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 March, 2010

IDF Declares Opposition to Zionism, Support for Palestinians ‘Revolutionary’ and Illegal

Wednesday, March 24th, 2010

Ariadna Jove Marti and Bridgette Chappell, ISM peace activists and dangers to the State and social order

Noam Sheizaf has a very good post about the small story involving two international peace activists working in Palestine who were arrested by the IDF and almost deported. They managed to lodge an appeal of their deportation and the government’s defense before the Supreme Court is sweeping, breathtaking and dangerous in the extreme.

What did the activisits do to deserve expulsion? Nothing. That is, no act. Not even words are cited. But their ideology and that of the International Solidarity Movement are cited as sufficient grounds for expulsion:

…The state said that Marti and Chappell belong to the International Solidarity Movement, an organization “that supports an ideology that is anti-Zionist, pro-Palestinian and universally revolutionary.”

The state maintained: “The organization’s activists are involved in activities against the security forces in areas of friction in Judea and Samaria and East Jerusalem.”

The two were “taking advantage of their tourist visas so they could participate in demonstrations in areas of friction…

Frankly, I don’t know whether the ISM takes any position on Zionism though it’s certainly pro-Palestinian. As for being “universally revolutionary,” this sounds straight out of the Joe McCarthy lexicon. I don’t even know what the phrase means, nor does the person who wrote it undoubtedly. But Alan Dershowitz would be proud and it’s a lie worthy of him.

It should also be noted that the ISM is absolutely non-violent. So when the government claims activists act against the security forces, whatever opposition they mount is non-threatening and pacifist in nature. Since when does a so-called western democracy need to be afraid of a few young people with pierced ears and ratty T-shirts (excuse the hyperbole) sitting in the road on behalf of Palestinian rights?

Noam raises another excellent point here:

It is, to the best of my knowledge, the first (but certainly not last) attempt to present criticism of Zionism or support for the Palestinian cause as illegal

I suppose the next step will be to make Israeli citizens culpable for similar views, which would then truly symbolize the death of Israeli democracy, which now is only on life-support.

Another important aspect of this case is that Israel claims that Area A around Ramallah, where the women were arrested, is wholly under Palestinian control. According to an agreement it signed, Israel has no right to exercise any control within this zone. Yet the IDF swooped down on a Palestinian-controlled area and arrested citizens of a foreign country. Under any other regime in the western world this would be state-sponsored kidnapping and viewed with outrage by the states whose citizens were apprehended. This being Israel, the nations do very little to oppose the violation of international agreements and the rights of their citizens.

Israel did something similar under Ehud Olmert when it entered Jericho, destroyed a prison and kidnapped Palestinian prisoners and transferred them to Israeli custody where they were promptly tried and imprisoned (Israel never heard of double-jeopardy I suppose).

Noam raises a good point asking what good any future Israeli peace agreement will be if it arrogates to itself the right to trespass on Palestinian territory virtually at will. In other words, and as I repeat endlessly here, this is a regime that does not believe in the rule of law. It uses the law when it suits its purposes (to expel the foreign activists) and ignores it when it suits (as it did when it pursued targeted assassinations in violation of a Supreme Court ruling).  Is it “universally revolutionary” to demand that Israel uphold the values of democracy in its own interactions with its citizens and neighbors?

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

Pelosi Fawns Over Bibi

Wednesday, March 24th, 2010

A smug Bibi looks on as Pelosi and Boehner shake hands, thinking: 'This is my insurance policy in case everything with Obama goes south.' (UPI/Roger L. Wollenberg)

Someone must not’ve told Nancy Pelosi about the tense discussions taking place this week between Bibi Netanyahu and her Democratic counterparts in the Obama administration.  She must’ve missed the memo warning of deep dissatisfaction in the executive branch with Bibi’s commitment to peace and serious negotiations with the Palestinians.  If they had, she certainly wouldn’t have fawned over Bibi today as she met with him and her Republican counterpart, John Boehner.  Here is a sampling of her sycophancy:

It is an honor and privilege, once again, to welcome Prime Minister Netanyahu to the Capitol of the United States…

He is a strong leader for the Israeli people, a man prepared to make sacrifices for the sake of peace and security of his country. The long friendship between the United States and Israel is founded on common values of democracy, pluralism, and freedom, and common hopes for peace and security for our children. We in Congress stand by Israel, something we have a joint bipartisan commitment — no separation between us on this subject. In Congress, we speak with one voice on the subject of Israel.

