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

Posts Tagged ‘gilad-shalit’

In Israeli TV Satire, Settlers Kidnap IDF Soldier–Real Settlers Not Amused

Wednesday, January 6th, 2010




The far right is up in arms about the Israeli TV satire, Eretz Nehederet (“Wonderful Country”), whose new season opened with a skit about the kidnapping of an Israeli soldier (I tried like hell to find some Israelis to either caption this in English or provide a good translation, so far no luck).  As the soldier records a “proof of life” video, you the viewer anticipate the plot will reflect the real capture by Palestinian militants of Gilad Shalit.  In the TV scene, the soldier begins by singing the praise of his captors, saying he is being treated well and “fed…[pregnant pause] Kosher.”  The camera then withdraws and the viewer sees that the captors are settlers who proceed to argue about what their demands should be.  As they list each demand (eg. end of the settlement freeze, amnesty for attacking police, creation of preferential development zones for settlements, etc.) they realize the government has already conceded them. This leaves them confused and demoralized till they come up with a new demand: pictures of a female ultra-Orthodox newscaster must be published in Blazer, a macho Israeli girlie mag, with her “elbows” uncovered! (Thanks for the translation to Zvi Solow). You can only imagine why Ketzele would find this to be sacrilege.

The skit concludes with two IDF officers responsible for negotiating the captive’s release, who watch the video and then confer about how to respond.  The 5 o’clock alarm goes off in the office and they merrily head for home to do “yoga” leaving the soldier to fend for himself till tomorrow.


The religious right was exercised further when the new season promo for Eretz Nehederet pictured naked cast members spreading paint on each other’s bodies. Uptight pro-settler Knesset members were not amused (to say the least–see video). While my Hebrew isn’t too shabby, the bearded rabbimullah in this education committee hearing is so pissed and talking so fast I literally thought his head might explode. Haaretz conveyed a few snippets of his bilge:

…A sketch of West Bank settlers kidnapping an Israel Defense Forces soldier, sparked cries of anti-Semitism and [incitement to] violence at a meeting of the Knesset Education Committee on Monday.

MK Ya’akov Katz, of the right-wing National Religious Party, said the promo for Eretz Nehederet reflected the sentiments of hatred exhibited toward Jews throughout history.

“When you see this program, you can understand how the Nazis slaughtered my grandfather, my uncles and my whole family in Poland,” Katz declared. “This is anti-Semitic propaganda, anti-Jewish. It shows a complete loss of self-rule and self-control, exploiting the right of decent and cultured people for freedom of expression.”

This guy is a stark raving lunatic if he believes even a tenth of what he claims. The sheer hysteria and foaming of the mouth in this diatribe shows the pro-settler right to be chewing-the-scenery actors whose role is to convince the electorate if they don’t get what they want then all of Israel, and even the Jewish people with them, will go to Hell.

I’m amused by the right-wing commenters here who complain about the hatred and violence espoused by the “radical left.” Take one look at this guy and tell me who hates best: the left or right. If someone shoved a gun or knife in this guy’s hand how hard would it have been for him to use it on the poor unfortunate television network lawyer attending the hearing to testify on behalf of the media company? Or alternatively, you could say it was typical settler Kabuki drama in which they attempt to convey their conviction to the rest of the nation that they are holy warriors and any bastard actor or satirist who gets in the way should have his head or other part of his anatomy chopped off.

These jokers don’t really care that they live in a democracy. They don’t know the meaning of the word. Democracy is what’s good for them. What’s not is poison, anti-Semitism, Jew hatred, any term that they can drege up that puts them in a favorable light and makes them out to be victims. Victims? These people are sly like a fox. They rule the roost, just like the settler-kidnappers realize in the skit.

Thanks to Sol Salbe for finding the YouTube video.

In a similar story, the Israeli TV show Big Brother has a contestant who is an anti-Occupation activist. Imagine how the settlers feel about a left-wing Israeli given the run of prime time television to say things like:

On the show, [contestant Edna] Kanti described her volunteer work at Machsom Watch, which monitors the conduct of Israel Defense Forces soldiers manning roadblocks in the West Bank, by saying: “I go to the roadblocks and I see all the thousands of people going where they are told, showing their identity cards and lifting their shirts. If they were to say, ‘Shove your laws up your ass, we don’t want to show you identity cards and we aren’t going away from the roadblocks,’ and if 2 million [Palestinian] people were to rise up, put on white clothes and say, ‘We are going where we want to go, this is our land,’ the occupation would be over.”

