Tag: Jerusalem

“VICTORY IS ONLY WON WHEN INDIVIDUALS HAVE THE COURAGE TO STAND UP AND TAKE ON EVIL TOGETHER”—RABBI COOPER

Hanukkah Should Shine a Bright Light and Unite us all in the Battle Against Evil: Rabbi Abraham Cooper, Fox News, Dec. 12, 2017 — Charles Dickens’ famous opening words from his 1859 novel “A Tale of Two Cities” accurately describe how many American Jews are feeling this year at the start of Hanukkah, our Festival of Lights, which begins at sundown Tuesday.

A Capital Idea: Elliott Abrams, Weekly Standard, Dec. 8, 2017 — President Trump on December 6 ended all hope of Middle East peace, recklessly encouraged terrorism, and ruined U.S. relations with all Arab countries.

How to Bring Peace to Palestine: Philip Carl Salzman, Frontier Centre, Dec. 11, 2017— The Canadian Government is sending $25,000,000 of taxpayers’ money to UNRWA, the United Nations Relief and Works Agency, which is uniquely dedicated to supporting Palestine refugees.

Iranian Terror. Argentinian Cover Up. Justice at Last?: Mark Dubowitz and Toby Dershowitz, New York Times, Dec. 11, 2017 — One morning last week, Argentines woke up to a political earthquake: A judge had charged a former president, Cristina Fernández de Kirchner, with “treason against the homeland,” punishable by up to 25 years in prison.

 

On Topic Links

 

Most Jewish Life & Holiday Customs Are Both Joyful and Portable: Allan Levine, CIJR, Dec. 15, 2017

WATCH: Trump Elaborates on Ancient Jewish Ties to Jerusalem at White House Chanukah Party: United With Israel, Dec. 8, 2017 

List of Reasons Why all Foreign Countries Should Follow President Trump on Jerusalem: Dr. Mordechai Kedar, Arutz Sheva, Dec. 7, 2017

Thoughts for Vice President Pence: David M. Weinberg, Israel Hayom, Dec. 15, 2017                                       

 

 

HANUKKAH SHOULD SHINE A BRIGHT LIGHT

AND UNITE US ALL IN THE BATTLE AGAINST EVIL

Rabbi Abraham Cooper

Fox News, Dec. 12, 2017

 

Charles Dickens’ famous opening words from his 1859 novel “A Tale of Two Cities” accurately describe how many American Jews are feeling this year at the start of Hanukkah, our Festival of Lights, which begins at sundown Tuesday. Dickens wrote: “It was the best of times, it was the worst of times, it was the age of wisdom, it was the age of foolishness, it was the epoch of belief, it was the epoch of incredulity, it was the season of Light, it was the season of Darkness .…”

 

In 2017 American Jews have never been so free to pursue the American Dream. We have many blessings to be thankful for in this great country, which has opened its doors to Jews from around the world. And yet, we sense a new season of darkness casting shadows on our collective future. Jewish paranoia? No. For decades, FBI annual hate crime statistics have identified African-Americans as the top target of race-based hate crimes. Jews – despite being just 2 percent of the U.S. population – are atop the list of targets of religious-based hate crimes.

 

But anti-Semitism this year has been different in scope and diversity. This year saw Jewish Community Centers targeted by over 120 bomb threats. The evacuations of Jewish toddlers from child-care centers at these Jewish Centers – and the months of not knowing who was behind the criminal bomb threats – devastated young Jewish parents. Older Jewish students in grades K-12 were subject to bullying and worse. Meanwhile, anti-Semitic invective, graffiti, overt threats and intimidation were directed against Jewish students who dared stand up for the Jewish State of Israel on our nation’s university campuses from coast to coast.

 

For example, Jewish students at Rutgers University were confronted by a blatant anti-Semite among their tenured professors who posted anti-Jewish statements and cartoons on Facebook.  Fortunately, Professor Michael Chikindas was removed by Rutgers last week as director of the Center for Digestive Health at the university, was barred from teaching required courses and will receive training in cultural sensitivity. But despite all the promises of an intimidation-free campus, too many such bigots are consistently shielded in the name of free speech, while Jewish students are left twisting in the wind.

 

Even before President Trump’s declaration last week that he recognizes Jerusalem as capital of Israel – a simple acknowledgement of reality – universities, some churches and elements of the progressive movements had legitimized those who demonize Jews and anyone daring to publicly declare support for the Jewish State. The anti-black and anti-Jewish outpouring of hatred by neo-Nazis, Ku Klux Klan members and their allies in Charlottesville, Virginia in August introduced a new, younger, social media-savvy generation of anti-Semites and racists.

 

Gone are the days when neo-Nazis had to leave hate-filled flyers on car windshields. Today these hatemongers deploy bots to personalize attacks on Jewish reporters, upload high-quality videos of their marches, and fully deploy the bells and whistles of social media to find new recruits. Radical imams promote overt Jew-hatred and some have even declared “death to the Jews” at mosques in our nation. There has been nary a response from other clergy, law enforcement or politicians. Public solidarity against history’s oldest hatred has grown dimmer even as anti-Semitism grows.

 

Last week I testified at the House Homeland Security Committee in Washington on the growing threats of domestic terrorism as it relates to the Jewish community. Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee, D-Texas, expressed genuine concern about the scope of hate in America today and asked if the answer was more money. I told the congresswoman that while we could always use more funds to bolster the security of our institutions, some problems will not disappear by throwing money at them. We need the grassroots in all our communities to fight together against hate.

 

This brings me to a core lesson for Jews and all Americans from the story of Hanukkah, which commemorates two very distinct miracles. The first miracle was the incredible victory of a ragtag band of outnumbered Jewish fighters, known as the Maccabees, over a powerful Greek military force controlling the Land of Israel more than 2,000 years ago. Yet our ancient sages downplayed the military miracle.

 

It was the second miracle that is the centerpiece of Hanukkah. This was the rekindling of the lights of the Menorah in the Holy Temple in Jerusalem with only a small container of pure olive oil that was untainted by the idol-worshipping occupiers. The oil, which should have kept the menorah lit for only 24 hours, lasted for eight days.

 

Our sages understood that military might is necessary in confronting and defeating evil. But they knew that embattled civilizations can only survive if they can defeat the enemy in the marketplace of ideas. The Maccabees, like all freedom-loving heroes through the ages, prevailed because they knew what they were fighting for. They would not allow their values about the sanctity of humanity to be erased by a conqueror, however powerful. Tuesday night and for the seven nights that follow, Jews around the world will place the lit menorah where neighbors and passersby can see it. By doing, so we remind ourselves and the world that ultimate victory is only won when individuals have the courage to stand up and take on evil together. It’s a lesson that must be applied this Hanukkah by Americans of all races and creeds if we are ever to prevail against evil.                                                    

 

Contents

A CAPITAL IDEA

Elliott Abrams

Weekly Standard, Dec. 8, 2017

 

President Trump on December 6 ended all hope of Middle East peace, recklessly encouraged terrorism, and ruined U.S. relations with all Arab countries. Or so one would think reading the reactions to his decision to recognize Jerusalem as the capital of Israel. The foreign minister of Sweden called the decision “catastrophic.” Not to be outdone, the veteran Palestinian negotiator Saeb Erekat said moving the U.S. embassy to Jerusalem would lead to “chaos, lawlessness, and extremism.” That wasn’t enough, so Erekat added, “President Trump just destroyed any possibility of a two-state [solution]” and “President Trump tonight made the biggest mistake of his life.”

 

The move that produced this hyperbole was announcing that Jerusalem is the capital of Israel and the United States would eventually build an embassy there. This was done in accordance with the Jerusalem Embassy Act of 1995, which Congress passed with huge bipartisan majorities. This week, Democrats couldn’t exactly eat those votes, but they could sure chew on the edges. Here was Nancy Pelosi: “Jerusalem is the eternal capital of the Jewish homeland. But in the absence of a negotiated settlement between Israel and the Palestinians, moving the U.S. embassy to Jerusalem now may needlessly spark mass protests, fuel tensions, and make it more difficult to reach a durable peace.” In other words, I used to be for it but now Donald Trump is for it so I’m not.

 

In the American Jewish community there was extremely widespread support—but the head of the Reform movement, Rabbi Rick Jacobs, cemented the view that it is a branch of the Democratic party by saying, “while we share the president’s belief that the U.S. Embassy should, at the right time, be moved from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem, we cannot support his decision to begin preparing that move now, absent a comprehensive plan for a peace process.” The “right time” for him is apparently just after the arrival of the Messiah.

 

Why all the hyperbole? After all, it’s a simple fact that Jerusalem is the capital of Israel and has been ever since its War of Independence ended in 1949. When an American president or secretary of state goes to see the Israeli prime minister or speak to the Knesset, that’s where he or she goes. In 2016 Barack Obama went to the Mount Herzl cemetery in Jerusalem to deliver a eulogy for Shimon Peres. The White House released the transcript under the heading “Remarks by President Obama at Memorial Service for Former Israeli President Shimon Peres, Mount Herzl, Jerusalem, Israel.” Nine hours later, it released a corrected version with Israel crossed out, like this: “Jerusalem, Israel.” This ludicrous action raised a question: In what country did Obama and his White House think Peres was being buried?

 

This absurd incident helps explain why Trump took his action. It was a victory for common sense and as well for history. After nearly 70 years, it was long past time for the United States to acknowledge what is obvious: Like every country, Israel has a capital, and it is unacceptable that Israel be the only country on earth that is refused the right to choose that capital. Refusing to acknowledge Jerusalem as Israel’s capital is part of the campaign, as old as Israel itself, to deny the Jewish state legitimacy. So what explains the ridiculous overreaction? For someone like Pelosi, there’s a simple rule: Never give Donald Trump credit for anything, period. For the Europeans, hatred of Trump combines with longstanding anti-Israel bias, especially in the foreign ministries. The many phony statements of regret and copious crocodile tears about possibly forthcoming violence broadcast the clear hope that there would be plenty of rioting, just to prove Trump wrong. For Arab regimes, fearful of public sentiment that is always pro-Palestinian and often propelled by simple Jew-hatred, the path of least resistance and greatest safety was to denounce Trump’s move.

 

There will be violence if Arab rulers want violence, and very little if they want to stop it. The Palestinian Authority itself is the main exhibit here. It should be held responsible for violence in Jerusalem and the West Bank because its overreaction and its deliberate mischaracterizations of what Trump has done will fuel violence. When the PA closes schools, as it did the day following Trump’s remarks, so students can be free to riot, it is encouraging violence. We have seen this play before, initially under Yasser Arafat and as recently as July, when two Israeli policemen near the Temple Mount were shot and killed and Israel installed metal detectors to prevent weapons from being brought there. The Palestinians might have said, “well, there are metal detectors all over Mecca, and for the same reason, to stop terror, so what’s the big deal?” Instead the ruling Fatah party called for “days of rage” and got them. What is the proper American response? To bow to threats of violence or to do what President Trump did and move forward? After all, when threats of violence and acts of violence are seen to change U.S. policy, there will be more of them. If, instead, they achieve nothing, there will be fewer of them.

 

 

Contents

HOW TO BRING PEACE TO PALESTINE

Philip Carl Salzman

Frontier Centre, Dec. 11, 2017

 

The Canadian Government is sending $25,000,000 of taxpayers’ money to UNRWA, the United Nations Relief and Works Agency, which is uniquely dedicated to supporting Palestine refugees. Some observers say that UNRWA actively supports Hamas, the Muslim Brotherhood movement dedicated to the destruction of Israel and the genocide of Jews. Hamas controls Gaza, from which it launches rocket and tunnel attacks on Israel. “’I’m horrified,’ said Conservative foreign affairs critic Peter Kent, who said there is ample proof that ‘massive amounts’ of UN aid have been redirected to support Palestinian military efforts against Israel. We have abundant evidence that UNRWA is part of the problem.” Conservative M.P. Andrew Scheer said that “UNRWA is an obstacle to achieving peace in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.” Canadian official policy states that “Canada is committed to the goal of a comprehensive, just and lasting peace in the Middle East.” The goal of Canadian aid to Gaza and the West Bank is to “support the establishment of a law-based, peaceful and prosperous society.” Canadians need to ask themselves whether Canada’s financial aid advances to cause of peace, or impedes it.

 

Champions of Palestine argue that Palestinians are victims of Israeli imperialism and colonialism, theft of Palestinian land, ethnic cleansing and genocide, apartheid, and white supremacy. Jewish Israelis are thus alleged to be oppressors of Palestinians, and the Palestinians are victims of Israeli oppression. It follows from this, goes the argument, that the hundred years of Palestinian mob violence and terrorism against the Jews in Palestine and Israel, the repeated invasions by Arab armies, the Palestinian and Arab refusal to engage with Israel or to “normalize” relations, the Palestinian rejection of all peace plans offered, and the continuing incitement to violence by the Palestinian Authority, are justified by the demand for Palestinian liberation from oppression. However poorly this argument fits with the facts, many Canadians seem to believe it. The demand for “liberation” from “oppression” is, however, not the same as a desire for peace. In fact, the Palestinians have multiple reasons for not wanting peace with Israel, all feeding together to strengthen one another and to reinforce the determination to reject peace:

 

The first reason that Palestinians reject peace with the Jewish State of Israel is the despised status of Jews in the view of Islam. Jews are viewed in the foundational texts of Islam as, at best, stubborn rejecters of the true faith, and, at worse, enemies of Islam. For 1400 years, Jews in Islamic lands had to pay heavy taxes not to be killed, accept ritual humiliation and a wide range of restrictions, and provide labour for the Islamic state, in order to claim “dhimma” protected status as subordinates. The idea that Jews could be politically independent and run their own state and society is monstrous to Islam and to many Muslims, and a violation of God’s order. The Palestinian Hamas Charter (Article 7) openly calls for the elimination not only of Israel but of all Jews everywhere: “The Day of Judgement will not come about until Moslems fight the Jews (killing the Jews), when the Jew will hide behind stones and trees. The stones and trees will say O Moslems, O Abdulla, there is a Jew behind me, come and kill him. Only the Gharkad tree would not do that because it is one of the trees of the Jews. (Related by al-Bukhari and Moslem).” (Hamas Charter, Article 7)

 

The second reason why the Palestinians reject peace with the Jewish State of Israel is that for 1400 years Palestine—so named by the Roman Empire after two centuries of wars with the Jews, to erase the names Israel and Judea—was occupied by invading Islamic forces, first the Arabs as they expanded their Empire from Europe to India, then the Ottoman Turks. Under Islamic law, lands governed by Muslims became Islamic waqf, Islamic foundations, which belong to Muslims in perpetuity. The establishment of a Jewish state on land long controlled by Muslims is thought by Muslims to be theft from God. Making peace with Jewish Israel would mean that the Palestinians would be surrendering Islamic territory to Jews, and by doing so betraying Islam and God…

[To Read the Full Article, With Footnotes, Click the Following Link—Ed.]  

 

 

Contents

IRANIAN TERROR. ARGENTINIAN COVER UP. JUSTICE AT LAST?

Mark Dubowitz and Toby Dershowitz

New York Times, Dec. 11, 2017

 

One morning last week, Argentines woke up to a political earthquake: A judge had charged a former president, Cristina Fernández de Kirchner, with “treason against the homeland,” punishable by up to 25 years in prison. Her crime? Nothing less than covering up Iran’s role in one of the deadliest terrorist attacks in the Americas before Sept. 11. On July 18, 1994, Ibrahim Hussein Berro, an operative of the Iranian-backed Hezbollah, drove a van filled with 606 pounds of ammonium nitrate fertilizer and fuel oil into the Buenos Aires Jewish community center, known as AMIA. More than 300 Argentines were wounded; 85 were murdered. It remains the bloodiest terrorist attack in Argentina’s history.

 

From 2004 until 2015, our friend, the prosecutor Alberto Nisman, tirelessly pursued the truth behind this crime. He knew from his investigation that the attack was an Iranian-planned operation. And he determined that Ms. Kirchner was behind a cover-up designed to whitewash Iran’s role. What drove Ms. Kirchner? Argentina faced deep economic problems at the time, and the financial benefits of closer relations with Iran might have tempted her. Her government also had populist ties to Iran and the Bolivarian bloc of nations led by Venezuela. Whatever the reason, never has Ms. Kirchner been formally charged in the crime. Until now.

 

When the federal judge Claudio Bonadio handed down the 491-page indictment against Ms. Kirchner; her foreign minister, Hector Timerman; her handpicked intelligence chief; her top legal adviser; two pro-Iran activists; and 10 others, he didn’t mince words. He called the attack on the Jewish community center an “act of war” by Iran and accused Ms. Kirchner of covering up the role of senior Iranian leaders and their Hezbollah proxies in exchange for a trade deal. If only Alberto Nisman were alive to see justice finally being pursued.

 

Three years ago, Mr. Nisman was set to testify to the country’s Congress on Ms. Kirchner’s role in the cover up. The day before his testimony, on Jan. 18, 2015, he was found dead in his apartment in Buenos Aires, with a bullet in his head. This, despite the fact that he had a 10-man security detail paid to protect him. Within hours, Ms. Kirchner announced that Mr. Nisman had committed suicide. In the days that followed, she strangely claimed his death was part of a lovers’ spat. Finally, she changed her story once more: His death may have been the result of rogue intelligence operatives.

 

When we heard the news of Mr. Nisman’s death and of Ms. Kirchner’s suspected cover-up, we were horrified, but not entirely shocked. Anyone who had followed Mr. Nisman’s pursuit of this case knew that he was assuming grave risks by taking on both a terrorist state and his own government. Through a decade of investigation, Mr. Nisman received death threats against not only him but his children as well. One email he told us about had a picture of bloodied and brutalized bodies lying on the ground, with a note saying this would be the fate of his young daughters if he did not cease his investigation.

 

None of it stopped him. Fearless and resolute, Mr. Nisman and his team had determined that former Iranian and Hezbollah officials planned the AMIA attack. He was able to show definitively that the plan included no less than Iran’s former president, Ali Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani; its minister of intelligence; its foreign minister; the head of Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps; the head of the corps’ elite Quds force; the Iranian cultural attaché in Argentina; and the third secretary at Iran’s Embassy in Buenos Aires, as well as the former head of Hezbollah’s external security. His investigation led Interpol to issue red notices — akin to international arrest warrants — against six of the perpetrators. Argentina itself issued arrest warrants for Mr. Rafsanjani and Ali Akbar Velayati, then foreign minister, which Iran predictably disregarded.

 

But Mr. Nisman did not stop there. In May 2013, he released a 500-page indictment outlining how Iran had penetrated not just Argentina, but also Brazil, Uruguay, Chile, Guyana, Paraguay, Trinidad, Tobago and Suriname, and how it used mosques, social service organizations and its own embassies to radicalize and recruit terrorists. Mr. Nisman also shared information that helped American authorities determine that Mohsen Rabbani, the Iranian embassy cultural attaché and one of the AMIA bombing masterminds, helped four men, including his disciple, a Guyanese official named Abdul Kadir, plot to blow up the fuel lines at Kennedy International Airport in New York. Mr. Kadir is serving a life sentence in the United States for the foiled plot, which could have led to the loss of countless lives.

 

In a normal democracy, investigating the murder of a man like Alberto Nisman would be a top priority. But Ms. Kirchner and her allies assured that justice for Mr. Nisman’s murder was stymied for years. That changed three months ago, when, under Argentina’s new president, Mauricio Macri, a fresh investigation by the Argentine national police found that Mr. Nisman had been drugged with Ketamine, a drug used to sedate animals, then brutally beaten before he was shot in the head…

[To Read the Full Article Click the Following Link—Ed.]

 

CIJR Wishes All Our Friends & Supporters: Shabbat Shalom and Chag Sameach!

 

Contents

 

On Topic Links

 

Most Jewish Life & Holiday Customs Are Both Joyful and Portable: Allan Levine, CIJR, Dec. 15, 2017—No doubt many traveling readers who've carried the Hanukkah/Chanukah Menorah & candles or oil while traveling during this well-known family centered Jewish holiday can relate memorable tales of others joining in with them, when engaging in honoring this practice in public places. 

WATCH: Trump Elaborates on Ancient Jewish Ties to Jerusalem at White House Chanukah Party: United With Israel, Dec. 8, 2017—President Donald Trump, addressing the annual White House Chanukah party, repeated his commitment to recognizing Jerusalem as the capital of the Jewish people. Demonstrating the ancient Jewish ties to Jerusalem and the Holy Temple, he told the story of Chanukah, including the miracle of the oil – “a sign of God’s presence in his dwelling place and a symbol of the faith and resilience of the Jewish people.”

List of Reasons Why all Foreign Countries Should Follow President Trump on Jerusalem: Dr. Mordechai Kedar, Arutz Sheva, Dec. 7, 2017—Arab and Muslim leaders and spokespersons have been trying to frighten the entire world in order to prevent other nations from recognizing Jerusalem as Israel’s capital – Trump’s declaration notwithstanding – and from relocating their embassies to Jerusalem. It’s time to tell the world what it should have realized a long time ago.

Thoughts for Vice President Pence: David M. Weinberg, Israel Hayom, Dec. 15, 2017—Dear U.S. Vice President Mike Pence. As you prepare to visit Israel next week, I ask you to take a few minutes to contemplate history and to think about fate.          

                                                              

 

 

TEMPLE MOUNT CRISIS: METAL DETECTORS REMOVED, PALESTINIANS CONTINUE PROTESTS

The Temple Mount Crisis — Far From Over, it’s Really Just Beginning: Avi Issacharoff, Times of Israel, July 26, 2017— Although for a moment it seemed that the metal detector crisis had ended Monday night, with the removal of the electronic gates and cameras from the entrances to the Temple Mount…

Palestinians: Metal Detectors or Lie Detectors – Who Is Violating What?: Bassam Tawil, Gatestone Institute, July 27, 2017— The metal detectors that were supposed to prevent Muslims from smuggling weapons into the Temple Mount compound, and which were removed by the Israeli authorities this week, have a more accurate name: "lie detectors."

