Mahzor

New York Public Library

Churches

Sarajevo Haggadah

Mah Nishtanah

Sarajevo haggadah

Antaea Darom

Israeli women's art

Action

Torah as music

Ben Heine

Action

ceramic bowl

Mohammad Said Kalash, "Offering Reconciliation" exhibit (photo: Ilan Amihai)

Action

Punch and Judy/Pinchas and Jamila

Avi Katz

Action

David Grossman

Ben Heine

Action

Eldrige Street shul

Lower East Side

Action

Dove

Ben Heine

Action

Two birds

Hoda Jamal

Action

Israeli and Palestinian boys

from documentary, Promises

Action

Cat in the Hat

Yiddish version

Action

Daylight through the Wall

Banksy: graffiti art on Separation Wall

Action

Maurice Sendak's Brundibar set

New Victory Theater (photo: Nan Melville/NYT)

Action

Daniel Barenboim, West-Eastern Divan Orchestra

Palestinian-Israeli musical ensemble (photo: Kerstin Joensson/AP)

Action

Great Day on Eldrige Street

N.Y.'s klezmer greats celebrate shul rededication (photo: Leo Sorel)

Action

Joint Appeal for Peace

(Avi Katz)

Joint Appeal for Peace

Ketubah, Ancona, Italy (1772)

(Jewish Theological Seminary library)

Ancona ketubah

Archive for January, 2009

Gaza: N.Y. Times Editorial Page Finally ‘Gets It’

Friday, January 9th, 2009

Yesterday, I wrote a critical post about the N.Y. Times editorial page’s “coverage” of Gaza noting that no columns had been written that were critical of the Israeli offensive (David Grossman’s was mildly so) and that no Arabs or Palestinians had been allowed to weigh in on the debate.  Little did I know that today’s edition completely rectified those inadequacies.  I noted yesterday that Nicholas Kristof wrote a piece about Gaza.  Add to that Rashid Khalidi and Gideon Lichfield.  All were excellent and highly critical of Israeli policy.

Finally, there has been enough innocent blood shed for the Times to understand that Israel’s invasion is becoming a disaster.  And that the longer it continues the worse the catastrophe will become for Gaza, for Israel, for the region, and for U.S. interests in the region.

You know you’ve struck a chord when the Israel lobby complains as Abe Foxman does in the letters to the editor section.

Jerome Slater too has noticed the Times’ change of heart:

It’s almost beginning to look like the Times has experienced an epiphany.  Not only is there increasingly skeptical coverage from its news reporters, including some who until now have been largely uncritical of Israel, but look at today’s amazing Op-Ed page: three columns that are highly critical of Israel, including one by Rashid Khalidi!  In fact, the online edition has an additional column by Roger Cohen, who writes: “I have never previously felt so despondent about Israel, so shamed by its actions….”

I’m also noticing the hasbara type commenters have retreated from this blog.  Either they’ve found bigger fish to fry or they too have become conflicted enough about what’s going on that they no longer have the moral confidence in Israel’s position that they once did.

UN Suspends Gaza Aid Programs After IDF Killings

Thursday, January 8th, 2009
Woman keening over relatives killed moments earlier by Israeli strike in Beit Lahiya (Khalil Hamra/AP)

Woman keening over relatives killed moments earlier by Israeli strike in Beit Lahiya (Khalil Hamra/AP)

After suffering severe attacks from Israeli forces resulting in the murder of several UN staffers (who were working in clearly marked vehicles), the organization has suspended its programs which feed half of the entire population of the besieged enclave:

International aid groups lashed out at Israel on Thursday over the war in Gaza, saying that access to civilians in need is poor, relief workers are being hurt and killed, and Israel is woefully neglecting its obligations to Palestinians who are trapped, some among rotting corpses in a nightmarish landscape of deprivation.

The United Nations declared a suspension of its aid operations after one of its drivers was killed and two others were wounded despite driving vehicles bearing United Nations flags and coordinating their movements with the Israeli military.

…The International Committee of the Red Cross reported finding what it called shocking scenes on Wednesday, including four emaciated children next to the bodies of their dead mothers. In a rare and sharply critical statement, it said it believed that “the Israeli military failed to meet its obligation under international humanitarian law to care for and evacuate the wounded.”

With this decision, the people of Gaza have gone from have a few shreds of bread to nothing.  Now, they not only face momentary death from Israeli missiles and shells; if not killed this way, they face death through creeping starvation.  And these are people who were on subsistence rations to begin with.