They quote Kanti as saying she would not follow “orders that seem to me retarded.”

And in this big, beautiful democracy that is Israel what are they saying about Ms. Kanti’s right to free speech? She has none. In fact, they want to convict her on charges of inciting Palestinian rebellion:

MK Michael Ben Ari (National Union) and Sholom Dov Wolpo, the Chabad rabbi who heads the right-wing Eretz Yisrael Shelanu…asked Deputy Attorney General Shai Nitzan on Monday to investigate…Edna Kanti. They say she has publicly incited rebellion and advocated refusal to serve in the Israel Defense Forces.

“These remarks are slanderous and contain violations of the law,” they wrote. “Ms. Kanti is in effect calling upon the Arabs to revolt against the state of Israel, to disobey orders from Israel Defense Forces soldiers and even start a rebellion.”

They’re only pissed because they didn’t think of putting one of their own cute, cuddly settler haus-frau on the show first to plead their cause. The left gets oodles of free publicity and they’re jealous as hell.

Al Jazeera Publishes New Piece on Shalit Prisoner Exchange

Tuesday, December 22nd, 2009

Al Jazeera has published my first piece, dealing with the Shalit prisoner exchange. I should add that this piece was submitted about two weeks ago so some recent developments aren’t covered there. Though the issues are still very pertinent (especially Israeli military censorship, which is at play here).

There is a hold-up in the final arrangements for this deal that apparently has something to do with Israeli demands for exiling certain freed prisoners.  The notion of forcing a released Palestinian prisoner into exile is difficult for Hamas to accept and appears to involve introduction of a new condition by the Israelis (a common Israeli negotiating tactic which often can often serve to derail things).  Matters are very tense now as the German mediator has threatened to quit if an agreement is not reached soon.  I am hoping that this happens in the coming days or weeks, but who knows?

My good friend Sol Salbe seems to believe there will be a hostage rescue attempt for Shalit before the New Year.  I don’t agree, but I wouldn’t put anything past this rightist government.

I want to pre-empt some of the know-nothing comments that I expect from my hasbara trolls.  Al Jazeera is accessible in Israel as a cable news offering.  If it’s good enough for Israel then it’s good enough for me.  There are a number of sites where I would love to be published, which has not happened yet.  Unfortunately,  I don’t chose where I’m published, editors choose whether to publish my work.  I’m delighted that Al Jazeera has done so.

Shalit Moved to Egypt?

Thursday, December 3rd, 2009

I preface this post with the caveat that everything reported here is from Arab and Israeli media sources which are not always fully reliable and vetted.  Even so, if there is any truth in the reports they are worth noting.

Haaretz says that a Kuwaiti newspaper is reporting that Gilad Shalit has been secretly moved by Hamas to Egypt as part of the initial stages of a prisoner exchange.  He was accompanied by two high-ranking Hamas operatives.  What puzzles me about this if it’s true is, why Hamas would take such a critical step given that there is not yet complete agreement with the Israelis on who and how many will be released.  I would’ve thought that Hamas would want to wait to take such a dramatic step until all its ducks were in a row.

Censorship of Shalit Deal Betrays Israeli Democracy

Monday, November 30th, 2009

In writing about this story, I find myself in a dilemma.  On the one hand, I am an advocate of free speech (though not an absolutist on this as some on the left are); on the other, I want a prisoner exchange to end the Shalit imprisonment.  Currently, the Israeli military censor has dictated that there be no release of the list of Palestinian prisoners to be released.  Such a release would allow the Israeli right to lobby against the entire deal by profiling the bloody hands of specific terrorists to be released.  The government wants no such public release until the cabinet signs an agreement approving the prisoner exchange.  This would have the effect of taking the wind out of the sails of the far-right anti-exchange forces.

Interestingly, there is a High Court ruling that governs the censor and in this case the government is clearly violating that 1989 decision:

Justice Aharon Barak wrote that the military censor is authorized to prevent publication of an item only in circumstances in which “there is near certainty of actual harm to security” and in which there is no “other alternative means to prevent the risk without avoiding damaging freedom of expression.”

