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 May, 2009

Mitchell Puts the Screws to Bibi Over Settlements

Sunday, May 31st, 2009

Some [Israeli] officials expressed disappointment after Tuesday’s round of meetings in London with George Mitchell, Obama’s envoy to the Middle East. “We’re disappointed,” said one senior official. “All of the understandings reached during the [George W.] Bush administration are worth nothing.”

Another official said the U.S. administration is refusing every Israeli attempt to reach new agreements on settlement construction.

Defense Ministry chief of staff Mike Herzog…spoke to Mitchell and his staff about understandings reached by former prime ministers Ehud Olmert and Ariel Sharon with the Bush administration on allowing continued building in the large West Bank settlement blocs. He asked that a similar agreement be reached with the Obama government.

Meridor spoke of the complexities characterizing the coalition headed by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, and said Washington’s demands of a complete construction freeze would lead to the dissolution of the Netanyahu government.

The Israeli delegates were stunned by the uncompromising U.S. stance, and by statements from Mitchell and his staff that agreements reached with the Bush administration were unacceptable. An Israeli official privy to the talks said that “the Americans took something that had been agreed on for many years and just stopped everything.”

–Haaretz, Obama to Give Two Years to Mideast Breakthrough

YESSSSS!

Bibi and Yvet’s Arab-Hatred: Bring It On!

Sunday, May 31st, 2009

Today, an Israeli wrote to me that the Knesset’s new anti-Nakba law had her more depressed than she’s been about Israeli politics in a long time:

When authorities start attempting to regulate and control thoughts/feelings/narratives, I feel that the end is really in sight…

While I certainly share her outrage at such anti-Arab extremism, it got me to thinking that perhaps such an outrageous political agenda might be a good thing after all.  I remember during the last Israeli election campaign, Jerry Haber wrote a post in which he advocated, “Vote Bibi!“  I was shocked when I read it.  It seemed the utmost cynicism since I felt at the time that a Livni-Kadima victory might show promise for peace when combined with the prodding of our president-elect (at the time) Barack Obama.

But Jerry was right perhaps in ways he wasn’t totally aware at the time: Bibi and his rightist government are a horror show.  They put Israel in the worst possible light in the rest of the world, and most crucially in Washington, D.C. where U.S. policy is made.  The more extreme and outrageous the policies advocated by Jerusalem, the lower Bibi’s stock will sink here and everywhere outside Israel.

So I say let them vote to ban Nakba.  Let them vote to compel a loyalty oath.  Let them ban Palestinian students from studying in Israel.  Let them rant about Iran being Amalek and toppling the mad mullahs.   Let them do their worst.  I say: “Knock yourself out.”  Give it your wingnut all.

I’m tempted to write something even more radical: let Israel bomb Iran or at least do everything but bomb Iran.  An Israeli attack on Iran will unite the entire world against this Israeli government.  It will focus the mind mightily on the need for resolution of the Israeli-Arab conflict.  In fact, it will almost guarantee a peace agreement even if it has to be imposed on Israel.

While attacking Iran would be an immense tragedy and I do not wish to see people needlessly suffer for any reason–even for peace, are circumstances not so desperate that we need to exploit every possible opportunity to transform our current predicament?  Can we not turn such a catastrophe into a redemptive act?  Hey, if Herman Kahn could think the unthinkable, can’t I contemplate how to turn a horror show into a way out of the Israeli-Arab miasma?

Gideon Levy, in his latest column, says it quite well, envisioning a Tzipi Livni prime ministership:

All this [her tenure as PM] would end in tears. Time more valuable than gold would be wasted for nothing. Livni would not have taken any tangible steps – no evacuation of settlements, no release of prisoners, no lifting of the siege and no reconstruction of Gaza, all of which are much more vital than any declaration of negotiations. In contrast to the Netanyahu era, the U.S. and world would once again have allowed this masquerade ball to take place. They even would have taken part.

Thankfully, Livni was not elected. True, with her, things would have been much more pleasant, but this would be a deceptive charm. With Netanyahu and Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman, the world may wake up and end the sleight of hand. Who knows, maybe some Israelis will follow its lead and wake up as well.

But even if Pres. Obama prevents Israel from a lunatic military adventure against Iran, there will still be plenty of wingnuttery possible in the Knesset.  I say, bring it on baby!