Congratulations, Israel.  You have gone from being grisly goons to being stranglers of Gazans.  God help me, I know that sentence was severe.  And I would normally never write anything so full of icy emotion.  But how else can one respond to this?  What words can one use that temper our outrage?

But I say, good for the Red Cross.  They put the onus squarely on Israel where it belongs.  By suspending aid, they’ve put them on notice that when images of the starving bodies start showing up in the pages of the world press (taken by those photographers who don’t themselves get arrested or shot at by the IDF) they will have only themselves (Israel) to blame.  Why should the Red Cross have to have workers die doing the work of feeding the starving and collecting the dead?  If Israel doesn’t want that happening, then let them collect the bodies and have the responsibility for feeding the Gazans.  You can be damn sure that once the IDF looks that option in the eye they’ll back down pronto.  They don’t want to go anywhere near having responsibility for feeding Gaza.

We should let the IDF as usual dig its own rhetorical “grave” by quoting the mealy-mouthed PR obscenities it uses to defend its brutalism:

Israeli officials…were not certain that the source of fire that killed and wounded the United Nations drivers was Israeli.“We do our utmost to avoid hitting civilians, and many times we don’t fire because we see civilians nearby,” said Maj. Avital Leibovich, chief army spokeswoman for the foreign media.

That must be what happened in the case of the UNWRA school when that tank gunner saw all those civilians outside the school but fired anyway killing up to 40.  What does the IDF take the world for–utter fools?

Death toll report on unlucky Day 13: 760 Gazan dead and 3,000 injured with up to 40% of the dead women and children.  Note that this number does not include deceased males as civilians.  Undoubtedly a significant number of dead Gazan males are civilians, which would consequently raise the percentage of civilian dead.  One IDF soldier died in fighting today, a total of 10 killed during the entire campaign.

Obama Prepared to Talk to Hamas

Thursday, January 8th, 2009

Wow. That’s all I can say. If this Guardian report is true, then in the coming weeks Obama administration policy will completely turn Bush’s Israel-Palestine policy on its head. And about time:

The incoming Obama administration is prepared to abandon President Bush’s doctrine of isolating Hamas by establishing a channel to the Islamist organisation, sources close to the transition team say.

The move to open contacts with Hamas – which could be initiated through the US intelligence services – would represent a definitive break with the Bush presidency’s ostracising of the group.

The Guardian has spoken to three people with knowledge of the discussions in the Obama camp…

There is growing recognition in Washington that the policy of ostracising Hamas is counter-productive.

First, let’s not overstate things. He’s not recognizing Hamas. He’s not renouncing Israel. He’s merely establishing initial low to mid-level contacts to determine whether Hamas is a party with which it can engage more seriously down the line possibly leading to full-fledged peace negotiations (if Hamas is still running Gaza and/or the PA).

But let’s not also undersell the significance of this. It sends a clear message to the current Israeli government engaged in mayhem in Gaza that this may be their last hurrah. It sends a clear message to whoever wins the next Israeli election (even if it’s Netanyahu) that the U.S. will pursue its own interests even if they include aspects that run counter to established precedent. In other words, if Netanyahu wishes to drag his feet and do everything possible to deny a Palestinian state or comprehensive peace agreement, Obama will go his own way. I don’t mean he will completely divorce himself from Israel. But he will be willing, for example to talk to Hamas and to encourage renewal of the Hamas-Fatah coalition government which was anathema to Bush and Olmert.

There is an old Israeli saying: when the U.S. sneezes, Israel gets pneumonia. That is the impact that this could have on Israel. It could encourage a sea change in policy toward the Palestinians. Note, I said “could,” not “will.” I’d be foolish to speak with such certainty about a region as mercurial as the Middle East.

Jonathan Freedland has summed up the developments best here:

If the latest signals are to be believed, Obama is now ready to soften the edges of those [previous] conditions [for dialogue with Hamas]. For those who believe that, whether we like it or not, Hamas is now part of the Palestinian reality and that no peace can ever come unless all the major players on both sides – Israeli and Palestinian – are included, this is a small, unofficial, unconfirmed but welcome move in the right direction.

This is the pragmatism we expected from Obama when we campaigned and voted for him.  It marks the end of the crazy extremism of the Bush administration which cut off its nose to spite its face in terms of the way it dealt with the Israeli-Arab conflict.

