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 February, 2009

Lieberman to Israeli Police: ‘Bite Me’

Saturday, February 28th, 2009

Avigdor Lieberman isn’t like you or me. Most of us go about our lives trying to follow the rules and when we break them by say, speeding or jaywalking we take our punishment and accept it. Perhaps reluctantly, but we accept it. Not so Lieberman. The laws don’t apply to him. And when he is rudely reminded that they do he howls like a jackal caught in a steel trap.

He and close family members are under investigation for money-laundering connected to the business consulting firm he’s run for the past several years. While it is true that police investigations do tend to have political overtones and can be quite selective, that doesn’t mean that the politicians under investigation are pure as the driven snow either. Given the conviction of a sitting president, a sitting minister, and son of a former prime minister, along with the resignation of the current prime minister under a cloud, claiming that Israeli politicians like Lieberman are persecuted is giving them far too much credit.

Lieberman would have you believe that not only is he being persecuted, he’s being persecuted by Israeli police using tactics of the worst of Stalin’s secret police:

“There must be someone here preparing the big drama. The method used here is the same one used by the NKVD (secret police) during Stalin’s era. Then too, in the 1930s, trials were conducted in order to break people.

“If I were to say something, they would immediately say that I was obstructing the investigation proceedings. As far as I’m concerned, they can bite me…It’s clear to me that these are animals, not human beings.

Bite me. That seems a mature response. Maybe Liberman has been taking lessons from Dick Cheney who employed a similar quite succinct riposte with Sen. Leahy on the senate floor. The Lieberman approach, when questioned is to swing a bat and knock the other guy over the head. That approach seems to find favor with a significant minority of the Israeli voting public who gave him 15 seats in the new Knesset and practically guaranteed a rightist, bat-swinging ruling coalition.

You remember Lieberman’s Jewish Week column in which he affirmed Israel’s democracy? Well, it appears he only embraces democracy to a point, as long as it benefits him. When it doesn’t, then democracy in the form of the rule of law, is dumped overboard. After all, Libby is far too big a man to have something as petty as a law restrain him. He has far too important things to do to be worried about such niceties.

It’s a tad ironic that he compares Israel’s police to Stalin’s NKVD. There are more than a few people who believe that Stalin is a figure with which Lieberman has a great deal in common.

Lies, Damn Lies and Avigdor Lieberman

Friday, February 27th, 2009

Disraeli once said memorably: “there are lies, damn lies and statistics.”  But he didn’t know Avigdor Lieberman.  If so, he might’ve substituted the latter’s name for “statistics.”

Avigdor Lieberman’s op-ed in Jewish Week is a tissue of lies.  There’s no other way to say it.  It’s shameful that the N.Y. newspaper has offered him a forum, but even more shameful that it did no fact-checking or editing to ensure that he wasn’t simply spouting fabrications and lies.  Even the fact that David Harris “comments” on Lieberman’s column is simply not enough as Harris pulls far too many punches in his rather lightweight reply.

Let’s start from the beginning:

During Operation Cast Lead in Gaza, I was appalled by the calls for the destruction of the State of Israel and for renewed suicide bombings that some Israeli Arab leaders called for at pro-Hamas rallies.

Now that would be interesting.  Following the Israeli media as I do, I’d have thought I’d come across such provocative statements covered somewhere in news stories during the war.  Even the N.Y. Times profiled the disquiet of Israel’s Arab community and never mentioned such a position.  I heard about no such statements and I’d challenge Lieberman’s supporters to document any rhetoric that even comes close to this.

Here is as close as Lieberman comes to proof of his claim:

At a pre-election panel, the Israeli Arab political party Balad’s representative, Awad Abed Al-Patah, declared, “The elections are one of the means at our disposal for battling Zionism within its home.”

I don’t read that statement as calling for the destruction of Israel. I read it as a critique against Zionism as defined by people like Lieberman and other extremist settlers who claim that Zionism means the settlement of every inch of “historical” greater Israel; who claim it means the expulsion of Israeli citizens who happen not to be Jewish; who claim it means the superiority of the Jewish religion.