Frank and Filner Refuse to Sign Aipac Letter

Friday, May 29th, 2009

All hail two Jewish members of Congress who have enough spine to resist the Aipac onslaught.  Aipac’s capo di tutti in the House appear to be Steny Hoyer and Eric Cantor.  They’ve been circulating a letter outlining recommended negotiation positions for the U.S. related to Israeli-Palestinian peace.  But a funny thing happened: Barney Frank and Bob Filner said “no thanks.”  Jewish legislators don’t usually cross Aipac.  So the fact that they refused to affix their names is an event of moment.

The letter appears innocuous enough until you place it in the current political context. We have an Israeli prime minister who’s just been lambasted here in Washington not just by an American president and secretary of state, but by some of his most slavish former admirers.  They uniformly told him to straighten up and fly right concerning freezing settlements and embracing a two state solution.  To which he’s responded by fumfering around and claiming he simply can’t accede to U.S. wishes and how unfair they are to the poor settlers who have expanding families with no place to live.

In that context, the letter is of a piece with Bibi’s tried and true tactics of attempting to play off Congress and the executive.  It won’t work this time, but you can’t blame a guy for trying.  Here’s the content of the letter:

Among the principles laid out by the House letter is that “the parties themselves must negotiate the details of any agreement” and that the United States must “work closely with our democratic ally, who will be taking the greatest risks in any peace agreement.”

What this means is that the U.S. has no right to exert any pressure on Israel to cave in to our demands.

“The proven best way forward is to work closely and privately together both on areas of agreement and especially on areas of disagreement,” states the missive, adding that the U.S. must be both “a trusted mediator and a devoted friend to Israel.”

Translation: Be Israel’s friend.  F*&k the other guy.

The letter also insists on an “absolute Palestinian commitment to end violence, terror and incitement” and urges “far greater involvement and participation by the Arab states both in moving toward normal ties with Israel and in supporting moderate Palestinians.”

First, you’ll notice the onus this places on the Palestinians while demanding nothing of the Israelis who haven’t exactly ended their own violence against Palestinians.  As for “involvement of Arab states,” this seems either a sham or a delusion.  Aipac seems to believe that Arab states should normalize relations with Israel in return for…nothing.  When the Arabs respond with stone-faced silence, then Bibi will have an opening to claim that Israel can’t possibly be forthcoming unless the Arab states reciprocate (one of his most beloved sham phrases).

Aside from all the narischkeit in this letter, there is the most important matter of all: Pres. Obama is going in an entirely different policy direction.  Aipac knows this, Bibi now knows it if he didn’t already, Congress knows this.  This letter is the last hurrah of the old order.

Obama’s policy eschews the smoke of mirrors of this letter.  It names things for what they are.  It doesn’t pull any punches.  If Aipac keeps playing these little games they’ll be left holding the bag, while the American Jewish peace camp gets onboard the peace train.

Bob Filner and Barney Frank–you guys are all right.

New Profile Threat to Israeli Militarist Consensus

Friday, May 29th, 2009

Recently, I met with an Israeli peace activist here in Seattle who shared with me his perspective on the role of the intelligence services within Israeli society. As an example of the noxiousness of their impact, he pointed to the recent arrest of the leadership of the New Profile movement by the Shin Bet. New Profile is a feminist anti-militarist group with encourages young people to resist conscription.

Given the importance of military service to Israel both from a security stand point as well as for social cohesion, any organized effort to resist such conformity would be seen in the most severe light by hardline security hawks. This explains why the Shin Bet came down so hard on virtually the entire national leadership of the group:

On 26 April, a day before Israel’s Memorial Day, Israeli police produced an absurd piece of political theatre – as Dimi Reider first reported here last Thursday. As if facing down dangerous organised criminals, they raided the homes of six activists in different parts of Israel, who were then detained for interrogation. Exploiting the emotions roused on a day of mourning for military dead, the police action singled out and branded anti-military activists as outside the legitimate Israeli community.

At the time of writing, police have summoned 10 additional activists for interrogation. The activists targeted are members of New Profile, a feminist movement working for over a decade to reverse the militarisation of state and society in Israel.

The truth of the matter is that Israeli society, and especially Israeli youth, are gradually casting off previous cultural and social norms.  Service in the IDF, once expected of all except yeshiva students, is no longer a sine qua non of Israeliness.  Throngs of young Israelis seek ways to avoid service.  Some leave the country if they can.  Some seek to game the system.  Others resist more forcefully and publicly.

