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 ‘jewish-voice-for-peace’

American Jewish Left in Transition

Sunday, September 6th, 2009

The American Jewish left is amidst a huge transition and I didn’t even realize it until I read Nathan Guttman’s article in The Forward.  When J Street first began two years ago, there were talks of all the Jewish peace groups merging with it.  But everyone seemed concerned about turf and that didn’t happen.  But now that J Street has emerged as a triple-threat type progressive group, it has sucked a good deal of the oxygen out of the world of the Jewish left.  Face it, J Street gathers most of the headlines, funding and opprobrium of the pro-Israel right.  They wouldn’t waste their energy on a group that was a nothing.  You don’t see Marty Peretz, Jonathan Tobin and their minions poring over public statements by Israel Policy Forum or Americans for Peace Now and waving them like Joe McCarthy to show the world all the Communists he’d found.

Brit Tzedek, a group which in my opinion has left a good deal of its potential unrealized, has seen the light and is in advanced merger talks with J Street.  Guttman’s story though, describes a convoluted structure of a proposed deal.  Though I used the term “merger,” Brit Tzedek won’t exactly be merging with J Street.  There will be no formal combination.  But J Street will absorb Brit Tzedek’s lobbying organization and those members who wish to transfer to the former group.  The old Brit Tzedek might remain in some form (or not).  That’s the part that makes no sense to me.

I suppose there may be some leaders of BT opposed to the deal who refuse to move over to J Street.  This format allows the majority of BT to switch and also allows the diehards to carry on a rump version of BT is they wish to do so.

Guttman describes IPF as being almost on life-support.  I don’t know if this is true as the mainstream Jewish press seems to love to report the demise of groups it views as outside the “communal consensus.”  One development that shocked me was that M.J. Rosenberg, a senior IPF staff member since the group’s launch has left.  He will be moving to Media Matters as senior foreign policy analyst.  It is a progressive media watchdog group where Eric Alterman also blogs.

M.J. made one good point in his blog post announcing his plans:

My move is part of a general trend toward making Middle East policy not a boutique issue, but a mainstay of liberal politics and journalism. I have long believed that it is impossible to be a liberal (or progressive) and yet support Middle East policies that perpetuate the deadly status quo. With Media Matters joining this fight, we can help progressives of all stripes understand that supporting occupation and settlements (or wars with various regional players) is antithetical to a progressive world view and, most important, is bad for America.

For far too long, the Israeli-Arab conflict has remained the territory of niche specialists, mostly Jewish or Arab, for whom it was a deep personal mission.  But the rest of the liberal-progressive community wanted nothing more than to stay out of the perceived quagmire.  Daily Kos and Markos’ deep aversion to this subject is a prime case in point.  I’m not sure M.J. is entirely right in that his move marks a sea change in attitudes among the progressive camp toward the region.  But I will say in the traditional Jewish wish: “From his mouth to God’s ears.”

I should make it clear that J Street, while it has done much right since its launch, is not perfect.  But one example is its upcoming conference which is being co-sponsored by seemingly every progressive American Jewish group with an interest in the Israeli-Arab conflict.  There is one catch: if you’re not a two state group you’re not invited.  That leaves out Jewish Voice for Peace which, in my opinion, is in its particular community almost as effective and enterprising as J Street–and with a lot less money and staff.

I understand the reason J Street feels it must place JVP outside the tent.  There are lots of Jewish rightist warriors who are gunning for it.  If they invited JVP, then they’d be spending time explaining their decision.  And they’d rather be advocating for Obama Mideast policy than explaining why they invited JVP to their conference.

But I have a real problem with the impoverishment of the Jewish left that comes from this sort of exclusion.  I believe in making the tent as big as possible not using artificial criteria to decide who is kosher and who is treif.  While I could understand excluding an anti-Zionist Jewish group, JVP is not anti-Zionist.

I also felt J Street’s public statement about Neve Gordon’s BDS article in the L.A. Times and Guardian was weak and attenuated.  There is a better way to tell the world you support academic freedom and free speech while not necessarily supporting a boycott, than the way J Street did.  So you’ll hear me criticize J Street in as constructive a way as I can.

YouTube Bans Blumenthal’s ‘Feeling the Hate’ Video

Friday, June 19th, 2009


What is YouTube afraid of? They’ve taken down Max Blumenthal‘s stunning video, Feeling the Hate in Jerusalem because it’s offended the sensibilities of some frightened Jews who believe it stirs anti-Semitism. Imagine that, showing the world that there are Jews who actually hold hateful, racist views of Arabs and their own African-American president might provoke anti-Semitism. And the best way to confront this hate is not to denounce it or combat it or even address it. The best approach is to kill the messenger and suppress the video. Of all the stupid things I’ve heard Jews do this is one of the stupider, and alas, more predictable ones.