Truly, what Lieberman is doing here is denying Arabs the right to put forward their own competing political vision of what the State of Israel should be. A competing vision is NOT the same as destroying the state. Only pro-Jewish racialists like Lieberman would feel threatened by a competing Israeli ethnic group putting forward an alternate perspective.

Actually, considering how provoked Israeli Arabs must’ve been by the Gaza war it’s remarkable they were as calm and relatively quiescent as they were. Polls also show Arabs to be overwhelmingly loyal and committed to the State of Israel.

In the following passage, Lieberman proceeds from the lame to the ludicrous:

In my adoption of an unapologetic stance on the duties of citizenship, I had strong role models from around the world. For example, Britain’s Home Office has recently drawn up new laws making responsible citizenship a requirement for those wishing to become UK nationals. Candidates will receive a probation period in which they must prove that they can contribute to the community. In the U.S., those requesting a Green Card must take an oath that they will fulfill the rights and duties of citizenship.

What do you notice about this passage? He’s talking about individuals who are NOT CITIZENS of these countries and the latters’ legitimate conditions for them to become so. Israeli Arabs ARE ALREADY citizens. There are no democratic nations I know of which demand loyalty oaths of current citizens. So, welcome to the club, Libby. The club of ex-democracies if Israel adopts your policies.

To continue with Lieberman’s extraordinary claims:

I stand at the head of the most diverse political party in the Knesset.

Among Lieberman’s inflated claims about his Knesset list, it should be noted that it lacks an Israeli Christian or Muslim, not to mention anyone who endorses a real two state solution. So how diverse can it be?  But one aspect of its “diversity” we should embrace is the fact that several of his faction members including himself are under investigation for corruption.  But then again, so many Israeli politicians are under such investigations that perhaps that doesn’t really signify diversity at all.

Lieberman is nothing if not a chutzpan:

Yisrael Beiteinu has no objection to the nonviolent expression of opinion. It is violent speech that forms a clear and present danger that we refuse to tolerate.

Apparently, what he really objects to is ARAB violent speech because if he objected to Jewish violent speech he’d have to outlaw himself. After all, it is Lieberman who called for “stringing up” Arab Knesset members from lampposts.

Don’t forget that Lieberman supports a two state solution:

I also advocate the creation of a viable Palestinian state.

Certainly he does…shorn of all Israeli settlements and including hundreds of thousands of current Israeli citizens who would be expelled to the new “viable” Palestinian state. Fits my definition of democracy.

Avigdor really does love his Israeli “darkies:”

If those who strive to topple the state with terror and violence would instead focus on improving daily life, education, infrastructure, and health care, we could all move on to better lives for everyone.

What he means is that if Arabs would just give up on their quest for full, equal rights in Israel then Israeli Jews could get on with their quest for better lives for their fellow Jews. The Israeli dream Lieberman speaks of has never included Israeli Arabs who are severely discriminated against; and no amount of bulls(^t from Lieberman can conceal that his supposed vision would exclude them.

Keep in mind that according to Akiva Eldar, Lieberman belonged to Kahane Chai when he first made aliya, which is now a banned terrorist organization.  Do you think the leopard changes his spots?

This is truly rich:

As part of the next government, I look forward to working with President Obama. I know that U.S.-Israel relations are as strong as ever, and that our shared values and interests make our friendship unshakeable.

Whoa, Avigdor. You’ve not even been invited to join the government and you’re already describing yourself as part of it? As for “shared values,” of what can he be speaking? Our shared values in diminishing the rights of our ethnic minorities? Our shared values in criminalizing political speech? Our shared values in inciting violence against those whose politics we disdain? Our shared values in declaring the religion of one group superior to that of another? Are those our shared values?

And lest anyone claim Lieberman is merely an outlier crackpot, keep in mind that Tzipi Livni said during the recent election campaign that the true home for Israeli Arabs was not Israel, but Palestine.  This is nothing but Lieberman’s platform warmed over.

I beseech the American Jewish community–do not be fooled by these sugar-coated lies.  They are poison and if you consum them you will be infected with Lieberman’s racist poison too.  Beware any charlatan who claims there are easy answers to Israel’s internal ethnic conflict.  The easy answers always come at the expense of one group or another: in this case, the Arabs.