I’m all for bi-partisanship when the two parties have something in common.  But if Pelosi seriously believes half the things she said above then she is seriously deluded about what Israel truly is.  And her bipartisan agreement with the Republicans is a pact with the devil.  Not to mention, that this is historically what Bibi does when he’s at odds with a U.S. president.  He turns to the rock-solid support Israel enjoys in Congress and goes over the president’s head.  If Obama is strong, it can’t work.  If he wavers, his goose is cooked and Bibi will feast on his carcass for dinner.

Pelosi clearly is thinking not about what’s going on behind closed doors at the White House, but of the November elections.  She foresees that $1-million dollars in advertising Shelly Adelson and the Republican Jewish Coalition waste every year attempting to prove that Democrats are Arab lovers and hate Israel, and that Republicans are uber Zionists and hate Palestinians.  This is yet another instance in which politics trumps truth. She figures she can speak a few white lies for the sake of retaining her Congressional majority.  The problem is those little white lies come back to haunt you and anyone who knows anything about the Israeli Palestinian conflict knows that they’re lies.

At least we can be comforted that Barack Obama, Joe Biden and Hillary Clinton don’t share Pelosi’s certainty on these issues.  Clinton was even willing to take the unprecedented step of telling Aipac delegates that she had serious disagreements with Bibi.  I don’t believe such a speech has ever been given at an Aipac conference.  Even though the level of disagreement was relatively mild, even raising the issue was shocking (and welcome).

It remains to be seen whether the disagreements which characterized this week’s meetings and last week’s imbroglio during Biden’s Israel visit mark a change of tone and approach by Obama to Israel; or whether they mark an ebb and flow in the relationship which eventually returns to equilibrium.  If the latter, we can wash our hands of Obama and any serious achievements regarding the Israel-Palestine conflict.  If the former, then there will have to be many more such disagreements openly stated and confronted before Israel and its government will understand what it must do for peace.

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

Britain Expels Mossad Station Chief

Tuesday, March 23rd, 2010


The British government decreed the Mossad’s station chief in London persona non grata in retaliation for the spy agency’s forging 12 British passports used in the Dubai assassination of Mahmoud al-Mabouh (if anyone can uncover the name of this person I’d be grateful).  For those Israelis who seek to portray this act as “more of the same” and Britain “going through the paces” consider that it is almost unheard of for allies to expel intelligence agents of friendly powers.  The last time I can think of this happening was…what a surprise, when Naor Gilon high-tailed it out of Washington a few years ago after serving as the Israeli conduit for Steve Rosen and Keith Franklin.  Yes, somehow Israel does get itself into more than its share of hot water with allegedly friendly governments.

This too somehow doesn’t sound like business as usual in Westminster:

…A host of lawmakers used harsh language to excoriate Israel on the floor of Parliament, calling for the expulsion of the Israeli ambassador, urging criminal prosecution of those involved in the Dubai operation and going so far as to say that Israel was becoming a “rogue state.”

The Telegraph’s foreign editor issued a call for the sacking of Mossad chief Meir Dagan and warned that future intelligence cooperation between Britain and Israel on major issues like Iran’s nuclear program would be imperiled until things were set aright.

Using Goebbels tactic of turning a lie you utter into truth and a truth your enemy utters into a lie, some of Israel’s most far-right Knesset members engaged in some looniness of their own, of course abusing the anti-Semitism trope in the process:

Members of the Israeli parliament likened the British government to “anti-Semitic dogs” and demanded the expulsion of Britain’s military attaché in Tel Aviv after erupting in fury over the expulsion of an Israeli diplomat in London.