Here’s how Max describes what’s happened to the video:

it is clear there is an active campaign by right-wing Jewish elements to suppress the video by filing a flood of complaints with Youtube. At the same time these elements have attempted to paint me as a self-hating Jew determined to foment anti-Semitism.

In a way, these timorous souls have given Max a gift. Instead of the hundreds of thousands who’ve seen it on Youtube before it was banned, now millions will see it thanks to the publicity they’ve inadvertently generated.

Jewish Voice for Peace, whose members discovered the video had been taken down by YouTube, has just begun a mass petition campaign to protest YouTube’s censorship. Tell YouTube that you’re not frightened of a little dose of truth; that you can handle hate by acknowledging it and fighting back against it. Tell YouTube that no matter how many timid Jews there are out there who are offended by this video, that it serves an important educational purpose. We want the video back!

If you’re able to do more call David Drummond, chief legal officer of Google at 650-253-0000 to complain about YouTube’s overreaction. E-mail YouTube’s press office to demand an explanation. Ask them to talk to Max about the video before banning it.

UPDATE: Other YouTube members have uploaded Max’s video via their own accounts and they are available for viewing. But Max’s original video is still banned. Our goal is for YouTube to unban Max’s account and his video. I presume that the other videos may be removed at any time.

Michael Levin made me aware of another YouTube controversy during the Gaza war in which the service banned a series of IDF videos of air strikes against Gaza targets. After the Israeli government and the hasbara crowd organized a campaign on behalf of the videos they were reinstated.

It would seem to me that if YouTube can reinstate videos portraying possible Israeli war crimes (targeting civilian targets) that the least they can do is reinstate a video which contains nothing more offensive than a few drunken American Jews spouting racist taunts.

Resist the Gaza Massacre!

Sunday, December 28th, 2008

I wanted to give my readers some opportunities to express their disgust with Israel’s massive and disproportionate assault on Gaza. J Street has begun a petition campaign calling for the U.S. government to intervene and stop the violence. Their statement reads in part:

At this moment of extreme crisis, J Street wants to demonstrate that, among those who care about Israel and its security, there is a constituency for sanity and moderation.  There are many who recognize elements of truth on both sides of this gaping divide and who know that closing it requires strong American engagement and leadership.

Click here.

Neither Israelis nor Palestinians have a monopoly on right or wrong. While there is nothing “right” in raining rockets on Israeli families or dispatching suicide bombers, there is nothing “right” in punishing a million and a half already-suffering Gazans for the actions of the extremists among them.

And there is nothing to be gained from debating which injustice is greater or came first.   What’s needed now is immediate action to stop the violence before it spirals out of control.

The United States, the Quartet, and the world community must not wait – as they did in the Israel-Lebanon crisis of 2006 – for weeks to pass and hundreds or thousands more to die before intervening.  There needs to be an urgent end to the new hostilities that brings a complete end to military operations, including an end to the rocket fire out of Gaza, and that allows food, fuel and other civilian necessities into Gaza.

…Following a renegotiated ceasefire, we urge the incoming Obama administration to lead an early and serious effort to achieve a comprehensive diplomatic resolution to the Israeli-Palestinian and Arab-Israeli conflicts.

Jewish Voice for Peace is also coordinating opposition to the Gaza violence. Their statement provides e mail addresses and links to make your views known to U.S. government officials:

JVP is working now to develop a multi-faceted and long-term response to the attacks on and strangulation of Gaza. We will let you know soon how you can be a part of this. But in this moment, especially for those of you who live in the United States:

1. The US Campaign to End the Occupation has a list of street actions taking place around the US now.

2. Contact the US White House to protest the attack and demand an immediate cease-fire. Call 202-456-1111 or send an email to comments@whitehouse.gov.

3. Contact the State Department at 202-647-6575

4. Contact your Representative and Senators in Congress at 202-224-3121

5. Contact your local media by phoning into a talk show or writing a letter to the editor.

Some of my readers have commented that some of these statements don’t go far enough in stating Israeli complicity and that they blame Hamas as if it is an equal culprit in the violence.  I want to make clear that my own position is slightly different than J Street’s.  But the key point for me is that Jewish progressives need a voice that can effectively protest at the highest political levels of our government.  As far as I’m concerned, J Street can do that which is why I support their work.

There is also room for other Jewish organizational responses and I will circulate those as well as I find them.  That is why I’ve also included JVP here.