Freeman Appointed National Intelligence Council Chair

Friday, February 27th, 2009

Attempting to head off a simmering firestorm by neocons and the pro-Israel lobby against Chas. Freeman–who was vetted as National Intelligence Council chair–Adm. Dennis Blair, director of national intelligence, finalized the former’s appointment yesterday.

One of the Republican members of the House or Senate intelligence committees who received Blair’s appointment notice must’ve leaked it to the Weekly Standard’s apoplectic editor, Michael Goldfarb. Just when he was about to take his pound of Obama flesh, the prey was whisked away from him. But Goldfarb got out of it the opportunity to pen a dyspeptic column, Saudi Puppet to Head NIC. Among Freeman’s alleged sins: he’s soft on bin Laden, opposes Chinese democracy, and admires Saudi Arabia’s king.

Considering the high pitched wail of Goldfarb’s typical rantings, not much that he says can be credited with having any truth. Witness this scurrilous attack on J Street, which claims it “collapsed” in the face of the Gaza war. Wishful thinking.

Perhaps most humorous was Goldfarb’s intimation that J Street’s leaders were a bit tetched in the head in believing the Israel lobby and Israeli embassy might be conspiring in the media to besmirch the group:

…Like Hamas, J Street is blaming a Jewish conspiracy for its current troubles, a cabal apparently run out of the Israeli embassy in Washington

Holy Aipac, Batman! You don’t think any such thing is possible do you? Also, quite deft to associate Hamas and J Street twice in two sentences, don’t you think?

The last word on this goes to Steve Clemons who approvingly notes the impotence of one of Freeman’s chief enemies, Steve Rosen, an accused former-Aipac spy:

…If Rosen and the other Israel-hardliners are going to prove anything in the campaign against Freeman, it will be their general impotence in challenging Barack Obama as flagrantly and as crudely as they are doing now.

H/t Phil Weiss

What Is Wrong with These People?

Wednesday, February 25th, 2009

A guest blog post by Jerome Slater, regular Tikkun Magazine contributor and University Research Scholar at SUNY Buffalo:

The general level of Israeli political discourse on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, most of which has always been low, seems to have reached a new nadir since the Israeli attack on Gaza. What follows is but one example, but a telling one.

Anat Lapidot-Firilla is a political scientist teaching at Hebrew University, a highly prestigious position. In Friday’s Haaretz she wrote a column, “What is Behind Turkey’s Antagonism Toward Israel,” in which she purports to explain the recent cooling of Israel’s alliance with Turkey, in particular prime minister Recep Erdogan’s anger at the Israeli attack. She offers a range of “theories,” including Turkish domestic politics, Erdogan’s clashes with the Turkish army, his alleged dreams of becoming a leader of the Muslim world, and even his personal pique.

Everything, that is, but genuine Turkish outrage at Israel’s ongoing oppression of the Palestinian people, which except for a passing reference to “shrill complaints” about the Gazan attack–revealing language in itself–is not considered as one of these many possible explanations. Indeed, Lapidot-Firilla could have simply made a neutral reference to Turkish anger at Israel as an observable fact and as one of the contributing explanations, without even having to acknowledge that the anger might be an understandable and legitimate response to Israeli behavior.

But no. Although written as if it was expert commentary by a leading scholar, this is not scholarship, but propaganda masking as neutral expert commentary. The very essence of scholarship is a commitment to truth, even uncomfortable truths. What Lapidot-Firilla has written is a travesty on an honorable profession.

Israel Lobby Smears Obama Intelligence Appointee

Wednesday, February 25th, 2009

JTA has launched the first salvo in the Jewish war against proposed Obama intelligence appointee, Chas. Freeman.  Freeman is a friend of Obama intelligence chief, Adm. Dennis Blair, who asked the former to chair the National Intelligence Council.  Freeman’s background as former U.S. ambassador to Saudi Arabia and vocal critic of the Israeli Occupation renders him deeply suspect in the pro-Israel community.

JTA’s Ron Kampeas dredged up a highly dubious “expose” published by his newspaper in 2005 which purported to find hatred of Israel in many educational materials created by Arab groups and circulated for use in U.S. schools.  Among them was a book funded by the Middle East Policy Council, chaired by Freeman.