Those who refuse have many motivations.  Some simply don’t want to be put in harm’s way.  Some object to the Occupation and refuse to participate in a system that perpetuates it.  Some motives are pure, some are less so.  But the truth of the matter is that the system is gradually breaking down.  It’s like Humpty Dumpty sitting on that wall.  When he falls, no amount of Shin Bet repair is going to put him back together again:

For years now, the army has regularly been exempting tens of thousands from service without difficulty…Their worry today is rather the popular vote of no-confidence in their easy use of the lives of soldiers – an anger no longer limited to alienated, impoverished parts of society but spreading deep into the middle class as well.

The growing legitimisation of the draft resisters in the Israeli mainstream is also evidence of the weakening of the hold fear has on our society. Those in power…are struggling to keep in place this longstanding means of obscuring political corruption and of feeding the notion of “national unity” in the form of “the people’s army”.

In her Comment is Free post, Rela Mazali, a co-founder of New Profile correctly notes that the group is merely a convenient whipping boy for the military-intelligence establishment:

According to Ha’aretz, the criminal investigation of New Profile is motivated by “growing concern at the defence establishment of a growing trend of draft evasion”. It is not New Profile that is worrying them, we are just an easy scapegoat through which they hope to sow fear and intimidate future draft dodgers.

My lunch companion told me that groups like New Profile are routinely infiltrated by the Shin Bet.  Especially if the group is seen as effective in promoting its goals as New Profile undoubtedly is.  You can bet that someone informed on all the leaders who were arrested.  I don’t know this for a fact.  But any spook worth his salt would say that NOT to infiltrate New Profile would be a dereliction of duty for the Israeli intelligence apparatus.  That’s how warped their thinking is.  A group of pacifist women are a threat to the state.  Imagine.

And what do the Israeli powers-that-be really fear?  Not just an attempt to break down the consensus regarding military service, important as that is; they also fear New Profile’s ultimate goal which is to struggle for a truly democratic civil society that will be fully inclusive of Jews and Arabs.  This scares the pants off them.  For them, this is the same as attempting to destroy the State of Israel as they know it.  Of course, it is nothing of the sort.  But the very idea that New Profile suggests an Israel based on different principles than those endorsed by the political/military/intelligence elite is deeply threatening.

I remember how the U.S. establishment reacted during the Vietnam War to draft resistance and other forms of civil disobedience and unrest.  Fists and billy clubs flew, shots were fired, young people died in places like Kent State and Orangeburg.  It was a frightening time.  The powers that be refused to concede to any young person the right to refuse to obey.  My hope is that just as this country absorbed some of the positive lessons offered by anti-war activists here, so too Israel will come to understand that New Profile and groups like it have valuable insights to offer that will make Israel a more just, more democratic, more peaceful society.  Amen.

Jonah’s Snow White

Thursday, May 28th, 2009

Jonah's Snow White (with extra eyes)

Jonah's Snow White (with extra eyes)

U.S. War Against Settlements Tightens

Thursday, May 28th, 2009

I’m being swallowed by a boa constrictor
And I don’t like it very much.

–Bibi Netanyahu and children’s song

President Obama held his first meeting with Palestinian president Mahmoud Abbas today.  But you’d hardly know it from the pages of the N.Y. Times.  In the only article concerning the meeting, the Palestinian is referred to a grand total of twice.  Nothing else is mentioned about the substance of the talks between the two leaders.  Is it possible that neither Abbas nor Obama said anything to each other, or that their representatives don’t want anyone to know what they did say?

Why do I get the impression that this is yet another example of the disappearing Palestinians?  Why did Obama bother to have a meeting with Abbas if no one in the U.S. media has any interest in anything he thinks?  Admittedly, the Israelis have done their best to render Abbas impotent and politically irrelevant, which may explain part of the reason there was so little to report from this event.

At any rate, the same article did contain lots of interesting information–about the U.S. approach to settlements.  The Israelis are finding themselves like prey caught by a boa constrictor.  Over time, there is less and less breathing room concerning settlements.  Obama is shutting off every “out” that Israelis have been used to enjoying from previous administrations.  For a peace advocate like myself, the process is a miracle to behold:

…Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton’s brusque[ly] call[ed] on Wednesday for a complete freeze of construction in settlements on the West Bank. In expansive language that left no wiggle room, Mrs. Clinton said that Mr. Obama “wants to see a stop to settlements — not some settlements, not outposts, not natural growth exceptions.”

Her comments took Israeli officials by surprise.

I should say so.  The Israelis don’t like a word of it.