“I think the British are being hypocritical, and I do not wish to insult dogs here, since some dogs show true loyalty, [but] who gave the British the right to judge us on the war on terror?” said Arieh Eldad, a right-wing member of the Knesset.

The canine theme was taken up by a second MP, Michael Ben-Ari, who said: “Dogs are usually loyal, the British may be dogs, but they are not loyal to us. They seem to be loyal to the anti-Semitic establishment.

“We have learned that a dog must be called by its name. This is anti-Semitism disguised as anti-Zionism.”

It makes you wonder how these thugs in the guise of politicians would react if MI5 stole Israeli passports and used them to assassinate an enemy of the state.  Would Israel sit back and enjoy it?  Somehow I doubt it.  These birds would be the first to decry this usurpation of Israeli sovereignty, etc.

Bibi Netanyahu got his sought after presidential meeting with Barack Obama today as the crowning glory of the Aipac conference.  But all was not well.  First, after swearing for days that Israel would never embarrass another American official with an announcement of building of new East Jerusalem settlements at delicate junctures in diplomatic activity, Haaretz reported that the Israeli government once again proudly announced the construction of new housing in that contested area.  And this only hours before Bibi graced the Oval Office.

The blame for this black eye goes not to the government this time, but to Jerusalem’s bellicose nationalist mayor, who approved of turning the Shepherd Hotel into housing for extremist settlers.  The Hotel was stolen through the manipulations of the Israeli government, which declared the Palestinian property unclaimed after 1967, eventually turning it over to pro-settler bingo magnate Irving Moskowitz for a cool $1-million.  Moskowitz funds a settler equivalent of the Nobel Prize for most vitriolic, hate-filled settler leader, the Moskowitz Prize for Zionism.  He throws a big party to celebrate and advertises in all the best Jewish periodicals.  Somehow, it’s a strange irony that the millions in bingo betting proffered by the hard-working people of southern California are funding some of the seediest, most hate-filled Jewish extremists in the Middle East.

In the meantime, Obama met Bibi today with no essential meeting of the minds on how to pursue peace negotiations despite the fact that the Israelis made much over the past week since the Ramat Shlomo fiasco, which ruined Joe Biden’s trip, that they were turning over a new leaf and would behave themselves in future.  We can see how long such assurances last.

The question is what will Obama do about it.  Given the history of the past year, it is hard to imagine Obama having the gumption necessary to take on Bibi.  George Bush and Jim Baker managed it in 1992, but sad to say, Barack Obama apparently is no George Bush.

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

Obama: PLO Agent in White House

Tuesday, March 23rd, 2010

'Warning: PLO agent in White House--the Land of Israel is OURS!' (Gili Yaari/Flash 90 European Pressphoto Agency)

This striking image accompanied the NY Times article about Bibi Netanyahu’s stem-winding speech at the Aipac conference in which he made some typically bellicose claims. Among them:

“The Jewish people were building Jerusalem 3,000 years, and the Jewish people are building Jerusalem today,” Mr. Netanyahu said to the group, the American Israel Public Affairs Committee. “Jerusalem is not a settlement; It’s our capital.”

It may be Bibi’s capital, but the rest of the world doesn’t seem to see it that way. And if no one but you recognizes it as your capital then for all intents and purposes it isn’t. Bibi, of course, purposely elides East and West Jerusalem in order to fudge the division between them that all but he and other Israeli rightists acknowledge.

In other words, the world has no problem with West Jerusalem being Israel’s capital as long as East Jerusalem becomes Palestine’s capital. That’s the sticking point.  And as far as the world is concerned, Jewish construction in East Jerusalem IS settlement.

A word about the image: it represents the views of a minority of Israel’s extreme right-wing and not the majority of Israelis as proven by a Haaretz poll this week which found that Israelis have a favorable impression of Obama.  But just as we have the Tea Partyers here, Israel has its extreme pro-settler lunatics.  We should keep in mind just what these people believe and represent and not fool ourselves into believing they are like us or can be reasoned with.