Here is Kampeas’ lurid prose today inveighing against Freeman:

The Obama administration’s reported pick for a top intelligence post helped peddle a Saudi-funded school study guide decried by Jewish groups and educators for having anti-Jewish biases…

Freeman is president of the Middle East Policy Council, a Saudi-funded think tank. A JTA investigative series in 2005 exposed how the council, led by Freeman, joined with Berkeley, Calif.-based Arab World and Islamic Resources in peddling the “Arab World Studies Notebook” to American schools. In the version examined that year by JTA staff, the “Notebook” described Jerusalem as unequivocally “Arab,” deriding Jewish residence in the city as “settlement”; cast the “question of Jewish lobbying” against “the whole question of defining American interests and concerns”; and suggested that the Koran “synthesizes and perfects earlier revelations.”

Then I went back to the original 2005 story to see whether its claims were any better documented.  They weren’t:

The “Arab World Studies Notebook” is…billed by its creators as an important tool to correct misperceptions about Islam and the Arab world, the manual for secondary schools has been blasted by critics for distorting history and propagating bias.

…The…publication was created as the joint project of two organizations – both of which receive Saudi funding.

Some of the references are subtle, say critics, making them all the more harmful. For example, the manual:

• Denigrates the Jews’ historical connection to Jerusalem. One passage, describing the Old City, says that “the Jerusalem that most people envisage when they think of the ancient city is Arab. Surrounding it are ubiquitous high-rises built for Israeli settlers to strengthen Israeli control over the holy city.”

• Suggests that Jews have undue influence on U.S. foreign policy. Referring to Harry S. Truman’s support of [Israel] it says: “Truman’s decision to push the U.N. decision to partition Palestine ended in the creation of Israel. The questions of Jewish lobbying and its impact on Truman’s decision with regard to American recognition – and indeed, the whole question of defining American interests and concerns – is well worth exploring.”

• Suggests that the Koran “synthesizes and perfects earlier revelations,” meaning those ascribed to by Christians and Jews.

Leaves out any facts and figures about the State of Israel in its country-by-country section, but refers instead only to Palestine.

So here is the extent of the charges against the book that Freeman, as Kampeas would have you believe, personally peddled to impressionable American school children:

1. It correctly notes that much of Jerusalem’s Old City is Arab.  Also notes that Jerusalem’s suburban communities across the Green Line are “settlements” and that those who live there are “settlers.”  The JTA report would have you believe that the textbook is calling every Jewish resident of Jerusalem a “settler.”  Considering that they have not provided enough context in their quote to know precisely what the text is specifically saying, I judge the reference to “ubiquitous high rises” to refer to newer Jerusalem neighborhoods across the Green Line, which are generally understood by everyone except Israel to be settlements.

2. Correctly suggests that lobbying by American Zionists had an effect on Truman’s decision to recognize Israel and that this subject is “well worth exploring.”

3. Correctly notes that Muslims see the Koran as “perfecting earlier revelations” of Christianity and Judaism, just as Jews see their religion as progressing from previous pagan religions common to ancient Israel.

4. Correctly notes that a textbook about the Arab Middle East doesn’t feature a great deal of information about Israel.

So what have we here?  Where’s the smoking gun?

To his credit, the JTA reporter does quote a figure sympathetic to Freeman like M.J. Rosenberg.  And I suppose I should be thankful that Freeman’s chief “accuser” in this story is none other than putative Aipac spy, Steve Rosen.  I find it rich that Rosen in effect accuses Freeman of having “dual loyalty” to Saudi Arabia, when the U.S. government is currently accusing Rosen of stealing secret intelligence documents to give to Israel.  One man’s dual loyalty is another’s filial duty to the Jewish state.

Among Freeman’s other offenses were to defend Walt-Mearsheimer’s The Israel Lobby, along with accepting $750,000 in Saudi funding for MEPC.  Kampeas does note a fact previously reported by Politico’s Ben Smith–that pro-Israel analysts like Dennis Ross also work in a similarly partisan environment funded by heavily pro-Israel donors.  Ross also worked for a think tank affiliated with the Jewish Agency for Israel, a quasi-government group.