In the same ruling, which subsequently served as the basis for an agreement on the subject of censorship between the security authorities and the media, Barak wrote that it is precisely because of the implications the decisions involving security have on the life of the nation that “it is appropriate to open the door to an open exchange of views on security matters” in which the press “will be free to serve as a forum for the exchange of views and criticism regarding essential issues for society in general and for the individual.

There is absolutely no basis on which even the most draconian adherent of national security might argue that release of the names would harm anyone except possibly Gilad Shalit, whose freedom would be postponed.  That makes the actual government argument in favor of censorship all the more ludicrous:

The state prosecutor wrote that unlike a prisoner release representing a diplomatic agreement or goodwill gesture, the current negotiations for Shalit are tantamount to “an ongoing terror attack” in which Israel is “bargaining” to reach a deal that would exact the lowest possible price.

…The state prosecutor wrote that ambiguity is essential to Israel’s very existence, and that without it, “it is impossible to hold effective negotiations and reach the goal of returning the abducted soldier to Israel.”

What he meant I think was not “ambiguity” but opacity.  For opacity is what the military censor wishes in this case.  And what is even more clear from this statement is that censorship is being used for a political, rather than national security purpose.  Of course it’s possible to hold effective negotiations to release Shalit without ambiguity or opacity.  Israel has done so before.  The difference now is that Israel has a hard right government for whom democratic values are peripheral considerations.

Though I’m 100% in favor of the exchange, I think the entire process of negotiating this exchange is important, including how it is approached within Israel itself.  If there is to be a debate why not have at it?  Let everyone know who will  be released.  Let the far right do their damndest to undermine the deal.  That will make the actual deal, which I have little doubt would go through anyway, all the more solid.

To negotiate a deal without such a full democratic debate undermines the validity of the enterprise itself and diminishes Shalit’s freedom when it is actually won.  To me, this abuse of military censorship is of a piece with the general decline in so-called Israeli democracy. And what is so strange about this case is that I’m on the same side as some of these far-right pro-settler militants who I so despise.  But of course, we are on the same side for completely different reasons which what is crucially important.  For them, they’d like to wreck a prisoner exchange because essentially they’d prefer to nuke Hamas and Gaza back to the Stone Age rather than negotiate with the Islamist movement.  For me, I see the prisoner exchange as a smallest chance of a fuller dialogue taking place at some later date between Hamas and Israel.

Aipac Sticks Its Nose in Shalit Prisoner Deal

Wednesday, November 25th, 2009

Every once in a while Haaretz publishes journalism that is garbage or let’s say that the informant it quotes is peddling garbage.  This is true of this report on opposition to the Shalit prisoner deal.  Are we to believe the ludicrous notion that the U.S. government would interfere in delicate negotiations between Israel and Hamas over the freedom of one of its soldiers held captive for years?  If we’re to believe this unnamed clown, this is the case:

…A senior Israeli official told Army Radio on Wednesday that the U.S. administration is opposed to the emerging understandings between Israel and Hamas surrounding the deal. “The U.S. does not support negotiations with terror organizations,” the official said. “Washington knows that any release of Palestinian prisoners to the West Bank could harm Palestinian President Abu Mazen (Mahmoud Abbas) and become a victory for Hamas,” he added.

Far be it from me to defend Bibi Netanyahu when he gets into a row with Aipac, but really has Josh Block, Aipac’s chief PR flack, taken leave of his senses?  He has the unmitigated chutzpah to diss a right-wing Israeli prime minister in the midst of deliberate negotiations for the release of an IDF soldier held captive for over three years?  Yup, here’s what Josh had to say:

The pro-Israel lobby AIPAC also voiced concern over the possible prisoner swap but refrained from explicitly criticizing Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. However, senior AIPAC strategist Josh Block told Army Radio that the Israeli government must find a balance between the release of hundreds of Palestinian prisoners and the protection of Israel’s long-term interests.

Israel is striking a deal with Hamas while it should be negotiating peace with the Palestinian Authority, Block said, adding that he hoped that Israel would be able to balance between the two.

