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, 2010

Israeli Secrets Behind Gaza Siege

Wednesday, May 5th, 2010

Several years ago, when Ariel Sharon was prime minister, his main advisor, Dov Weisglass “jokingly” said that Israel’s siege was intended to put Gazans on a diet:

“It’s like a meeting with a dietitian. We need to make the Palestinians lose weight, but not to starve to death.”

Yes, it was macabre, but typical of the callousness and gallows humor Israeli leaders like to employ when dealing with Palestinians.  Little did we know that the IDF actually does maintain a formerly secret document about how many calories it takes to maintain Gazans on the near edge of malnutrition:

The Israeli authorities also confirm the existence of four documents related to how the blockade works: how they process requests for imports into Gaza, how they monitor the shortages within Gaza, their approved list of what is allowed in, and a document entitled “Food Consumption in the Gaza Strip – Red Lines” which sets out the minimum calorie intake needed by Gaza’s million and a half inhabitants, according to their age and sex.

And in case you were wondering, the Gaza siege and such a dietary plan are play a major role in maintaining the security of the State of Israel:

“The limitation on the transfer of goods is a central pillar in the means at the disposal of the State of Israel in the armed conflict between it and Hamas.”

Wouldn’t you say that a siege that has been in place for four years now hasn’t quite done the job it was supposed to as Hamas is still in power.  Not to mention that there is currently a ceasefire in place and no “armed conflict” between Israel and Hamas as the statement maintains.  Isn’t it about time to try something new?  Like not maintaining people on the edge of malnutrition over long periods of time?  I know Martin Kramer would disagree since he believes that such borderline starvation inhibits Arab women from having babies who all grow up to be terrorists.  But everyone else recognizes the failure of this strategy.

In a court case brought by the Israeli NGO Gisha, which demanded that the government reveal the criteria behind its siege policy including what products were forbidden and why, the government came up with this ingenious justification for opacity:

In each case, the state argues that disclosure of what is allowed in and why would, in their words, “damage national security and harm foreign relations”.

Apparently, it would harm national security, for example, for the world to know that cinnamon is permitted by coriander not.  It’s obvious why this information would harm foreign relations: because it would reveal to the rest of the world the utter idiocy and sheer caprice of Israeli decision-making.

In case you’re considering sending care packages, these are the items which so endanger the security of the State that they may, on no account, be imported into Gaza:

Among the large range of goods currently forbidden are jam, chocolate, wood for furniture, fruit juice, textiles, and plastic toys.

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

Dershowitz’ Lies: There He Goes Again

Tuesday, May 4th, 2010

I bet you didn’t know I accused Alan Dershowitz of trying to kill Michael Lerner.  Neither did I.  But hell, that’s what the Dersh would have you believe in his latest ripping lie-filled yarn at HuffPo.  He’s back there for the second time in six days, this time claiming Michael Lerner is trying to silence him.

Editors would do the man a favor by restraining his written output.  Every time he writes he lies.  And often when he writes he repeats the same lie he’s already published, which only compounds the problem.  It’s come to the point where I wonder whether he knows he’s lying and doesn’t give a crap; or whether some mental impediment or grandiosity complex actually persuades him that anything issuing from his mouth must be true.

Somehow Lerner and I, by noting these lies and their ability to inspire the acts of other unbalanced individuals who share Dersh’ s views, constitute an attempt to “silence” him. Which is ludicrous if you consider that it is Dersh has published two pieces on this in four different publications in a space of six days. If this is silencing, then what would giving him free reign look like? Besides, God forbid anyone should think they could silence the biggest and fastest mouth this side of Brooklyn.

Imagine the hypocrisy of a tenured Harvard professor who almost single-handedly destroyed the academic career of Norman Finkelstein complaining about someone trying to silence him?  In fact, I half expect Dershowitz may be researching employment information about our 38 rabbis and dispatching a damning dossier to their synagogue boards as he did at DePaul with Finkelstein.  I wouldn’t put it past him.