So it seems that for Rosen and Freeman’s other detractors, what’s good for a goose like Ross isn’t for a gander like Freeman.  Seems fair to me.

Jewcy Dries Up

Tuesday, February 24th, 2009

Jewcy is a Jewish internet portal featuring original writing about the arts, culture and politics.  When I first encountered the site I was quite excited because when it comes to Jewish media, there is very little that is hip, unconventional or provocative.  Jewcy appeared to fit that mold with bold graphics, outrageous headlines, challenging ideas.

I even spent a week writing blog posts for Jewcy at the invitation of editor, Michael Weiss.  The fact that I was drubbed in the comment threads quite savagely seemed a price worth paying for breaking out of the isolation of my own blog (this was before I began writing for Comment is Free or Huffington Post).  After my guest blogging stint, I couldn’t even get anyone at Jewcy to reply to queries, let alone publish anything.

Then a few months ago, out of the blue, Weiss approached me about moving my blog, lock, stock and barrel, to Jewcy.  He said that Meryl Yourish’s blog and my own would be the only political blogs included in a larger project to feature a variety of Jewish blogs on the Jewcy site.  We would be paid based on the site traffic we generated.  It seemed an intriguing idea and frankly I was flattered, especially when Weiss told me I was the blog with the largest existing audience that had been invited to join Jewcy.

I looked over a deal memo and with a few exceptions liked what I saw and told Weiss that.  The next step was to receive a formal contract, which Weiss promised.  I waited, and waited, and waited.  For weeks.  Nothing.  Weiss reassured that the project was still going forward.

Then the Gaza war happened.  For some reason (I never spent much time reading the Jewcy site), I looked at the politics section of the site to see how Jewcy was covering the war.  Of the 20 or so stories on the main page, only one by Dan Sieradski (which announced a demonstration), was remotely critical.  The rest more of less savagely denounced Hamas and cheered on Israel’s assault.  There was no doubt and certainly nothing remotely approaching criticism.

I began thinking about the role David Corn and Marc Cooper had played as house liberals when Pajamas Media first launched.  I wondered whether perhaps I was being used to provide a liberal veneer on an otherwise right-wing pro-Israel site.  I wrote to Weiss and asked whether he could offer more balance in the politics section regarding the war.  I expressed some of my concerns about the site’s rightward slant and whether I might be a token liberal voice.

And that was how I was disinvited from joining the Jewcy family.  Weiss took humbrage at my criticism and said it must mean I didn’t want to participate in the blogging project.  That’s not actually what I’d meant, but it’s just as well he interpreted it that way.  If we hadn’t had the falling out, I still be waiting for that contract.

The resulting exchange between Weiss and myself was vituperative, ugly and defensive. It made me realize that despite the fact that the Jewcy editor had invited me to join the site, he was holding his nose while doing so.

JTA announced today that its founders and financial backers, including Jewish neocon Michael Steinhardt, no longer felt Jewcy was a viable business venture in the prevailing economy.  They were pulling the plug, though allowing staff to retain the site name and domain in order to continue it independently.

Before agreeing to join Jewcy, I asked a few friends if they’d had any contact with the Jewcy folks.  What one wrote was eye-opening:

I personally think the leadership is a bunch of depraved, Heeb style, designer drug type Jews – and having gone to their [...] party, I can tell you that the experience showed me a kind of depraved night club, money / sex / celebrity scene that I thought only existed in LA and didn’t happen in an explicitly Jewish context. Anyways, that’s my ringing endorsement!

JTA adds:

[Founder Michael] Steingart started Jewcy as a Jewish themed party night at his Ars Nova theater space in Hell’s Kitchen in Manhattan. That eventually spawned a clothing brand that sported off-beat Jewish products, such as women’s underwear and t-shirts bearing such slogans as “Shalom Motherfucker.”

All this makes me think that Jewcy was much closer to David Abitbol of Jewlicious notoriety than to something truly innovative and culturally and politically challenging. Jewcy was shock for shock’s sake, titillation for titillation’s sake. Its politics, such as they were, were much more Wieseltier or even Pipes than Waskow or Burg.