Because Aipac despises Hamas the American Jewish group would tell Israel’s government not to negotiate to free Gilad Shalit?  And if Josh Block or a “senior Israeli official” or the “U.S. administration” is so concerned about a prisoner swap hurting Mahmoud Abbas why don’t they just tell Abbas to free Shalit.  If he can’t, who else does Israel negotiate with?

Shalit-Barghouti Deal Imminent?

Monday, November 23rd, 2009

One never knows what to say about the on again, off again negotiations to free Gilad Shalit and the seemingly unending media stories announcing an imminent deal.  So one approaches this subject with some trepidation.  But there are enough serious signals that haven’t been seen before that a deal is close, that it’s worthwhile considering what could happen and its possible impact on Israeli-Palestinian relations.  The outline of the proposal is that in return for releasing kidnapped IDF soldier, Gilad Shalit, Israel will release 450 Palestinian prisoners including the most prominent, Marwan Barghouti.

Marwan Barghoutis wife sits under his image (James Hill/NY Times)

Marwan Barghouti's wife sits under his image (James Hill/NY Times)

What is different now from previous rumors of a deal?  First of all (and you won’t see this mentioned in Ethan Bronner’s NY Times report because he never acknowledges such issues), the Israeli military censor has thrown up complete embargo over coverage of this issue.  The only thing Israeli media can do is speculate about the matter.  They can’t report on what any minister or intelligence officer or IDF commander might have to say.  This is unprecedented in Israeli history as Haaretz notes.  It can only mean that Israel realizes that any false note introduced into the mix could doom the negotiations.  Even more importantly, this right-wing government is extremely sensitive to criticism from its farther right flank of the idea of freeing Palestinian terrorists.   Blanket censorship is one way to dampen such criticism.  Bronner doesn’t want to deal with the implication of the Only Democracy in the Middle East™ using censorship in order to manipulate political debate as this would not reflect well on Israel’s “democracy.”

Ever since Shalit’s kidnapping speculation has been rampant that Marwan Barghouti would be included in the exchange.  He is the most respected Palestinian political leader (including Abbas and even Haniyeh) and a potential future leader of the PA.  In fact, this Haaretz article speculates that the Palestinian prisoner’s freedom might expedite the resignation of Mahmoud Abbas and his replacement by Barghouti.  In today’s Palestine, his role and stature is roughly akin to that of Nelson Mandela in apartheid era South Africa.

Now, apparently both sides are indicating this VIP (very important prisoner) is slated to be freed as well.  So it becomes important to speculate how this might change the Palestinian political landscape.  Given how depressing (for anyone seeking peace, which excludes the Netanyahu government) the current situation is, it’s important to note that even if Barghouti is released it doesn’t mean that this will single-handedly transform the situation for the better.

I’m afraid that the current Israeli government has proven itself adept at outwaiting and outsmarting a U.S. president and the PA.  So it’s doubtful that a PA headed by Barghouti (were this to happen) could work any immediate miracles.  But it is worthwhile speculating what might happen in the longer term.  The Netanyahu government, secure and stable as it now seems, won’t be so forever.  Indeed, if a strong PA leader comes on the scene, one that Israelis feel could be trusted to deliver on his promises and who could carry Hamas with him, then the electorate might feel more secure in electing a more forthcoming government.  It’s not outside the realm of possibility that a more pragmatic leader like Tzipi Livni could be elected within a year or so who might actually proceed to final status talks and negotiate a deal with the Palestinians.

Of course, there are many rivers to cross before we get to that point.  But I think in the long-term this release could produce positive results for peace.

One aspect of Bronner’s reporting also calls out for critique:

Many governments, including that of the United States, want to end the embargo to relieve the suffering of the 1.5 million people in Gaza, especially after Israel’s military invasion 11 months ago, which destroyed thousands of homes and factories. But Israel has said it will not end until Mr. Shalit’s release.

Therefore, if a deal is really imminent, it may also signal the possibility of some opening of the commercial crossings.

First, no government has been willing to engage in any serious effort to oppose the Gaze siege despite the fact that is a clear breach of international law.  So giving credit to nations for wanting the siege to end is an empty gift to them since they’re not willing to go to the mat to make it happen.  Second, the idea that Israel will feel empowered to diminish Gaza’s suffering because Hamas has freed Gilad Shalit is laughable.  Israel has SAID that it would do so and that the Shalit kidnapping is one of the developments that justifies continuing the siege.  But given Israel’s hatred of Hamas and its imperviousness to the notion of honoring verbal commitments, the likelihood of ending the siege or even lessening it is practically nil.

