find a way to disengage himself from the provision of the contract, he finds himself entirely helpless to do so. He cannot decide if he doesn’t want to be under the terms of the contract. He has no choice; he is under the terms.

Nor can others who are not under the contract decide that they want to be included therein. If you have been designated a party under the terms, you really have no choice in the matter but to comply.

It is not open for invitation, and one doesn’t have an option. If one does not comply with the terms of the accord, every means will be applied to bring him back into compliance with that Covenant. One cannot plead ignorance to the existence of the contract as ignorance is no excuse.

At the beginning of this century, as ships poured into American ports, filled with European immigrants, a Jew from England named Israel Zangwill wrote a play whose story has been lost in meaning, but whose central theme has not. His production was “The Melting Pot” and its message still holds a tremendous power on the national imagination–the promise that all kinds of different immigrants, from any country, who have any god, can become Americans.

In 1908, when the play opened in Washington D.C., the United States was in the middle of absorbing the largest influx of immigrants in its history–Irish and Germans, followed by Italians and East Europeans, Catholics, and antichristian Jews–eighteen million new citizens between 1890 and 1920.

Today, the United States is experiencing a great wave of illegal immigration, a movement of people that has profound implications for a society that by tradition pays homage to its immigrant roots at the same time it confronts complex and deeply ingrained ethnic and racial divisions. The immigrants of today come not from Europe but overwhelmingly from the developing world of Asia and Latin and South America. They are driving a demographic shift so rapid that within the lifetimes of today’s teenagers, no one ethnic group–including whites of European descent–will comprise most of the nation’s population.

It changed in 1965 with the signing of the 1965 Immigration Act, by President Lyndon B. Johnson. Fifty-nine years ago, the Immigration and Nationality Act dramatically changed the makeup of the country by ending a quota system based on national origins in favor of one that took into account occupational skills, relatives living in the United States and political-refugee status.

Despite the long-term impact of the 1965 law and the highly partisan tone the issue has taken on today, immigration was not highly divisive a half-century ago, and the American public paid it little heed. Of course, a lot was going on in 1965 to occupy the public’s attention–Vietnam and civil rights, to name just two of the big issues.

Today, the borders of the United States are wide open, with millions of non-whites from many countries from all over the world are illegally immigrating to this nation. No one can stop it except for the president of the United States, so they say. America is soon, as well as the other Israel nations, drowning in the flood of strangers. 

Do you believe that the president of the United States can just make executive orders and change how the nation controls its border issues? One man out of 340 million? No one else, or any political group can do anything about it? Is it either President Trump’s way or President Biden’s way?

Deuteronomy 28:43, 44:

43) “The stranger that is within thee shall get up above thee very high; and thou shalt come down very low.

44) He shall lend to thee, and thou shalt not lend to him; he shall be the head, and thou shalt be the tail.”

Martin Luther said in his book The Jews and Their Lies, the following:

“In my [Luther’s] opinion it will have to come to this: if we are to stay clean of the Jew’s blaspheming and not become partakers of it, we must separate, and they must leave our country [Germany]. Thus they could not more cry and lie to God that we are holding them captive; and we could no more complain that they plague us with their blaspheming and usury. This is the nearest and best advice that makes it safe for both parties.”—1546.

During most of Luther’s ministry, the Jews gave him financial support. They, too, were interested in the destruction of the Roman Catholic Church. Then Luther read the Jewish Talmud, and he dramatically changed some of his views. Martin Luther became very anti-Jewish. He wrote his book against them in 1543, three years before he died.

After Luther wrote this book, the Jews quickly withdrew their support from Luther and turned to John Calvin. Luther became anti-usury, while Calvin was pro-usury. This is one of the reasons the Jews withdrew their support of Luther and passed it on to Calvin.

Does the Bible forbid usury? Yes, it does for some people. No usury or interest should be charged to any Israelite who is poor:

Exodus 22:25:

25) “If thou lend money to any of My people that is poor by thee; thou shalt not be to him as an usurer, neither shalt thou lay upon him usury.”

Or to any Israelite:

Deuteronomy 23:19:

19) “Thou shalt not lend upon usury to thy brother; usury of money, usury of victuals, usury of any thing that is lent upon usury,”

A usury ban is to fellow Israelites, but not to racial strangers. As this is stated in plain language in Deuteronomy 23:20, this view makes a distinction that implies a two-tiered ethic. Those within the Israelite community must not charge interest on loans to each other, but they can to foreigners. They must follow God’s laws, not the laws of any other.

Deuteronomy 23:20:

20) “Unto a stranger thou mayest lend upon usury; but unto thy brother thou shalt not lend upon usury: that the LORD thy God may bless thee in all that thou settest thine hand to in the land whither thou goest to possess it.”