Imagine the hypocrisy of someone who called Richard Goldstone a moser, a Jewish crime punishable by death, dismissing a claim that Dersh might be guilty of inciting violence against Michael Lerner.

First, our brash advocate believes he can’t be guilty of inciting the acts of vandalism against Lerner because he doesn’t know the perpetrators and didn’t put them up to it.  Like a good defense attorney, Dershowitz knows how to frame an issue narrowly to absolve himself of responsibility.  But you don’t have to know someone or tell them to do a bad act to be guilty of incitement.  All you have to do is make odious statements whose contents are widely known in the uber-Israelist crowd in which Dersh and these scumbags run.  Comments like Dershowitz’, in which he called Lerner and others who signed a statement supporting Richard Goldstone, “Hamas rabbis” and “virulently anti-Israel” among other choice epithets, could easily drive bad people to commit bad deeds.

The pro-Israel propagandist scoffs at the notion that Lerner was in any jeopardy despite the fact that his life has repeatedly been threatened over the 24 years he has published Tikkun:

On a scale of one to ten, having a few posters glued to your house ranks at about a one for seriousness.

Dersh, on the other hand, has faced down the tiger in his den.  Who sent the tiger?  Why, Michael Lerner of course:

I have been threatened with real violence, not a couple of posters on my house. I have needed armed bodyguards, policemen with bulletproof vests and other forms of protection from those incited by Lerner and his crew.

If any of this is true (it would be nice if Dershowitz would provide evidence for any of it, which he doesn’t), where is the least smidgen of evidence that anything Michael Lerner did or said about him had any impact on those who allegedly threatened his life?  Dershowitz also ignores the fact that Lerner’s life too has really been threatened by people like Victor Vancier who have demonstrated the capacity for real acts of violence.

And where is the evidence that anything Michael Lerner has done or said was intended to “silence” someone afflicted with loggorhea?  There is none of course.  But don’t let that stop a serial liar when he’s just getting started.

The demagogue’s dismissal of any jeopardy Lerner faced through the attack on his home contrasts to this trenchant and eloquent comment in the HuffPo thread by Paul Surovell:

As a defender of democracy and free expression it behooves you to issue a more serious response to the action against Lerner, perhaps along the lines of the statement by the ADL, Jewish Community Relations Council, Northern California Board of Rabbis, and Jewish Federation of the East Bay, which says:

“We unequivocally condemn criminal acts perpetrated against Rabbi Lerner’s home. Political disagreements must be resolved in a civil manner, and not by resorting to violence. Our communities are especially disturbed that this crime targeted Rabbi Lerner at his home, thereby conveying to him the message that he may not be safe there. We are encouraged by the responsiveness of the Berkeley Police Department to this incident, and we urge its officers to investigate this crime as thoroughly as possible. The entire community must send a message to the perpetrators that we reject violence and criminality as a means to express our political opinions.”

The Harvard bloviator calls me a “follower” of Michael Lerner.  Not only am I NOT a follower of Lerner, we often disagree on many issues.  My post, which Dersh attacks was written independent of any discussion or consultation with Lerner.  I don’t support Lerner because he is Lerner.  I support him because I originally devised the idea of writing the letter whose signatories Dershowitz maligned; and because the Tikkun founder’s reputation and property have been  assaulted by hyper-Zionist thugs, one of whom is Alan Dershowitz.

I wrote that his incitement against Lerner reminded me of King Henry’s statement about Thomas a Becket: “Will no one rid me of this meddlesome priest.”  Somehow this becomes a claim:

…Accusing me in effect, of trying to kill Lerner.

Note the well-placed “in effect.”  That phrase conceals a lot of mendacity since I not only never accused him of trying to kill Lerner, I never accused him of inciting anyone else to do so either.  But hey, why let a few facts get in the way?