And to use one of Walter Mondale’s best campaign lines: Ethan Bronner won’t say that.  I just did.

Israeli Soldier Kidnapped

Thursday, August 13th, 2009

UPDATE: The Jerusalem Post is claiming that all IDF soldiers have been accounted for and the kidnapping apparently was a false alarm.  Thanks to reader Nathan for bringing this to my attention.

An astonishing development in Israel: the IDF has announced and a Palestinian militant group confirmed that it abducted an Israeli soldier in the center of Israel.  Though the police have thrown up roadblocks throughout the area, given the announcement from the abductors that they’d completed the operation, it seems likely they have made their escape.  It goes without saying that this new development complicates everything.  It complicates the negotiations for Gilad Shalit’s freedom (the other abducted IDF soldier held by Hamas).  It complicates U.S. attempts for a settlement freeze.  Whenever Israel’s security is threatened, Israelis retreat into a security shell and are unwilling to entertain the idea of flexibility in any form.

This kidnapping is unlike the previous Shalit event because the latter was captured while on duty on the Israeli border with Gaza.  This one occured within Israel proper and means that the kidnappers infiltrated the country and procured a car.  All this would entail a fairly extensive operation involving a number of co-conspirators.  This will shock Israel and rattle the nerves of the entire country.  The Shin Bet will be on the carpet for this major breach of national security.  Policitians will outdo themselves in nationalist bellicosity.  There will be calls for retaliation and worse.  It will get ugly.

Almost no one in Israel will face the nasty truth that the status quo is not viable.  That there will always be horrible events like this unless there is real peace with real negotiations and real compromises in which each side gives up something it doesn’t want to give up.  Israelis naturally prefer to be lulled by things as they are.  They don’t like to contemplate giving up anything for the sake of an unknown.  It seems almost an impossibility to convince them otherwise in the midst of such trauma.  How do you ask a human being to look past the current woe to see that the only way to avoid future woe is by stepping into the unknown; and that the unknown is better than the known because the former will only lead to more such trauma?

Israeli Bait and Switch on Shalit Deal

Wednesday, February 18th, 2009

News coming out of the Middle East had a long-term ceasefire between Israel and Hamas a matter of hours away as recently as two days ago. Hamas would agree to halt rocket attacks on Israel. Israel would agree to halt military operations on Gaza. Israel would agree to lift the siege. The issue of Gilad Shalit and freeing Palestinian prisoners would be left to the next stage of negotiations.

That was what we heard till today. And as is Israel’s wont, when it suits, it changes its terms almost on a whim. Amos Gilad, Ehud Olmert’s military advisor and chief negotiator with Hamas and Egypt, thought he had a deal. But now he doesn’t. And he’s pissed:

Amos Gilad, the Israeli Defense Ministry’s liaison in talks with the Egyptians, was quoted in the newspaper Maariv on Wednesday as having told an associate that Israel was risking its relations with Egypt.

“I don’t understand what it is that they’re trying to do,” Mr. Gilad was quoted as saying about the Israeli government. “To insult the Egyptians? We’ve already insulted them. It’s madness. It’s simply madness. Egypt has remained almost our last ally here.”

Undoubtedly, the recent election is causing Olmert to cave in to pressure from the Israeli right which wants to do nothing that could be seen as capitulating to Hamas. Bibi Netanyahu has a strong hand as a result of the resurgence of the right in the elections. He’s whispering in Olmert’s ear of his unhappiness and the prime minister is losing heart.

To me, this is unconscionable. Only a country with unstable or two-faced political leaders takes a year or more to negotiate a deal with an enemy and then tries to alter the terms in its favor at the last minute. What does Israel think? That Hamas is so eager to do a deal that it will cave to this ploy? Could Israel really believe this? Or do the Israeli pols care so little about Gilad Shalit’s return that they’d risk blowing up the deal to score nationalist political points and look tough before the electorate?

The ball is in Israel’s court. It got this far towards releasing Shalit. If it wants a deal it knows what the terms are. If it doesn’t it can play games as it has and risk losing everything. Hamas has very little to lose and certainly doesn’t need this deal as much as Israel