It’s a shame because there are thousands of unaffiliated or outsider Jews who would embrace a true counter-culture enterprise that Jewcy promised to become but never did. But right-wingers like Michael Steinhardt are never going to sink money into such a project since it runs counter to their political philosophy.

Lieberman Shill Game

Monday, February 23rd, 2009
From Lieberman to Lieberman, there is no Lieberman like Lieberman (Ariel Jerozolimski)

From Lieberman to Lieberman, there is no Lieberman like Lieberman (Ariel Jerozolimski)

There is an old Jewish saying comparing the Biblical Moses and Rabbi Moses ben Maimon (Maimonides):

From Moses to Moses there was none like Moses.

In what is perhaps the ultimate example of bathos (from the sublime to the ridiculous), I thought in light of the recent meeting between the charming brothers’ Lieberman, we should change the terms to:

From Lieberman to Lieberman, there was none like Lieberman.

Could Joe and Avigdor Lieberman be brothers?  You might think so based on the shameless shilling Joe did for Avigdor in the latter’s bizarre campaign to be named foreign minister in the incoming Netanyahu government.  In a way, this is an important indicator of what could easily happen if Bibi fails in his efforts to entice Livni or Barak into his coalition and turns instead to the far-right and far-Orthodox.

Avigdor can dream all he wants about the foreign ministry portfolio.  That doesn’t mean he’s going to get it.  Imagine if the Obama adminstration declares him persona non grata for his membership in an Israeli terror group, Kahane Chai.  How can he possibly serve as foreign minister when he might not even be allowed to enter the U.S.?

And to have Joe Lieberman willingly cooperate in this charade and give this Jewish racist the don’s kiss is contemptible.

Like Joe, the Jerusalem Post dutifully fulfills its role as the mouthpiece of the Israeli right:

Israel Beiteinu leader Avigdor Lieberman met with his American namesake, US Senator Joseph Lieberman, on Sunday in what sources close to him said was an audition for the role he wants in Prime Minister-designate Binyamin Netanyahu’s government: foreign minister.

Lieberman has told associates in closed conversations that he will request the Foreign Ministry in coalition talks. Former ambassador to Washington and incoming Israel Beiteinu MK Danny Ayalon, who accompanied Lieberman to the meeting, said he was a natural fit.

“He’s already prepared to be foreign minister,” Ayalon said.

“Of course he’s fit for the position. He’s a strategic thinker and analyst. He’s impressive one on one. His English is very good. The more meetings like this, the more people understand his caliber. I’ve been meeting ambassadors, including Arab officials, and no one is raising eyebrows about the possibility of Lieberman being the minister of foreign affairs.”

…The senator requested the meeting, because he wanted to better understand the Israel Beiteinu leader’s views. He advised his namesake to go to the US to explain his views.

“Though we’re not related by blood, we are privileged to hold positions in two great nations,” the senator said after the meeting. “I wanted to meet Lieberman, because he will play an important role in the next government, so it’s important that we in the US get to know him well.”

Joe, I know how low you can go. You’ve gone this low before…but to tell the American people that they need to get to know Avigdor Lieberman better and to tout his brand as something worthy of American consideration is beyond despicable. I’ve been ashamed that Joe is a Democrat for a few years now, but not I’m absolutely repelled by him. Get this man out of our Party now.

If he wants to shill for an Israeli proto-fascist let him do it on his own time. To wrap himself in the robe of the U.S. senate as he touts this piece of vileness demeans the senate.

Danny Ayalon, Lieberman’s chief enabler within the Party, shows a deft Bushian touch in renaming revolting legislation to make it smell like a rose instead of the turd it is:

The Israel Beiteinu chairman explained his party’s platform, including his call for a loyalty oath, which he renamed “the responsible citizenship bill,” and dispelled what he said were myths about the party being racist.

What’s perhaps most intolerable among a series of deeply insulting statements is this one seeking to wrap Yisrael Beitenu’s racism in the mantle of the U.S. constitution:

“I told him that we are the most Americanophile party,” Ayalon said. “We support drafting a constitution, an American system of government, and instituting a pledge of allegiance like America has.”