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

Dershowitz: Keep Those Lies Comin’

Monday, March 22nd, 2010


Those of you who remember the Canadian Jewish film, Lies My Father Told Me, might think of Alan Dershowitz virtually whenever he opens his mouth.  And regrettably he did so (lied, that is) once again at the Aipac national conference.  Dersh couldn’t resist the impulse to chew out Hadar Susskind, J Street’s policy director, who was crashing (by invitation I presume) the Aipac event.  Unfortunately for Aipac, there was a French camera crew that recorded the imbroglio (Aipac’s PR flack Josh Bloch threw them out for their trouble). Aipac can’t be happy that Dersh went “off message” and gave J Street such great YouTube coverage on their big day.

Among the lies Dersh unloaded on Susskind:

“You should ask yourself why Norman Finkelstein loves you.”

The only problem: Norman Finkelstein doesn’t “love” J Street.  He doesn’t even support J Street.  If anything Finkelstein would despise the group as being insufficiently strong in its views about the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

Dersh also accuses J Street of having Zbigniew Brezinski speak at its national conference. Though Amy Spitalnick and Susskind immediately point out his error he blusters through it all and maintains his lie with a straight face.

In the next breath, Dershowitz says:

I’ll speak to anybody. I’ll speak to Hamas, I’ll speak to Hezbollah.

I’m going to go out on a limb and out Dershowitz Dershowitz. I’ll pay him real money if he can prove he has any substantive contact with any representative of Hamas or Hezbollah in the next six months. Put your money where your mouth is, Al.

Another lie:

Some of Israel’s worst enemies have signed on in support of J Street.

But the problem with Dershowitz’s lies is that they sound just credible enough when he utters them that you’re hoodwinked for just the amount of time it takes for him to escape to utter the next lie.  By the time you’ve cottoned onto him he’s three lies down the line from where you caught him.

What’s truly comic and idiotic about Dershowitz is that he actually attempts to advance the argument that if J Street was really serious about being pro-Israel they would join Aipac and attempt to turn it into the kind of organization they (J Street) would like it to be. Seriously. Dersh actually tells the J Street staff member:

What we do is resolve our differences internally and we speak with one voice. And we put out a consensus statement on [sic] one voice.

Folks, these are the Jewish dinosaurs speaking. And you remember what happened to T-Rex? The Dershes of the Jewish world will have some impact for some time. But the longer they try to get away with sclerotic thinking like this the less impact and credibility they will have on anyone.

Dersh also tells Susskind rather incredulously that: “You know there are those who think that Aipac is too far left.” As if the fact that Sheldon Adelson thinks Aipac is a bunch of Jewish commies has any significance whatsoever to anyone but Shelly Adelson & Alan Dershowitz and Howard Kohr. Inside Jewish baseball, Al. Who cares?

Dersh lets Susskind know that he doesn’t think Aipac is “too far right” or “too far right” but “neutral on these issues!” Neutral! What universe is he living in?

Ron Kampeas should spend more time reading Steve Clemons and he would learn that the faux Aipac press release distributed today supporting a settlement freeze was written in jest by Clemons.  Or at least if it wasn’t written by him, it was inspired by a mock Aipac press release he did write.

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

J Street 2010 Poll of American Jews

Monday, March 22nd, 2010

J Street has just released its third annual poll (full pdf results) of American Jewish opinion.  It contains some very interesting findings. Considering that the Aipac national policy conference began today and Bibi Netanyahu and every Congress member will be there showing the flag, it’s instructive to know that only 10% found Israel to be the most important issue as they confronted the next Congressional election.  Only 2% found Iran most important.  Keep that in mind the next time Bibi rattles Israeli sabers or asks Obama to give him bunker buster bombs to destroy Iranian nuclear sites.