One Israeli group which deserves criticism for its position on the violence is Meretz.  Chaim Oron made this statement which I find tortuous and hopelessly morally and politically compromised:

I would like also to point out that at this point in time, we are obligated to act with caution. Things that appear to us as obvious, are not understood the same way by many people – and not only by the general public, but also among our most loyal supporters and friends — left wingers and human rights supporters, and those who are stuck in their homes as missile attacks continue. When we make a public statement, we must think if [sic] these people, as well as of our obligation to oppose a military escalation when it is unnecessary and is harming innocent people on both sides.

In conclusion, below is the official statement of the New Movement-Meretz Party on this subject:

“At this stage, following the IDF’s action in the Gaza strip, Israel’s primary interest should now be to renew the ceasefire agreement as quickly as possible. The safety of Israeli citizens who live in the vicinity of Gaza and the safety of the kidnapped IDF soldier Gilad Shalit, demand maximum caution when considering a further large scale operation, particularly a ground invasion, which means sinking in the Gazan mud, in comparison to which, the Lebanese mud is shallow.”

In friendship,
M.K. Haim Oron (Jumas),
Chairman, The New Movement-Meretz Party

I resent the implication that a truly principled opposition to the Gaza invasion would mean ignoring or disrespecting the suffering of Sderot.  In fact, the restoration of a ceasefire that bound Israel to ending its siege of Gaza and bound Hamas to restore calm would show the ultimate respect to Sderot because it would end its suffering.  Oron’s statement shows how hopelessly muddled the Israeli left has become.

It is times like these that test a Zionist’s soul. And Meretz is found wanting as it was during the Lebanon invasion. Unfortunately, we have no principled Israeli left opposition except Hadash, whose overall agenda some find problematic. It is a sad time for many more reasons than one.

Support the Shministim

Wednesday, December 17th, 2008


A group of Israeli young people are refusing to serve in the IDF as a sign of their opposition to the Occupation. Some of them currently are serving jail sentences for honoring their convictions. Jewish Voice for Peace is campaigning on their behalf, seeking 30,000 signatures by tomorrow, December 18th, for a petition to be presented to defense minister Ehud Barak, asking that their status as conscientious objectors be recognized.

Omer Goldman, daughter of a retired senior Shin Bet officer, explains her act of resistance thus:

Why I am one of the Shministim:

“I believe in service to the society I am part of, and that is precisely why I refuse to take part in the war crimes committed by my country. Violence will not bring any kind of solution, and I shall not commit violence, come what may.”

I encourage my readers to sign the petition if you wish to support young, principled Israelis who are speaking truth to power.

When I was their age I was the first Jew ever to come before my local draft board as a conscientious objector. My application for CO status was approved. It’s not so easy for these young people, which is why we must stand behind them. Join Ed Asner, Ronnie Gilbert, Howard Zinn, Adrienne Rich and other prominent Jewish progressives in endorsing this campaign.

I-97 Opponents Plan $150,000 Campaign

Tuesday, July 15th, 2008

[Update: Rob Jacobs correctly noted in a comment below that my original title was in error.  it is not Stand With Us that is spending $150,000 to defeat I-97, but rather that amount will be spent to defeat it by those who oppose it (including, but not limited to SWU.]

Opponents of Seattle’s anti-Occupation divestment measure, I-97, announced that they plan to spend $150,000 to fight it in court and on the ballot.  Though I’m no expert in local politics, this seems an extraordinary amount of money to spend for a local Seattle measure.  Of this, $80-90,000 will be spent on hiring an attorney (I’m trying to identify who this is) to represent the group (presumably in court challenges) and the remainder to hire the political consultants, Gogerty Stark Marriott.  Among the latter’s clients have been such conservative corporate clients as Walmart and Weyerhaeuser.  They also represented AT&T in its attempts to topple net neutrality regulations under consideration in Congress.

I recently wrote an op-ed for the local Seattle Jewish newspaper, JTNews, in which I predicted that opponents of the Israel Occupation divestment inititiave, I-97, would pull out all the stops, twisting the meaning of the measure to be anti-Israel.  They’ve gone one better.  In a message to supporters, Stand With Us, the right-wing pro-Israel group leading the campaign, falsely characterizes the Initiative:

…(I-97)…is a Trojan horse, an anti-Israel initiative cloaked as an anti-Iraq War initiative. While proponents claim that I-97 “Divests from War,” two-thirds of the Initiative focuses on divestment from Israel. It would penalize Israel for protecting Israeli civilians from terrorist attacks and Qassam missiles. And it would penalize only Israel and not the Palestinian leadership or Hamas for shooting Qassam missiles at civilian neighborhoods or sending suicide bombers into pizzerias and shopping malls.