I am guessing this will send shivers down the spine of the Israel lobby.  In fact, memos and phone calls are probably flying as a type this.  Watch for denunciations and warnings from the likes of Aipac and the Conference of Presidents.  Israeli politicians will warn how dangerous such a policy change will be and how it will only encourage more terrorism.  There will be blowback.  I just hope it doesn’t derail these hopeful developments.

Residents of Gaza, Sderot Call for Immediate Ceasefire, Negotiations

Wednesday, January 7th, 2009

Thank God for a few sane Israeli and Palestinian voices in the wilderness that is the Gaza war:

Some 1,800 Israelis and Palestinians, including 500 Sderot residents, sign petition calling for end to IDF operation in Gaza, renewal of dialogue between Israel, Hamas.

…Some 500 Sderot residents have recently signed a petition calling to stop the IDF operation in the Strip and renew the truce with Hamas. Arik Yalin, 43, from Sderot told Ynet that over 1,800 Israelis and Palestinians have already joined the petition.

“About a month ago we realized that the situation was about to deteriorate into total chaos,” he explained. “It’s important for us to voice an opinion that represents quite a few residents who live within the rocket range but who believe that we can, and should try to resolve this ongoing conflict in a peaceful manner. We have experienced the terrible hardship of life under rocket fire for the past eight years, and it has deeply hurt us both mentally and physically. Our need to voice a different stance stems from the strong desire to change the situation and begin negotiations with the other side in order to stop the violence,” he added.

According to Yalin, a military operation will only deepen the hatred on both sides and reduce the chances of reaching a settlement. “The underlying assumption is that eventually there would be some kind of understanding. The only question is how many innocent people would get killed along the way.”

If the ordinary citizens of Sderot and Gaza can see eye to eye then why can’t their leaders? What is it that Arik Yalin knows that Ehud Barak doesn’t?  Maybe Yalin lives in the path of the missiles and it has given him a more nuanced understanding of the issues and necessities called for to resolve this issue.  The group Yalin leads is called A Different Voice.

Tom Friedman Wins Journalism Award, Lamest Paragraph Written About Gaza

Wednesday, January 7th, 2009

Tom Friedman wins the award for worst single paragraph written about the Gaza war by someone who ought to know better:

The fighting, death and destruction in Gaza is painful to watch. But it’s all too familiar. It’s the latest version of the longest-running play in the modern Middle East, which, if I were to give it a title, would be called: “Who owns this hotel? Can the Jews have a room? And shouldn’t we blow up the bar and replace it with a mosque?”

This is utterly inane and shows Friedman at his most reductionist.  He has this annoying habit of trying to reduce complicated issues into neat digestible concepts.  What makes it especially annoying is that he does it in a smug self-satisfed way; as if to say: “Aren’t I clever?”

Here his tendency to reduce the complexities of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict to three neat syllogisms founders. I was wondering when Friedman was going to get around to pontificating on Gaza.  It only took him twelve days to figure out what he wanted to say as 600 Gazans died.  And then when he spoke it was like a hot air balloon with all the helium drained out of it.

There is a strange bifurcation going on at the Times.  The news reporting has generally been first-rate.  And I say this as someone who’s been critical of Ethan Bronner’s reporting from his start a few months ago.  But the editorial page has been AWOL: one editorial which pussy-footed around the issues and tried to be all things to all people.  Two columns written by David Grossman and Benny Morris.  The latter’s column was typically whiny and beside the point; and Grossman’s advocating a 48 hour truce was definitely not his best work.  David Brooks and Bill Kristol both sprached about Gaza in their typically neocon fashion.  No columns by anyone critical of the Gaza attack and most significantly nothing by an Arab, Muslim or Palestinian.

No liberal vision at all.  It’s a glaring gap in the Times’ coverage.  It seems to show an editorial board which is at sea and simply doesn’t know how to address this travesty.  This is not the glorious (though many would disagree), comprehenvsive approach, so superior to that of the Washington Post,  that I’ve come to expect of the Times on this subject.

I recall the Times’ coverage of the Lebanon War being much more sure-footed including editorials which analyzed the issues without fear or favor to the Israel lobby.  I don’t know what’s happened in the interim.

NOTE: After writing this I just noticed that Nicholas Kristof has finally spoken about Gaza, including this incisive passage:

Barack Obama has said relatively little about Gaza. At first, given the provocations by Hamas, that was understandable. But as the ground invasion costs more lives, he needs to join European leaders in calling for a new cease-fire on all sides — and after he assumes the presidency, he must provide real leadership that the world craves.