The only proper comparison would be if the U.S. constitution affirmed that Blacks could only be citizens if they pledged loyalty to a white country and affirmed that the most segregated Hispanic regions of the country should be ceded to Mexico in order to rid us of undesirables. Note that Lieberman’s loyalty oath has become an innocent “pledge of allegiance.”

Brothers under the skin?

The Israel Beiteinu leader praised the senator after the meeting and said that “Lieberman is the best name in the world.”

Israeli Government in Disarray, Coalition Talks Stall, Ceasefire Negotiator Fired

Monday, February 23rd, 2009

Israel seems to specialize in internal domestic drama and instability.  Today is no exception.  Wherever you look within the government there is disarray, dysfunction and general malaise.  The N. Y. Times reports that Bibi Netanyahu has failed to lure Ehud Bark and Labor into a broad based new ruling coalition.  Previously, he had failed in his initial attempt to interest Tzipi Livni in joining his government.

Whether this is merely a tried and true opening political gambit on behalf of the future junior partners, or whether Barka and Livni are both expressing principled position and will indeed not join Netanyahu’s rightist coalition remains to be seen.  A number of veteran Haaretz journalists believe this is merely Kabuki drama and that at least Livni and possibly Barak will join the coalition.  They may be playing hard to get in order to extract the maximum concessions from the soon to be prime minister.

But if Livni does not join, then Netanyahu will have the worst of all possible political worlds: an extreme right, ultra Orthodox coalition which will be be virtually unempowered to tackle any major social or political issue impacting Israeli society, especially the Israeli-Arab conflict.  Stasis may suit Israel, but it certainly won’t suit Syria or the Palestinians, nor more importantly Barack Obama, who appears to want to really get things done regarding Israeli-Arab peace–unlike his predecessor.  Barak and Livni may be banking on a far-right coalition being so stagnant that it will not last long, leading to yet another set of elections.

Ehud Olmert for the past few days has been having a major temper tantrum as he contemplates leaving the prime ministership.  When he bait and switched the Egyptians, Hamas and his own negotiator and changed the terms of the ceasefire proposal that awaited approval, the negotiator, Amos Gilad, had a public meltdown in the Israeli press and accused Olmert of jeopardizing Israeli security by conditioning a ceasefire on Gilad Shalit’s release.  This had never been included in the initial part of the ceasefire plan.  Olmert’s about-face virtually shut down the negotiation.

As a result of Gilad’s uncharacteristic public candor, Olmert had a hissy-fit, fired Gilad and accused him of everything but selling nuclear secrets to Iran (though that charge may be coming).  Gilad is a defense ministry appointee and so loyal to Ehud Barak, who has stood by Gilad.

The Shalit family are dismayed by this development.  Changing horses in midstream is never a good idea in such a high level negotiation.  It wreaks havoc on all sides and is a recipe for accomplishing nothing.

Now negotiations are stalled, though today Olmert appointed Shin Bet head Yuval Diskin and Olmert’s political fixer, Shalom Turgeman, as new co-negotiators (I wonder why there needs to be two negotiators, does one need to watch what the other’s saying and doing and report back to Olmert?).

By comparison, Hamas looks downright responsible and stable.  Imagine that: a so-called terror group looks almost statesmanslike alongside the meltdown that constitutes the current State of Israel.

In yet another unprecedented development sure to add pressure to both sides, Amnesty International accused Israel and Hamas of both misusing foreign supplied weapons to kill civilians.  The group urged the UN to impose an international arms embargo on both sides.  I think this is a brilliant tactical move on Amnesty’s part.  It faults both sides equally.  It pressures both sides equally.  It enables both the UN, U.S. and Europeans to ratchet up pressure on both sides if they so choose.  It tells both sides that the rest of the world is rapidly losing patience with just the type of histrionics I outlined above which stalls any forward movement toward peace.

Israel is unused to such outright criticism that hits it where it lives–in the armaments bread basket.  It’s got to hurt.  Given, Amnesty is not a major player on the world stage.  But here it acts as a catalyst which the bigger players can use if they wish.  I hope they will.