Of course, I-97 has nothing whatsoever to do with defending Israel, Qassam rockets or suicide attacks.  I-97 is about the Occupation, period.  It calls for divesting municipal pension funds from U.S. companies that profit from the Israeli Occupation.  At that, only two companies have been mentioned as potential targets: Motorola and Caterpillar.  So much for “penalizing Israel for protecting civilians from terror.”

When you place such a campaign in the hands of right-wing extremists like SWU, you get mendacious, apocalyptic rhetoric like this.  The only question is whether the lies fan the flames of opposition to the measure or whether voters see through the histrionics and are repelled by it.  My hope is for the latter to happen.

I wonder whether the Jewish federation, which is an enthusiastic participant in the opposition campaign, has signed on for such extremist rhetoric.  I, for one, hope that they let the wingnuts rule the roost on this one.  The more extreme the rhetoric the easier it will be to discredit them.

In a side note, Allyson Rowen Taylor, an L.A.-based pro-Israel extremist credits herself as a “founder” of Stand With Us.  It’s interesting to note that she has written that former President Jimmy Carter “clarly [sic] is in cahoots with the radical Islamofacists.”  She’s accused Israel’s major universities, without providing any evidence of course, of supporting faculty members who are “anti-Israel radicals…openly call[ing] for Israel to be annihilated.”

Though I don’t believe she is directly involved in the Seattle campaign, the hate-filled Rowen Taylor symbolically represents the real Stand With Us with whom the local Seattle Jewish community has thrown in its lot.  Rowen Taylor is also Rachel Neuwirth’s best friend and ideological soulmate.  Readers will recall that Neuwirth called a UCLA Hillel rabbi a “kapo.”  Neuwirth recently filed an appeal of her loss in her libel claim against me to the California State Court of Appeals.

Locally, Stand With Us also brags that two local legislative districts considered endorsing the initiative and both voted it down.  What the message neglects to say is that, according to a supporter present at one of the meetings, SWU actually packed the room with opponents who did not live in the district; and on a voice vote they drowned out the actual local residents who supported it.

I’m sorry to report that Brit Tzedek and most other liberal Jewish peace groups, oppose I-97.  Since I’m a member of Brit Tzedek, I have to say that I’m most disappointed in the group’s political timidity.  I think the utterly catastrophic situation which the Occupation has imposed on both the Palestinians and Israel calls for drastic measures instead of calculation and caution.  I’m pleased to say that Jewish Voice for Peace supports it.

What Do Susan Sarandon, Alan Dershowitz and the Russian Mob Have in Common?

Thursday, December 27th, 2007
Susan sarandon denise rich isabella rosseliniSusan Sarandon, Denise Rich & Isabella Rosselini at Leviev opening (Scott Wintrow/Getty Images)

I hope that title grabbed your attention. They shouldn’t have anything in common, right? The first a progressive, the second a troglodyte. Well, unfortunately they do. They both like diamonds. Nothing wrong with that you might say. Unless the diamonds come from African conflict zones and unless their proceeds are used to build West Bank settlements on confiscated Palestinian land. All of which is true.

Susan Sarandon has a taste for diamonds and the high life and so attended the glittering opening of Lev Leviev’s new Madison Avenue jewelry emporium. She was joined in the crowd by other celebrities like Isabella Rosselini, Dr. Ruth Westheimer and Denise Rich (maybe she was there to arrange a “pardon” for Leviev as she did for her ex, Marc Rich). Problem was that to enter the store Sarandon had to cross a picket line established by Adala NY, a group of human rights adherents who oppose the Israeli Occupation. Despite the cause, Sarandon crossed. Not only that. Jewish Voice for Peace wrote a subsequent letter asking her to voice her opposition to Leviev’s pro-settlement activities. The response–silence. Well, not exactly. The NY Post’s Page Six quotes a representative saying that Sarandon has no “tie” to Leviev and thus nothing to renounce. Which is basically a casuistic non-answer.

lev leviev & roman abramovichRoman Abramovich & Lev Leviev, Tel Aviv (Nir Keidar/Getty Images)

Lev Leviev grew up in Tashkent as a member of the Bukharan community. He came to Israel as a teenager and eventually joined the Israeli diamond industry producing polished diamonds. He has become wealthy in his chosen profession by trafficking in Angolan diamonds. Walter Ruby, writing in Jewish Week, notes that Forbes lists him as the 210th richest person in the world worth $4.1 billion (Zev Chafets says that Leviev’s associates estimate his real worth as closer to $8 billion). He also funds the Chabad-dominated Federation of Jewish Communities of Russia.

