Muslim and Jewish Women in Nazareth

'We can live in peace'...John Lennon (photo: Dafna Tal)

Mahzor

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 ‘yisrael-beitenu’

Lies, Damn Lies and Avigdor Lieberman

Friday, February 27th, 2009

Disraeli once said memorably: “there are lies, damn lies and statistics.”  But he didn’t know Avigdor Lieberman.  If so, he might’ve substituted the latter’s name for “statistics.”

Avigdor Lieberman’s op-ed in Jewish Week is a tissue of lies.  There’s no other way to say it.  It’s shameful that the N.Y. newspaper has offered him a forum, but even more shameful that it did no fact-checking or editing to ensure that he wasn’t simply spouting fabrications and lies.  Even the fact that David Harris “comments” on Lieberman’s column is simply not enough as Harris pulls far too many punches in his rather lightweight reply.

Let’s start from the beginning:

During Operation Cast Lead in Gaza, I was appalled by the calls for the destruction of the State of Israel and for renewed suicide bombings that some Israeli Arab leaders called for at pro-Hamas rallies.

Now that would be interesting.  Following the Israeli media as I do, I’d have thought I’d come across such provocative statements covered somewhere in news stories during the war.  Even the N.Y. Times profiled the disquiet of Israel’s Arab community and never mentioned such a position.  I heard about no such statements and I’d challenge Lieberman’s supporters to document any rhetoric that even comes close to this.

Here is as close as Lieberman comes to proof of his claim:

At a pre-election panel, the Israeli Arab political party Balad’s representative, Awad Abed Al-Patah, declared, “The elections are one of the means at our disposal for battling Zionism within its home.”

I don’t read that statement as calling for the destruction of Israel. I read it as a critique against Zionism as defined by people like Lieberman and other extremist settlers who claim that Zionism means the settlement of every inch of “historical” greater Israel; who claim it means the expulsion of Israeli citizens who happen not to be Jewish; who claim it means the superiority of the Jewish religion.

Truly, what Lieberman is doing here is denying Arabs the right to put forward their own competing political vision of what the State of Israel should be. A competing vision is NOT the same as destroying the state. Only pro-Jewish racialists like Lieberman would feel threatened by a competing Israeli ethnic group putting forward an alternate perspective.

Actually, considering how provoked Israeli Arabs must’ve been by the Gaza war it’s remarkable they were as calm and relatively quiescent as they were. Polls also show Arabs to be overwhelmingly loyal and committed to the State of Israel.

In the following passage, Lieberman proceeds from the lame to the ludicrous:

In my adoption of an unapologetic stance on the duties of citizenship, I had strong role models from around the world. For example, Britain’s Home Office has recently drawn up new laws making responsible citizenship a requirement for those wishing to become UK nationals. Candidates will receive a probation period in which they must prove that they can contribute to the community. In the U.S., those requesting a Green Card must take an oath that they will fulfill the rights and duties of citizenship.

What do you notice about this passage? He’s talking about individuals who are NOT CITIZENS of these countries and the latters’ legitimate conditions for them to become so. Israeli Arabs ARE ALREADY citizens. There are no democratic nations I know of which demand loyalty oaths of current citizens. So, welcome to the club, Libby. The club of ex-democracies if Israel adopts your policies.

To continue with Lieberman’s extraordinary claims:

I stand at the head of the most diverse political party in the Knesset.

Among Lieberman’s inflated claims about his Knesset list, it should be noted that it lacks an Israeli Christian or Muslim, not to mention anyone who endorses a real two state solution. So how diverse can it be?  But one aspect of its “diversity” we should embrace is the fact that several of his faction members including himself are under investigation for corruption.  But then again, so many Israeli politicians are under such investigations that perhaps that doesn’t really signify diversity at all.

Lieberman is nothing if not a chutzpan:

Yisrael Beiteinu has no objection to the nonviolent expression of opinion. It is violent speech that forms a clear and present danger that we refuse to tolerate.

Apparently, what he really objects to is ARAB violent speech because if he objected to Jewish violent speech he’d have to outlaw himself. After all, it is Lieberman who called for “stringing up” Arab Knesset members from lampposts.

Don’t forget that Lieberman supports a two state solution:

I also advocate the creation of a viable Palestinian state.

Certainly he does…shorn of all Israeli settlements and including hundreds of thousands of current Israeli citizens who would be expelled to the new “viable” Palestinian state. Fits my definition of democracy.

Avigdor really does love his Israeli “darkies:”

If those who strive to topple the state with terror and violence would instead focus on improving daily life, education, infrastructure, and health care, we could all move on to better lives for everyone.

What he means is that if Arabs would just give up on their quest for full, equal rights in Israel then Israeli Jews could get on with their quest for better lives for their fellow Jews. The Israeli dream Lieberman speaks of has never included Israeli Arabs who are severely discriminated against; and no amount of bulls(^t from Lieberman can conceal that his supposed vision would exclude them.

Keep in mind that according to Akiva Eldar, Lieberman belonged to Kahane Chai when he first made aliya, which is now a banned terrorist organization.  Do you think the leopard changes his spots?