Caving in Cravenly to Terror, Acting Stupidly Towards Jordan: Dr. Mordechai Kedar, Arutz Sheva, July 27, 2017— Israel's security cabinet decided to remove all the metal detectors and cameras at the Temple Mount entrances…

Victory Requires Patience: Efraim Inbar, Israel Hayom, July 19, 2017— The Knesset has launched an Israel Victory Caucus, co-chaired by Yisrael Beytenu MK Oded Forer and Yesh Atid MK Yaakov Peri, following the establishment of a similar caucus in the U.S. Congress.

 

On Topic Links

 

Clashes Erupt at Temple Mount as Muslim Worshipers Return to Site: Dov Lieber, Times of Israel, July 27, 2017

Israel’s Embassy in Jordan May Stay Closed: Jewish Press, July 27, 2017

In Unprecedented Attack, Israel Hayom Pans ‘Helpless,’ ‘Feeble’ Netanyahu: Times of Israel, July 26, 2017

Beyond the Debate Over Metal Detectors (Video): Amb. Dore Gold, JCPA, July 27, 2017

         

 

THE TEMPLE MOUNT CRISIS —

FAR FROM OVER, IT’S REALLY JUST BEGINNING                                                                      

Avi Issacharoff

Times of Israel, July 26, 2017

 

Although for a moment it seemed that the metal detector crisis had ended Monday night, with the removal of the electronic gates and cameras from the entrances to the Temple Mount, we are evidently still in the midst of an impasse that may last for quite some time. Both sides, and especially the two leaderships, each for their own political reasons, appear to be exacerbating the situation, looking for confrontation rather than calm.

 

On the one side, there is Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas, who, along with his Fatah movement, explicitly called Tuesday for an escalation of the struggle and for large-scale demonstrations against Israel on Friday. This seems to be an attempt to extricate the PA leader from the depths of irrelevance.

 

On the other is Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who seemed to be profoundly impacted by the results of Tuesday’s Channel 2 survey, which indicated deep public dissatisfaction with his response to the Temple Mount crisis. Hours after the poll’s publication, he ordered the Defense Ministry not to evacuate some 120 settlers who illegally occupied a contested home in Hebron, in addition to instructing police to individually check every worshiper ascending to pray at the Temple Mount — a decision perceived by the Palestinian public as a declaration of war.

 

Both sides continue their gallop toward a deeper, bloodier confrontation, and there is no responsible adult in the room to stop the deterioration. Anyone who may have expected Defense Minister Avigdor Lieberman to intervene in the police’s war against the security establishment, or perhaps speak out against Netanyahu’s decisions of late, has quickly learned that a country long acclimated to operating without a foreign minister has also functioned for the past two weeks without a defense chief. The man simply does not exist.

 

The indications that the crisis is far from over are evident on several levels. First, Tuesday’s demonstrations by Muslim worshipers, which spiraled into violence outside the entrances to the Temple Mount, involved thousands of demonstrators refusing to enter the Al-Aqsa compound despite all of their demands being met. Asked what exactly they were protesting at that point, their responses were as absurd as something you might hear on a TV sitcom.

 

The problem here is that the statements made by demonstrators, Muslim religious leaders and the Palestinian leadership are not funny. And the person most responsible for setting the tone at this stage is the mufti of Jerusalem, Sheikh Muhammad Hussein, who of all the Jordanian Waqf members is the furthest from being a representative of Amman. Hussein, who receives his salary from the Palestinian Authority, announced early Tuesday afternoon that Muslim prayer would continue to be held outside the Temple Mount. When asked why, he explained that only when the situation was restored to the way it was before July 14 would the worshipers return to the Haram al-Sharif.

 

The fact that there are no longer any metal detectors or security cameras did not prevent him and his followers from conjuring a list of new demands: “removing invisible cameras,” removing cameras overlooking the Temple Mount, removing barricades still lying around the Old City, the planting of trees on the Al-Aqsa compound, etc. It is as if “someone” is trying to invent demands in order to exacerbate the situation, and is unfortunately succeeding in doing so.

 

The second indication relates to Abbas. On Tuesday, the PA president gathered the leadership of the Jerusalem branch of Fatah’s militant Tanzim faction at his office in Ramallah. He understood that Israel had pulled the rug from underneath him when it removed the metal detectors and that he and his Fatah movement were accordingly in extreme political distress. If in the past Abbas was considered weak, now many in the Palestinian public consider him to be simply irrelevant. He was not part of the erupting crisis on the Temple Mount, nor was he involved in efforts to solve it. The Jordanians, according to a senior Palestinian source, did not even update the PA leadership regarding the arrangement it had reached with Israel to remove the metal detectors and cameras.

 

Consequently, it seems that the Palestinian leadership’s decision to escalate the struggle is intended to convey a message not only to Israel but also to Jordan: Anyone who tries to ignore us or erase our role with regard to the Temple Mount will receive an intifada in East Jerusalem and the West Bank. What we are therefore now seeing is a struggle for survival by Abbas and his Fatah movement. Abbas has given a green light to the Tanzim faction to organize demonstrations and rallies this Friday, but no one knows how they will end. This quite easily could lead to shooting battles with IDF soldiers, casualties, deaths and even a scenario, mentioned more than once in recent years, which includes all the ingredients necessary for an intifada. It certainly won’t end well…

[To Read the Full Article Click the Following Link—Ed.]                

 

 

Contents

PALESTINIANS: METAL DETECTORS OR LIE DETECTORS –

WHO IS VIOLATING WHAT?

Bassam Tawil

Gatestone Institute, July 27, 2017

 

The metal detectors that were supposed to prevent Muslims from smuggling weapons into the Temple Mount compound, and which were removed by the Israeli authorities this week, have a more accurate name: "lie detectors." They have exposed Palestinian lies and the real reason behind Palestinian anger. Israel apparently removed the metal detectors from the gates of the Temple Mount as part of a deal to end an unexpected crisis with Jordan over the killing of two Jordanian men by an Israeli embassy security officer in Amman. The security officer says he was acting in self-defense after being attacked by one of the Jordanians with a screwdriver.

 

The crisis erupted when the Jordanian authorities insisted on interrogating the officer — a request that was rejected by Israel because the officer enjoys diplomatic immunity. US intervention and a phone call between Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Jordan's King Abdullah helped end the crisis peacefully and quickly, and the officer and the rest of the Israeli embassy staff were permitted to leave Jordan and head back to Israel.

 

Shortly after the embassy staff returned to Israel, the Israeli authorities started removing the metal detectors that were installed at the entrances to the Temple Mount after terrorists murdered two Israeli police officers on July 14. The move sparked a wave of rumors and speculation, according to which the Jordanians allowed the embassy staff to return home in exchange for the removal of the metal detectors. Israel and Jordan have denied any link between the shooting incident in Amman and the removal of the metal detectors.

 

The crisis that erupted between Israel and Jordan over the killing of the two Jordanians was solved in less than 48 hours — much to the dismay of the Palestinians. The Palestinians were hoping to exploit the crisis to exacerbate tensions between Amman and Jerusalem. Their ultimate goal: to cause the Jordanians to scrap their peace treaty with Israel and return to the state of war with the "Zionist enemy." The Palestinians were also hoping to exploit the crisis to incite Jordanians against Israel and the Hashemite monarchy.

 

Fortunately, the Jordanian authorities did not fall into the Palestinian trap. They realized that it is in their own interest to resolve the crisis swiftly and peacefully. King Abdullah was wise enough not to allow the Palestinians to drag him into a confrontation with Israel.

 

Since the installation of the metal detectors at the Temple Mount, the Palestinians have been waging yet another campaign of fabrications and distortions against Israel. This Palestinian blood libel claims that Israel is seeking to "change the status quo" at the Temple Mount by introducing new security measures such as metal detectors and surveillance cameras at the gates to the holy site. Yet if anyone has violated the status quo it is the Palestinians themselves. Status Quo Violation Number One: For the past two years, the Palestinians have been trying to prevent Jews from touring the Temple Mount — a practice that has been allowed since 1967.

 

Status Quo Violation Number Two: The Palestinians and their supporters have long turned the Temple Mount into a battlefield for clashing with Israeli policemen and Jewish visitors. In an ongoing arrangement that ought to interest the international community, they pay Muslim men and women salaries to come to the compound and harass policemen and Jewish visitors by hurling insults at them and throwing stones and petrol bombs. These individuals belong to an outlawed group known as the Murabitun. This is a group of Muslim fanatics who receive money from the Palestinian Authority, Hamas and the Islamic Movement in Israel to do their utmost to stop Jews from entering the Temple Mount.

 

Status Quo Violation Number Three: Over the past two decades, the Waqf (Islamic Trust) that manages the affairs of the mosques on the Temple Mount, and other parties, have been carrying out illegal excavation and construction work at the site in a bid to create irreversible facts on the ground. The Waqf and the Palestinian Authority claim that the excavation work is aimed at refuting Jewish claims to the Temple Mount and showing the world that Jews have no historical, religious or emotional attachment to Jerusalem.

 

Status Quo Violation Number Four: The Palestinians and their supporters have been using the Temple Mount compound as a platform for spewing anti-Semitism and calls to murder Jews and all "infidels." This abuse of the holy site as a podium for spreading Palestinian poison is far from a new practice. Palestinians and other Muslims have been doing this at the Al-Aqsa Mosque and other mosques around the world for decades. Take, for example, when the imam at Al-Aqsa Mosque predicted that the "White House would turn black, with the help of God." This prayer, attended by thousands of Muslim worshippers, came only a few weeks before the 9/11 terror attacks. Last week, another imam prayed to God that Israeli policemen guarding the Temple Mount would be widowed and orphaned. These are only a handful of the countless examples of how mosques are being used to indoctrinate the hearts and minds of Muslims with hate.

 

Status Quo Violation Number Five: The murder of two policemen on July 14 is the mother of all status quo violations. Until the murder, Muslims had resorted to less deadly weapons such as stones and petrol bombs to attack Jews and policemen. July 14 represents the first time that Muslims used firearms at the Temple Mount. While it is not unusual to see Muslims blowing up mosques and committing atrocities against fellow Muslims in many Arab and Islamic countries, the shooting attack at the Temple Mount was still unprecedented.

 

Smuggling weapons into the Temple Mount is a grave desecration of the holy site. Murdering two police officers, who were stationed there to safeguard the site and protect Muslim worshippers, takes the level of violation and desecration to new lows. It is worth noting that the two police officers were not murdered during a confrontation or a violent incident. One of them was shot in the back while he was standing at one of the entrances to the Temple Mount.

 

After the July 14 murder, Palestinians began waging daily protests by refusing to enter the Temple Mount through metal detectors installed by the Israeli authorities to prevent weapons smuggling for the safety of the Muslim worshippers themselves. Instead, Palestinians gather every evening at the entrances to the Temple Mount, where they complete their prayers with a volley of stones and petrol bombs lodged at police officers. Crucially, and contrary to Palestinian claims, there has been no Israeli decision to ban Muslims from entering the Temple Mount…

[To Read the Full Article Click the Following Link—Ed.]                

 

 

Contents

CAVING IN CRAVENLY TO TERROR,

ACTING STUPIDLY TOWARDS JORDAN                                             

Dr. Mordechai Kedar

          Arutz Sheva, July 27, 2017

 

Israel's security cabinet decided to remove all the metal detectors and cameras at the Temple Mount entrances, and perhaps even the cameras at the Lion's Gate and the other gates that lead into the Old City of Jerusalem, placed there just a few days ago after the cold-blooded murder of two Druze Border Police officers by Israeli Arab terrorists. The decision was linked to Jordan's freeing the security guard in the Israeli Consulate there, although the guard has diplomatic immunity, having been sent by the Shabak chief on a mission to Jordan and engaging in negotiations with colleagues in the Hashemite Kingdom.

 

The Cabinet decision talks about developing "smart checks" for the astronomical cost of 100 million IS to take the place of the detectors and cameras. I am willing to bet – you name the amount – that nothing of significance will be developed in the near future and the talk of "smart checks" is meant to mislead the public, deluding the man in the street into thinking that Israel has found a way to be sovereign in the Old City and the Temple Mount. In addition, even if a miracle occurs and new technology is developed, there is zero chance that it will be put in place without riots. For Israel-hating Muslims, there is  no difference between metal detectors, cameras and any other technology, because putting anything there means Jewish Sovereignty, contradicting basic Islamic tenets mandating that Jews have to live as dhimmis under the protection of the ruler but subject to his whims, and that they must pay the humiliating Koranic jyzia head tax.

 

Without doubt, the Israeli government caved and retreated from its decision to operate security apparatus at the entrances to the Temple Mount. From today on, only Jews and tourists will be expected to undergo a humiliating search to be sure they are not carrying phylacteries or prayer books when they ascend the Mount. Muslims, who proved their terrorist proclivities on the 14th of July this year, will continue to enter the holy site without being searched or supervised and will be able to smuggle weapons on to  the Mount. Pressure was exerted on the Israeli government from every direction: Israeli Arabs, PA Arabs, Arab and Muslim countries, Europe and the USA.

 

Israel's capitulation when faced with these pressures is of grave significance. The first failure is the fact that Israel's government did not coordinate its steps with the US government, particularly Jason Greenblatt, Trump's special envoy to the Middle East. The government did not expect the crashing wave of Islamic opposition to the move and did not obtain American support for the security measures beforehand. After all, every American understands the necessity of these measures in light of the terrorist reality in which the enlightened world finds itself.

 

Muslim haters of Israel have received enormous encouragement from this affair. Their future demands will be much greater, in just the way one's appetite grows at the sight of food. Terror, it seems, does pay, and the state of Israel looks for easy, immediate and temporary solutions to problems instead of dealing forthrightly with challenges and emerging the victor over those who wish to harm us. The Jewish people will pay a high price for this questionable "achievement" of "defusing tensions on the ground," a result that is far from proven.

 

Removing the security apparatus proved that the Muslims have scored another victory over the Jews. Once again it has been made clear that Israel's government has melted down the steadfast sticking-to-our-guns mentality that characterized the Jewish people when the state was established in 1948 and during the wars that have since accompanied life on our ancestral lands. No declaration, no matter how bombastic, whether proclaimed by the president, prime minister, ministers, officials, IDF commanders or  police can hide the bitter and humiliating truth that terrorists forced the Israeli government  to cave in and retreat from its correct and completely justified – original – decision.

 

How will the government be able to look the families of the two Border Police officers in the eye?  What  will all those irresponsible ministers say to  the families hit by the terror that will unquestionably increase thanks to their weak and scandalous decision to remove the security apparatus guarding the capital of Israel? How will the Israeli Police deal with the wave of terror that this government's stupidity will bring about, without being provided with the means necessary to accomplish their mission? What nation with the will to live caves in to terror this way?..

[To Read the Full Article Click the Following Link—Ed.]    

 

 

Contents  

             

VICTORY REQUIRES PATIENCE

Efraim Inbar       

                                                Israel Hayom, July 19, 2017

 

The Knesset has launched an Israel Victory Caucus, co-chaired by Yisrael Beytenu MK Oded Forer and Yesh Atid MK Yaakov Peri, following the establishment of a similar caucus in the U.S. Congress. The caucus hopes to sensitize the Israeli public, as well as politicians in Israel and abroad, to the need to attain a decisive victory over the Palestinians. Professor Daniel Pipes, the scholar behind this project, argues convincingly that a peace settlement will only be possible after the Palestinians realize that the 100 years of struggle against Zionism has failed.

 

To date, the Palestinians (not only Hamas) still entertain hopes that the Zionist enterprise can be dismantled. Israel's victories on the battlefield against Arab armies, its success in containing terrorism and the prosperity of the Jewish state have not yet cemented a sense of defeat among the Palestinians. Therefore, the Palestinian Authority continues the campaign to delegitimize Israel. Elements in Palestinian society even believe that Jewish society will inevitably crumble under the pressure of terrorist attacks and internal tensions.

 

The view that Israel will eventually disappear, just like the Crusaders in the 12th century, is widespread. The Palestinians are encouraged by the indiscriminate financial and diplomatic support they get from abroad and are pleased with the enhanced regional influence of Iran, which pledges the destruction of Israel. The assumption that their desire for a state leads to concessions needed for a peace settlement with Israel remains to be proven. Taking into consideration the nature of the "peace partner," the protracted struggle is likely to continue unless a new pragmatic leadership emerges. Alas, such a leadership is not in the offing, leaving Israel no choice but to wage a limited war on the PA in the West Bank and Hamas in the Gaza Strip.

 

Indeed, Israel is in a state of war, not in a peace process. This truth is not palatable to the international community that emphasizes diplomacy and wants to believe that the Palestinians are interested in peace. This predicament constrains Israel's military freedom of action in the pursuit of victory. Its ability to inflict pain on the Palestinians — which is what war is about — is limited. It is often accused of exercising excessive force by a liberal press that is inherently averse to any use of force.

Moreover, Israel is torn by a permanent dilemma. On the one hand, it tries to buy calm, and time, by providing economic means to sustain the weak Palestinian economy. Jerusalem understands that hungry neighbors attract international criticism of Israel and could turn into a security problem. On the other hand, it needs to punish the violent Palestinians to create deterrence, and to affect their behavior and aspirations. It is not easy to balance the first effort, basically a short-term consideration, with the attempt to deliver a costly defeat to the Palestinians that might bring an end to the conflict faster.

 

The Palestinian reluctance to adopt realistic foreign policy goals and Israel's hesitation to use its military superiority to exact a much higher cost from the Palestinians are the defining features of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict…                                                                                                                                           

[To Read the Full Article Click the Following Link—Ed.]

 

Contents

 

On Topic Links

 

Clashes Erupt at Temple Mount as Muslim Worshipers Return to Site: Dov Lieber, Times of Israel, July 27, 2017—Thousands of Muslim worshipers entered the Temple Mount on Thursday for the first time in nearly two weeks, many shouting in delight as they did so, and violent clashes erupted between Palestinians and Israeli security forces at the compound.

Israel’s Embassy in Jordan May Stay Closed: Jewish Press, July 27, 2017—While Israel wants Ambassador to Jordan Einat Schlein and her staff to return as soon as possible to the Israeli embassy in Jordan, that probably won’t be happening.

In Unprecedented Attack, Israel Hayom Pans ‘Helpless,’ ‘Feeble’ Netanyahu: Times of Israel, July 26, 2017—After years of backing Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, the free daily Israel Hayom castigated the premier’s “display of feebleness” and his “helpless” response to the Temple Mount crisis on its front page on Wednesday, in a large above-the-fold headline.

Beyond the Debate Over Metal Detectors (Video): Amb. Dore Gold, JCPA, July 27, 2017—It’s extremely important to remember where exactly the current crisis about metal detectors on the Temple Mount in Jerusalem came from – to recall it all started when guns were smuggled onto the Temple Mount and actually used against two Israeli policemen.  Officers Haiel Sitawe and Kamil Shnaan were killed as a result of these illegal firearms that were brought in to a holy site.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

E.U., LEFTISTS, & HOSTILE JEWISH CRITICS IGNORE ISRAEL’S ACHIEVEMENTS, AND A FLOURISHING, REUNIFIED JERUSALEM

Rebuff the EU's Threats: David M. Weinberg, Israel Hayom, June 3, 2016— The European Union is on the rampage.

The Left vs. Israel: Daniel Pipes, Washington Times, May 30, 2016— Since the creation of Israel, Palestinians, Arabs, and Muslims have been the mainstay of anti-Zionism, with the Left, from the Soviet Union to professors of literature, their auxiliary.

Edward Alexander, Jews Against Themselves: Abigail L. Rosenthal, JCPA, May 8, 2016— These remarkable essays by Edward Alexander bring intellectual precision, moral fearlessness and literary elegance to bear on a syndrome that could be called “Jewish suicidalism.”

Jerusalem Challenge: Jerusalem Post, June 2, 2016— Tens of thousands of Israelis, most of whom belong to the religious-Zionist stream of Judaism, will come together Sunday to participate in the traditional Flag Parade for Jerusalem Day.

 

On Topic Links

 

Leftists Demand Jerusalem Day Parade Avoid Muslim Quarter: Arutz Sheva, May 15, 2016

The Jews of the American Revolution: Meir Y. Soloveichik, Wall Street Journal, May 26, 2016

Finishing the War: Frederick Taylor, Wall Street Journal, May 20, 2016

What Is German?: Anna Sauerbrey, New York Times, May 26, 2016

 

 

 

REBUFF THE EU'S THREATS                                                             

David M. Weinberg                                                                         

Israel Hayom, June 3, 2016

 

The European Union is on the rampage. Every Monday and Thursday it has taken to shelling out threats to downgrade diplomatic and economic ties with Israel, unless Israel does this or desists from doing that. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who is also acting foreign minister, should rebuff the escalating European intimidation.

 

This week the EU hit Israel with a double whammy. First, it fiercely warned the Coordinator of Government Activities in the Territories that Israel's policy of demolishing illegal and unauthorized Palestinian construction is harming ties between Israel and the 28-member EU. This includes the wild Bedouin building spurt that the EU has insolently funded in the strategic E1 quadrant between Jerusalem and Maaleh Adumim‎, in entirely purposeful defiance of Israel.

 

And today in Paris, EU foreign ministers led by France intend to promulgate "parameters" for a solution of the Palestinian-Israeli conflict, which will again likely move the international markers in directions favorable to the Palestinians, while threatening Israel with deadlines for compliance. The brazen EU intervention in E1 has reached extreme heights of chutzpah.

 

The IDF defines the area in question a pivotal part of Israel's strategic depth, and essential to "defensible borders" for Israel. It is also Area C under the Oslo Accords, which means that Israel holds exclusive civilian and military control.