Also disturbing is Leviev’s participation in the Land Redemption Fund, which purchases land under false pretenses from Palestinian owners in order to transfer them to settlement ownership. Leviev’s development company is also building several settlements including a $230 million project on land confiscated from the Palestinian village of Bilin, which is in the international news because of weekly protests there against the Apartheid Wall. Leviev and the LRF use Palestinian stooges to approach Palestinian farmers, many of whom can no longer farm their land anyway due either to the Wall or settler intimidation, offering to pay many times what the land is worth. As far as the farmers know the land is being purchased by a fellow Palestinian. Instead, the land reverts to LRF and then becomes land that Leviev can build settlements on, further increasing his empire after selling the homes to settlers.

The residents of Bilin and Jayyous recently wrote to Sarandon asking her to take up their cause against settlements encroaching on their land.

I should amend my post title by acknowledging that Lev Leviev is not a member of the Russian mob. He’s way beyond that. His money has bought him respectability that every shady character craves, even as he continues pillaging poor Palestinian farmers as he makes hundreds of millions of dollars and perverts the chances for peace between Israel and the Palestinians.

Recently, Leviev decided to expand his diamond and real estate business to New York, where he owns property worth well over $1 billion including the Plaza Hotel and New York Times building ($525 million). The store opening and accompanying protest was covered by The Forward and JTA, which indicates a rapidly changing political climate in the American Jewish community. Until recently, such a story would’ve been met with skepticism or derision by much of the Jewish community and press. It also indicates that Adalah NY had created dramatic protest imagery that would appeal to New York’s mass media.

As the photo above indicates, Leviev is linked with former Russian mobster and now oligarch, Roman Abramovich in the diamond business. Abramovich, in attempting to smooth his path into international business and social circles also purchased the Chelsea football club. Leviev, not to be outdone, also owns an Israeli football club. According to Haaretz, Leviev and Abramovich are among the two largest donors to Elad, whose goal is the “Judaize” East Jerusalem by buying up Arab property and transferring it to Jewish ownership. Elad refused to disclose its donor list publicly and is in danger of being dissolved by the government.

Surprisingly, the NY Post’s Page Six has kept the story alive with periodic updates–probably because the right-wing paper seeks to embarrass the progressive Sarandon. What is a shame is that with a short note to the public Sarandon could reaffirm her commitment to support ending the Occupation and tell the world she knew nothing about Leviev’s right-wing agenda and had no intention of shopping in his store again. Instead, she’s trying to fudge the issue.

As for Dershowitz, ever the entertaining clown, Dersh must’ve seen the brouhaha and decided he needed to get a slice of Sarandon’s PR. So he went down to the Leviev showroom and came out swinging his shopping bag as if it contained Norman Finkelstein’s head. All of which is quite interesting when you consider that during his Democracy Now debate with the latter he said that he opposed Israeli settlements. How quickly they forget. After watching Dershowitz’s pathetic primping performance in this video you realize that he’s nothing more than an ambulance chaser for political notoriety, a Jewish Ann Coulter.

Say No to $60 Billion U.S. Mideast Arms Deal

Tuesday, August 7th, 2007

jewish voice for peace u.s. arms deal campaign screenshot
The Mideast needs a lot of things–peace, development, education, infrastructure, human rights–but another $60 billion in U.S. weapons aid isn’t one of them. Most things the Bush Administration is abysmal at. But wreaking war and havoc in the Mideast is one that they’ve really mastered. So I see last week’s proposal to increase weapons sales over a ten year period to Israel to $30 billion; Egypt to $13 billion; and the Gulf states to $20 billion–along the same lines.

Bush thinks he’s following a two track policy of politically & militarily bolstering our so-called allies like Saudi Arabia, Iraq, Egypt and Jordan. But his political proposals are toothless and all that he will have to show in ten years time when the arms sales are complete is a wholesale escalation in violence partially enabled by the increased weaponry all sides will bring to bear against their enemies.

That’s why I welcome Jewish Voice for Peace‘s campaign against the arms sales. It is unfortunate that other dovish Jewish groups aren’t protesting this ill-advised proposal though I can understand that they don’t want to appear to be anti-Israeli in opposing the increase in aid to Israel, as this might sit poorly with American Jewish conservatives. But truly, this aid package will only damage the prospects for peace in the Mideast and long-term this will hurt Israel as well as the Arab countries in the region.

Please take a moment and send a message to Washington that you too oppose the arms sales.