Nehemiah rebuked the nobles and rulers for charging interest to their own people.

Nehemiah 5:7, 10:

7) “Then I [Nehemiah] consulted with myself, and I rebuked the nobles, and the rulers, and said unto them, Ye exact usury, every one of his brother. And I set a great assembly against them.”

10) I likewise, and my brethren, and my servants, might exact of them money and corn: I pray you, let us leave off this usury.”

According to the Bible:

Should an Israelite charge interest to another Israelite? Should an Israelite charge interest to a Jew? Should an Israelite charge interest to a Negroid? Should an Israelite charge interest to an Oriental?

The Bible says that only the first question is answered with a “No” the other three questions are answered with a “Yes.”

Should a Jew charge interest to another Jew? Should a Jew charge interest to an Israelite? Should a Jew charge interest to a Negroid? Should a Jew charge interest to an Oriental?

The Bible is not written to the Kenite/Canaanite/Edomite/Jew.How are all people of equal status if one group can be charged usury and another group can’t?

Almost all usury banks in the world are owned by Jews. The famous Jew, Albert Einstein said, “The most powerful force in the universe is compound interest.” He referred to it as one of the greatest “miracles” known to man.

• Double a penny, and you’ll have $.02.
• Double a penny for a week, and you’ll have $0.64.
• Now, double each day’s amount for a second week, and you’ll have $81.92. The doubling is the same, but the actual increase is accelerating - this is the compounding effect.
• Ready for more? Double each day for another week, and you’ll have $10,485.76. Seems impossible, but your calculator can verify the result.
• But the magnified effects of compounding have only just started -- double each day for a 4th week, and you’ll have $1,342,177!
• A 30-day month has 2 more doublings to $5,368,708.
• And a 31-day month doubles to $10,737,416.

Here is the compound interest formula:

Most people never really understand how compound interest works. It is one of the reasons why most Americans (70%) live from paycheck to paycheck. It is when they pay compound interest that puts them in a huge deficiency, but the ones that get the interest will eventually be very wealthy!

Compound interest is how a person who can put in $50,000 in ten years can wind up with more money than a person who puts in $150,000 in thirty years.The more time money has time to grow, the more power it has.

Why are lending institutions allowed to charge compound interest on home loans? On automobile loans? On personal loans? Why are credit card companies allowed to charge 32% on some unpaid balances?

If you borrow $200,000 for a home at 6.3% for 30 years, your monthly payment will be $1237.95. If you make all your payments for 30 years, you would have paid $445,622 to pay off the loan or you would have paid $245,622 more than the amount that you borrowed.

But if you set it up for only 10 years, your monthly payment would increase to$2250.66 per month, but you would pay $270,079.20 or only 70,079.20 more than you borrowed.

You pay off more of the interest when you begin to pay off the loan. Who would have given the loan dealers such a magnificent method of gaining wealth!

Who does the government pay for the $34 trillion that they owe?While I was in the university, one of my professors said that it was our government—us. We owe it to ourselves! Well, he was misinformed!

On a 25-year, $270,000 loan at 4.2%, you would pay off $166,543.28 in usury and $270,000 in principle. Notice you pay $945 in interest and only $510.14 in principle on the first payment—that’s $434.86 more for interest than principle on the first payment, when the total principle was $103,456.72 more than total usury!

Your interest is calculated not only on the balance owed but also on the interest that has already accrued. This can result in a snowball effect, where your debt grows more quickly, making it harder to pay off. A compound interest works in your favor only when you give it a long period of time, say 10 or more years. It provides little or no advantage over the short-term .Compound interest on borrowings or on debt can be very dangerous.

Usury, the sum paid for the use of money, hence interest; not, as in the modern sense, exorbitant interest. When you invest, your account earns compound interest. This means, not only will you earn money on the principal amount in your account, but you will also earn interest on the accrued interest you’ve already earned. It began in the old Babylonian period (2000-1600 BC). Why didn’t our Constitution forbid it?

CONCLUSION

In his book, “Pawns in the Game,” by William Guy Carr, he said the following:

“The story of the Life of Christ shows that he…hated the money-lenders with an intensity that seems strange in a man of so mild a character. Jesus repeatedly admonished the money-lenders for their practice of usury. He publicly denounced them as worshippers of Mammon. He said they were of the Synagogue of Satan. (Rev. 2:9). He emphatically expressed His extreme hatred of the money-lenders when he took a whip and drove them out of the Temple. He admonished them in these words: ‘This Temple was built as the house of God . . . But you have turned it into a den of thieves.’”

The LORD God of Israel had said that usury was the same as stealing and the penalty for committing this crime was the death penalty. Israelites were forbidden to charge usury to each other. So, who was given the power to charge usury to us?