 

Yet illegally established Palestinian villages and Bedouin shantytowns have slowly closed the corridor between Jerusalem and Maaleh Adumim, where a major highway runs, crawling to within several meters from it. These illegal outposts steal electricity from the highway lights and water from Israeli pipelines. Civil Administration data, recently presented to the Knesset's subcommittee on Judea and Samaria, shows that 6,500 Palestinians currently live in some 1,220 illegally built homes in the area, and that this number is growing weekly.

 

Enter the imperious EU. Boycotts of Israeli products no longer satisfy the bullies of Brussels. Ramping up their confrontation with Israel, they have gone into the business of establishing "settlements" for the Bedouin and Palestinians in this area, tower and stockade style. The EU has poured perhaps 100 million euros into EU-emblazoned prefabs, EU-signed roads, and water and energy installations — in E1, in Gush Etzion, near Tekoa, in the South Hebron Hills, and even in the Negev.

 

Under the cover of diplomatic immunity, the EU's settlement-building bosses audaciously thumb their noses at COGAT inspectors, then scream bloody murder when the IDF moves in, ever so minimally (far too meekly and infrequently, I think) to knock back a few of the most provocatively and problematically positioned EU illegal outposts. Note that every Israeli prime minister since Yitzhak Rabin has promised and intended to build in the E1 quadrant as the eastern strategic anchor for Jerusalem and its critical connection to the Jordan Valley, only to be stymied by international protests.

 

In short, the EU's support of the Palestinians has subversively graduated from passive diplomatic and financial assistance to seditious participation in the Palestinian Authority's illegal construction ventures. The explicit intent is to erode Israeli control of Areas C and eastern Jerusalem while promoting Palestinian territorial continuity. 

 

The EU even has extended its deep concern for Arab land rights, and outrageous interference in Israeli planning matters, to the Negev and Galilee, as detailed in the shocking 2014 book "Catch the Jew!" by German-Israeli author Tuvia Tenenbom. The writer captured ugly scents of ardent anti-Semitism and furious opposition to any Zionist presence in Palestine in his interviews of EU and European NGO officials who are enabling the Palestinian, Bedouin and Israeli Arab land wars against Israel. The book is required reading, in Hebrew or English. But brace yourself: It unveils a violent, wicked world of official Israel bashers.

 

As for today's Paris peace conference: The old cornerstones of peace diplomacy are out the window. "Not prejudging the outcome of negotiations" and "direct negotiations between the parties without coercion" are principles that no longer hold sway. Dictating impatiently to Israel is in vogue…

[To Read the Full Article Click the Following Link—Ed.]                

 

Contents                                                                                                                                        

THE LEFT VS. ISRAEL                                                                                              

Daniel Pipes                                                                                               

Washington Times, May 30, 2016

 

Since the creation of Israel, Palestinians, Arabs, and Muslims have been the mainstay of anti-Zionism, with the Left, from the Soviet Union to professors of literature, their auxiliary. But this might be in process of change: as Muslims slowly, grudgingly, and unevenly come to accept the Jewish state as a reality, the Left is becoming increasingly vociferous and obsessive in its rejection of Israel.

 

Much evidence points in this direction: Polls in the Middle East find cracks in the opposition to Israel while a major American survey for the first time shows liberal Democrats to be more anti-Israel than pro-Israel. The Saudi and Egyptian governments have real security relations with Israel while a figure like (the Jewish) Bernie Sanders declares that “to the degree that [Israelis] want us to have a positive relationship, I think they're going to have to improve their relationship with the Palestinians.”

 

But I should like to focus on a small illustrative example from a United Nations institution: The World Health Organization churned out report A69/B/CONF./1 on May 24 with the enticing title, “Health conditions in the occupied Palestinian territory, including east Jerusalem, and in the occupied Syrian Golan: Draft decision proposed by the delegation of Kuwait, on behalf of the Arab Group, and Palestine.” The three-page document calls for “a field assessment conducted by the World Health Organization,” with special focus on such topics as “incidents of delay or denial of ambulance service” and “access to adequate health services on the part of Palestinian prisoners.” Of course, the entire document singles out Israel as a denier of unimpeded access to health care.

 

This ranks as a special absurdity given the WHO’s hiring a consultant in next-door Syria who is connected to the very pinnacle of the Assad regime, even as it perpetrates atrocities estimated at a half million dead and 12 million displaced (out of a total pre-war population of 22 million). Conversely, both the wife and brother-in-law of Mahmoud Abbas, leader of the Palestinian Authority, whose status and wealth assures them treatment anywhere in the world, chose to be treated in Israeli hospitals, as did the sister, daughter, and grand-daughter of Ismail Haniyeh, the Hamas leader in Gaza, Israel’s sworn enemy.

 

Despite these facts, the WHO voted on May 28 to accept the proposed field assessment with the predictably lopsided outcome of 107 votes in favor, 8 votes against, 8 abstentions and 58 absences. So far, all this is tediously routine. But the composition of those voting blocs renders the decision noteworthy. Votes in favor included every state in Europe except two, Bosnia-Herzegovina (which has a half-Muslim population) and San Marino (total population: 33,000), both of which missed the vote for reasons unknown to me.

 

To repeat: Every other European government than those two supported a biased field assessment with its inevitable condemnation of Israel. To be specific, this included the authorities ruling in Albania, Andorra, Austria, Belarus, Belgium, Bulgaria, Croatia, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Iceland, Ireland, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Macedonia, Malta, Moldova, Monaco, Montenegro, Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Russia, Serbia, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, and the United Kingdom.

Making this European near-unanimity the more remarkable were the many absented governments with large- to overwhelming-majority-Muslim populations: Burkina Faso, Chad, Côte d'Ivoire, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Gabon, Gambia, Kyrgyzstan, Libya, Mozambique, Sierra Leone, Sudan, Tajikistan, Tanzania, Togo, and Turkmenistan.

 

So, Iceland (with effectively no Muslims) voted for the amendment and against Israel while Turkmenistan (which is over 90 percent Muslim) did not. Cyprus and Greece, which have critical new relations with Israel, voted against Israel while the historically hostile Libyans missed the vote. Germany, with its malignant history, voted against Israel while Tajikistan, a partner of the Iranian regime’s, was absent. Denmark, with its noble history, voted against Israel while Sudan, led by an Islamist, did not.

 

This unlikely pattern suggests that monolithic Muslim hostility is cracking while Europeans, who are overwhelmingly on the Left, to the point that even right-wing parties pursue watered-down left-wing policies, increasingly despise Israel. Worse, even those who do not share this attitude go along with it, even in an obscure WHO vote. Muslims, not leftists, still staff almost all the violent attacks on Israel; and Islamism, not socialism, remains the reigning anti-Zionist ideology. But these changes point to Israel’s cooling relations with the West and warming ones in its neighborhood.                              

 

Contents                                                                                                                                                            

EDWARD ALEXANDER, JEWS AGAINST THEMSELVES                                                                               

Abigail L. Rosenthal                                                                                                         

JCPA, May 8, 2016

 

These remarkable essays by Edward Alexander bring intellectual precision, moral fearlessness and literary elegance to bear on a syndrome that could be called “Jewish suicidalism.” That is almost the right name for it, save that the leaders of this trend – portraits delineated by Alexander – exempt themselves from the condemnations they rain down on their fellows. The motivational patterns that Alexander exposes cannot, as is sometimes claimed, reduce to self-hatred. Rather, shown in vivid detail are the workings of opportunistic self-love.

 

Alexander is professor of English at the University of Washington. He is the author of books that span literary, cultural and Jewish worlds. In his latest book (Transaction Publishers, 2015), Alexander’s contemporary survey is a wide one, though it does not pretend to exhaustiveness. In “Michael Lerner: Hillary Clinton’s Jewish Rasputin,” we meet the founder of the magazine Tikkun, “the omnipresent, gentile-appointed voice of the Jewish community,” but meet him at an earlier career stage, back when he incited mob violence and threatened lawsuits to intimidate his opponents.

 

In “Antisemitism Denial: The Berkeley School,” we meet Judith Butler who urges progressive people to fight antisemitism but thinks it “wildly improbable that somebody examining the divestment petitions signed by herself and her co-conspirators might take them (as hundreds on her own campus already had) as condoning antisemitism.” Alexander compares Butler’s puzzlement to that of Dickens, who did not know what to make of Fagin, the villainous Jew he had created in Oliver Twist. “The reason for Dickens’s puzzlement was that, in an important sense, he did indeed not ‘make’ Fagin, and therefore didn’t know what to make of him. Fagin was ready-made for Dickens by the collective folklore of Christendom, which had for centuries fixed the Jew in the role of Christ-killer, surrogate of Satan, inheritor of Judas, thief, fence, corrupter of the young—to which list of attributes Butler and her friends would now add ‘Zionist imperialist and occupier.’”

 

The type described in Jews Against Themselves is not new. Drawing on recent research into this phenomenon, by Sander Gilman, Ruth Wisse and others, Alexander traces the genre historically to its medieval prototypes. Throughout the era of triumphalist Christianity, there were Jewish informers – my term not his – who converted to the dominant religion. Innocent themselves, they deflected attacks onto other, also innocent Jews, thereby becoming actually guilty, this time of towering betrayals.

 

Pope Gregory IX, who ordered the Talmud publicly burned in Paris and Rome, was acting on the seemingly expert, vilifying “explications” of Talmud presented to him in 1239 by Nicholas Donin, a Jewish convert and member of the Dominican Order. A few years later, Pablo Christiani made his coming out as a Christian credible and deadly by orchestrating the celebrated public “disputations” (really show trials) of 1263, in which Nachmanides was forced to defend Judaism against Christiani’s accusations, under intellectually disabling rules of engagement. So also, it may have been another convert, Johannes (Josef) Pffefferkorn, who gave Martin Luther the inspiration and precedent for his destructive campaigns against the Jews of Germany. Luther justified his lootings and burnings in The Jews and Their Lies, which ended up a favorite on Hitler’s bookshelf.

 

In “Disraeli and Marx: Stammgenosse?” (tr. of the same stock), Alexander tracks the type into the political arenas of the nineteenth century, where these tortured but vastly influential figures carried on their relations of public repudiation (more damaging and venomous in the case of Marx) with their Jewish forebears.

 

This is background, because the Jewish informer is not just an historical curiosity. Unfortunately, he is still with us and going strong. What is novel about him in his current guise is that he no longer disavows his Jewish identity. On the contrary. The new anti-Jewish Jew embraces his Jewishness. One might wish it were otherwise but, for good or ill, we will not find him among the converts – not to the Christianity of popes or Protestants, not to Voltaire’s religion of reason, not to Marxism nor to Disraeli’s Church of England.

 

Like his predecessors, the new informer still attacks the innocent Jewish actor on the stage of history – in the present case Israel – hoping thereby to deflect attacks from himself. But, in so doing, he claims to be more authentically Jewish than those retrograde fellow Jews who somehow fail to follow him in his tireless efforts to delegitimize and thus destroy the only Jewish state.

 

The new informers have their own stylistic habits. They are great moralizers. Of course, as Aristotle knew long ago, the problem of moral evaluation is not to find a principle. It’s to discern what principle is the remedy for the precise situation in view. Thus, patience is a fine virtue, but not the one called for in a fire. Moral questions call for discernment. Alexander is constantly finding the anti-Jewish Jew to be at least morally imprecise, but more often tastelessly obtuse. For example, in “Why Jews Must Behave Better Than Anyone Else,” Alexander looks at Jewish pundits such as Anthony Lewis and Milton Viorst, who openly proclaim that they judge Israel by standards “higher” than the ones they apply to its enemies or to any other state. “From its birth” Lewis writes, “Israel asked to be judged as a light among nations.” No, Alexander points out, it asked no such thing. The intent of Zionist founders was to have a Jewish state that could enter into the normal conditions enjoyed by other nations.

 

Thomas Friedman, another advocate for expectations targeting Israel alone, justifies the unfairness by imputing to journalists an ‘’identification with the dreams of Biblical Israel and mythic Jerusalem [that] runs so deep that when Israel lives up to its prophetic expectations, it is their success too.’” Not true, Alexander points out. Christians, who may include journalists, have inherited a two-thousand year old propensity to view Jews in a light so harsh and unflattering as to be notably mythical, with a correlative habit of thinking that Jews should not be allowed to defend themselves. As to the “prophetic” pretensions of Israel’s critics, whether Jewish or other, when they wield the double standard: the prophets gave a message from God to the people of the Covenant. Journalists are not God.

 

In “The Moral Failure of American-Jewish Intellectuals,” Alexander compares the silence of these intellectuals while the Holocaust was going on to their similar deafness to the significance of reborn Israel. “Like protagonists in a great tragedy, the Jewish people had imposed a pattern of meaning upon otherwise incomprehensible suffering. … Having averted their eyes from the destruction of European Jewry, the ‘first-rank’ Jewish intellectuals now looked away from one of the most impressive assertions of the will to live that a martyred people has ever made.”…

[To Read the Full Article Click the Following Link—Ed.]                                                                                                                                                                

Contents

                                                               

JERUSALEM CHALLENGE                                                                                                          

Jerusalem Post, June 2, 2016

 

Tens of thousands of Israelis, most of whom belong to the religious-Zionist stream of Judaism, will come together Sunday to participate in the traditional Flag Parade for Jerusalem Day. The mood will be festive, with singing and flag waving. But this year an additional element will be added to the celebrations: the importance of seeking peaceful coexistence.

Organizers of the Flag Parade have agreed to a police request to change the schedule of the march through the Muslim Quarter of Jerusalem out of respect for Muslim sensitivities. The idea is to avoid clashes in the Muslim Quarter between flag-waving religious Jews and crowds of Muslims on their way to pray on the Temple Mount. In a sense, the arrangement that enables peaceful coexistence of celebratory religious Jews alongside Muslim worshipers is a microcosm of the unique societal, cultural and religious tensions so characteristic to the city.

 

On one hand, it is difficult to be indifferent to a rebuilt Jerusalem. Even Jews not inclined to seeing in contemporary events manifestations of Providence cannot help but admit that Jerusalem’s resurgence is amazing. Forty-nine years after the city was united, Jerusalem has become a bustling metropolis that is bigger today – both in population and in square meters of built-up area – than ever before in history. As writer Cynthia Ozick has noted, Jerusalem is a “phoenix city” with a “history of histories.” Like the Phoenix, Jerusalem has burned and been reborn from its own ashes over the millennia. But no previous rebirth can quite compare to the present one. Assyrians, Babylonians, Seleucids and Romans have come and gone. Muslims and Christians – each with their own ideas about Jerusalem’s meaning – have killed each other for the right to rule the city.

 

All along Jews never stopped praying for a rebuilt Jerusalem. Unshackled from oppressive Jordanian rule over its eastern half, Jerusalem could thrive and develop. And it has. The city’s population has grown to 870,000 as of the end of 2015, according to figures released by the Central Bureau of Statistics for Jerusalem Day, which makes it the largest city in the country. The light rail has transformed the city, as have the satellite neighborhoods of Pisgat Ze’ev, Givat Ze’ev, Har Homa and Gilo. Just wander the streets around Mamilla and Ben-Yehuda and witness the diversity. Jews and non- Jews both locals and tourists rub shoulders, a Babel of languages can be heard.

 

On the other hand, Jerusalem faces myriad challenges. Perhaps the most formidable is the integration of Arab residents, who make up 37 percent of the capital’s population. Jerusalem Arabs who spoke to The Jerusalem Post’s Opinion Page Editor Seth Frantzman this week complained of unfair treatment when it comes to municipal services, infrastructure such as water and roads, and housing. A proportion of east Jerusalem’s children live under the poverty line. There is a shortage of classrooms in Arab schools. No large housing project has been completed for the growing Arab population.

 

The construction of the security barrier cut off tens of thousands of residents of Arab neighborhoods from the rest of Jerusalem. Though they live within the municipal boundaries, they do not receive basic municipal services such as garbage collection and sewage and water services. Law enforcement is lax because police dare not venture into these areas.  The difficulty of integrating Jerusalem’s Arab population is exacerbated by the political conflict. Only around 1.5 percent of Arab residents vote in municipal elections even though they have a right to, because doing so would be seen as legitimization of Israel. But as a result, Arabs have no representative in the city council who can advance their interests.

 

For nearly two millennia Jews prayed to return to Zion, which was often conceived of not principally as a physical place but as an ideal, a symbol of Jewish spirituality and of hope for peace in a more perfect era. We have not achieved peace. But the physical resurgence of Zion in under way. On Jerusalem Day we should feel thankful for living in a generation that has witnessed a rebuilt Jerusalem. But we must not lose sight of the many challenges presented by Yerushalayim shel mata – the earthly, material Jerusalem of brick and mortar and human beings.                 

                                                             

CIJR Wishes All Our Friends & Supporters: Shabbat Shalom!

Contents           

 

On Topic Links

 

Leftists Demand Jerusalem Day Parade Avoid Muslim Quarter: Arutz Sheva, May 15, 2016—Left-wing NGOs "Tag Meir” (Light Tag) and “Ir Amim" (City of Nations) turned to the Israel Police Jerusalem District demanding to stop this year's traditional Jerusalem Day “Rikudgalim” (Flag Dance or March of Flags) from marching through the streets of the Muslim Quarter in the Old City.

The Jews of the American Revolution: Meir Y. Soloveichik, Wall Street Journal, May 26, 2016—New Yorkers strolling through Chinatown in downtown Manhattan last Sunday might have noticed an unusual flurry of activity: Jewish men and women, a rabbi in a clerical gown, and a color guard gathering in graveyard tucked away behind a wrought-iron fence. Members of the New York synagogue Shearith Israel, the oldest Jewish congregation in North America, were visiting their historic cemetery at Chatham Square.

Finishing the War: Frederick Taylor, Wall Street Journal, May 20, 2016—Between 1618 and 1648, millions of civilians died from violence, famine and pestilence as armies ranged across Central Europe in a savage conflict about power and religion. When the treaty was signed that ended the Thirty Years’ War, one famous clause granted perpetua oblivio et amnestia (eternal forgetting and forgiving) to all the forces involved. It represented mutual recognition that each side had committed equally unspeakable acts.

What Is German?: Anna Sauerbrey, New York Times, May 26, 2016—In Germany, a big question is back on the table: What is German — and how German do you have to be to belong to Germany? With the arrival in 2015 of 1.1 million refugees and migrants, it’s an important issue. But rather than having a reasoned debate, the extremists have already taken control. For a disturbing number of Germans, the answer is culture, including religion.

 

 

 

                  

 

 

 

E.U., LEFTISTS, & HOSTILE JEWISH CRITICS IGNORE ISRAEL’S ACHIEVEMENTS, AND A FLOURISHING, REUNIFIED JERUSALEM

Rebuff the EU's Threats: David M. Weinberg, Israel Hayom, June 3, 2016— The European Union is on the rampage.

The Left vs. Israel: Daniel Pipes, Washington Times, May 30, 2016— Since the creation of Israel, Palestinians, Arabs, and Muslims have been the mainstay of anti-Zionism, with the Left, from the Soviet Union to professors of literature, their auxiliary.

Edward Alexander, Jews Against Themselves: Abigail L. Rosenthal, JCPA, May 8, 2016— These remarkable essays by Edward Alexander bring intellectual precision, moral fearlessness and literary elegance to bear on a syndrome that could be called “Jewish suicidalism.”

Jerusalem Challenge: Jerusalem Post, June 2, 2016— Tens of thousands of Israelis, most of whom belong to the religious-Zionist stream of Judaism, will come together Sunday to participate in the traditional Flag Parade for Jerusalem Day.

 

On Topic Links

 

Leftists Demand Jerusalem Day Parade Avoid Muslim Quarter: Arutz Sheva, May 15, 2016

The Jews of the American Revolution: Meir Y. Soloveichik, Wall Street Journal, May 26, 2016

Finishing the War: Frederick Taylor, Wall Street Journal, May 20, 2016

What Is German?: Anna Sauerbrey, New York Times, May 26, 2016

 

 

 

REBUFF THE EU'S THREATS                                                             

David M. Weinberg                                                                         

Israel Hayom, June 3, 2016

 

The European Union is on the rampage. Every Monday and Thursday it has taken to shelling out threats to downgrade diplomatic and economic ties with Israel, unless Israel does this or desists from doing that. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who is also acting foreign minister, should rebuff the escalating European intimidation.

 

This week the EU hit Israel with a double whammy. First, it fiercely warned the Coordinator of Government Activities in the Territories that Israel's policy of demolishing illegal and unauthorized Palestinian construction is harming ties between Israel and the 28-member EU. This includes the wild Bedouin building spurt that the EU has insolently funded in the strategic E1 quadrant between Jerusalem and Maaleh Adumim‎, in entirely purposeful defiance of Israel.

 

And today in Paris, EU foreign ministers led by France intend to promulgate "parameters" for a solution of the Palestinian-Israeli conflict, which will again likely move the international markers in directions favorable to the Palestinians, while threatening Israel with deadlines for compliance. The brazen EU intervention in E1 has reached extreme heights of chutzpah.

 

The IDF defines the area in question a pivotal part of Israel's strategic depth, and essential to "defensible borders" for Israel. It is also Area C under the Oslo Accords, which means that Israel holds exclusive civilian and military control.

 

Yet illegally established Palestinian villages and Bedouin shantytowns have slowly closed the corridor between Jerusalem and Maaleh Adumim, where a major highway runs, crawling to within several meters from it. These illegal outposts steal electricity from the highway lights and water from Israeli pipelines. Civil Administration data, recently presented to the Knesset's subcommittee on Judea and Samaria, shows that 6,500 Palestinians currently live in some 1,220 illegally built homes in the area, and that this number is growing weekly.