You’d think with all that Harvard faculty support behind him he’d have a grad student proofread his copy before publishing.  Get a load of this sentence, responding to my criticism of the professor for “impugning the morals of his enemies.”  This is his barely coherent reply:

This is by one who supports the rabbi who has impugned the morals of his own enemies, namely the leaders of Israel by falsely accusing them of setting out to kill as many civilians as possible.

Of course, this claim too is a lie.  Neither Lerner, nor Goldstone nor the rabbinical signers have accused Israel’s leaders of “setting out to kill as many civilians as possible.”  Norman Finkelstein has already pointed out that Dershowitz either doesn’t know what a lie is or simply doesn’t give a crap.  He is to liars what O.J. Simpson was to sociopaths–a perfect specimen of the type.

What Lerner and I demand is truth and accuracy, qualities Dershowitz wouldn’t know if they bit him in the ass.

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

‘Yonatan Shapira, Make Me Babies’

Tuesday, May 4th, 2010

Enough doom and gloom.  Forget about useless proximity talks, hooligan uber-Zionists, rabid settlers, the Israel lobby foaming at the mouth over Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.  Instead enjoy some good old-fashioned foot-stomping Israeli pop music.  Oh, damn.  Here I thought I was going to give you some unalloyed fun entertainment for a change.  Even that seems impossible.  After you hear this wonderful song, you’ll also hear how even such auditory delight is fraught with political angst Israel-style (Hebrew).

At any rate, Israeli pop artist Aya Corem attended music school with Yonatan Shapira with whom she apparently shared some good times.  She wrote a whimsical song about him as her imaginary lover and showed it to him.  They laughed over the preposterousness of it all.  Shapira was flattered undoubtedly.  Never once did he believe he’d be hearing his name blaring from radios all over Israel, the subject of a raging pop hit.  Now wherever he travels he hears a song describing him as irresistibly cute and sexy, while in his heart he knows he’s been fired from his job for his political views and that he may be forced to leave the country to earn a living.

The story begins with an intrepid IDF helicopter pilot, very good at what he does, experiencing pangs of remorse when he hears that Israel has dropped a 2,000 lb. bomb on a residential apartment building in Gaza, killing not only a Hamas leader, Salah Shehadeh, but his entire family and everyone else in the building–18 civilians in all.  At this, Shapira decided he could no longer fly missions in which he might kill civilians.  In 2004, he became a refuser and joined 27 other pilots, the cream of the crop of the IDF officer corps, and wrote a public letter announcing their intent.  As with all other such refusers, the IDF sees them as dangerous to morale and prosecutes them to the fullest extent. Eventually, Shapira affiliated with Israeli peace groups like Yesh Gvul and Combatants for Peace.

In the meantime, he went to work as a commercial helicopter pilot flying flying for an Australian company that did maintenance work for an Israeli electric utility.  At first, all went well.  He was a trusted and respected pilot and employee.  He was called upon to train other pilots in some of the most dangerous types of helicopter maneuvers and maintenance work.

Then he announced he planned to attend an academic course in Europe during the summer and that he would only be available to work for a portion of the season.  The company, whose executives had expressed hostility to his political activism within the IDF before, notified him that there was no more work for him.  They claim he was the equivalent of a lazy employee who thought he deserved summers off.  When he asked for a letter of dismissal to prove he had been fired, the CEO tauntingly told him: You want a letter of dismissal, get one from Arafat!

Shapira sued the company with the help of distinguished human rights lawyer Michael Sfard.  His former employer claimed they love Shapira and that he’s a swell guy.  They just couldn’t find work for him.  Other pilots working for the company said they’d be happy to switch schedules to allow him to complete his course.  You decide who was telling the truth.

In the meantime, Yonatan Shapira just wanted to work at the job he loves.  He wanted to remain in the country he loves.  He wanted to continue his activism on behalf of peace.  But unfortunately the small-minded and petty were irked by his independence and iconoclasm.  They’d rather have a pilot who completed his IDF pilot’s course, did his job, didn’t rock the boat, bombed who he was told to bomb, came home and kissed the wife and kids afterward, etc.