And this represents yet another wriggle from Bibi’s minions as they adjust to the ever constricting political environment:

Mr. Netanyahu’s spokesman, Mark Regev…[said] that “normal life” would be allowed in settlements in the occupied West Bank, using the phrase that Israel often uses to describe continued construction to accommodate population growth. Privately, Israeli officials said they were upset by the administration’s hard line.

You bet they’re upset.  For over forty years, presidents have nodded and winked at Israeli settlement expansion.  In 1993, at the time of Oslo there were 200,000 settlers.  Now there are 400,000.  I can remember back in the 1970s when Ariel Sharon spoke in oracular terms of 100,000 settlers and we thought he was out of his mind.  Little did we know he was crazy like a fox.

But thank God, there will be no more winking or nodding.  This administration means business.  In a battle between an 18 foot boa constrictor and its prey there can be little doubt who will eventually win.  Not that I mean to carry this analogy to its logical conclusion.  The U.S. isn’t going to swallow and digest Israel.  Rather it is going to squeeze the life out of the notion that settlements are a viable proposition for Israel.  If Israelis won’t kill this notion off themselves, then Obama is going to lend a hand and drive the stake through the monster’s heart.

One element of Helene Cooper’s report disturbed me, as it represented the same old bankrupt U.S. policy first adopted by the Bush administration; and I’d thought that Obama had outgrown the failures of our previous president:

Mr. Obama congratulated Mr. Abbas for adhering to the West’s argument that he should not form a national unity government with the militant Islamist organization Hamas until Hamas forswears violence and recognizes Israel’s right to exist.

Actually, a national unity government could be part of the solution to the problem of a fractured, impotent Palestinian polity unable to make peace with Israel.  The fact that Obama insists on the same tired articulation of Hamas as a terrorist entity is disappointing.  But I don’t think this is by any means the last word from the president on this subject.

Martin Indyk, that bellweather of liberal pro-Israel opinion, makes this rather remarkable (for him) statement about the souring of American Jewish attitudes towards the settlements:

“People in the American Jewish community and in Israel are sick of settlement activity. The whole zeitgeist has changed.”“People in the American Jewish community and in Israel are sick of settlement activity. The whole zeitgeist has changed.”

Banning Palestinian Students from Israeli Universities

Thursday, May 28th, 2009

The Israeli Supreme Court, that toothless wonder when it comes to confronting the national security state, has permitted the state intelligence apparatus to throw up an entirely new set of non-security criteria in order to prevent Palestinians from studying at Israeli universities.

Now, in addition to proving they’re intellectually worthy of academic study, a would-be Palestinian enrollee will have to prove they are not a security risk AND surmount a whole host of non-security barriers including the following:

• Only PhD and Masters students will be considered and only if there is no practical alternative to studying in Israel

• Preference will be given to applicants to programs focusing on regional cooperation or developing coexistence and regional peace. The Education Ministry must testify as to the nature of the program

• Palestinians will not be allowed to study professions that have the potential to be used against Israel.

• The applicant will have to provide the army with a detailed request from a recognized academic institution explaining the grounds on which the institution wants him to study there

• There will be no further examination if the applicant has a security or criminal record.

• The army will take into account the age of the applicant and his personal status.

The army, at its own discretion, may refuse to consider an applicant even if the student meets the above criteria.

These new and improved regulations (for the intelligence apparatus, that is) are quite astonishing.  What they reveal is a nation that has decided that its institutions of higher learning are largely meant to exclude Palestinians.  The military gets to determine which professions have the potential to harm Israel.  Given that the same military determines that musical instruments are too dangerous to allow into Gaza, you can imagine how this could be interpreted: what, you want to study special education?  Forget it.  You might brainwash some poor child into becoming a shahid.

You’ll note that preference will be given to those enrolling in programs supporting “regional cooperation or developing coexistence.”  Forgive me my cynicism but I’m interpreting “cooperation” a little differently than some might.  Shouldn’t we be the least suspicious that “regional cooperation” might mean educating those Palestinians who will give the security services the most bang for their buck when they return to Palestine?  Recruiting spies and collaborators?  That certainly couldn’t be possible.

Regarding the age and “personal status” criteria, the defense ministry wishes to prevent young, single Palestinians from studying in Israel.  If you’re an old geezer, married and with a few kids you’re more likely to pass the test.

The final criteria simply allows the military to reject any candidate for any reason or no reason at all.  This is the way things work in the national security state.  We do it the way I say because I say.  You don’t like it.  You can go to hell.  Who cares what you bloody simpering leftist dupes think anyway.