 

Enter the imperious EU. Boycotts of Israeli products no longer satisfy the bullies of Brussels. Ramping up their confrontation with Israel, they have gone into the business of establishing "settlements" for the Bedouin and Palestinians in this area, tower and stockade style. The EU has poured perhaps 100 million euros into EU-emblazoned prefabs, EU-signed roads, and water and energy installations — in E1, in Gush Etzion, near Tekoa, in the South Hebron Hills, and even in the Negev.

 

Under the cover of diplomatic immunity, the EU's settlement-building bosses audaciously thumb their noses at COGAT inspectors, then scream bloody murder when the IDF moves in, ever so minimally (far too meekly and infrequently, I think) to knock back a few of the most provocatively and problematically positioned EU illegal outposts. Note that every Israeli prime minister since Yitzhak Rabin has promised and intended to build in the E1 quadrant as the eastern strategic anchor for Jerusalem and its critical connection to the Jordan Valley, only to be stymied by international protests.

 

In short, the EU's support of the Palestinians has subversively graduated from passive diplomatic and financial assistance to seditious participation in the Palestinian Authority's illegal construction ventures. The explicit intent is to erode Israeli control of Areas C and eastern Jerusalem while promoting Palestinian territorial continuity. 

 

The EU even has extended its deep concern for Arab land rights, and outrageous interference in Israeli planning matters, to the Negev and Galilee, as detailed in the shocking 2014 book "Catch the Jew!" by German-Israeli author Tuvia Tenenbom. The writer captured ugly scents of ardent anti-Semitism and furious opposition to any Zionist presence in Palestine in his interviews of EU and European NGO officials who are enabling the Palestinian, Bedouin and Israeli Arab land wars against Israel. The book is required reading, in Hebrew or English. But brace yourself: It unveils a violent, wicked world of official Israel bashers.

 

As for today's Paris peace conference: The old cornerstones of peace diplomacy are out the window. "Not prejudging the outcome of negotiations" and "direct negotiations between the parties without coercion" are principles that no longer hold sway. Dictating impatiently to Israel is in vogue…

[To Read the Full Article Click the Following Link—Ed.]                

 

Contents                                                                                                                                        

THE LEFT VS. ISRAEL                                                                                              

Daniel Pipes                                                                                               

Washington Times, May 30, 2016

 

Since the creation of Israel, Palestinians, Arabs, and Muslims have been the mainstay of anti-Zionism, with the Left, from the Soviet Union to professors of literature, their auxiliary. But this might be in process of change: as Muslims slowly, grudgingly, and unevenly come to accept the Jewish state as a reality, the Left is becoming increasingly vociferous and obsessive in its rejection of Israel.

 

Much evidence points in this direction: Polls in the Middle East find cracks in the opposition to Israel while a major American survey for the first time shows liberal Democrats to be more anti-Israel than pro-Israel. The Saudi and Egyptian governments have real security relations with Israel while a figure like (the Jewish) Bernie Sanders declares that “to the degree that [Israelis] want us to have a positive relationship, I think they're going to have to improve their relationship with the Palestinians.”

 

But I should like to focus on a small illustrative example from a United Nations institution: The World Health Organization churned out report A69/B/CONF./1 on May 24 with the enticing title, “Health conditions in the occupied Palestinian territory, including east Jerusalem, and in the occupied Syrian Golan: Draft decision proposed by the delegation of Kuwait, on behalf of the Arab Group, and Palestine.” The three-page document calls for “a field assessment conducted by the World Health Organization,” with special focus on such topics as “incidents of delay or denial of ambulance service” and “access to adequate health services on the part of Palestinian prisoners.” Of course, the entire document singles out Israel as a denier of unimpeded access to health care.

 

This ranks as a special absurdity given the WHO’s hiring a consultant in next-door Syria who is connected to the very pinnacle of the Assad regime, even as it perpetrates atrocities estimated at a half million dead and 12 million displaced (out of a total pre-war population of 22 million). Conversely, both the wife and brother-in-law of Mahmoud Abbas, leader of the Palestinian Authority, whose status and wealth assures them treatment anywhere in the world, chose to be treated in Israeli hospitals, as did the sister, daughter, and grand-daughter of Ismail Haniyeh, the Hamas leader in Gaza, Israel’s sworn enemy.

 

Despite these facts, the WHO voted on May 28 to accept the proposed field assessment with the predictably lopsided outcome of 107 votes in favor, 8 votes against, 8 abstentions and 58 absences. So far, all this is tediously routine. But the composition of those voting blocs renders the decision noteworthy. Votes in favor included every state in Europe except two, Bosnia-Herzegovina (which has a half-Muslim population) and San Marino (total population: 33,000), both of which missed the vote for reasons unknown to me.

 

To repeat: Every other European government than those two supported a biased field assessment with its inevitable condemnation of Israel. To be specific, this included the authorities ruling in Albania, Andorra, Austria, Belarus, Belgium, Bulgaria, Croatia, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Iceland, Ireland, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Macedonia, Malta, Moldova, Monaco, Montenegro, Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Russia, Serbia, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, and the United Kingdom.

Making this European near-unanimity the more remarkable were the many absented governments with large- to overwhelming-majority-Muslim populations: Burkina Faso, Chad, Côte d'Ivoire, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Gabon, Gambia, Kyrgyzstan, Libya, Mozambique, Sierra Leone, Sudan, Tajikistan, Tanzania, Togo, and Turkmenistan.

 

So, Iceland (with effectively no Muslims) voted for the amendment and against Israel while Turkmenistan (which is over 90 percent Muslim) did not. Cyprus and Greece, which have critical new relations with Israel, voted against Israel while the historically hostile Libyans missed the vote. Germany, with its malignant history, voted against Israel while Tajikistan, a partner of the Iranian regime’s, was absent. Denmark, with its noble history, voted against Israel while Sudan, led by an Islamist, did not.

 

This unlikely pattern suggests that monolithic Muslim hostility is cracking while Europeans, who are overwhelmingly on the Left, to the point that even right-wing parties pursue watered-down left-wing policies, increasingly despise Israel. Worse, even those who do not share this attitude go along with it, even in an obscure WHO vote. Muslims, not leftists, still staff almost all the violent attacks on Israel; and Islamism, not socialism, remains the reigning anti-Zionist ideology. But these changes point to Israel’s cooling relations with the West and warming ones in its neighborhood.                              

 

Contents                                                                                                                                                            

EDWARD ALEXANDER, JEWS AGAINST THEMSELVES                                                                               

Abigail L. Rosenthal                                                                                                         

JCPA, May 8, 2016

 

These remarkable essays by Edward Alexander bring intellectual precision, moral fearlessness and literary elegance to bear on a syndrome that could be called “Jewish suicidalism.” That is almost the right name for it, save that the leaders of this trend – portraits delineated by Alexander – exempt themselves from the condemnations they rain down on their fellows. The motivational patterns that Alexander exposes cannot, as is sometimes claimed, reduce to self-hatred. Rather, shown in vivid detail are the workings of opportunistic self-love.

 

Alexander is professor of English at the University of Washington. He is the author of books that span literary, cultural and Jewish worlds. In his latest book (Transaction Publishers, 2015), Alexander’s contemporary survey is a wide one, though it does not pretend to exhaustiveness. In “Michael Lerner: Hillary Clinton’s Jewish Rasputin,” we meet the founder of the magazine Tikkun, “the omnipresent, gentile-appointed voice of the Jewish community,” but meet him at an earlier career stage, back when he incited mob violence and threatened lawsuits to intimidate his opponents.

 

In “Antisemitism Denial: The Berkeley School,” we meet Judith Butler who urges progressive people to fight antisemitism but thinks it “wildly improbable that somebody examining the divestment petitions signed by herself and her co-conspirators might take them (as hundreds on her own campus already had) as condoning antisemitism.” Alexander compares Butler’s puzzlement to that of Dickens, who did not know what to make of Fagin, the villainous Jew he had created in Oliver Twist. “The reason for Dickens’s puzzlement was that, in an important sense, he did indeed not ‘make’ Fagin, and therefore didn’t know what to make of him. Fagin was ready-made for Dickens by the collective folklore of Christendom, which had for centuries fixed the Jew in the role of Christ-killer, surrogate of Satan, inheritor of Judas, thief, fence, corrupter of the young—to which list of attributes Butler and her friends would now add ‘Zionist imperialist and occupier.’”

 

The type described in Jews Against Themselves is not new. Drawing on recent research into this phenomenon, by Sander Gilman, Ruth Wisse and others, Alexander traces the genre historically to its medieval prototypes. Throughout the era of triumphalist Christianity, there were Jewish informers – my term not his – who converted to the dominant religion. Innocent themselves, they deflected attacks onto other, also innocent Jews, thereby becoming actually guilty, this time of towering betrayals.

 

Pope Gregory IX, who ordered the Talmud publicly burned in Paris and Rome, was acting on the seemingly expert, vilifying “explications” of Talmud presented to him in 1239 by Nicholas Donin, a Jewish convert and member of the Dominican Order. A few years later, Pablo Christiani made his coming out as a Christian credible and deadly by orchestrating the celebrated public “disputations” (really show trials) of 1263, in which Nachmanides was forced to defend Judaism against Christiani’s accusations, under intellectually disabling rules of engagement. So also, it may have been another convert, Johannes (Josef) Pffefferkorn, who gave Martin Luther the inspiration and precedent for his destructive campaigns against the Jews of Germany. Luther justified his lootings and burnings in The Jews and Their Lies, which ended up a favorite on Hitler’s bookshelf.

 

In “Disraeli and Marx: Stammgenosse?” (tr. of the same stock), Alexander tracks the type into the political arenas of the nineteenth century, where these tortured but vastly influential figures carried on their relations of public repudiation (more damaging and venomous in the case of Marx) with their Jewish forebears.

 

This is background, because the Jewish informer is not just an historical curiosity. Unfortunately, he is still with us and going strong. What is novel about him in his current guise is that he no longer disavows his Jewish identity. On the contrary. The new anti-Jewish Jew embraces his Jewishness. One might wish it were otherwise but, for good or ill, we will not find him among the converts – not to the Christianity of popes or Protestants, not to Voltaire’s religion of reason, not to Marxism nor to Disraeli’s Church of England.

 

Like his predecessors, the new informer still attacks the innocent Jewish actor on the stage of history – in the present case Israel – hoping thereby to deflect attacks from himself. But, in so doing, he claims to be more authentically Jewish than those retrograde fellow Jews who somehow fail to follow him in his tireless efforts to delegitimize and thus destroy the only Jewish state.

 

The new informers have their own stylistic habits. They are great moralizers. Of course, as Aristotle knew long ago, the problem of moral evaluation is not to find a principle. It’s to discern what principle is the remedy for the precise situation in view. Thus, patience is a fine virtue, but not the one called for in a fire. Moral questions call for discernment. Alexander is constantly finding the anti-Jewish Jew to be at least morally imprecise, but more often tastelessly obtuse. For example, in “Why Jews Must Behave Better Than Anyone Else,” Alexander looks at Jewish pundits such as Anthony Lewis and Milton Viorst, who openly proclaim that they judge Israel by standards “higher” than the ones they apply to its enemies or to any other state. “From its birth” Lewis writes, “Israel asked to be judged as a light among nations.” No, Alexander points out, it asked no such thing. The intent of Zionist founders was to have a Jewish state that could enter into the normal conditions enjoyed by other nations.

 

Thomas Friedman, another advocate for expectations targeting Israel alone, justifies the unfairness by imputing to journalists an ‘’identification with the dreams of Biblical Israel and mythic Jerusalem [that] runs so deep that when Israel lives up to its prophetic expectations, it is their success too.’” Not true, Alexander points out. Christians, who may include journalists, have inherited a two-thousand year old propensity to view Jews in a light so harsh and unflattering as to be notably mythical, with a correlative habit of thinking that Jews should not be allowed to defend themselves. As to the “prophetic” pretensions of Israel’s critics, whether Jewish or other, when they wield the double standard: the prophets gave a message from God to the people of the Covenant. Journalists are not God.

 

In “The Moral Failure of American-Jewish Intellectuals,” Alexander compares the silence of these intellectuals while the Holocaust was going on to their similar deafness to the significance of reborn Israel. “Like protagonists in a great tragedy, the Jewish people had imposed a pattern of meaning upon otherwise incomprehensible suffering. … Having averted their eyes from the destruction of European Jewry, the ‘first-rank’ Jewish intellectuals now looked away from one of the most impressive assertions of the will to live that a martyred people has ever made.”…

[To Read the Full Article Click the Following Link—Ed.]                                                                                                                                                                

Contents

                                                               

JERUSALEM CHALLENGE                                                                                                          

Jerusalem Post, June 2, 2016

 

Tens of thousands of Israelis, most of whom belong to the religious-Zionist stream of Judaism, will come together Sunday to participate in the traditional Flag Parade for Jerusalem Day. The mood will be festive, with singing and flag waving. But this year an additional element will be added to the celebrations: the importance of seeking peaceful coexistence.

Organizers of the Flag Parade have agreed to a police request to change the schedule of the march through the Muslim Quarter of Jerusalem out of respect for Muslim sensitivities. The idea is to avoid clashes in the Muslim Quarter between flag-waving religious Jews and crowds of Muslims on their way to pray on the Temple Mount. In a sense, the arrangement that enables peaceful coexistence of celebratory religious Jews alongside Muslim worshipers is a microcosm of the unique societal, cultural and religious tensions so characteristic to the city.

 

On one hand, it is difficult to be indifferent to a rebuilt Jerusalem. Even Jews not inclined to seeing in contemporary events manifestations of Providence cannot help but admit that Jerusalem’s resurgence is amazing. Forty-nine years after the city was united, Jerusalem has become a bustling metropolis that is bigger today – both in population and in square meters of built-up area – than ever before in history. As writer Cynthia Ozick has noted, Jerusalem is a “phoenix city” with a “history of histories.” Like the Phoenix, Jerusalem has burned and been reborn from its own ashes over the millennia. But no previous rebirth can quite compare to the present one. Assyrians, Babylonians, Seleucids and Romans have come and gone. Muslims and Christians – each with their own ideas about Jerusalem’s meaning – have killed each other for the right to rule the city.

 

All along Jews never stopped praying for a rebuilt Jerusalem. Unshackled from oppressive Jordanian rule over its eastern half, Jerusalem could thrive and develop. And it has. The city’s population has grown to 870,000 as of the end of 2015, according to figures released by the Central Bureau of Statistics for Jerusalem Day, which makes it the largest city in the country. The light rail has transformed the city, as have the satellite neighborhoods of Pisgat Ze’ev, Givat Ze’ev, Har Homa and Gilo. Just wander the streets around Mamilla and Ben-Yehuda and witness the diversity. Jews and non- Jews both locals and tourists rub shoulders, a Babel of languages can be heard.

 

On the other hand, Jerusalem faces myriad challenges. Perhaps the most formidable is the integration of Arab residents, who make up 37 percent of the capital’s population. Jerusalem Arabs who spoke to The Jerusalem Post’s Opinion Page Editor Seth Frantzman this week complained of unfair treatment when it comes to municipal services, infrastructure such as water and roads, and housing. A proportion of east Jerusalem’s children live under the poverty line. There is a shortage of classrooms in Arab schools. No large housing project has been completed for the growing Arab population.

 

The construction of the security barrier cut off tens of thousands of residents of Arab neighborhoods from the rest of Jerusalem. Though they live within the municipal boundaries, they do not receive basic municipal services such as garbage collection and sewage and water services. Law enforcement is lax because police dare not venture into these areas.  The difficulty of integrating Jerusalem’s Arab population is exacerbated by the political conflict. Only around 1.5 percent of Arab residents vote in municipal elections even though they have a right to, because doing so would be seen as legitimization of Israel. But as a result, Arabs have no representative in the city council who can advance their interests.

 

For nearly two millennia Jews prayed to return to Zion, which was often conceived of not principally as a physical place but as an ideal, a symbol of Jewish spirituality and of hope for peace in a more perfect era. We have not achieved peace. But the physical resurgence of Zion in under way. On Jerusalem Day we should feel thankful for living in a generation that has witnessed a rebuilt Jerusalem. But we must not lose sight of the many challenges presented by Yerushalayim shel mata – the earthly, material Jerusalem of brick and mortar and human beings.                 

                                                             

CIJR Wishes All Our Friends & Supporters: Shabbat Shalom!

Contents           

 

On Topic Links

 

Leftists Demand Jerusalem Day Parade Avoid Muslim Quarter: Arutz Sheva, May 15, 2016—Left-wing NGOs "Tag Meir” (Light Tag) and “Ir Amim" (City of Nations) turned to the Israel Police Jerusalem District demanding to stop this year's traditional Jerusalem Day “Rikudgalim” (Flag Dance or March of Flags) from marching through the streets of the Muslim Quarter in the Old City.

The Jews of the American Revolution: Meir Y. Soloveichik, Wall Street Journal, May 26, 2016—New Yorkers strolling through Chinatown in downtown Manhattan last Sunday might have noticed an unusual flurry of activity: Jewish men and women, a rabbi in a clerical gown, and a color guard gathering in graveyard tucked away behind a wrought-iron fence. Members of the New York synagogue Shearith Israel, the oldest Jewish congregation in North America, were visiting their historic cemetery at Chatham Square.

Finishing the War: Frederick Taylor, Wall Street Journal, May 20, 2016—Between 1618 and 1648, millions of civilians died from violence, famine and pestilence as armies ranged across Central Europe in a savage conflict about power and religion. When the treaty was signed that ended the Thirty Years’ War, one famous clause granted perpetua oblivio et amnestia (eternal forgetting and forgiving) to all the forces involved. It represented mutual recognition that each side had committed equally unspeakable acts.

What Is German?: Anna Sauerbrey, New York Times, May 26, 2016—In Germany, a big question is back on the table: What is German — and how German do you have to be to belong to Germany? With the arrival in 2015 of 1.1 million refugees and migrants, it’s an important issue. But rather than having a reasoned debate, the extremists have already taken control. For a disturbing number of Germans, the answer is culture, including religion.

 

 

 

                  

 

 

 

AS ISRAELIS CELEBRATE YOM YERUSHALAYIM—COLLEGE CAMPUSES RECEIVE FAILING GRADES FOR LOGIC & SANITY

We welcome your comments to this and any other CIJR publication.

 

Campus Debates on Israel Drive a Wedge Between Jews and Minorities: Jennifer Medina & Tamar Lewin, New York Times, May 9, 2015 — The debates can stretch from dusk to dawn, punctuated by tearful speeches and forceful shouting matches, with accusations of racism, colonialism and anti-Semitism.

This Pro-Israel Student Leader Lets Alan Dershowitz ‘Sleep at Night’: Maayan Jaffe, Algemeiner, Apr. 26, 2015— Jewish organizations and leaders have been racking their brains trying to address the issue of skyrocketing antisemitism on college campuses.

The Modern University Risks Becoming a Cocoon of Self-Indulgence and Anti-Intellectualism: Rex Murphy, National Post, Mar. 27, 2015 — Lighthouses of reason, or beacons of  folly?

Jerusalem Day: City of Peace: Shlomo Riskin, Jerusalem Post, May 14, 2015— What is so special about Jerusalem?

 

On Topic Links

 

Jerusalem Then and Now: A Journey in Photos: Noam Chen, Times of Israel, May 14, 2015

Re-Liberating Jerusalem: David M. Weinberg, Israel Hayom, May 15, 2015

Draft International Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Anti-Semitism: Amb. Alan Baker, JCPA, May 6, 2015

Anti-Semitism Goes to School: Ruth Wisse, Mosaic, May 4, 2015

         

                            

CAMPUS DEBATES ON ISRAEL DRIVE

A WEDGE BETWEEN JEWS AND MINORITIES                                     

Jennifer Medina & Tamar Lewin

New York Times, May 9, 2015

 

The debates can stretch from dusk to dawn, punctuated by tearful speeches and forceful shouting matches, with accusations of racism, colonialism and anti-Semitism. At dozens of college campuses across the country, student government councils are embracing resolutions calling on their administrations to divest from companies that enable what they see as Israel’s mistreatment of Palestinians.

 

And while no university boards or administrators are heeding the students’ demands, the effort to pressure Israel appears to be gaining traction at campuses across the country and driving a wedge between many Jewish and minority students. The movement is part of the broader Boycotts, Divestment and Sanctions campaign, or B.D.S., which has spread in recent years both in Europe and the United States. The issue has received intense attention on campus particularly since the conflict in Gaza last summer, which killed hundreds of Palestinians. The movement’s goal is to isolate and punish Israel for its policies toward Palestinians and its occupation of the West Bank.

 

There are now Israel-related divestment groups at hundreds of major colleges, including the University of Michigan, Princeton, Cornell and most of the University of California campuses. Their proposals are having mixed success: So far this year, students have passed them on seven campuses and rejected them on eight.

 

College activists favoring divestment have cast the Israeli-Palestinian conflict as a powerful force’s oppression of a displaced group, and have formed alliances with black, Latino, Asian, Native American, feminist and gay rights organizations on campus. The coalitions — which explicitly link the Palestinian cause to issues like police brutality, immigration and gay rights — have caught many longtime Jewish leaders off guard, particularly because they belonged to such progressive coalitions less than a generation ago.

 

At Northwestern University this year, for example, the student government debated a divestment resolution for more than five hours, as students with clashing views sat on opposite sides of the room. Some of the talk was openly hostile, with charges of racism and colonialism. “Discomfort is felt by every person of color on this campus,” said an Egyptian-American senior, Hagar Gomaa. “To those who say this divestment bill makes you uncomfortable, I say: Check your privilege.”