Aaron David Miller…suggests…that presidents should offer Israel “love, but tough love.”

So, Mr. Obama, find your voice. Fall in tough love with Israel.

So we can at last say that one of the Times’ liberal columnists has said something decent and articulate on the subject.  About time.  What took them so long?

Gaza: Praise the Dead, Curse Their Killers

Wednesday, January 7th, 2009
Members of al-Samouni clan mourn their dead (AP)

Members of al-Samouni clan mourn their dead (AP)

A few days ago I wrote about the shelling of the Gaza home in which the al-Samouni family took refuge after it was evicted by force by the IDF from its own home earlier.  The N.Y. Times reported that 11 family members had been killed.  Apparently, this report was far from complete.

Now word has seeped out that the death toll was much larger–as high as 60 or 70 killed.  What’s worse, there were over 20 wounded who could not escape the wreckage and were left to fend for themselves with no medical attention.  The Israeli troops could’ve cared less.  In fact, when the Red Crescent made efforts to approach the home they were driven off by Israeli firing.

Just today, three days after the shelling, aid workers finally arrived and removed 15 wounded.  However, Israeli forces again fired on them and forced them to withdraw with eight wounded still remaining at the  site.  Speaking as someone who truly does want to find something that would allow me to see humanity and decency among Israelis, I am forced to concede that I am always disappointed.  Even soldiers fighting a battle must make provision for evacuating civilian wounded.  The fact that the IDF has refused is beyond bestial.  I sputter with rage and indignation as I write this.

In the Book of Exodus, it says God hardened Pharaoh’s heart so he wouldn’t empathize with Jewish suffering. Now it’s the IDF and all Israel whose heart is hardened. We should remember that at the time of the Exodus it was the Egyptians whose first born all died after they had earlier sought to exterminate Jews by killing all the male babies. Is the only way to end this madness for Israel to suffer the same trauma they’re inflicting on the Palestinians? Will the former harden its heart forever?

I propose that we from now on refer to Ehud Barak as Barak the Butcher.  Let this stain whatever legacy he hopes to have for himself.  Keep in mind this is a man who donned a woman’s dress in order to assassinate his first terrorist in Lebanon.  Mazel tov Ehud, you no longer wear a dress when you kill.  Now it’s a business suit.  But it’s still the same grisly murder.  Barak to the Hague.

The Telegraph provides more background on the tragedy here.

Father mourns his children killed at UNWRA school (Abid Katib/Getty)

Father mourns his children killed at UNWRA school (Abid Katib/Getty)

If Israel is looking for brownie points for allowing a three hour ceasefire every other day for humanitarian relief to enter Gaza, they won’t find them here.  It is simply an outrage that you kill civilians almost with impunity and then seek to relieve the pressure by agreeing to a fig leaf like this.  It is no coincidence that the lull was proposed within hours of the single most devastating civilian attack of the entire war (for let’s name this by what it really is) in which 40 were killed.  Cynical doesn’t even begin to describe this.

Israel claims in its defense it was responding to mortar fire from the school, while UNWRA denies categorically that this was so.  It appears there may have been mortar fire originating in the neighborhood of the school but not from within it.  Can an Israeli tank not see innocent civilians before it fires its rounds or does the IDF simply not care when it lets loose the guns?

At any rate, let the pro-Israel apologists view this image and come up with some foolhardy defense of this crime.  It reeks to high heaven.

Barack Obama: do the eight words you released in your statement of sympathy yesterday do any of this justice??  For the love of God, man, you can do better.

UNWRA Denies IDF Claim Militants Fired from Gaza UN School

Wednesday, January 7th, 2009

Haaretz reports in its Hebrew edition that after a thorough internal investigation UNWRA–which operated the Gaza school hit by Israeli shell fire earlier today resulting in the deaths of at least 42 civilian refugees–finds no evidence there were militants firing mortars from the school’s grounds.  In fact, UNWRA notes that video the IDF disseminated yesterday seeking to verify the army’s claim was actually shot in 2007.  Either the IDF intelligence apparatus is so incompetent it dredges up video from nearly two years ago to prove something happened yesterday or…it is so malign that it brazenly attempts to pass off this claim to the world in a desperate attempt to lower a smokescreen over what actually happened.  If UNWRA’s claim is correct, then what actually happened appears to be something close to a cold-blooded massacre of refugee civilians.