Israeli university officials are not pleased.  Imagine, they’re under the rather quaint impression that only academic critieria should be used to determine whether a candidate merits admission to a university.  Where do they think they are?  Harvard?  Oxford?  We’ve got a garrison state to run here and have no luxury to run things as they do in the effete west:

“We are being forcibly prevented from accepting students who can make a decidedly valuable contribution to higher education in Israel,” Hebrew University Law Prof. Alon Harel said, following the court ruling.

“I call upon the court and the defense establishment to respect academic freedom. The decision whether or not to accept a student must be the exclusive decision of the university, while the military should be limited to performing a security check.”

Six of the seven universities, including top officials from the Technion, the Hebrew University, the Feinberg Seminary of the Weizmann Institute, Tel Aviv University, the University of Haifa and Ben-Gurion University also protested the army’s criteria for granting permits.

In a letter sent to Defense Minister Ehud Barak on May 12, the universities charged that the criteria for considering granting entry permits to Palestinian students accepted by Israeli universities “constitutes a gross and harmful intervention by military elements in purely academic considerations.”

But hey, they have nothing to fear–those fearless judges have provided a powerful tool for rejected candidates.  They can appeal to the Supreme Court for review.  So get this, the Israeli Supreme Court is now in the business of vetting candidates to university.

So say you want to go an Israeli law school.  You thought all you had to do was score well on your LSATs, write a good essay, do an internship, and your record would speak for itself.  Not so fast.  Here’s how I picture a meeting of the Hebrew University admissions committee: in the room are the admissions director, perhaps a representative of the academic department.  They’re joined by an IDF intelligence officer smoking one of those big, fat cigars.  The academics mull over the candidates and pass the finalists to the Lt. Col.  As he’s blowing smoke rings through the air, he gives a thumbs up to a few and thumbs down to all the rest.  Then he passes the files back to the academics who dutifully file out of the office and report on who the IDF has chosen for next year’s law school class.

Then maybe they’ll keep a law clerk for a Supreme Court justice in a side room and he’ll get all the dossiers of those who’ve appealed their rejection.  He’ll huddle with the justice and together they’ll be final arbiters of who the real bad apples are.

Those few Palestinians who pass the rigors of this test will either be saints, octogenarians, or Shin Bet plants.

The original complainant in this case was Palestinian chemistry grad student, Sawsan Salameh.  Though the army originally rejected her as an enrollee, it eventually relented and she currently is pursuing her PhD and doing research at Hadassah Hospital.

Here are the restrictions this dangerous Palestinian woman faces:

…The military permit she received prevents her from going beyond Jerusalem or staying over in Jerusalem; she must be out of the city by 7 p.m. each day.

This means that she cannot attend any lecture that ends later than 5:30, since it takes her one-and-a-half hours to get to her home, which is located north of the city, from the Hadassah-University Medical Center at Ein Kerem, where she is doing the research for her doctorate.

Am I the only one who sees the dark humor in all of this?  This is the insanity of Occupation.  It beggars common sense and human decency and turns all of us into paupers.

H/t to Adam Horowitz.  I’m with Adam concerning the issue of the Israeli academic boycott.  Pro-Israel academics puff out their chests with indignation about the violation of basic rights and academic freedom that would be involved in such a boycott.  But they fail to realize that an Israeli academic system whose admissions process is essentially gamed by the defense ministry when it comes to Palestinian applicants, is one in which such rights and freedoms have already been corrupted.

JTA’s Leslie Susser, Rubbish Reporting

Tuesday, May 26th, 2009

Half of what JTA publishes about Israeli politics is rubbish.  Which means that the other half of the time they don’t make utter fools out of themselves.  Tonight I’m taking out the rubbish.

JTA’s Israel correspondent is Leslie Susser, who consistently spins ‘straw’ reporting into–not gold–but lead.  You’ll recall that one of his pieces of lead was the claim that 20% of Arab residents of East Jerusalem engaged in terror.  His latest travesty is a report on the alleged tactical errors Hamas committed during Operation Solid Dead (Lead).

He begins with the premise that most journalists would report as a positive: that Hamas is honoring the ceasefire that concluded the last Gaza war.  Instead, for Susser, stenographer of the Israeli establishment that he is, Hamas’ decision not to fire rockets is coldly and cynically calculated to curry favor with the west and the movement’s other potential allies.

Note this sourceless passage:

…There are signs as well of a new [Hamas] strategy of keeping the peace.

Hamas wants to win points with the international community and pave the way for a grand bargain: It releases captured Israeli soldier Gilad Shalit in return for hundreds of Palestinian prisoners and the opening of border crossing points between Israel and Gaza.