What can I say.  Life is complicated.  Especially in Israel.  Hopefully, since the song and Haaretz article were written a few years ago and Shapira does still live in Israel, some aviation company hopefully appreciated having a pilot about whom a wonderful pop song was written.  And Yonatan Shapira went back to being the Israeli he’d like to be.  In the meantime, don’t get this get you down too much.  Enjoy the song.  I assume things worked out for Yonatan and he enjoyed the joke and the song as much as we do.

In the meantime, Shapira is an accomplished musician in his own right and has written this devestating faux lullaby, Sleep, Sleep, to imaginary Israeli children coaxed to sleep as a handsome Israeli pilot plans to drop his bombs on some unsuspecting Palestinian children (possibly):

So come to us, airplane
With a one-ton bomb
Little children will go to sleep now
Up there in the sky
Pretty-eyed pilots
It’s all so good and nice
The angels of death are approaching
Sleep tight…
So good night, Tomer
Good night, Ilan
Good night, Nati,
Good night Dan

H/ts Ron Kampeas, Dimi Reider, Ori Nir.

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

Dershowitz’ Climate of Incitement: Pro-Israel Hooligans Vandalize Michael Lerner’s Home

Monday, May 3rd, 2010
alan dershowitz

Alan Dershowitz: inciter of hate and violence against fellow Jews

It is absolutely no accident that Alan Dershowitz singled Rabbi Michael Lerner out for special opprobrium in his most recent Jerusalem Post and Huffington Post columns and that local Bay Area Jewish pogromists decided shortly thereafter to “party” at Lerner’s home.  They defaced it with the slogans and themes they could’ve learned at Dersh’s knee:

Berkeley police today confirmed that the attack on Rabbi Lerner’s home late Sunday June 2nd or early morning Sunday July 3rd [the correct dates were May 2d or May 3rd] was in fact a crime and was being investigated.

The attackers used a powerful form of glue to attach posters to his door and around the property of his home attacking Lerner personally, and attacking liberals and progressives as being supporters of terrorism and “Islamo-fascism.” They posted a printed bumper sticker saying “fight terror–support Israel” next to a caricature of Judge Goldstone whose UN report on Israel’s human rights violations in its attack on Gaza last year has been denounced as anti-Semitic and pro-terror by right wingers in Israel and the U.S.. The caricature has Goldstone talking about his being kept from his grandson’s bar mitzvah, and the caricature of Rabbi Lerner responds by saying “any enemy of Israel is a friend of mine.”

…In the 24 years of Tikkun’s operation, we have received many death threats and vicious hate mail, including phone calls to our office announcing that “Rabbi Lerner is dead” and others saying “We will kill all of you.” This particular attack has two worrisome elements not previously there:

1. They attack Rabbi Lerner’s home. As law enforcement people told us, this is a way of conveying the message to Lerner: “We know where you live, we know your house is vulnerable, so don’t ignore our threats.”

2. By linking Lerner to alleged terrorism, they provide for themselves and other extremists a “right-wing justification” to use violence against Lerner

Here are some of the salient passages of Dershowitz’ recent rave, which denounced a group of rabbis, including Lerner, who I had urged to make a Jewish moral statement supporting Richard Goldstone in response to his treatment at the hands of the South African Jewish community.  Note the terms of incitement therein and think how they might impact the type of deranged, violent mind that carried out the mini-pogrom at Lerner’s home:

A group of rabbis, many of whom have long records of anti-Israel activism, authored a “Rabbinic letter” to Goldstone congratulating him on his grandson’s bar mitzvah and using the occasion to make virulently anti-Israel claims, including the blood libel that Israel deliberately targeted innocent Palestinian civilians without any military purpose. These ignorant rabbis