Again, it is possible that the IDF shells were misdirected or some other technical error caused these deaths.  Or it is possible that the Israeli firing was willful.  In either case, the tragedy is unpardonable and again, if the UNWRA story is correct, solely the fault of the IDF.  Let them explain their way out of this.

This is the beginning of the end, my friend.  It cannot go on much longer.  As I wrote in my previous post, this may be the Qana straw that broke Cast Lead’s back.

Qana Redux: IDF Massacres 42 Civilian Refugees at Gaza UN School

Tuesday, January 6th, 2009

There are only three scenarios that will end the senseless carnage in Gaza:

1. the world community must coalesce around a demand for an immediate ceasefire.

2. the IDF blunders in an operation which ends in major loss of Israeli life.

3. the IDF blunders and kills a large number of Gaza civilians in a single catastrophic event.

Unfortunately, we do not yet have #1, though Barack Obama has ended his Sphinx like silence with the following almost Delphic oracle:

The loss of civilian life in Gaza and in Israel is a source of deep concern for me.

Regarding #2: yesterday, the IDF shelled a Gazan home full of its own troops killing three, wounding 20.  That unfortunately qualifies as the type of disaster which may make Israelis begin to take pause at the sacrifices their boys must make in this godforsaken enterprise.  Though I fear that this alone will not end the fighting.

Rushing survivor of UN school massacre to hospital (Ismail Zaydah/Reuters)

Rushing survivor of UN school massacre to hospital (Ismail Zaydah/Reuters)

Regarding #3: sadly, today brings news of a Qana-like utter disaster.  The IDF fired mortar rounds directly at a UN school killing 42 and injuring 50 more several severely.  The death toll is expected to rise.  Since the UN had provided coordinates for all its Gaza facilities, the army knew it was targeting a UN building housing civilians.  This, like Qana is the disaster that will begin to turn the hearts of world opinion against Operation Solid Lead.

Israel claims mortars were fired at its forces from the school.  Even if this were true, the idea that you fire a mortar at a school crammed with 350 civilians is grotesque.  IF you want to take out 2 militants, you don’t do it by firing a mortar.  The officer who ordered the mortar round fired deserves the IDF medal for duncehood.  The only thing such weaponry guarantees is the result that we have now.

Reuters tells the story of the disaster differently:

…Two tank shells exploded outside the school, spraying shrapnel inside and outside the building where hundreds of Palestinians had sought refuge from the fighting.

I have given up hope that the Israeli government gives one solid crap about Palestinian life.  The only thing that moves them is world opinion.  That is why Obama’s statement, pathetic as it is, is a start.  It may loosen the tongues of some world leaders who’ve been sitting on the sidelines waiting to see which way the wind would blow.  For the fence-sitters, this would be the time to get off their duffs and tell their UN ambassadors to get into intensive diplomatic mode.  The time for stalling is long gone.  The UN needs to get down to business and end this thing.  Whatever Bush or Rice think is happening or that they wanted to happen, they have to end this before there is an even greater catastrophic failure.

Given Gaza is a densely populated urban enclave, you know that either the IDF is going to blunder into killing its own, Hamas is going to ambush a platoon and kill a significant number of troops, or Israel will kill massive numbers of civilians once again.  The Times even notes the IDF’s tendency toward such disasters:

Israel has been criticized in the past for the inaccuracy of its shelling…

In November 2006, Israel all but stopped firing tank and artillery shells into Gaza after 18 Palestinian civilians, most from one family, were killed by Israeli shells that missed their target and hit a row of houses in Beit Hanoun.

In another strike, during its conflict with Hezbollah in July 2006, Israel suspended air attacks in southern Lebanon for 48 hours after one of its air strikes on the southern town of Qana left dozens of civilians, many of them children, dead.

This had to happen.  The only question was how long it would take before it did.  I predicted it would from the very first day of the war.  It doesn’t take rocket science to know this.

What does take a bit of finesse is butting Hamas and Israeli heads together to engineer a ceasefire.  And I’ll repeat for the umpteenth time: the ceasefire needs to satisfy not only Israeli demands for an end to rocket fire.  It also needs to address Gaza’s need for a total end to the Israeli siege.  The blockade as a policy designed to topple Hamas has failed.  It has long been time to abandon it and take a different tack.

Latest death toll: 640 Gazans, five Israelis and five soldiers.

Performance Optimization WordPress Plugins by W3 EDGE