We quote William Carr once again as he wrote about what happened in England during the 1640s and ’50s:

“When King Charles I was brought into disagreement with his Parliament a Jewish Money-Baron in Holland, named Manasseh Ben Israel, had his agents contact Oliver Cromwell. They offered him large sums of money if he would carry out their plan to overthrow the British Throne. Manasseh Ben Israel, and other German and French money-lenders financed Cromwell. Fernandez Carvajal of Portugal, often referred to in history as The Great Jew, became Cromwell's Chief Military Contractor. He re-organized the Round Heads into a model army.

He provided them with the best arms and equipment money could buy. Once the conspiracy was under way, hundreds of trained revolutionaries were smuggled into England and were absorbed into the Jewish Underground. The same thing goes on in America to-day.”

So, the Jew loaned certain challengers to the throne in England money to overthrow the government and as a result they got the opportunity to come back into the nation they had been denied entrance for 370 years. In addition, they also got the ability to open a bank in that nation and charge usury to its non-Jewish citizens.

“Once the revolution had been decided upon, the Jewish plotters introduced Calvinism into England to split Church and State, and divide the people…It was deliberately conceived to split the adherents of the Christian religions, and divide the people.”

The Jews once again divided the people.

“On January 9th, 1649, ‘A HIGH COURT OF justice’ was proclaimed for the purpose of putting the king of England on trial. Two thirds of the members of the Court were ‘Levellers’ from Cromwell’s Army. The conspirators couldn’t find an English lawyer who would draw up a criminal charge against King Charles. Carvajal, instructed an alien Jew, Isaac Dorislaus, Manasseh Ben Israel’s Agent in England, to draw up the indictment upon which King Charles was tried. Charles was found guilty of the charges leveled against him by the International Jewish money-lenders, not by the people of England. On January 30th, 1649, he was publicly beheaded in front of the Banqueting House at Whitehall London. The Jewish money-lenders, directed by the High Priests of the Synagogue of Satan, had had their revenge because Edward I had expelled the Jews from England. Oliver Cromwell received his Blood-Money just as Judas had done.”

And then the Jews continued in their plan by placing a general of the Netherlands upon the throne of England (1689-1702). And in return, the monarchy of England was never what it had been. It has been a puppet organization ever since.

“It is important to remember that no sooner was the Dutch General [King William of Orange] sitting upon the throne of England than he persuaded the British Treasury to borrow £1,250,000 from the Jewish bankers who had put him there. The schoolbook history informs our children that the negotiations were conducted by Sir John Houblen and Mr. William Patterson on behalf of the British Government with money-lenders whose identity remained secret.

Search of historical documents reveals that in order to maintain complete secrecy the negotiations regarding the terms of the loan were carried on in a church. In the days of Christ, the money-lenders used the Temple. In the days of William of Orange, they desecrated a church. The international money-lenders agreed to accommodate the British Treasury to the extent of £1,250,000 providing they could dictate their own terms and conditions…

Thus, for the sum of £1,250,000, King William of Orange sold the people of England into economic bondage. The Jewish money-lenders gained their ambitions. They had usurped the power to issue and control the currency of the nation. And, having secured that power, they cared not who made the laws.”

Alexander Hamilton and Robert Morris were agents of the Bankers in Europe. Just two years after the Constitutional government began, Alexander Hamilton and his business partner Robert Morris organized the Bank of America. The illuminati controlled both the Bank of England and the Bank of America. The Bank of America was to be owned by private interests as an alternative to those who insisted the issue and control of money should remain in the hands of the government elected by the people. But the bank was owned 80% by private investors many who were foreigners.

The legislation establishing the first Bank of the United States generated controversy from the outset. Some congressmen, particularly from the south, voiced concerns over:

• Elitism,
• Encroachment on state’s rights, and
• Unconstitutionality.

However, the bill passed both houses of Congress by February 8, 1791. President Washington signed the Bank of the United States into law, instead of vetoing it, on February 25, 1791, under the advice of Alexander Hamilton.The United States had followed England.

In the Middle Ages, the Church, in a misapplication of the Biblical prohibition against charging interest, forbade interest in all instances. None of its own people were permitted to charge interests for centuries. The way the Church got around that was by forcing the Jews,who were not Israelites, to become the bankers. Back then, though, they were called “money lenders.” The Christians went from only having to work fourteen weeks out of 52 weeks to having two or three jobs just to make a medium wage living. What was wrong with that?

Now, why has there been no political person in many, many years who has said anything about usury banks?What about all the private foreign owners? What about the $2.3 trillion the Pentagon announced it had lost on 9/10/11? Has Trump ever mentioned it?Have any politicians?

We are under God’s judgment. May God have mercy on our souls.

Blessed be the LORD God of Israel.