These bigoted rabbis

These “rabbis for Hamas” have no shame and no credibility. They exploit their rabbinical status to support any conclusion that undercuts self defense Israeli actions…

The worst of these rabbis (and that’s saying a lot), Michael Lerner, after attempting to politicize the bar mitzvah by offering his anti-Israel synagogue for the event, has decided to honor Richard Goldstone with Tikkun Magazine‘s “Ethics Award.” I guess all it takes to be honored by Tikkun is to pass Lerner’s litmus test of lying about Israel. That’s Lerner’s definition of “ethics.” There are some good people on the advisory board of Tikkun Magazine. They now have an obligation to reconsider their membership unless they wish to be associated with a rabbi who is prepared to accuse Israel, in the absence of any evidence, of deliberately setting out to murder Palestinian civilians without any military purpose.

Someone ought to summon this intellectual hooligan to a beyt din for the use of such odious language.  I have no problem with anyone disagreeing with the sentiments in the rabbinic letter and saying so.  But to use the language above is to beg for the sociopathic among us to take action.  In effect, Dershowitz’s words here are the equivalent of “Will no one rid me of this meddlesome priest?”  Of course, there are those willing to act upon Dershowitz’s rhetoric.  He, of course is too slick to be caught anywhere near a real act of violence.  He would rather use rhetorical violence to impugn the morals of his enemies and gin up real violence by others.

I am younger than Alan Dershowitz, but when I was younger no Jew I knew would dare speak of any rabbi, whether they agreed with them politically or not, in the terms Dersh uses here.  Rabbis deserved and received respect because of their learning and their service to the Jewish people.  There are many rabbis who I don’t like either personally or politically.  But I would never go anywhere near using the terms Dershowitz does.

To be clear, there are Orthodox settler rabbis who have advocated actual acts of violence and murder against fellow Jews and Palestinians.  For them, I reserve no respect and have written about them in very strong language.  But there is no possible way the Harvard professor can argue the rabbis signing the Goldstone letter are anywhere near such status.

roy cohn

Alan Dershowitz, the Roy Cohn of this generation (Robert Mappelthorpe)

This is not the first time he has incited against a respected Jewish figure: on Israeli radio he called Richard Goldstone a moser, a betrayer of Jews, someone whom the tradition finds worthy of death for such a crime.

So what Alan Dershowitz does is to poison Jewish discourse, to debase the values of our community which show honor to rabbinic leaders, to spread calumny and plants the seeds of violence.  He’s this generation’s Roy Cohn, a scummy, truculent, trash-talking hater.  Mazel tov, Alan.  Your ancestors are hopefully spinning in their graves unless they too had no moral compass.

There is one other troubling aspect of this case outlined here by Tikkun staff:

The police say that this is not a “hate crime” because the attackers were not attacking Rabbi Lerner for his religion, but for his politics.

What the police do not understand is that for these rightist Jews their brand of Zionism IS a religion.  This is not stam politics.  This is bloody fratricidal civil war inside the Jewish body politic.  Make no mistake, this is a hate crime.  I’d like someone to tell me whether the assassination of Rabbi Meir Kahane was a hate crime.  If it was, this is too.  The only difference is that a Muslim killed Kahane and a Jew vandalized Lerner’s home.  These Jews hate Lerner no less than Kahane’s assassin hated him.

Finally, I should say that Alan Dershowitz isn’t the only person who hates Michael Lerner.  There are other sterling representatives of the Jewish spirit like Victor Vancier who runs the Masada2000 site who has actually physically threatened Lerner:

In May [2001]…Masada2000 listed Lerner as one of “the five most dangerous Jewish enemies of the Jewish people,” and posted detailed driving directions to his home address. Draped in guillotines, nooses and racist language, the site repeatedly stated: “If you’re ever in the San Francisco area, drop in on him at his home.”

Predictably, the death threats and hate e-mails started pouring in–more than 60 to date. Late-night calls also drastically increased. “Both my wife and I were extremely scared,” Lerner says.