 

A speaker who identified herself only as a Chicana student said she was there to support Palestinians on campus. “We have seen the racism of people who get mad that so many empowered minorities are recognizing how their struggles are tied to the Palestinian struggle,” she said. “Students have accused us of conflating many cases of oppression. To these students, I have a couple of words for you: What you call conflation, we call solidarity.” A student who said she had family in Israel was among those who shot back for the other side. Voting for divestiture, she said, is “pointing fingers, it’s aggressive, it’s misinformed, it’s unjust, and — most important for this campus — it’s totally one-sided.”

 

When the vote was finally taken by secret ballot, the tally was close, with 24 in favor of asking Northwestern’s administration to divest — which it did not do — and 22 against. As the debates spill from undergraduate council to dorm room, students and college officials are grappling with where to draw the line between opposition to Israel’s policies in the West Bank and Gaza — a position shared by many Jews — and hostility toward Jews. Opponents of divestment sometimes allude to the Holocaust. “What bothers me is the shocking amnesia of people who look at the situation of American Jews right now and say, ‘You’re privileged, you don’t have a right to complain about discrimination,’ ” said Rachel Roberts, a freshman at Stanford who is on the board of the Jewish Student Association there. “To turn a blind eye to the sensitivities of someone’s cultural identity is to pretend that history didn’t happen.”

 

Everywhere, the discussions are long and tense: At Michigan, where the student government narrowly defeated a divestment resolution this year for the second time, university staff members were on hand to talk to students and help if they needed a break from the debate. At several schools where divestment proposals have been considered, swastikas have been painted on the doors of Jewish fraternities. “There’s more poison in the rhetoric than we’ve ever felt before,” said Rabbi Chaim Seidler-Feller, the executive director of Hillel at the University of California, Los Angeles, who has worked on college campuses for more than four decades. “There are so many students who now see Israel as part of the establishment they’re against. What’s alarming is this gets deeply embedded and there’s no longer room for real discussion.”

 

But where many Jews say they worry about anti-Semitism, divestment activists say they are concerned about retaliation and the stifling of their views. Sometimes, the specific aims of campus divestment campaigns can get lost in broader debates about the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. At Barnard College, which is one-third Jewish, a group called Students for Justice in Palestine put up a banner last year saying, “Stand for Justice, Stand for Palestine,” showing a map of the area with no internal border demarcating Israel. The banner was taken down the next morning after Jewish students complained that it made them feel threatened. Jannine Salman, the member of Columbia Students for Justice in Palestine who made the banner, said that anti-Zionism, not anti-Semitism, was the motive — and that the recent formation of a campus chapter of Jewish Voice for Peace, which favors divestment, should drive home the point.

 

“There is a bifurcation: Zionism is a political identity, Judaism is a religious identity, and it does a disservice to both to blur the line,” Ms. Salman said. “When there was the anti-apartheid boycott in South Africa, was that anti-white? Absolutely not. This is like that.”…

[To Read the Full Article Click the Following Link—Ed.]   

                                                                       

Contents                                                                                      

   

THIS PRO-ISRAEL STUDENT LEADER LETS

ALAN DERSHOWITZ ‘SLEEP AT NIGHT’                                                                               

Maayan Jaffe                                                                                             

Algemeiner, Apr. 26, 2015

 

Jewish organizations and leaders have been racking their brains trying to address the issue of skyrocketing antisemitism on college campuses. But at least one prominent pro-Israel activist is reassured by the presence of a student more than five decades his junior. “Justin Hayet lets me sleep at night,” says Alan Dershowitz, the 76-year-old former Harvard Law School professor.

 

The laundry list of recent antisemitic incidents on college campuses isn’t pretty. Swastikas were painted on the building of a Jewish fraternity house at University of California, Davis. Jewish candidates for student government at University of California, Los Angeles and Stanford University have been grilled about their religion. A Jewish professor at Connecticut College has been persecuted over false accusations that he called for the annihilation of the Palestinians. “Right now is a time of fear,” says Gilad Skolnick, director of campus programming for the Committee for Accuracy in Middle East Reporting in America (CAMERA). “We continue to see an uptick in antisemitism on campus and it scares students from doing what they are supposed to do at university—engage in educational and open discourse.”

 

Enter Justin Hayet, a 21-year-old student at Binghamton University – State University of New York, who says that while many of his peers “run away and try to ignore” anti-Semitism, he is “running toward it.” “I want to fix it,” Hayet tells JNS.org. On May 3, Hayet will receive CAMERA’s David Bar-Illan Award for Outstanding Campus Activism award at the media watchdog organization’s annual gala dinner. Chloe Valdary, a pro-Israel student at the University of New Orleans, will receive a similar award. The David Bar-Illan Award is given in memory of the renowned Israeli editor, musician, and policy leader to students who are making Israel’s case on campuses that are often ideological battlegrounds.

 

“Who is going to replace us?” Dershowitz tells JNS.org, speculating on a day when well-known Jewish leaders like himself, Irwin Cotler, and Elie Wiesel are no longer part of the picture. “Justin Hayet—this is a guy who can really become a major leader in the pro-Israel community.”

 

Hayet has deep black hair, an inquisitive brow, and a personality that CAMERA’s Skolnick describes as “passionate” and “optimistic.” Originally from Pikesville, Md., Hayet served as a CAMERA Fellow for the 2013-14 academic year. He hosted a pro-Israel event that drew more than 135 students from diverse backgrounds to hear Israel Defense Forces Lt. Colonel Anat Berko discuss the motivations of suicide bombers who are women and children. He penned multiple pro-Israel letters to the editor in his college newspaper, was published in The Jerusalem Post, and was interviewed by Israel’s Channel 1 network about the pro-Israel movement on college campuses. He is featured in the Jerusalem U film Crossing the Line 2, which provides an in-depth look at the rise of antisemitism on college campuses, the vitriol of organizations such as SJP, and the steadfast determination of Jewish students in the face of such attacks.

 

All this, and Hayet was not even raised in a particularly Zionist family, says his mother, Cheryl Hayet. But Cheryl says she “always encouraged my son to follow his dreams.” In 2008, Hayet decided he wanted to visit Israel. He enrolled in a leadership development opportunity through the local Jewish Community Center. In 2009, he traveled to Israel with that group. “When he got back, the next words were, ‘How do I get back?’” Cheryl Hayet recalls…

 

Hayet looked for an organization that would give him a vehicle for his passion for Israel advocacy. CAMERA was that match, offering him the creative platform to be as expressive as possible on his campus. He later signed on as a recruiter for The Jewish Agency for Israel’s MASA (Israel Journey) program. Amid the abundance of negative messaging about Israel on campuses, getting students interested in studying abroad in the Jewish state is no easy task, says Samantha Robins, recruitment manager for MASA. But Hayet has been among the program’s most successful recruiters. When the students don’t come to him, “he goes and finds them,” Robins tells JNS.org.

 

To be an Israel advocate, Dershowitz says, “You have to know everything.” He explains that pro-Israel activists are constantly bombarded with false information. A true voice for Israel needs to be on top of every news story, have the resources to respond to false allegations, and be a flexible thinker, according to Dershowitz. Moreover, there is an imperative to present the facts in a compelling way and with unbounded energy. “For pro-Israel advocates, there is no vacation,” says Dershowitz, who met Hayet through Israel advocacy work. Israel advocates also need a thick skin, he says. “There will be people who attack you, hate you, demean you, try to destroy you at every point,” Dershowitz says…

[To Read the Full Article Click the Following Link—Ed.]   

                                                                     

Contents                                                                                      

   

THE MODERN UNIVERSITY RISKS BECOMING A COCOON OF SELF-                                    

INDULGENCE AND ANTI-INTELLECTUALISM                                                                               

Rex Murphy                                                                                                         

National Post, Mar. 27, 2015

 

Lighthouses of reason, or beacons of  folly? Which more readily applies to some modern universities? If you have been happy enough to read a New Statesman piece recently, there would be little hesitation in opting for the latter. The column discussed that only-in-a-university puffball of a controversy over The Vagina Monologues. The VM, for those fortunate enough not to have heard of it, is an Eve Ensler opus/art project that offers soliloquizing genitals as an avenue to feminist empowerment, a concept kitten-cute in all its daring and originality. Not surprisingly, it’s been a huge hit on all sorts of enlightened campuses, its combination of vulgarity and Spice Girls feminism being a sure winner with those wishing to storm the barricades of privilege from a front-row seat.

 

The New Statesman piece contained this jewel of progressive reporting: “A U.S. women’s college recently announced it would be discontinuing its annual performance of The Vagina Monologues: it’s exclusionary to talk about vaginas when some women do not have one.” The “women” in question were, by all the ancient indications we have so sturdily relied upon until the blaze of reason started to flicker and dim, men. But the men — on whose behalf students at the all-women university in question, Mount Holyoke, were protesting — were identifying (this is the term of art) as women, but had not yet “transitioned.” They were still, as it were, biologically on the other side of the fence. As was explained by the theatre board that cancelled Ms. Ensler’s vaginal ventriloquism:

 

“At its core, the show offers an extremely narrow perspective on what it means to be a woman … Gender is a wide and varied experience, one that cannot simply be reduced to biological or anatomical distinctions, and many of us who have participated in the show have grown increasingly uncomfortable presenting material that is inherently reductionist and exclusive.”

 

And there you have it. Biological and anatomical distinctions are described by the highly progressive as offering “extremely” narrow perspectives on what it means to be a man or a woman. And they make some people “uncomfortable.” If you were fortunate enough right now to be standing over George Orwell’s grave in the sweet garden of the churchyard at Sutton Courtenay, Oxfordshire, you would hear, piercing the roar of his revolving corpse, a plaintive, despairing voice crying out: “Bury me deeper. Now. Please.”

 

Literally, you could multiply the instances of silly thinking and foolish actions by the hundredfold that now burden universities across the West, as the institutions that have carried the light of intellect from the earliest days of Athens, through the Renaissance, right to our present day, have surrendered to every passing fad and fancy of ever-more trivial and mentally bankrupt causes. Such as the Occupy the Syllabus farce at the University of California at Berkeley, which lamented the presence of such feeble intellects as Socrates, Aristotle, Hobbes, Locke and Hegel in a course, they being that terrible triune of white, dead and male.

 

What is more dismal than the modern campus, with its litany of “safe spaces,” its protection from offence, its bleats about micro-aggressions, the chatter of white privilege and the spate of hysteria over the “rape culture?” The new model of the university risks becoming a cocoon of self-indulgence and actual anti-intellectualism. Administrators, in particular, take a craven posture before any challenge that might land them in the minefields of identity or gender politics.

 

The universities, under the banner of hollow diversity and the even more hollow and self-contradictory banner of tolerance, are mutating into thought-suppressing machines. Any flag raised in the name of identity or marginalization has them prostrate in anxiety and fear. The idea of undergraduate life as a rooting out of intellectual predispositions, of history as anything but a huge case file of oppression, of testing minds as opposed to flattering feelings, is lost.

 

The universities are running a risky race. The more they quiver before the onslaught of the cause-mongers, refuse to take clear and bold stands against protest intimidation tactics, the more they lose their centuries-old prestige. It is a situation that should concern everybody. The ability to think clearly, and the absorption of the best that has been thought and said, have given the world all the moral and scientific progress — real progress — it has ever known. As universities become more and more the willing hostages of the anti-thought brigades, the more they will diminish in both esteem and worth.                                                                                                                              

Contents                                                                                      

                                                      

JERUSALEM DAY: CITY OF PEACE

Shlomo Riskin                                 

Jerusalem Post, May 14, 2015

 

What is so special about Jerusalem? The fact is that Jerusalem – unique among the cities of Israel – is completely identified with our Jewish national mission, expressing by its very name “City of Peace” our prophetic vision for the world. When the Almighty initially elected Abraham, he gave him a mandate: “Through you shall be blessed all of the nations of the earth” (Genesis 12:3). It was for this universal purpose that Abram’s name was changed from Av Ram (exalted father of one nation, Israel) to Avraham; father and teacher of a multitude of nations.

 

Abraham’s descendants will eventually erect a Temple to which all the nations will flock in order to learn and accept the Torah of peace: “To beat their swords into plowshares and their spears into pruning hooks, so that nation will not lift up sword against nation and humanity will not learn war anymore” (Isaiah 2:4). Jeru means “city” in ancient Semitic languages and Shalem means “peace” (wholeness). Abraham was chosen because he was uniquely committed to ethical conduct, the only true path to peace: “For I have elected, loved and appointed him, because he commands his children and his household after him that they keep the way of the Lord, to do compassionate righteousness and moral justice” (Gen. 19:19).

 

Hence, the very first mention of Jerusalem in the Bible is in the context of a meeting between Abraham – immediately after he had defeated the four terrorist kings who captured the innocent Lot – and Melchizedek (literally, the King of Righteousness), the ruler of Shalem. Our Sages identify Shalem with Jerusalem and Melchizedek with Shem, son of Noah – a righteous gentile who served as priest to the Universal Lord of peace, morality and righteousness. Melchizedek brought out bread and wine – reminiscent of the showbread and wine libations of the laterto- be-built desert sanctuary and Jerusalem Temples as well as of our present-day hallot and kiddush wine. He then blessed Abraham to the Lord Most High, Maker of Heaven and Earth, who had delivered Abraham’s foes unto his hands.

 

Abraham reciprocated by giving this gentile priest tithes of everything he owned (Gen. 14:18–20). Nahmanides derives from this episode that Jerusalem is the one place in the world which had always maintained faith in ethical monotheism – in the God who created Adam and Eve in His image. So it is no accident that Abraham met his gentile counterpart in Jerusalem, to declare their joint acceptance of the God of righteousness and peace. Our Holy Temples were (and will be) built on Mount Moriah, Jerusalem, and from there a message of peace will be communicated throughout the world. This is the very place to which God sends Abraham to sacrifice his beloved son Isaac. Abraham acquiesces, but God stays his hand – and this entire incident may well have come to teach that although it will sometimes be necessary to make the ultimate sacrifice for our faith, God does not want innocent human beings to be killed in His Name. The God of ethical monotheism is not Moloch.

 

Abraham calls the place of the binding “God shall be seen,” that is to say that from Mount Moriah the God of ethical monotheism shall be seen and accepted by all the nations of the world. Jeru, or Yeru, is a cognate of the verb to see, Yera’eh, will be seen; the Bible will later teach that on the three pilgrim festivals, every Jew must go up to the Temple Mount “to be seen” by God (Deuteronomy 16:16). And the story of the binding of Isaac concludes with a repetition of the Divine mandate to Abraham, “And through your seed all the nations of the earth shall be blessed.”

 

Let us fast-forward 4,000 years. In 1978, at the end of the Camp David peace talks between US president Jimmy Carter, Egyptian head of state Anwar Sadat and prime minister Menachem Begin, Carter pressed Begin to sign a letter in which he would “merely” agree to place the final status of Jerusalem on the negotiating table. Begin refused. With great emotion he explained that in the Middle Ages there lived a beloved, wise rabbi: Rav Amnon of Mayence, who was pressed by the bishop at least to consider converting to Christianity.

 

After a lengthy argument, the rabbi agreed to ponder the issue for three days. As soon as he returned home, the rabbi was smitten by deep despair; at the end of the three days, he returned to the bishop. “Punish me, O bishop,” he cried. “I should never have agreed to think about such an egregious act against my faith. The tongue which said I would ponder, the hand that shook yours in acquiescence, the leg that came to do your bidding – remove them from my body.” The bishop gladly did as the rabbi requested. The next day was Rosh Hashana, and racked with pain, Rav Amnon was brought to the synagogue, where he cried out before the congregation the U’Netaneh Tokef prayer he had composed the day before.

 

Begin told the American president, “I understand that we may sacrifice a limb to save an entire body. But Jerusalem is Israel’s heart, the focus of our mission. Our Psalmist declared, ‘If I forget thee, O Jerusalem, let my right hand be removed from my body, let my tongue cleave to the roof of my mouth, if I remember thee not’ (Psalms 137:5-6). Please don’t ask me to sign your letter; I would rather forfeit my right hand and my tongue. I cannot repeat Rav Amnon’s transgression….”

 

CIJR Wishes All Our Friends & Supporters: Shabbat Shalom!

No Daily Briefing Will Be Published Monday

 

 

Contents

                                                                                     

 

On Topic

 

Jerusalem Then and Now: A Journey in Photos: Noam Chen, Times of Israel, May 14, 2015—Israel is about to mark what I believe is one of the country’s most important national days: Jerusalem Day.

Re-Liberating Jerusalem: David M. Weinberg, Israel Hayom, May 15, 2015—It's been almost 50 years since Israel unified Jerusalem and turned it from a dusty and depressed backwater into a truly radiant international capital city sparkling with energy and creativity.

Draft International Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Anti-Semitism: Amb. Alan Baker, JCPA, May 6, 2015—Clearly, and sadly, the issue of anti-Semitism has always been and remains a major recurring aspect in the international arena and narrative.

Anti-Semitism Goes to School: Ruth Wisse, Mosaic, May 4, 2015 —I never dreamed that it could come to this!”

 

ABBAS, HAMAS FUEL LATEST JERUSALEM UNREST — IS THIS THE BEGINNING OF THE THIRD INTIFADA?

We welcome your comments to this and any other CIJR publication. Please address your response to:  Rob Coles, Publications Chairman, Canadian Institute for Jewish Research, PO Box 175, Station  H, Montreal QC H3G 2K7 

 

Contents:

 

Is the Third Intifada Here?: David Brinn, Jerusalem Post, Nov. 5, 2014— There’s a sense of free fall in Jerusalem, of events spinning out of control – they are no longer isolated incidents.

Is the Post-Abbas Mideast Already Here?: Seth Mandel, Commentary, Nov. 5, 2014 — Hamas celebrated an act of suicide terrorism in Jerusalem today that mirrored both late October’s attack at a Jerusalem light rail stop and another attack later today in the West Bank.

The Role of Hamas and Fatah in the Jerusalem Disturbances : Pinhas Inbari, JCPA, Oct. 26, 2014 — The deterioration of the security situation in Jerusalem cannot be understood only on the Israeli-Palestinian level

Palestinians: Stop the Children’s Intifada!: Khaled Abu Toameh, Breaking Israel News, Oct. 30, 2014—The exploitation of children in the fight against Israel has attracted little attention from the international community and the media.

On Topic Links

 

Israeli Leaders, Left and Right, Hold Abbas Responsible for Jerusalem Terror Wave: Dave Bender, Algemeiner, Nov. 5, 2014

Jordan Recalls Envoy From Israel Over 'Unprecedented Escalation in Jerusalem'.: Tovah Lazaroff & Michael Wilner, Jerusalem Post, Nov. 5, 2014

Jerusalem in the Unholy Grip of Religious Fervor: David Horovitz, Times of Israel, Nov. 6, 2014

Israel Surrenders the Temple Mount: Jerold Auerbach, Algemeiner, Nov. 5, 2014

For Israel, Two-State Is No Solution: Naftali Bennett, New York Times, Nov. 5, 2014

 

                             

IS THE THIRD INTIFADA HERE?                                                                           

David Brinn                                                                                                

Jerusalem Post, Nov. 5, 2014

 

There’s a sense of free fall in Jerusalem, of events spinning out of control – they are no longer isolated incidents. And they’re not subsiding – riots on the Temple Mount, ongoing rock attacks on the light rail, rioting in Arab neighborhoods, the attempted assassination of Yehudah Glick, and on Wednesday another fatal sidewalk terrorist attack on the seam line between western and eastern Jerusalem. Anyone who lived here through the first and second intifadas will recognize the same jittery, nervous spirit in the streets. It used to be unsafe to board a bus; now it’s unsafe to stand at a bus stop or light rail station. Pedestrians look suspiciously out of the corner of their eyes as they walk on the street.

 

They are no longer isolated incidents. Wednesday’s riot at the Temple Mount was not spontaneous. It was premeditated by Palestinians who gathered the night before with their weapons, prepared for a morning attack on Jewish visitors to the site. A few hours later, Ibrahim al-Acri, a Hamas-affiliated resident of Shuafat, mowed down more than a dozen pedestrians, killing a border policeman – another premeditated act of terrorism that was hailed by Hamas as the act of a “holy martyr” defending so-called “Israeli aggression” at al-Aksa Mosque…Whether it’s the third intifada or a new spin-off, Jerusalem is in the throes of the worst spate of Arab violence against Jewish residents in over a decade. The question is not what to call it. The question is: What are our leaders going to do about it? Build more Jewish housing in post- 1967 Jerusalem neighborhoods? Encourage Jewish groups to buy up more property in Silwan? Increase the maximum punishment for rock throwing? Call to change the status quo on the Temple Mount to enable free Jewish prayer? None of those moves appears to be helpful, and they have in fact exacerbated the situation.

 

However, nothing Israel has done justifies Jordan’s decision Wednesday to recall its ambassador to Israel for consultations, following what it called Israeli ”violations.” That absurd doublespeak – placing the blame for rising Palestinian violence on the Israeli victims – does nothing to calm the situation. And neither does Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas praising Glick’s attacker as a Palestinian hero. It’s clear that the Jerusalem uprising has the backing and support not only of Palestinian terrorist groups but also the PA, purportedly our potential partners in a two-state solution. That eventuality seems farther away with each Palestinian terrorist attack and each security and political response by Israel. All the moves and countermoves seem to be adding fuel to the already scorching fire. Unfortunately, as time has proven, we can’t expect the Palestinian leadership to stop inciting and egging on unrest by creating hysteria over an imaginary Israeli takeover of the Temple Mount – it’s so much easier to foment hate and revenge than it is to actually sit down and try to create a better future for its people. And we can’t expect the current Israeli coalition to take a step back from its policy of building Jewish housing in all parts of Jerusalem or allowing the continuing parade of ministers and politicians onto the Temple Mount campaigning for changing the long-standing status quo.