Of those polled who favored the U.S. taking an active role in resolving the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, 66% would do so even if it meant the U.S. stated its disagreements with Israel publicly.  63% supported the U.S. “exerting pressure” on Israel to achieve peace.  44% (to 40%) felt it was acceptable to take Israel to task publicly when it acts in ways that embarrass the U.S. or tarnish our credibility.  60% felt that Israel’s announcement of construction of 1,600 new housing units in East Jerusalem damaged its relations with the U.S.  53% agree with those Jewish organizations (like J Street) which stated publicly that the Ramat Shlomo housing announcement was detrimental to peace and damaged U.S. interests in the Middle East.  Only 47% agreed with those organizations (like Aipac) which claimed that Obama’s criticism of Israel was detrimental to the strategic partnership between two allies and that the U.S. should tone down its criticism in order to maintain such solidarity with Israel.

Unlike the AJC national survey, J Street didn’t poll people on their views about specific policy issues like Iran, settlements, 67 borders, sharing Jerusalem, two states, etc.  If they had, no doubt, results might have appeared somewhat less progressive (or at least that’s what appears to be the case in the AJC poll).  Regardless of that, the J Street poll indicates that Obama has carried along the majority of the Jewish community in his sharp response to the provocation that was the Ramat Shlomo announcement.  And this runs directly contrary to Aipac’s approach.

A few questions about affiliation were interesting.  60% do not belong to a synagogue.  45% never or hardly ever attend a religious service.  Only 8% called themselves Orthodox.  Only 20% donate to “Israel-related charities” (like Aipac).  67% have never been to Israel.  And something that should slightly embarrass those of us Jewish bloggers (and indicate the room for potential growth in our readership)–only 2% turn to blogs to learn news about Israel.  The Forward at 4% and Haaretz at 6% didn’t do much better unfortunately.  There was an interesting age differential noted in the poll respondents.  The largest cohort, 19% was over 64 (55% were over 50!).  The second largest group, 11% was 18-24.  Hopefully, this will mean that 11% cohort could turn into readers of this blog (not that I want to lose my older readers)!

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

Settlers: ‘Finish the Occupation’ by Any Means Necessary

Monday, March 22nd, 2010

Settler graffiti from Hebron (Breaking the Silence)

If the political slogan”by any means necessary” hadn’t already been created by Malcolm X, the settlers would have to invent it to describe their policy towards the Arabs.  In other words, get rid of them by any means necessary.  That’s the only way to understand this image shot in Hebron, a product of radical settler graffiti.

Now, we can interpret this message in only two ways and neither are very good.  The Occupation must end by ridding the land of Arabs.  Either we can do this over their live bodies or their dead bodies.  It seems to make little difference to the hooligans who devised this message.  Genocide or mere population transfer, either will suffice.  They seem to be saying to the Palestinians: the choice is yours & we’ll be happy to oblige either way.

Thanks to reader, Simcha Shtull who reminds me that the Hebrew (actually Aramaic) initials refer to bsiyata d‘shemaya (“with the help of heaven”).  In other words, an invocation to God to help in the ethnic cleansing process.  But I remind my readers that this is not Judaism, not my Judaism.  This is, as I’ve written this week, a perversion of Judaism as I and 98% of the world’s Jews know it.  Please do not make the mistake of confusing this with all Jews and all Judaism.

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

J Street’s NY Times Ad Shows One-State Map

Monday, March 22nd, 2010

What's wrong with this map?

I find it amazing that J Street would spend a hundred thousand dollars or two on a full page N.Y. Times ad that displays this map of Israel.  My acute readers will note a strange anomaly of the map–it doesn’t show Palestine.  Now, I always thought J Street supports a two state solution.  But you wouldn’t know it from this map.  Even if someone from J Street wanted to argue that it deliberately doesn’t show Palestine because the message is that “it’s time” to create one, that simply isn’t conveyed even indirectly by the graphic.  The copy does make one reference to a two state solution and even with that the overall copy is rather puerile.

We understand why such an ad was published.  Today is the first official day of the Aipac conference and displaying a map including Palestine wouldn’t score any points with the Aipac set, even though they officially claim they support a two state solution as well.

So what I want to know is what so funny about peace, love, understanding and a two-state solution??

Not J Street’s finest hour.  H/t to Ira Glunts at Mondoweiss.

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]
Performance Optimization WordPress Plugins by W3 EDGE