So if it wasn’t Dershowitz it could be someone else.  The difference is that Alan Dershowitz has a respected platform from which to launch his hate.  Others have dark, dank websites no one ever visits.  Speaking of respected platforms, can anyone tell me why Dersh is given such a perch at HuffPo?  I can understand JPost since they’re a Jewish neocon publication.  But HuffPo?  Is Arianna chummy with the guy?  Otherwise, I don’t get it.  You’d think now with Dersh using the website to preach hate that results directly or indirectly in violence they might reconsider.

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

Reporters Without Borders: IDF ‘Predator of Press Freedom’

Monday, May 3rd, 2010
40 predators of press freedom

Reporters Without Borders: 40 Predators of Press Freedom

Reporters Without Borders recently announced its annual list of 40 most dangerous violators of the principles of a free press: 40 Predators of Press Freedom.  There were the usual suspects: Vladimir Putin, Kim Jong Il, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, Robert Mugabe, the Somali Shabab.  The list also included the Fatah police for their repression of Hamas journalists on the West Bank (it should be noted that Hamas itself has not had a spotless record).

But one representative gracing the list might (or might not) surprise you: the IDF.  Here is the RSF citation:

The IDF was again responsible for abuses of authority and acts of violence against journalists in the Palestinian Territories in 2009. The Israeli authorities denied the international media access to the Gaza Strip “for safety reasons” during Operation Cast Lead, the military offensive that ran from 27 December 2008 to 18 January 2009. This was a serious press freedom violation. The Israeli forces targeted several buildings housing news media during the offensive. In all, six journalists were killed during Operation Cast Lead, two of them while working, and around 15 others were wounded.

Two Palestinian journalists based in Jerusalem, Khodr Shaheen, the correspondent of the Iranian Arabic-language TV station Al-Alam, and his assistant, Mohammed Sarhan, were charged during Operation Cast Lead with “divulging secret information” and “transmitting information to the enemy in wartime.” Their two-month jail sentences and additional suspended sentences of six months in prison were eventually quashed by the Israeli supreme court. The Israeli security forces tend to behave arbitrarily towards Palestinian journalists and media workers in the West Bank and Gaza Strip. At least 33 Palestinian journalists were physically attacked and injured by Israeli soldiers during 2009 and another 25 have been since the start of 2010. Israeli soldiers implicated in these abuses are rarely prosecuted.

The RSF listing also notes the Kamm-Blau case as an example of repression of press freedom.  Last month, eight Palestinian journalists were injured by live fire from the IDF at marches.  The group also noted the “lack of transparency” shown in the deportation of Maan News Agency journalist, Jared Malsin.  The citation didn’t note the carte blanche given to the military and intelligence services in pursuit of national security cases and the accompanying trampling of press freedom that often ensues; particularly through the rampant abuse of secret gag orders and other such hocus pocus manuevers.

H/t NotIDFSpokesman.

If J Street Wants the Political Center, Why Not Join Aipac?

Sunday, May 2nd, 2010

The first time I heard Alan Dershowitz lecture Hadar Susskind at the Aipac conference telling him that J Street should join Aipac, I thought it was typical grandstanding by the right-wing pro-Israel huckster (I still think that).  But the longer I think about what he said and J Street’s pronounced move from the left to the political center, the more sense he makes.

I can also remember how J Street, when it began, ran like the plague from any notion, at least publicly, of criticizing Aipac or setting itself up as an alternative to Aipac.  To most of us on the left, it was clear that if J Street was ever to represent anything it would have to take on Aipac and beat it at its own game.  It turns out though, that we should have read the tea leaves and understood that the J Street leadership’s allergy to criticizing Aipac was not a tactic, but a strategy genuinely expressed.