This is truly rich:

As part of the next government, I look forward to working with President Obama. I know that U.S.-Israel relations are as strong as ever, and that our shared values and interests make our friendship unshakeable.

Whoa, Avigdor. You’ve not even been invited to join the government and you’re already describing yourself as part of it? As for “shared values,” of what can he be speaking? Our shared values in diminishing the rights of our ethnic minorities? Our shared values in criminalizing political speech? Our shared values in inciting violence against those whose politics we disdain? Our shared values in declaring the religion of one group superior to that of another? Are those our shared values?

And lest anyone claim Lieberman is merely an outlier crackpot, keep in mind that Tzipi Livni said during the recent election campaign that the true home for Israeli Arabs was not Israel, but Palestine.  This is nothing but Lieberman’s platform warmed over.

I beseech the American Jewish community–do not be fooled by these sugar-coated lies.  They are poison and if you consum them you will be infected with Lieberman’s racist poison too.  Beware any charlatan who claims there are easy answers to Israel’s internal ethnic conflict.  The easy answers always come at the expense of one group or another: in this case, the Arabs.

Amir Peretz and Ehud Olmert: From Catfight to Blood Brothers in Single Weekend

Wednesday, April 5th, 2006
Ehud olmert and Amir Peretz at joint press conferenceEhud Olmert and Amir Peretz announce Kadima-Labor coalition; is it me or do the two look not entirely comfortable with each other? (photo: Tomer Appelbaum/Baubau)

One moment Amir Peretz was negotiating with the Israeli rightist parties to form an odd left-right coalition in which he would be prime minister and the next he was shaking hands with Ehud Olmert, who called Labor his “senior partner” in the forthcoming Kadima-led coalition. One minute anonymous Kadima sources are whispering that Peretz is a light-weight not worthy of national leadership and the next they’re reportedly offering him the Defence portfolio. If your head’s spinning then welcome to the altered reality of Israeli politics where almost everything imaginable can happen and often does (and a few unimaginable things too).

Peretz reportedly really wanted the Finance portfolio to ensure he could execute his economic agenda guaranteeing an increased minimum wage and other policies to help those at or below the poverty line. But Kadima leaders are balking at entrusting the Israeli economy to a man with such “radical” views. I wonder why, though, they feel more comfortable offering him Defense. After all, his ideas about Israel’s military policy are probably no less unorthodox (at least compared to those of the political elite). Does Kadima expect that the sheer size and ocean liner inertia of the defense establishment will overmatch Peretz? If he is offered Defense and takes it, it will be interesting to see whether the military industrial complex bests him or the other way around. It’d be nice to think that Peretz may be able to put a lid on some of the worst excesses of the IDF and security services in their treatment of the Palestinians.

The other distressing factor in coalition negotiations is Olmert’s announcement during his joint press conference with Peretz that Avigdor Lieberman and Yisrael Beitenu are to be partners in the coalition. Lieberman is the politician who hatched the harebrained scheme to transfer sovereignty over hundreds of thousands of Arab Israelis to the PA in order to ensure somehow the continued demographic preponderance of Jews in Israeli society. Menachem Klein has derided this “plan” as lunacy and a sham, saying that at most 200,000 Israeli Arabs might live close enough to the Green Line to be eligible for “transfer.” Klein notes that this is barely more than the 150,000 East Jerusalem Palestinians whose homes have been annexed by Israel, but who have not been given Israeli citizenship or the right to vote. Presumably, if Israel refuses to return this territory to the PA, then these Palestinians will have to be given some form of Israeli citizenship and voting rights.

If I recall correctly, Lieberman is one of the ministers from Sharon’s cabinet who resigned rather than support the Gaza withdrawal. One wonders how he will react to the far more substantial planned West Bank withdrawal. In fact, an unnamed Labor source predicts in Haaretz that Lieberman will resign as soon as the “convergence plan” is implemented dragging the religious parties in the coalition with him. Or perhaps Lieberman believes he can enter government and modify and stall withdrawal? That wouldn’t be promising for Olmert. Another matter which should be worrying for Peretz is that the latter’s dovish views of the Israeli-Palestinians conflict will be in direct conflict with Lieberman’s hard right views. How can the two co-exist in the same cabinet?? Indeed, perhaps Olmert has engineered this deliberately hoping to muzzle Peretz’s efforts to promote Israeli-Palestinian peace negotiations.

I don’t see the Lieberman addition to the government as promising at all. It will just lead to more stasis on the Israeli-Palestinian front. We should expect no positive development in relations between the two peoples as long as Lieberman can put in his two cents at the highest political level. For the life of me I can’t understand why Olmert isn’t going for an alternative, and much more stable option: Kadima, Labor, Meretz, Pensioners and Shas for well over 70 seats. My guess is that Olmert worries that this coalition would be much more heavily weighted toward the left and he may not feel comfortable taking his government in this direction. After all, it would give Peretz much more room to lobby for strong action toward negotiations with the Palestinians. This must be something that Olmert is loathe to do. Hence the coalition he’s now proposing.