This is certainly not a ‘new’ or ‘grand’ strategy.  These negotiating points have been bandied about for months.

Here is more unsupported supposition passing for journalistic acuity:

If the relative quiet holds, the grand bargain could be struck. But even if it is, the prospects for a change in American attitudes to Hamas seem remote.

“Seem to be remote” on what basis?  Susser does bring up the fact that Hamas refuses western and Israeli conditions for recognizing Hamas as a legitimate partner: ending terror and recognizing Israel.  But on one point he has just contradicted himself because earlier he acknowledged that Hamas was adhering to the ceasefire, hence it was not engaging in terror.  As for recognition of Israel, Susser refuses to concede that the 10-year hudna that Khaled Meshal offered in his N.Y. Times interview WAS a form of tacit recognition.

Now comes the sorriest series of passages in Susser’s piece:

The Hamas reassessment of policy follows the recognition of mistakes it made before and during last winter’s fighting.

Where is the evidence that Hamas acknowledges “mistakes?”

To a large extent the organization fell victim to its own propaganda: That Israel was weak, that the Israel Defense Forces wouldn’t dare enter Gaza on the ground, and if it did it would be severely punished. Hamas also believed the fighting would lead to international pressure on Israel to fully open the border crossing points into Gaza.

While it may be true that Hamas made mistaken assumptions before the Israeli invasion, Susser of course neglects to mention the equally mistaken assumptions that Israel made: that Hamas was foolish and it’s fighters could be drawn into the open and slaughtered, that the IDF would crush, or even topple it and compel it to stop firing rockets.  None of these assumptions were borne out, which means that Israel failed in its war goals.  Not a word about that since Susser’s intent is to impugn the Palestinians, not to analyze the situation in a balanced fashion.

As for Israel being “punished,” it has been punished in the court of international public opinion after murdering 1,400 mostly unarmed Palestinian civilians.  As for pressure to end the Gaza siege, it has mounted exponentially.

Note once again in the following passage, that it is not only unsourced, but that no media reports that I’ve read, including ones from Israel, confirm the allegations brought forward here:

None of its [Hamas'] assumptions proved true, leading to strong criticism by leading Hamas politicians of the movement’s more radical military wing and the peremptory dismissal of some senior military commanders.

Where is the criticism?  Where are the dismissed commanders? Perhaps in Susser’s imagination or that of his Shin Bet informants?

Here is a perfect example of the disastrous policy offerings proffered by the intelligence apparatus of a national security state:

[Shin Bet director] Diskin claimed that during the war he had recommended overthrowing the Hamas government because as long as it was in control in Gaza, progress for peace with the Palestinians would not be possible. The security services chief also said he feared that in a new Palestinian election, Hamas probably would win in the West Bank, too, with horrendous consequences for the region as a whole.

Diskin made no recommendations, but what he was implying is clear: At some point in the future, if Israel wants peace, it will have to topple the Hamas government.

What Diskin really means to say is that a Hamas win would bring horrendous consequences for Israel–NOT the region as a whole.  Though for Diskin those are one and the same thing.  By the way, Hamas did win one election.  What horrendous regional consequences caused directly by Hamas resulted from that win?

Isn’t it astonishing (or perhaps just the opposite) that the Shin Bet offers the same wisdom concerning Hamas as it offers concering Iran: regime change.  There is absolutely no consideration (just as there was none on the part of the Bush administration before it toppled Saddam) of what comes after regime change.  Who takes the ayatollahs’ place?  Who takes Hamas’ place?  Frankly dear, the Shin Bet doesn’t give a damn.  Let the Iranians carve each other up for a generation or two.  Diskin could give a crap.  The same with the Palestinians.  Topple Hamas and let the Palis fight amongst themselves for the few spoils left over.  The worse the Arabs look, the better off Israel is by comparison.

This “strategy” is cynical beyond measure.  It walls off the Israeli garrison state as the entire region burns in fire around it.  Come to think of it, this IS apocalyptical stuff worthy of one of those fiery Biblical prophets or (if you’re an evangelical fire-breather like a certain former president) the Book of Revelations.

But the rest of us don’t want to live amidst apocalypse.  We want a Middle East in which nations try to get along with each other at least minimally.  That’s why reporting like Susser’s and “intelligence” offerings like that of the Shin Bet do such a disservice, both to JTA readers and the entire Israeli nation.

Performance Optimization WordPress Plugins by W3 EDGE