Now, Shmuel Rosner, aping Dersh, wonders if J Street feels so cozy with the Israel government why doesn’t it join Aipac. He wrote this on the subject:

An Israeli familiar with the content of J Street’s meetings in Israel this week had said that “they sounded not much different from the visitors we have in AIPAC delegations”…It raises an old question: Why can’t they just join AIPAC instead of competing with them?…But there’s another way of looking at it: Maybe as a separate organization with more credibility on the left J Street can help Israel more by way of helping curb the wacky initiatives of the far left (like divestment in Berkeley).

I’d never quite thought of the fact that J Street either intentionally or unintentionally may serve to co-opt the political energy of the American Jewish peace movement.  Progressives funnel their energy into the organization which transmutes it in turn into  faintly liberal pro-Israel substance that bears only a slight resemblance to the actual political values of many of those progressives.  In this way, J Street contributes to the dumbing down of progressive Jewish politics.

Before I note some more of Rosner’s portrayals of Ben-Ami’s statements, I should add that Rosner is a terrible journalist, totally incapable of allowing his own right-wing prejudices from distorting everything he reports.  So it’s possible that the characterizations below of Ben-Ami’s opinion, none of which are actual quotations of anything Ben-Ami says, may be less than accurate.  Not to mention that it is in Rosner’s political interest to paint J Street as deviating from its original progressive political agenda and drifting farther right.  But given what I’ve read of Ben-Ami’s views elsewhere, and the lack of complaint by Ben Ami about misconstruing his views, we’ll take them as more or less accurate:

He seems quite happy about the bettering of relations with Israeli officialdom. My interpretation: He’d like this to continue, and is willing to pay a price for it.

Not once in the conversation – not once! – was there a word of criticism regarding Israeli policies. The only word of criticism I heard from Ben Ami this week was directed at the Palestinian leadership and its reluctance to go back to negotiations.

Is Netanyahu serious about negotiations? Ben Ami says he was convinced that Netanyahu is serious…

this is significant: Ben Ami doesn’t criticize Netanyahu and says he is serious about negotiations. Some J Street enthusiasts back home aren’t going to be happy – and Ben Ami knows this, and doesn’t seem to care much.

Ben Ami emphasized that J Street will not support boycott or divestment. Such position will also drive the more radical elements of the Jewish-sphere away from the organization.

In a related story, J Street’s national spokesperson scolded a local Brandeis chapter leader who criticized neocon University President Yehudah Reinharz’s choice of Israeli Ambassador Michael Oren as commencement speaker.  She said her organization “welcomed” Oren as commencement speaker.

There was a time when I might chalk all this up to the organizational leadership allowing itself to get boxed in or outmaneuvered on issues.  But the logic of having a sulha with Michael Oren, and breaking bread with Shimon Peres, and expressing a willingness to meet with settler leaders seems to be a deliberate move to the center.  And this move to the center precisely mirrors the Labor party’s gradual movement away from its founding principles under the tutelage of none other than Shimon Peres (till he was moved by Sharon’s blandishments and abandoned Labor for Kadima) and now Ehud Barak.

Many of us over many years held out hope for the Israeli liberal Zionist parties that they could represent a distinct political voice for peace and justice.  That same romance some of us may have had with J Street before it began and up until its national conference seems to be cooling rapidly.

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

Jeremy Ben Ami: ‘What Does the Left Want from J Street?’

Sunday, May 2nd, 2010

Jeremy Ben Ami did an interview with the Jerusalem Post in which he had the equivalent of Sigmund Freud’s “what does woman want” moment. The reporter also managed to use me as a foil for the whole rather sordid exercise:

Some of the group’s former supporters on the far-left of the American Jewish spectrum are growing disenchanted by the organization’s positions.

“I often defend J Street from my readers who accuse it of being ‘AIPAC lite,’” blogger Richard Silverstein wrote this week. However, in the wake of an interview in which Ben-Ami praised AIPAC’s role in strengthening the US-Israel relationship, “I find it harder and harder to do this.”