 

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s strategy, as expressed at Wednesday’s official state memorial ceremony for slain prime minister Yitzhak Rabin, is to bring in as much security as necessary to crush this intifada. He has, perhaps rightly, blown off Abbas as a potential partner and sees only a military solution to the battle for Jerusalem. Let’s hope his way is the right one… because the third intifada is apparently here, despite Israel Police Insp.- Gen. Yohanan Danino’s statement to the contrary Wednesday, spoken only an hour or so after the surviving victims of the van attack were whisked away to the hospital. They are no longer isolated incidents.

                                                                       

Contents      

                                                                                

IS THE POST-ABBAS MIDEAST ALREADY HERE?                                            

Seth Mandel                                                                                                        

Commentary, Nov. 5, 2014

 

Hamas celebrated an act of suicide terrorism in Jerusalem today that mirrored both late October’s attack at a Jerusalem light rail stop and another attack later today in the West Bank. It is not suicide bombing, but more like a form of Islamist suicide by cop. Terrorists are driving cars into civilians–a tool of attack not new to the conflict but which is currently happening with some regularity–and in the first two attacks the terrorist killed a civilian and the terrorist was also killed, in each case by Israeli police arriving at the scene to stop more violence. In this afternoon’s attack, the third in the last two weeks, the driver of the vehicle sped away.

 

Hamas and other Palestinian “resistance” groups have not, apparently, abandoned suicide terrorism after all and are now engaged in a renewed campaign. This type of violence is, of course, reminiscent of the second intifada, which is why it has Jerusalem on edge. The Palestinians have responded to each attack by rioting, so they are basically in a consistent state of violent agitation.

 

There is something more concerning about this latest round of Palestinian violence, however. Though it is perpetrated in some cases by members of Hamas, it has a spontaneous quality to it, and the riots in Arab neighborhoods of Jerusalem are keeping the atmosphere that engenders it going seemingly around the clock. And as much as it is reminiscent of past such campaigns of violence, there is indeed something a bit different about this one: it is heralding the arrival of the post-Abbas Palestinian polity. Now it’s true that PA President Mahmoud Abbas is not only still present and accounted for but is also helping to spark the violence by calling for resistance against Jewish civilians in Jerusalem. But Abbas is not leading; he’s merely following in the path of those who started the party without him. Abbas was famously opposed to Yasser Arafat’s decision to launch the second intifada, and he surely knows that chaos and disorder and Hamas-fueled anarchy only undermine his own power. But he can’t stand around with his hands in his pockets either, because support for spilling Jewish blood drives Palestinian popular opinion.

 

If Abbas survives this current attempted intifada–and make no mistake, Abbas is in the crosshairs of Hamas’s terror campaigns as well–it will be nominally and, in fact, quite pathetically. And the current disorder is precisely why Israel has been protecting Abbas and helping him hold power: Abbas is no partner for peace, but he is the least-bad option available. A powerless, irrelevant, or deposed Abbas means these terror campaigns of Iran’s Palestinian proxies are all that remains of concerted Palestinian strategy. Concern over a post-Abbas Middle East is becoming more common. Last month, the Times of Israel’s Haviv Rettig Gur wrote a typically incisive essay on the state of play between Israel and the Arab world, noting that Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu–often one to embrace ideas that seem absurd only to soon solidify into conventional wisdom–was preparing for this eventuality. Last year Jonathan Schanzer explained, quite rightly, that it was time for Abbas to name a successor to ensure continuity in the peace process.

 

But what if the more dangerous scenario is not an absent Abbas but an irrelevant one? That’s what seems to be playing out right now. It’s possible that an Abbas-led PA is a leaderless PA. There is no old guard and no new blood, but something in between that leaves the Palestinian polity not yet in league with the Islamist fanatics of Hamas in a fluid, precarious state on the precipice. And so we have the vicious yet cartoonish spectacle of the Palestinian president effectively joining a Palestinian intifada that started without him. Arafat wanted an intifada, and he got one. Abbas didn’t, and for a time was able to prevent it. Does Abbas want an intifada now? He can’t possibly be that stupid. But it doesn’t appear to matter. Just what is Abbas actually doing, as leader of the PA? Getting the Palestinians closer to a peace deal? Certainly not; he walked away from it (more than once). Preventing Hamas from setting the terms of the debate? Hardly. Keeping a lid on an angry Palestinian polity inclined to violence? Not anymore. Abbas may or may not get swept away by a new uprising. It’s ironic that what could save him from such a fate is the fact that, increasingly, it might not even be worth the trouble.

 

                                                                       

Contents         

                                                                                                                                            

THE ROLE OF HAMAS AND FATAH

IN THE JERUSALEM DISTURBANCES                                                                 

Pinhas Inbari                                                                                                                

JCPA, Oct. 26, 2014

 

The deterioration of the security situation in Jerusalem cannot be understood only on the Israeli-Palestinian level; it is umbilically connected to the chaos in the Middle East and to the great struggle between the moderate Sunni regimes and the Muslim Brotherhood, which seeks to make the Jerusalem issue a rallying cry of the “Arab Storm.” The Brotherhood’s strategy hopes to unite all of the region’s Islamic movements around the idea of the Muslim Caliphate with the Al-Aqsa Mosque as its hub. As demonstrated during Operation Protective Edge, the Brotherhood flaunted the banner “the siege of Gaza” to incite European Muslims to demonstrate in the streets with their leftist allies, thereby advancing the status of Islam on the Christian continent. Today, the Muslim jihadists use the “Save Jerusalem” campaign to again bring millions of agitated Muslims into the streets of Europe.

 

Before the recent hit-and-run terror attack on a Jerusalem light rail platform that killed an American-Israeli infant, the head of Hamas’ Political Bureau, Khaled Mashal, published a special announcement calling “on our people to hasten immediately to defend Jerusalem and Al-Aqsa, and on the Muslim nation to send a painful message of rage to the world that the Palestinian people and with them the Arab and Islamic nation will not keep quiet about Israeli crime.” Thus, in Hamas’s view it is the Jerusalem issue that can place the Palestinians at the forefront of the revolution unfolding in the Arab world, and of the Muslim awakening in Europe.

 

The clarion call of Al-Aqsa was sounded by the eminent Muslim Brotherhood jurist, Doha-based Sheikh Yusuf al-Qaradawi, when in Cairo’s Tahrir Square in February 2011, immediately after the ouster of President Mubarak, he called for Al-Aqsa’s liberation. Subsequently, he published a book titled Jerusalem: The Problem of Every Muslim. In the introduction, the preeminent scholar of the Muslim Brotherhood says, “O nation of Islam, arise, the hour has come, and the hour of danger beckons – to Jerusalem, to Jerusalem – Al-Aqsa, Al-Aqsa!” Sheikh Qaradawi got into a bitter polemic with the head of the Palestinian Authority, Mahmoud Abbas, after Abbas called to inundate Jerusalem with massive Muslim tourism so as to preserve its Muslim nature in the face of  the “Judaization of the city.” Sheikh Qaradawi has ruled that visiting Jerusalem is forbidden so long as it is under Israeli occupation; Jerusalem must be liberated by force and not by “tourism.” The leader of the northern branch of the Islamic Movement in Israel, Sheikh Raed Salah, who belongs to the circles closest to Sheikh Qaradawi, stated that “Jerusalem is the capital of the imminently approaching Islamic Caliphate.”

 

In monitoring Hamas’s websites, one gets the impression that pressure to sow discord in Jerusalem greatly intensified after the overthrow of former Egyptian president Mohamed Morsi, the crackdown on the Muslim Brotherhood there and its designation as a terrorist movement. Meanwhile, a crisis erupted between Saudi Arabia and Qatar over the funding of the Brotherhood branches in the Arab world, including Hamas, based on the claim that these are terror organizations. Presumably, Qatar tried indirectly to help the Brotherhood in Egypt by inspiring support for them on the Jerusalem issue. It is also evident that in Syria, Qatar has funded an attempt to establish terror groups that put Jerusalem at the top of their concerns, such as the “Al-Aqsa Army.” The fact that Khaled Mashal is living in Qatar has helped the Qataris realize that by ratcheting up the Palestinian issue it can reignite the passion of the Arab masses throughout the Arab world in support of the Muslim Brotherhood. As we saw in Operation Protective Edge, Qatar dictated a tough line against a ceasefire in the hope of bringing the Arab masses out into the streets. Qatar failed in the Arab world – but succeeded in Europe.

 

The use of the Jerusalem issue to exert pressure on the Arab world in general has greatly increased the pressure on Jordan, which was recognized in its peace treaty with Israel as custodian of the Jerusalem holy places.9 The pretension of the worldwide Muslim Brotherhood movement to represent the Jerusalem issue has led the Brotherhood in Jordan to censure the Hashemite government in this regard and question whether Jordan is really safeguarding Al-Aqsa. The fact that the Palestinian Authority has joined Hamas’s campaign to “Save Al-Aqsa,” notwithstanding the agreement that the Authority has signed with Jordan, will likely lead to difficulties between the latter two. King Abdullah has harshly castigated Israel on the Jerusalem issue;11  it must be understood that he himself is in distress. During the two previous intifadas, Fatah of Jerusalem in fact took pains to exclude Jerusalem from the sphere of the conflict. Fatah sources say it was indeed the Fatah Tanzim in Jerusalem that told Arafat, “The interest of the residents of east Jerusalem in steadfastness – sumud – requires excluding them from the sphere of violence.” Hence, whereas the West Bank and Gaza engaged in terror, the Fatah Tanzim made the struggle an issue of sumud, such as safeguarding illegal construction; and even though the Second Intifada was dubbed the “Al-Aqsa Intifada,” Fatah took care to distance it from the holy place.

 

Today, the situation is the opposite: quiet Gaza is licking its wounds, the West Bank is also – relatively – quiet, while most of the focus is on Jerusalem. The main reason is a drastic decline in support for Fatah in Jerusalem, so that it is the Islamic movements such as Hamas and the international Hizb ut-Tahrir movement, which advocates a caliphate, that are directing the events. For Fatah there is nothing left but to be pulled along by Hamas.

 

With an eye to the seventh Fatah conference, planned for the end of the year though its date has not yet been set, Abbas met with members of the “Jerusalem district” of Fatah. Fatah sources in Jerusalem say that the makeup of the cadres has been changed so that “street punks” and even the “underworld” have been recruited to foment an intifada in Jerusalem. They have demanded payment for their activity but so far no budget has been provided to them.  Legal costs for those arrested are supposed to have been paid, but receipt of the funds is not certain. Fatah’s Silwan (Jerusalem) branch was quick to glorify the hit-and-run killer of the three-month-old American-Israeli baby, Chaya Zissel Braun, posting an obituary for the murderer on its official Facebook page, and also using the words “heroic Martyr.”

 

On the issue of funding Fatah activity in Jerusalem, eyes are turned to Qatar, the great financier of all the movements that are undermining regional stability, including in Israel. The large sums evidently being used by the websites of Hamas and the Muslim Brotherhood to wage the Jerusalem campaign indicate that much Qatari money has already flowed their way, and Fatah is now waiting in line. Fatah’s very weak standing in the Al-Aqsa compound was apparent in the attack –wild to the point of life-endangering — on Palestinian religious affairs minister Mahmoud al-Habash when he visited the Al-Aqsa Mosque at the end of June this year. His attackers were Hamas and Hizbat ut-Tahrir men, and the Palestinian Authority’s security forces had a very hard time rescuing him. The joint attack also conveyed a message that these two movements, which have struggled over hegemony on the Mount, have reconciled and are now acting in unison. Yet everyone is competing for Qatar money – a fact that only spurs local groups towards greater levels of violence. Fatah’s joining of the Al-Aqsa campaign as a wagon hitched to fundamentalist Qatar may well herald a takeover of Ramallah by the radical Islamic movements – unless the Palestinian Authority regains its bearings in time.

 

                                                                       

Contents       

                                                                                                                          

PALESTINIANS: STOP THE CHILDREN’S INTIFADA!                                       

Khaled Abu Toameh                                                                                    

Jewish Press, Nov. 4, 2014

 

The exploitation of children in the fight against Israel has attracted little attention from the international community and the media. Human rights groups and the UN have chosen to turn a blind eye to this human rights abuse. Instead of condemning it, these groups are busy denouncing Israel for targeting minors. This strategy works out well for Hamas and Fatah, who can always blame Israel for “deliberately targeting” Palestinian children — an allegation the media in the West often endorses without asking questions. Even more worrying is that the Palestinian groups often reward the families, who then become less motivated to stop their children from risking their lives. Adult activists who encourage and send children to take part in violence should be held accountable, not only by Israel but by their own people. If these adults want an intifada, they should be the first to go out and confront Israeli policemen and soldiers.

 

Hamas, Fatah and other Palestinian groups are using children from east Jerusalem and the West Bank in what appears to be a new intifada against Israel. Nearly half of the Palestinians arrested by Jerusalem Police over the past few months are minors. Some of them are as young as nine. These children are being sent to throw stones and firebombs, and launch fireworks at policemen and IDF soldiers, as well as at Israeli civilians and vehicles, including buses and the light rail in Jerusalem. The exploitation of children in the fight against Israel has attracted little attention from the international community and media. Human rights groups and United Nations institutions have chosen to turn a blind eye to these human rights abuses. Instead of condemning those who exploit the children and dispatch them to confront policemen and soldiers, these groups and institutions are busy denouncing Israel for targeting minors.

 

Most of the children’s attacks occur after school, so they are not deprived of education. But sadly, some of the Palestinian minors get killed or wounded in clashes with Israeli security forces. Orwa Hammad, a 14-year-old Palestinian-American boy from the village of Silwad near Ramallah, was shot dead by IDF soldiers last week. The IDF says he was spotted preparing to hurl a firebomb at Israeli vehicles. Earlier, 13-year-old Bahaa Bader was shot dead by IDF soldiers in the village of Beit Likya, also in the Ramallah area. An IDF spokesman said soldiers responded with live fire when residents threw firebombs at them as they were exiting the village. Last month, 16-year-old Mohammed Sinokort from the Wadi al-Joz neighborhood of Jerusalem was killed during a stone-throwing incident.

 

This is not the first time that Palestinian groups use children in the struggle against Israel. During the first intifada, which erupted in 1987, children and women were often at the forefront in clashes with Israeli security personnel…Moreover, the Palestinian groups know that the children who are being sent to confront Israeli soldiers and policemen will not be held accountable. Most of the minors detained by the Jerusalem Police for their involvement in the violence are released to house arrest. In cases where the children are aged nine to 13, they are referred to social welfare authorities without being detained. The majority of these children are going out to throw stones and firebombs at Israelis because they are come from poor families or are lacking in good education and other economic and social privileges. But many of them come from middle-class families and do not live in refugee camps.

 

These children are victims of a campaign of indoctrination and incitement that is being waged by various Palestinian groups such as Hamas and Fatah. It is a campaign that is being waged through the media, mosques, educational institutions and the fiery rhetoric of leaders and activists. What is even more worrying is that the Palestinian groups often reward the families of the children by hiring lawyers and paying fines imposed on them by Israeli courts. As a result, the families are less motivated to stop their children from risking their lives. There are also reports that Fatah and Hamas activists in Jerusalem have been paying children small sums of money to throw stones and firebombs at Israelis and block roads in several Arab neighborhoods.

 

Hamas and Fatah had long discovered that children are one of the most effective tools in the fight against Israel — especially because of the damage Israel sustains in the court of international public opinion. Thus far, it appears that the Palestinian groups have been successful in their effort to depict Israel as a country that deliberately targets Palestinian minors whose only crime is that they “resisted occupation.” Dressing children in military uniforms and allowing them to carry rifles and pistols during rallies in the West Bank and Gaza Strip is one way of encouraging them to put their lives at risk. But of course Hamas, Fatah and other Palestinian factions do not see anything wrong with this practice. The adult activists who send and encourage children to take part in violence should be held accountable, not only by Israeli authorities, but also by their own people and international human rights organizations. If these adults want an intifada, they should be the first to go out and confront Israeli policemen and soldiers. The time has come for the international community and media to pay attention to their disturbing conduct and demand that Palestinian groups stop hiding behind children.

 

           

Contents                                               

 

On Topic

 

Israeli Leaders, Left and Right, Hold Abbas Responsible for Jerusalem Terror Wave: Dave Bender, Algemeiner, Nov. 5, 2014 —Multiple Israeli officials on Wednesday condemned Palestinian Authority (PA) President Mahmoud Abbas for what they charged was his direct and indirect incitement leading to a string of terror attacks, including today’s lethal vehicular assault in Jerusalem.

Jordan Recalls Envoy From Israel Over 'Unprecedented Escalation in Jerusalem'.: Tovah Lazaroff & Michael Wilner, Jerusalem Post, Nov. 5, 2014—Jordan recalled Ambassador to Israel Walid Obeidat for consultations in Amman to protest Israeli “aggression” on the Temple Mount and in Jerusalem in general, further fraying its already tense relationship with the Jewish state.

Jerusalem in the Unholy Grip of Religious Fervor: David Horovitz, Times of Israel, Nov. 6, 2014 —In his ominously titled book, “The End of Days: Fundamentalism and the Struggle for the Temple Mount,” author Gershom Gorenberg quotes a staggering conversation that took place at the Temple Mount immediately after it was captured by Israeli paratroopers on June 7, 1967, while the victorious soldiers still “wandered about the plaza as if they were dreaming.”

Israel Surrenders the Temple Mount: Jerold Auerbach, Algemeiner, Nov. 5, 2014—Since Israel declared independence on May 14, 1948, ending nearly two thousand years of Jewish exile and dispersion, only one other moment has rivaled its stunning historical significance.                                                                                                                                                                 

For Israel, Two-State Is No Solution: Naftali Bennett, New York Times, Nov. 5, 2014—Recent events in the Middle East are a reminder of how the old models of peace between Israel and the Palestinians are no longer relevant. The time has come to rethink the two-state solution.

 

 

 

               

 

 

 

                      

                

                            

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 Contents:         

Visit CIJR’s Bi-Weekly Webzine: Israzine.

CIJR’s ISRANET Daily Briefing is available by e-mail.
Please urge colleagues, friends, and family to visit our website for more information on our ISRANET series.
To join our distribution list, or to unsubscribe, visit us at http://www.isranet.org/.

The ISRANET Daily Briefing is a service of CIJR. We hope that you find it useful and that you will support it and our pro-Israel educational work by forwarding a minimum $90.00 tax-deductible contribution [please send a cheque or VISA/MasterCard information to CIJR (see cover page for address)]. All donations include a membership-subscription to our respected quarterly ISRAFAX print magazine, which will be mailed to your home.

CIJR’s ISRANET Daily Briefing attempts to convey a wide variety of opinions on Israel, the Middle East and the Jewish world for its readers’ educational and research purposes. Reprinted articles and documents express the opinions of their authors, and do not necessarily reflect the viewpoint of the Canadian Institute for Jewish Research.

 

 

Rob Coles, Publications Chairman, Canadian Institute for Jewish ResearchL'institut Canadien de recherches sur le Judaïsme, www.isranet.org

Tel: (514) 486-5544 – Fax:(514) 486-8284 ; ber@isranet.org

YOM YERUSHALAYIM, 47TH ANNIVERSARY OF UNIFICATION; SAVING DANISH JEWS FROM SHOAH; O’S WEST POINT RETREAT

We welcome your comments to this and any other CIJR publication. Please address your response to:  Rob Coles, Publications Chairman, Canadian Institute for Jewish Research, PO Box 175, Station  H, Montreal QC H3G 2K7 – Tel: (514) 486-5544 – Fax:(514) 486-8284; E-mail: rob@isranet.org

 

The Dangerous Divided Jerusalem Fantasy: Jonathan S. Tobin, Commentary, May 28, 2014—  On this date in the Hebrew calendar 47 years ago, Israeli forces ended the division of Jerusalem.

One Country Saved Its Jews. Were They Just Better People?: Michael Ignatieff, New Republic, Dec 12, 2013— This magnificent book states its central argument in its title. Danish Jews survived Hitler’s rule in World War II, when other European Jews did not, because Danes regarded their Jewish neighbors as countrymen.

Obama’s Ad Hoc Foreign Policy: Charles Krauthammer, National Review, May 29, 2014— It is fitting that the day before President Obama gives his grand West Point address defending the wisdom and prudence of his foreign policy, his government should be urging Americans to evacuate Libya.

Letters from Our Readers

 

On Topic Links

 

Yom Yerushalayim: Reunification of a People and a Past: Israel Forever Foundation, Jewish Press, May 28, 2014

Jerusalem Day: Isi Leibler, Jerusalem Post, May 28, 2014

The Holocaust's Foremost Unsung Hero: Emily Amrousi, Israel Hayom, Apr. 27, 2014

At West Point, President Obama Binds America’s Hands on Foreign Affairs: Washington Post, May 28, 2014

Cadets Not Excited With Obama Speech; Media United Against President: Joseph R. Carducci, Downtrend, May 29, 2014

 

THE DANGEROUS DIVIDED JERUSALEM FANTASY           

Jonathan S. Tobin                                                                                                           Commentary, May 28, 2014

                         

On this date in the Hebrew calendar 47 years ago, Israeli forces ended the division of Jerusalem. The city had been split during the Arab siege of the capital in 1948 and it remained cut in half by an ugly wall as well as by dangerous no-man’s-land zones. The victory in the Six-Day War ended an illegal occupation of the eastern portion of the city as well as the walled Old City by Jordan that had lasted for 19 years but was not recognized by the world. In breaking down the barriers, the Israelis not only reunited the city but opened access to its religious shrines—including the Western Wall and the Temple Mount—which had been off limits for Jews during the Jordanian occupation. But as Israelis celebrated what is known as “Jerusalem Day” today, support for the push to reinstate the division of the city in the international community has grown. Every Middle East peace plan proposed in the last 15 years, including the three Israeli offers of statehood that the Palestinians turned down, included a new partition of Jerusalem even though both sides remain murky about how that could be accomplished without reinstating the warlike atmosphere that prevailed before June 1967.