Such statements from J Street “make clear that there is less and less daylight between J Street and AIPAC,” Silverstein concluded.

Ben-Ami was unmoved.

“I don’t know what they thought we were and what it is that they want,” he said of the disappointed activists…

It should go without saying that I am not a “former supporter” of J Street nor am I on the “far left” except in the mind of a reporter for a far-right Israeli newspaper.  All this the journalist would’ve learned had he bothered to do his job and ask me what my views were on the subject. This now makes three times at least the Post has written articles in whole or part about my political views and never once has anyone bothered to confirm their characterization before publishing it.

I consider myself agnostic about J Street. When it does the right thing I will support and praise it. When it does the wrong thing I will criticize it. And I’ve done both (though more of the latter lately).

It does seem to me though that when the Jerusalem Post praises your organization for joining the pro-Israel consensus within the American Jewish community, that there’s something wrong. While for Ben-Ami, this is a development that appears to be most welcome.

I asked Ben-Ami to clarify his remarks in this interview especially as they pertain to me. Apparently, he’s done so many interviews during his current visit there he can’t remember what he said on the subject and whether he was specifically criticizing my own views about J Street. An altogether unsatisfactory answer.

So let’s address Ben-Ami’s closing sentence in the passage above: what did Jewish progressives think J Street was?  We thought it would provide a real alternative to Aipac.  We thought it would work in favor of a comprehensive settlement of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and push the Obama administration in the right direction when it backed down or lost faith in its own resolve.  We thought J Street would have the strength of its convictions and refuse to cave to the prejudices of the Israel lobby in such matters as Iran, the Gaza war, and BDS.  But most of all we didn’t want J Street to be a liberal version of Aipac or Aipac lite as some of my readers disparagingly refer to it.

Just as Freud has driven feminists to distraction with the cluelessness of his “what does Woman want” statement, so has Ben-Ami proven J Street is drifting farther and farther from progressive discourse with his “I don’t know what they thought we were” statement.  At the present rate, it is beginning to drift perilously close to irrelevance to progressive discourse.

Thank God we still have Americans for Peace Now and Jewish Voice for Peace, who are much truer to what I believe a progressive Jewish perspective should be on the conflict.

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

Gary Bauer Launches Keep Israel Safe, Attacks Obama for ‘Coddling’ Iran

Saturday, May 1st, 2010


With Mahmoud Ahmadinejad scheduled to speak at the UN in the coming days, the pro-Israel warlocks are out in force. The Israel lobby yesterday took out a full page N.Y. Times ad saying that ending U.S. use of foreign oil would stop Iran from getting the bomb. Not to be outdone, the Republican evangelical-right beast is stirring in its lair as well. Gary Bauer, under the tutelage of, or at least in homage to Lynne Cheney’s Keep America Safe, has launched Keep Israel Safe with what the Weekly Standard wildly errs in calling a “hard-hitting” video claiming that Barack Obama misguidedly snubs Israel’s prime minister while coddling the lunatics in Teheran. The campaign seems to also have direct or implict support from Bill Kristol and his Weekly Standard, which was the first media outlet to announce the group’s existence.

It’s really edifying propaganda material. Definitely deserves a place in the annals of hasbara as one of the more lurid, ridiculous loads of dreck. Perhaps Frank Luntz can include it in his next edition of the Hasbara Handbook:

Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, Iran’s President.

He vows to destroy Israel. Quote: “Wipe Israel from the pages of Israel.” “Wipe them off the map.”

Time is running out. Soon, the world’s most dangerous regime will have the world’s most dangerous weapon: the atomic bomb.

So how does out president respond to the threat against our ally, Israel? By condemning Israel for building homes in Jerusalem, its capital. By snubbing Israel’s prime minister when he came to Washington. By coddling the Iranian regime…

If you were Israel would you feel safe in Barack Obama’s hands? Tell the White House that keeping Israel safe helps keep America safe.

H/t Joel Katz, Religion and State in Israel.

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