 

But for those who believe that such a partition is essential to peace, the process by which a city that has grown exponentially in the last five decades, with Jews and Arabs no longer neatly divided by a wall, could be split is merely a matter of details. To fill in the blanks for its readers, Ha’aretz published a Jerusalem Day feature that provided the answer to the question. Highlighting a complicated scheme put forward by a Jerusalem architectural firm, the paper asserted that most Jerusalemites wouldn’t even notice the difference if their city was re-partitioned. On the surface the plan, which has been funded by a variety of left-wing sources, seems practical if complicated and expensive. But it is not only completely unrealistic; it is based on a fantasy that the real problem in Jerusalem is primarily one of engineering, aesthetics, and logistics. Like every other element of other utopian peace plans that are sold to both the Israeli and Western publics as the solution that “everybody knows” must eventually happen, this vision of Jerusalem ignores the fundamental problem of peace: the fact that the Palestinians don’t want it.

 

The conceit of the divided Jerusalem scheme is that the old “green line” that once cut through the city as well as the West Bank is alive and well. Since the second intifada, Jews largely avoid Arab sectors of the city and Arabs do the same in Jewish sections. The only problem then is how to “soften” the appearance of a division so as to codify the reality of a divided city without actually reinstating the ugly and perilous military fortifications that served as the front lines for the Arab-Israeli wars from 1949 to 1967. There is some truth to the notion that Jerusalem is currently divided in this manner. But it is a fallacy to assert that it is anything as absolute as the authors of the plan and their media cheerleaders claim. Contrary to the notion popularized by the terminology used by the media, there is no real east or west Jerusalem. The city is built on hills with much of the “eastern” section actually in the north and south where Jewish neighborhoods on the other side of the green line have existed for over 40 years. The idea that this can all be easily sorted out by handing out the Jewish sections to Israel and the Arab ones to “Palestine” won’t work.

 

It is a falsehood to assert that 40 percent of Jerusalemites can’t vote in municipal elections. Residents of Arab neighborhoods could vote but don’t. If they did participate they would hold real power, but for nationalist reasons they choose to boycott the democratic process and the result is that they have been shortchanged. While current Mayor Nir Barkat opposes division of the city, he has rightly argued that Israel has to do better in serving Arab neighborhoods because with sovereignty comes responsibility. But what the plan’s authors also leave out of the equation is that a division would deprive many of these same Arabs of their employment and health coverage since a great number work on the Israeli side or get their medical treatment there. Will they give that up for Palestine? Just as when the security barrier was erected, many Arabs will clamor to stay on the Israeli side of any divide for obvious reasons.

 

Left unsaid in the piece is the fact that there are actually a number of interlocked Jewish and Arab neighborhoods. Nor does it explain how the Hebrew University campus on Mount Scopus (which was isolated as a Jewish enclave during the Jordanian occupation) could be reached from what they propose to be Israeli Jerusalem or how Jerusalemites could access the scenic Sherover/Haas promenade in the city. And those are just a few of the anomalies that go unsolved or unanswered in a scheme that treats transportation patterns and border security as if they were mere blots on the map rather than avoidable facts. There’s also no mention here about how security in this intricately divided city could be administered. Would Israelis really be prepared to cede the security of their capital to foreign forces? Could peace monitors be relied upon to respect Israeli sovereignty over the Jewish neighborhoods if they become, after peace, the object of a new intifada whose purpose would be to chip away at the rump of the Jewish state?…

[To Read the Full Article Click the Following Link—Ed.]

                                                                               

                                               

Contents
                                  

                                        

 

ONE COUNTRY SAVED ITS JEWS.

WERE THEY JUST BETTER PEOPLE?

Michael Ignatieff                                                

New Republic, Dec. 14, 2014

 

This magnificent book states its central argument in its title. Danish Jews survived Hitler’s rule in World War II, when other European Jews did not, because Danes regarded their Jewish neighbors as countrymen. There was no “us” and “them;” there was just us. When, in October 1943, the Gestapo came to round up the 7,500 Jews of Copenhagen, the Danish police did not help them to smash down the doors. The churches read letters of protest to their congregations. Neighbors helped families to flee to villages on the Baltic coast, where local people gave them shelter in churches, basements, and holiday houses and local fishermen loaded up their boats and landed them safely in neutral Sweden. Bo Lidegaard, the editor of the leading Danish newspaper Politiken, has retold this story using astonishingly vivid unpublished material from families who escaped, and the testimony of contemporary eyewitnesses, senior Danish leaders (including the king himself), and even the Germans who ordered the roundups. The result is an intensely human account of one episode in the persecution of European Jews that ended in survival.

 

The story may have ended well, but it is a complex tale. The central ambiguity is that the Germans warned the Jews and let most of them escape. Lidegaard claims this was because the Danes refused to help the Germans, but the causation might also have worked in the other direction. It was when the Danes realized that the Germans were letting some Jews go that they found the courage to help the rest of their Jewish community escape. Countrymen is a fascinating study in the ambiguity of virtue. The Danes knew long before the war that their army could not resist a German invasion. Instead of overtly criticizing Hitler, the Social Democratic governments of the 1930s sought to inoculate their populations against the racist ideology next door. It was in those ominous years that the shared identity of all Danes as democratic citizens was drummed into the political culture, just in time to render most Danes deeply resistant to the Nazi claim that there existed a “Jewish problem” in Denmark. Lidegaard’s central insight is that human solidarity in crisis depended on the prior consolidation of a decent politics, on the creation of a shared political imagination. Some Danes did harbor anti-Semitic feelings, but even they understood the Jews to be members of a political community, and so any attack on them was an attack on the Danish nation as such.

 

The nation in question was imagined in civic terms rather than ethnic terms. What mattered was a shared commitment to democracy and law, not a common race or religion. We can see this in the fact that Danish citizens did not defend several hundred communists who were interned and deported by the Danish government for denouncing the Danish monarchy and supporting the Hitler-Stalin pact. The Danes did nothing to defend their own communists, but they did stand up for the Jews.

 

The Danish response to the Nazis illuminates a crucial fact about the Holocaust: the Germans did not always force the issue of extermination where they faced determined resistance from occupied populations. In Bulgaria, as Tzvetan Todorov has shown in his aptly titled book The Fragility of Goodness, the Jews were saved because the king of Bulgaria, the Orthodox Church, and a few key Bulgarian politicians refused to assist the German occupiers. Why did a similar civic sense of solidarity not take root in other countries? In Holland, why did 80 percent of Dutch Jews perish? And what about France: why did liberty, equality, and fraternity not apply to the citizens driven from their homes by French police and sent to deportation and death? These questions become harder to answer in the light of the Danish and Bulgarian counterexamples. One possible explanation is that the German occupation’s presence in Denmark was lighter than in either France or Holland. The Danes, like the Bulgarians, kept their king and maintained their own government throughout the occupation. Self-government gave them a capacity to defend Jews that was never possible in the occupied zones of France or Holland.

 

Both the Danish king and the Danish government decided that their best hope of maintaining Denmark’s sovereignty lay in cooperating but not collaborating with the German occupiers. This “cooperation” profited some Danes but shamed many others. The Danish population harbored ancestral hostility to the Germans, and the occupation reinforced these feelings. The Germans, for their part, put up with this frigid relationship: they needed Danish food, and Danish cooperation freed up German military resources for battle on the Eastern Front, and the Nazis wanted to be liked. They wanted their “cooperative” relationship with Denmark to serve as a model for a future European community under Hitler’s domination. From very early on in this ambiguous relationship, the Danes, from the king on down, made it clear that harming the Jews would bring cooperation to an end and force the Germans to occupy the country altogether. The king famously told his prime minister, in private, that if the Germans forced the Danish Jews to wear a yellow star, then he would wear one too. Word of the royal position went public and even led to a myth that the king had actually ridden through the streets of Copenhagen on horseback wearing a yellow star on his uniform. The king never did wear a star. He didn’t have to wear one, because, thanks to his opposition, the Germans never imposed such a regulation in Denmark.

 

Then, in late summer in 1943, the order came down from Eichmann to the local German authorities in Copenhagen that they had to rid the city of its Jews, these authorities faced a dilemma. They knew that the Danish politicians, police, and media—that Danish society as a whole—would resist and that, once the cooperation of the Danes had been lost, the Germans would have to run the country themselves. The Germans in Copenhagen were also beginning to have second thoughts about the war itself. By then the German armies had been defeated at Stalingrad. While the Gestapo in Poland and Eastern Europe faced the prospect of defeat by accelerating the infernal rhythm of extermination in the death camps, the Gestapo in Denmark began to look for a way out. The local Gauleiter, a conniving opportunist named Werner Best, did launch the roundup of the Jews, but only after letting the Jewish community find out in advance what was coming, giving them time to escape. He did get his hands on some people in an old-age home and dispatch them to Theresienstadt, but all but 1 percent of the Jewish community escaped his clutches. It is an astonishing number.

 

When Adolf Eichmann came to Copenhagen in 1943 to find out why so many Jews had escaped, he did not cashier the local Gestapo. Instead he backed down and called off the deportations of Danes who were half-Jewish or married to Jews. Lidegaard’s explanation for Eichmann’s volte face is simply that the institutions of Danish society all refused to go along. And without their cooperation, a Final Solution in Denmark became impossible. Totalitarianism, not to mention ethnic cleansing and ethnic extermination, always requires a great deal of collaboration. When they got wind of German plans in September 1943, the Danish government resigned, and no politician agreed to serve in a collaborationist government with the Germans thereafter. After the roundups of Jews were announced, leading Danish politicians of different parties issued a joint statement declaring, “The Danish Jews are an integral part of the people, and therefore all the people are deeply affected by the measures taken, which are seen as a violation of the Danish sense of justice.” This is the political culture of “countrymen” with which Lidegaard explains the extraordinary determination—and success—of the Danes in protecting their Jewish population…

 

When the Germans arrived to begin the deportations, Jews had already been warned—in their synagogues—and they simply vanished into the countryside, heading for the coast to seek a crossing to neutral Sweden. There was little or no Jewish communal organization and no Danish underground to help them. What ensued was a chaotic family-by-family flight, made possible simply because ordinary members of Danish society feigned ignorance when Germans questioned them, while sheltering families in seaside villages, hotels, and country cottages. Danish police on the coast warned hiding families when the Gestapo came to call, and signaled all-clear so that boats bearing Danish Jews could slip away to Sweden. The fishermen who took the Danish Jews across the Baltic demanded huge sums for the crossing, but managed to get their frightened fellow citizens to safety. When the Gestapo did seize Jewish families hiding in the church of the small fishing village of Gilleleje, the people were so outraged that they banded together to assist others to flee. One villager even confronted the local Gestapo officer, shining a flashlight in his face and exclaiming: “The poor Jews!” When the German replied, “It is written in the Bible that this shall be their fate,” the villager unforgettably replied: “But it is not written that it has to happen in Gilleleje.”

 

Why did the Danes behave so differently from most other societies and populations in occupied Europe? For a start, they were the only nation where escape to a safe neutral country lay across a narrow strait of water. Moreover, they were not subject to exterminatory pressure themselves. They were not directly occupied, and their leadership structures from the monarch down to the local mayors were not ripped apart. The newspapers in Copenhagen were free enough to report the deportations and thus to assist any Jews still not in the know to flee. The relatively free circulation of information also made it impossible for non-Jewish Danes to claim, as so many Germans did, that “of this we had no knowledge.” Most of all, Denmark was a small, homogeneous society, with a stable democracy, a monarchy that commanded respect, and a shared national hostility to the Germans. Denmark offers some confirmation of Rousseau’s observation that virtue is most easily fostered in small republics…

 

Countrymen is a story about a little country that did the right thing for complicated reasons, and got away with it for equally complicated reasons. It is a story that reinforces an old truth: solidarity and decency depend on a dense tissue of connection among people, on long-formed habits of the heart, on resilient cultures of common citizenship, and on leaders who marshal these virtues by their example. In Denmark, this dense tissue bound human beings together and indirect rule made it impossible for the Germans to rip it apart. Elsewhere in Europe, by contrast, it was destroyed in stages, first by ghettoizing and isolating the Jewish people and then by insulating bystanders from the full horror of Nazi intentions. Once Jews had been stripped of citizenship, property, rights, and social existence—once they could appeal only to the common humanity of persecutors and bystanders alike—it was too late.

 

There is a sobering message in Lidegaard’s tale for the human rights era that came after these abominations. If a people come to rely for their protection on human rights alone, on the mutual recognition of common humanity, they are already in serious danger. The Danish story seems to tell us that it is not the universal human chain that binds peoples together in extremity, but more local and granular ties: the particular consciousness of time, place, and heritage that led a Danish villager to stand up to the Gestapo and say no, it will not happen here, not in our village. This extraordinary story of one small country has resonance beyond its Danish context. Countrymen should be read by anyone seeking to understand what precise set of shared social and political understandings can make possible, in times of terrible darkness, acts of civil courage and uncommon decency.

 

Contents
                                  

OBAMA’S AD HOC FOREIGN POLICY                                    

Charles Krauthammer                                                                                      

National Review, May 29, 2014

 

It is fitting that the day before President Obama gives his grand West Point address defending the wisdom and prudence of his foreign policy, his government should be urging Americans to evacuate Libya. Libya, of course, was once the model Obama intervention — the exquisitely calibrated military engagement wrapped in the rhetorical extravagance of a nationally televised address proclaiming his newest foreign-policy doctrine (they change to fit the latest ad hoc decision): the responsibility to protect, or R2P. You don’t hear R2P bandied about much anymore. Not with more than 50,000 civilians having been slaughtered in Syria’s civil war, unprotected in any way by the United States. Nor for that matter do you hear much about Libya, now so dangerously chaotic and jihadi-infested that the State Department is telling Americans to get out. And you didn’t hear much of anything in the West Point speech. It was a somber parade of straw men, as the president applauded himself for steering the nation on a nervy middle course between extreme isolationism and madcap interventionism. It was the rhetorical equivalent of that classic national-security joke in which the presidential aide, devoted to policy option X, submits the following decision memo: Option 1. All-out nuclear war…Option 2. Unilateral surrender…Option 3. Policy X.

 

The isolationism of Obama’s telling is a species not to be found anywhere. Not even Rand Paul would withdraw from everywhere. And even members of Congress’s dovish Left have called for sending drones to Nigeria, for God’s sake. As for Obama’s interventionists, they are grotesquely described as people “who think military intervention is the only way for America to avoid looking weak” while Obama courageously refuses to believe that “every problem has a military solution.” Name one person who does.

 

“Why is it that everybody is so eager to use military force?” Obama recently and plaintively asked about Ukraine. In reality, nobody is. What actual earthlings are eager for is sending military assistance to Ukraine’s woefully equipped forces. That’s what the interim prime minister asked for when he visited here in March — and was denied. Two months later, military assistance was the first thing Petro Poroshenko, Ukraine’s newly elected president, said he wanted from the United States. Note: not boots on the ground.

Same for Syria. It was Obama, not his critics, who went to the brink of a military strike over the use of chemical weapons. From which he then flinched. Critics have been begging Obama to help train and equip the outmanned and outgunned rebels — a policy to which he now intimates he might finally be coming around. Three years late. Qusair, Homs, and major suburbs of Damascus have already been retaken by the government. The battle has by now so decisively tilted toward Assad — backed by Russia, Iran, and Hezbollah, while Obama dithered — that Assad is holding triumphal presidential elections next week.

 

Amid all this, Obama seems unaware of how far his country has fallen. He attributes claims of American decline to either misreading history or partisan politics. Problem is: Most of the complaints are coming from abroad, from U.S. allies with no stake whatsoever in U.S. partisan politics. Their concern is their own security as they watch this president undertake multiple abdications from Warsaw to Kabul. What is the world to think when Obama makes the case for a residual force in Afghanistan – “after all the sacrifices we’ve made, we want to preserve the gains that you have helped to win” — and then announces a drawdown of American forces to 10,000, followed by total liquidation within two years on a fixed timetable regardless of circumstances?

 

The policy contradicts the premise. If you want not to forfeit our terribly hard-earned gains — as we forfeited all our gains in Iraq with the 2011 withdrawal — why not let conditions dictate the post-2014 drawdowns? Why go to zero — precisely by 2016? For the same reason, perhaps, that the Afghan surge was ended precisely in 2012, in the middle of the fighting season — but before the November election. A 2016 Afghan end date might help Democrats electorally and, occurring with Obama still in office, provide a shiny new line to his résumé. Is this how a great nation decides matters of war and peace — to help one party and polish the reputation of one man? As with the West Point speech itself, as with the president’s entire foreign policy of retreat, one can only marvel at the smallness of it all.

 

 

LETTERS FROM OUR READERS

 

“Dear Fred…I had a high opinion of Barry Rubin, and was sorry to hear of his death at a relatively early age. I also liked and approve of your obituary essay. You presented a case that I would like to see given proper attention by Gentiles as well as Jews, conservatives and liberals. Power to your arm. Best Wishes,   

—Neil (Feb. 8, 2014)

 

“In general I am a supporter of CIJR and consider it an excellent and valuable organization. I have, however, had reservations about some of your positions. For example, you appear to often paint United States president Obama as anti-Israel and pro-Arab. I contend there is little or no evidence for this. He is rather, a weak and ineffictive leader, especially in foreign matters. As well, there is an understandable, but often wrong tarring of left wingers as Israel bashers. Perhaps this last was what you had in mind in reprinting the rather sick and slightly dated article by Steven Plaut called "On the Tikkun Olam Fetish" in today's Daily Briefing. In my view it was nothing more than a puny defence of Orthodoxy and an attack on more liberal strains of Judaism. This does no service to your cause and mine, the defence of Israel, and represents one of Israel's great failings. It was in no way useful, nor appreciated.”

—Ken (Mar. 10, 2014)

 

“The Purimspiel Daily Briefing was lovely and very entertaining. I am wondering where is all the material from and if either of you wrote up one of these funny ones. Happy Purim”

—Jack (Mar. 16, 2014)

 

“As someone who consumes a vast amount of research daily on the Arab-Israeli conflict, I can think of no other pro-Israeli think tank that has  attained the reach, scope, effectiveness, and impeccable credentials as CIJR in its unparalleled original research and analysis: From  the Middle East and international  radical Islam to  internal developments within Canada affecting the Jewish community  and its overpowering intellectual analysis of what is going in Israel, the Muslim World and the reverberations in Canada and north America. CIJR is not just a think tank. It is an intellectual leader and unrelenting activist institution  in protecting the security of the State of Israel and of Canada itself from the unspeakable ravages of international radical Islamic movements, as they have established centers from gravity from the Middle East, Asia, Africa, south America, Western Europe and North America…So on the occasion of the CIJR’s 26th Annual Gala Dinner, let me raise a toast to the incredibly hard working and truly assiduous workers behind this miraculously effective  institute and wish it another 26 years of unparalleled  success.  This is one organization that has truly made a difference in our lives and in improving the security of the Jewish people and the State of Israel. It deserves all of our support. “

—Steven Emerson, Executive Director, The Investigative Project on Terrorism (May 14, 2014)

 

CIJR wishes all its friends and supporters: Shabbat Shalom!

Yom Yerushalayim: Reunification of a People and a Past: Israel Forever Foundation, Jewish Press, May 28, 2014—There has been a continuous Jewish presence in Jerusalem, and our connection to and passion for the city has been preserved as a memory by Jewish people around the world.

Jerusalem Day: Isi Leibler, Jerusalem Post, May 28, 2014—In the spirit of Yom Yerushalayim, Jerusalem Day, I would like to share with you a remarkable sermon I have just come across, which was delivered by my late father-in- law, Rabbi Israel Porush, at the Great Synagogue in Sydney one year after the Six Day War.

The Holocaust's Foremost Unsung Hero: Emily Amrousi, Israel Hayom, Apr. 27, 2014—In 1986, a 78-year-old man named Moshe Kraus died in Jerusalem. You probably don't recognize the name. He was never commemorated in any way.

At West Point, President Obama Binds America’s Hands on Foreign Affairs: Washington Post, May 28, 2014 —President Obama has retrenched U.S. global engagement in a way that has shaken the confidence of many U.S. allies and encouraged some adversaries.

Cadets Not Excited With Obama Speech; Media United Against President: Joseph R. Carducci, Downtrend, May 29, 2014

                               

 

                            

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 Contents:         

Visit CIJR’s Bi-Weekly Webzine: Israzine.

CIJR’s ISRANET Daily Briefing is available by e-mail.
Please urge colleagues, friends, and family to visit our website for more information on our ISRANET series.
To join our distribution list, or to unsubscribe, visit us at http://www.isranet.org/.

The ISRANET Daily Briefing is a service of CIJR. We hope that you find it useful and that you will support it and our pro-Israel educational work by forwarding a minimum $90.00 tax-deductible contribution [please send a cheque or VISA/MasterCard information to CIJR (see cover page for address)]. All donations include a membership-subscription to our respected quarterly ISRAFAX print magazine, which will be mailed to your home.

CIJR’s ISRANET Daily Briefing attempts to convey a wide variety of opinions on Israel, the Middle East and the Jewish world for its readers’ educational and research purposes. Reprinted articles and documents express the opinions of their authors, and do not necessarily reflect the viewpoint of the Canadian Institute for Jewish Research.

 

 

Rob Coles, Publications Chairman, Canadian Institute for Jewish ResearchL'institut Canadien de recherches sur le Judaïsme, www.isranet.org

Tel: (514) 486-5544 – Fax:(514) 486-8284 ; ber@isranet.org

YOM YERUSHALAIM – JERUSALEM DAY: “FOR ZION’S SAKE I WILL NOT KEEP SILENT AND FOR JERUSALEM’S SAKE I WILL NOT REST” — ISAIAH 62:1

Download a pdf version of today's Daily Briefing.

 

Contents:                          

 

 

Yerushalaim – Ir Shalom –  The City Of Peace: Baruch Cohen, May 8, 2013

 

Jerusalem Syndrome: Chaim Richman, Jerusalem Post, May 7, 2013—Jerusalem Day,  observed this week on May 8, marks the 46th anniversary of the liberation and unification of Jerusalem in the 1967 Six Day War. The return of Jerusalem, greatest and most decisive of all Israel’s military victories, opened floodgates of emotion that ran deep in the nation’s collective heart.

 

Why Jerusalem Should not Be Divided: David Weinberg, Real Clear World, April 1, 2010—The upshot of [the] Obama-Netanyahu confrontation is that the White House wants to move Israel rapidly towards a division of Jerusalem. However, the widely held presumption that splitting Jerusalem will lead to prosperity for the city and to peace for Jews and Arabs is an egregious error. Partitioning Jerusalem will destroy the city.

 

Jerusalem, Capital of Israel: An Islamic Prophecy: Ali Salim, Gatestone Institute, January 29, 2013—Jerusalem is the capital of the Children of Israel…and it is forbidden for Musims to demand it. Is it possible that Allah, who in His infinite mercy, calls them the Chosen People, and promises them the Holy Land, also plans to murder them, using the Muslims in Palestine as His intermediary?

 

On Topic Links

 

Timeline for the History of Jerusalem: Jewish Virtual Library

Is Jerusalem Really Negotiable?: Alan Baker, JCPA, May 2013

One Jerusalem. Undivided. Open to all. Controlled by Israel: David Horovitz, Times of Israel,  May 8, 2013

Between East & West: Jerusalem’s No-Man’s Land: Aviva & Shmuel Bar-Am, Times of Israel, May 8, 2013

The Heart and Soul of the Jewish People: Farley Weiss, Jewish Press, May 8th, 2013

 

 

YERUSHALAIM – IR SHALOM –  THE CITY OF PEACE

Baruch Cohen, May 8, 2013

In loving memory of Malca   z”l

“Jerusalem is the heart of the Jewish People.”

–         David Ben-Gurion

 

The history of Yerushalaim is the history of greatness, splendour, lofty ideals and of war and peace. Yerushalaim is the history of man. It has a history of settlement of more than five thousand years, and  the Jewish people has been connected to Yerushalaim for at least three thousand of those five thousand years.

 

   Throughout the centuries of their dispersion, in whatever corner of the planet they found themselves, the Jews prayed for their return to Zion, the biblical synonym for Yerushalaim.

 

   History has no parallel to the mystic bond of the Jews with Yerushalaim. Without it there would be no State of Israel. Houses of prayer, synagogues, where ever in the world they were built, were oriented towards the east, towards Yerushalaim and the practice is followed to this very day.

 

   Yerushalaim is and will forever remain the centre of the Jewish nation, the capital of the old/young rebuilt State of Israel.

 

Next year in a united and strong Yerushalaim!

B’shana haBaa b’ Yerushalaim HaBnuia!

 

Top of Page

 

 

JERUSALEM SYNDROME

Chaim Richman

Jerusalem Post, May 7, 2013

 

Jerusalem Day,  observed this week on May 8, marks the 46th anniversary of the liberation and unification of Jerusalem in the 1967 Six Day War. The return of Jerusalem, greatest and most decisive of all Israel’s military victories, opened floodgates of emotion that ran deep in the nation’s collective heart.

 

So why isn’t Jerusalem Day observed as a national holiday in the manner of Independence Day? Or perhaps the real question is, what exactly is it that we are celebrating? The sad truth is that the government of Israel suffers from a hereditary disease – let’s call it “Jerusalem Syndrome” albeit of a different nature than the popularized version. The contagion made its first appearance on June 7, 1967, moments after Mordechai “Motta” Gur’s famous words, “The Temple Mount is in our hands,” and shortly before Moshe Dayan handed the keys back to the Islamic Wakf.

 

On that day, IDF chief rabbi Shlomo Goren stood on the Temple Mount and studied the Mount of Olives with binoculars. He was scouting for a suitable area to bring the fallen paratroopers to burial as soon as possible. The IDF commanders relayed him a message from the government: Don’t make plans for burial in the Mount of Olives… we have no intention of staying. The government of Israel considered the reunification of Jerusalem and especially the Temple Mount to be a liability from the get-go.

 

An article in last week’s Hebrew-language Makor Rishon featured minutes from the protocols of the first meeting of the “Ministerial Committee on the Status of United Jerusalem,” held a mere two days after the war was concluded. That meeting was focused on how to stem the unbridled feeling of nationalism that resulted from the liberation of the Temple Mount and the Western Wall.

 

A great deal of remorse was expressed over what then minister-without-portfolio Menachem Begin termed the “unfortunate” incident of the Israeli flag briefly being flown over the Jewish people’s holiest site, the location of the Holy of Holies in the Temple – the Dome of the Rock. The unauthorized flag had been hoisted by a errant lone solider. It was removed after four hours. Israel didn’t want her flag flying over the Temple Mount then. Nowadays, foreign – and hostile – flags are flown freely over the Temple Mount, with impunity; flags of the PLO, Hamas, Hezbollah, Syria and others.

 

Those present at that meeting vied with each other as to the best way to express unequivocal sensitivity to Muslim concerns, and assure the Arab population that Israel had no intentions of injecting any form of Jewish identity into our holiest site, opting to replace its significance with that of the Western Wall. As everyone knows, the Islamic Wakf was given full authority to establish and enforce the rules at the Temple Mount. So while Israel is a veritable beacon of human rights and religious tolerance for other faiths, Jews are denied the basic right to pray at their holiest site, the Temple Mount.

 

Every day, hundreds of tourists waiting in line to ascend the Mount stand by incredulously as they witness the selection, separation and degradation of Jews in the Jewish state, who are forced to identify themselves and are warned against praying, moving their lips, closing their eyes, crying, singing, bowing down, or any other action that could be perceived as “incitement” against Muslim religious sensitivities. When they finally do ascend it is in carefully limited groups, while their every step and movement is monitored by aggressive, intrusive Wakf agents.

 

The astounding fact is that Israel never intended to liberate the Old City of Jerusalem, and the event was viewed more as an accident than a miracle. Without the maverick Rabbi Goren’s personal initiative to push the IDF to liberate the Old City, Jerusalem’s reunification would have probably never happened at all.

 

Israel’s government simply did not know what to do with this liability; subsequently this odd “Jerusalem Syndrome” has been the legacy of every successive Israeli government since, and is the key to understanding our nation’s attitudes and actions regarding “the eternal and undivided capital of the State of Israel.”

 

Without understanding the significance and importance of the Temple Mount, without understanding why Jerusalem is our capital and the soul of our people, Jerusalem Day is meaningless. It’s not a simple issue of sovereignty or nationalism. The Temple Mount represents the destiny of the Jewish people to be a light to the nations. It is the prophetic vision of a world united, of Jerusalem’s beauty flowing out to all humanity. It is the secret of what the Jewish people can become, what they can bring to the world.

 

Hiding from responsibility for the Temple Mount means we are hiding from ourselves. The thunderous Hebrew words of General Motta Gur’s immortal statement, "har habayit beyadeinu" (The Temple Mount is in our hands) also convey another meaning: The Temple Mount… is in our hands. How we choose to deal with it, and all that it means for the people of Israel, is up to us.

 

The writer, a rabbi, is the director of the international department of the Temple Institute in Jerusalem

 

WHY JERUSALEM SHOULD NOT BE DIVIDED

David Weinberg

Real Clear World, April 1, 2010

 

The upshot of [the] Obama-Netanyahu confrontation is that the White House wants to move Israel rapidly towards a division of Jerusalem. However, the widely held presumption that splitting Jerusalem will lead to prosperity for the city and to peace for Jews and Arabs is an egregious error. Partitioning Jerusalem will destroy the city. It will die, in every way – culturally, religiously, economically and more. And politically, the shearing of Jerusalem into Arab and Jewish sovereignties will turn it into the bull's eye of Mideast battle – a city that will make Belfast at its worst look like paradise.

 

The main reason for this is that any section of the city handed over to Arab rule will immediately become ground zero for the fierce war being waged within the Arab world over Islamic lifestyle, ideology and legitimacy. Just who is going to rule in Arab eastern Jerusalem? Will it be the declining secular Palestinian national movement (whose sway in the West Bank is tentative at best), or the radical Islamist Hamas (which openly seeks Israel's destruction), or the annihilationist al-Qaida affiliated forces (who are growing in strength in the territories), or the increasingly radical and violent Israeli Arab Islamic movement (which has been the main force behind recent unrest on the Temple Mount), or the Jordanians (who have a superior claim to Arab leadership in Jerusalem under the 1994 peace treaty with Israel), or the Moroccans (who head the Arab League's Supreme Jerusalem Committee), or the Saudis (who see themselves as the true custodians of Islamic holy sites)?

 

Each of these forces will seek to prove its supremacy and bolster its legitimacy in the Islamic world through control of Arab Jerusalem and aggression against what remains of Jewish Jerusalem. What better way to prove one's loyalty to the Islamic cause than to attack the rump Israeli presence in the city? And with bases of operations to work from in the eastern half of the city (whose neighborhoods will no longer be under Israeli security control) – locations that are bare meters away from Israeli homes and government and commercial centers – such terrorism will be oh, so very easy, so irresistibly tantalizing.

 

Thus, if the city is irresponsibly butchered into halves, it will inevitably die a slow death. What Israeli family is going to walk with its kids to the Western Wall on Friday night through checkpoints and alleyways patrolled by Palestinian police? What Birthright group is going to shop in the Mamilla pedestrian mall below Jaffa Gate with Palestinian or Arab League sharpshooters on the Old City walls above?

 

What American church group is going to march along the Stations of the Cross in Jerusalem's Christian and Muslim Quarters with Hamas or Saudi modesty patrols harassing the women? What hi-tech company is going to invest in Jerusalem when the Kassam missiles start flying from Sheikh Jarrah into Har Hotzvim?

 

The world needs to be reminded directly: It is only complete Israeli security control over united, greater Jerusalem that prevents the city from becoming a boiling cauldron of conflict within the volatile Arab and Islamic world and from becoming the hottest-ever-imaginable flashpoint of Israeli-Arab war. There is no "neutral" peacekeeping force in the world that will do a serious or better job than the IDF and Israel Police of keeping Jerusalem a terrorist-free zone.

 

There is also absolutely no empirical basis to believe that Arab rulers of Jerusalem will maintain the Israeli gold standard of unimpeded religious worship in the city. There is no Arab or Muslim country in the Middle East where Christians or Jews can freely operate religious institutions. Under Palestinian Authority and Hamas rule, Christians in the West Bank and Gaza have been hounded, terrorized and driven out. Christian Bethlehem is, effectively, no more. The Church of Nativity was defiled by Palestinian Muslim terrorists who turned it into an armed refuge in 2002. Who will protect the churches of Jerusalem from the same fate under Islamic rule?

 

Jewish synagogues and holy sites in Jericho, Nablus and Gush Katif have fared no better – they were burned to the ground while Palestinian police looked on. Under Jordanian rule, Jews were not allowed to reach their holy places in Jerusalem at all, while thousands of Jewish graves on the Mount of Olives were desecrated and the tombstones used to pave streets. How can this be prevented under Palestinian rule?

 

Here's the truth: It can't. Neither the purported Arab rulers of eastern Jerusalem that President Barack Obama so earnestly wants to induct, nor the international community, will competently guard Jewish, Christian and Western interests in Jerusalem. Israel is the only reliable, responsible guardian of Jerusalem.

And while we're at it, here is another non-politically correct truth that needs to be articulated: Israel needs, desires and has developed Jerusalem as a workable, attractive city; it is the centerpiece of the ancient Jewish people and the modern State of Israel.

 

The Arabs and Palestinians, however, don't really care about Jerusalem; they never did. In fact, they would consider it a triumph if Jerusalem were so wracked by conflict and poverty that it was ruined for 1,000 years – just as long as it would be lost to the Jews. That is one more reason why Jerusalem cannot be parceled out to the Palestinians.

 

We need "to tell the truth when it is needed," as Secretary of State Hillary Clinton condescendingly said in her recent AIPAC speech. Well, the truth is that Jerusalem under Israel has flourished. For Jews, Muslims, Christians, scholars, clergymen, craftsmen, architects, artists, archeologists and tourists alike, the past 43 years have been good times. For everyday citizens too: Never before in its 3,000-year history has the city been such a magnet for simple residency. Witness the incredible demand for, and sky-high prices of, housing in the city today.

 

Israel has sagaciously developed the city from a backwater town to a magnificent metropolis, and astutely kept it open and expanded the possibilities for religious worship of all faiths. Cautious Israeli custodianship has kept a lid on the always-smoldering religious-national tensions in the city. It has, most of the time, managed the complicated city with sophistication and sensitivity.

 

Even the Arabs of Jerusalem agree. Any Palestinian will tell you (privately, of course) that, in the broader scale of things, he prefers to live in an Israeli-controlled Jerusalem over a Jerusalem controlled by a Hamas imam-ocracy or the incredibly mislabeled Palestinian "Authority" (where there is little authority or democracy of any type).

 

That's why very few Jerusalem Arabs have ever participated in terrorist activities. That's why any and every Palestinian who can has been desperately scurrying over to the Israeli side of the security fence in and around Jerusalem. That's why Jerusalem Arabs are buying up homes at a dizzying pace in several predominantly Jewish neighborhoods like French Hill, Pisgat Ze'ev and Talpiot. Thus, the sundering of Jerusalem is not only patently unwise, but unfair to Jewish history and to Israel's fine stewardship of the city. Has the Obama administration even bothered to think this through?

 

Top of Page

 

 

JERUSALEM, CAPITAL OF ISRAEL: AN ISLAMIC PROPHECY

Ali Salim
Gatestone Institute, January 29, 2013
 

If you listen in Arabic to the hate-speeches made by Egyptian President Mohamed Morsi; or to Turkish President Erdogan; or to the calls made from Qatar by Muslim Brotherhood leader Sheikh Yusuf al-Qaradawi and from the Gaza Strip by the head of Hamas, Khaled Mashaal for the killing of the Jews, you will understand why Arabs and Muslims believe Allah is punishing them by having them kill each other: It is because His prophecies are not being fulfilled.

 

For example, it is heresy and a violation of the will of Allah to sidestep calls for recognizing Jerusalem as official capital of the Children of Israel, and moving the American embassy there. It ignores the prophecy of the Noble Qur'an, which predicts the return of the Children of Israel to their land from the four corners of the earth, as it is written in Al-Isra, Verse 104, "And we said to the Children of Israel after him, Dwell in the land, then, when the final and the last promise comes near, we shall bring you altogether as a mixed crowd."

 

Although the stance adopted by the leaders of the Western world in general, and the American administration in particular, may be the consequence of their desire to strengthen their image in the eyes of the Muslim countries, their image is seen only as reflecting their weakness and attempts to ingratiate themselves with both radical Islam and Christian anti-Semitism.

It is not my intention to state that the other monotheistic religions do not also have their place in the holy city of Jerusalem. But political lies come mostly from radical Islamist sources, then somehow become accepted facts. This violates the prophecies of the messengers of Allah, and especially those of the greatest of His prophets, Muhammad…

The various distortions of history and religion by politically-oriented Islamic sheiks and leaders for the sake of false, infidel, political goals, are legion. The way the Salafist Islamic sheiks and members of the Muslim Brotherhood twist the Noble Qur'an to suit their narrow political goals makes me angry, as it also makes angry the millions of Muslims around the world who know the eternal truth written in Islam's Noble Qur'an.

Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat, for example, invented the fabrication that Palestinians are the descendants of the Jebusites and other Canaanite tribes of the land of the at the time of the Book. Behind this fabrication was Arafat's attempt to "prove" that the Palestinians lived in the Holy Land before the Children of Israel, and that therefore they have a greater right to it.

According to the Qur'an, however, "a race of giants" lived in the Holy Land but were destroyed by the Children of Israel, led by Joshua with the help of Allah the Almighty. There were never "Palestinians" in the Holy Land, nor is there one word of them in the Noble Qur'an, nor any prophecy regarding their existence, nor any right to the Holy Land or any other place in the future or on Day of Judgment in the Noble Book of Allah.

The Palestinians are not mentioned or even hinted at in the Noble Qur'an, but the Children of Israel are mentioned countless times and they are mentioned as the Chosen People, as it is written in Al-Baqara, Verse 47, "O Children of Israel, remember My favour that I have bestowed upon you and that I preferred you over the worlds." They are mentioned as inheritors of the Holy Land which, according to all the Islamic commentators, is Jerusalem and the country around it. The Muslim claim that the Divine promise to the Children of Israel appears in the Noble Qur'an in the past tense and therefore is not relevant today is a malicious lie. Everyone knows that most of the Noble Qur'an was written in the past tense, but what was written about the Children of Israel was a promise and a prophecy, and Allah does not change His mind or break His promises.

Anyone who claims that what is written about the Jews is only relevant for the past and that the Children of Israel disappeared turns our beloved Prophet from prophet to mere historian who did not know what the future would bring. Anyone who claims that the "real" Children of Israel disappeared and that the Jews of today are not the genuine Children of Israel of the Noble Qur'an is a liar and a deceiver, because if there are no Children of Israel then the prophecy of Muhammad…is irrelevant and he did not foresee the return of the Children of Israel to their land for the third time and instruct them to settle it, and promise that if they did what was right in the eyes of Allah and acted well they would succeed, as it is written in Al-Isra, Verses 6 and 7, "We gave you back the power against them, and aided you with wealth and children, and made you larger in numbers. Now, if you do well, you will do well for your own souls; and if you do evil, it will only go against them…." And if one prophecy is false then all are false, and the Noble Qur'an has no value. Thus we have to admit that regardless of the mistakes the Jews make concerning our Palestinian brothers, they in fact act well, even to the Arabs in Israel, and they are charitable according to the tradition of Islam, and they are clearly more honest than the Arab and Muslim leaders today who oppress their own people and daily slaughter them and shed their blood…..

Top of Page

 

Timeline for the History of Jerusalem: Jewish Virtual Library

 

Is Jerusalem Really Negotiable?: Alan Baker, JCPA, May 2013—Perhaps the most complex, special and intractable item on the negotiating agenda between the State of Israel and the Arab world in general, and the Palestinian people in particular, is Jerusalem. Israelis oppose re-dividing Jerusalem.

 

One Jerusalem. Undivided. Open to all. Controlled by Israel: David Horovitz, Times of Israel,  May 8, 2013—Mayor Nir Barkat says he’s repositioning the city to retake the role it fulfilled ‘amazingly well’ for a thousand years  where all peoples were equally accepted, but Jewish sovereignty was unquestioned

 

Between East And West: Jerusalem’s No-Man’s Land: Aviva and Shmuel Bar-Am, Times of Israel, May 8, 2013—Jerusalem’s No-Man’s Land was born in November of 1948, when Moshe Dayan, commander of the Israeli forces in Jerusalem, met with his Jordanian counterpart Abdullah a-Tal. Neither Dayan nor a-Tal intended the map to be anything but temporary and unofficial, nor did they mean to divide Jerusalem in two. Still, when the war finally ended in 1949, the rough lines on this map were accepted as the final ceasefire lines in Jerusalem.

 

The Heart and Soul of the Jewish People: Farley Weiss, Jewish Press, May 8th, 2013—Yom Yerushalayim, which we marked this week, is a monumental day in Jewish history. It is a celebration of the first time in 2,000 years that Jews regained sovereignty over the Kotel, the Western Wall, and the Temple Mount, which is Judaism’s holiest site. And it is a time to thank God for giving us the extraordinary gift that is Jerusalem.

Top of Page

 

 

Visit CIJR’s Bi-Weekly Webzine: Israzine.

CIJR’s ISRANET Daily Briefing is available by e-mail.
Please urge colleagues, friends, and family to visit our website for more information on our ISRANET series.
To join our distribution list, or to unsubscribe, visit us at http://www.isranet.org/.

The ISRANET Daily Briefing is a service of CIJR. We hope that you find it useful and that you will support it and our pro-Israel educational work by forwarding a minimum $90.00 tax-deductible contribution [please send a cheque or VISA/MasterCard information to CIJR (see cover page for address)]. All donations include a membership-subscription to our respected quarterly ISRAFAX print magazine, which will be mailed to your home.

CIJR’s ISRANET Daily Briefing attempts to convey a wide variety of opinions on Israel, the Middle East and the Jewish world for its readers’ educational and research purposes. Reprinted articles and documents express the opinions of their authors, and do not necessarily reflect the viewpoint of the Canadian Institute for Jewish Research.

 

 

Ber Lazarus, Publications Editor, Canadian Institute for Jewish ResearchL'institut Canadien de recherches sur le Judaïsme, www.isranet.org

Tel: (514) 486-5544 – Fax:(514) 486-8284 ; ber@isranet.org

ISRAEL’S NEW COALITION, JERUSALEM’S BOTTOM-UP UNITY—AND ISLAM’S JUDENREIN GHOST CITIES

Download an abbreviated version of today's Isranet Daily Briefing.pdf 

 

Contents:                          

 

Mulling Over Our New Government: Isi Leibler, Jerusalem Post, Mar. 14, 2013Bravo! Unless there is an unanticipated last minute reversal, after six tortuous weeks of horse trading, spin and hypocrisy, Israel will have its 33rd government. Most of us, not already having written off our politicians, were thoroughly distressed that even during this crucial period for Israel our elected representatives still spent so much time jockeying for personal or political benefit.

 

Ghost Cities: Mark Steyn, National Review, Feb. 26, 2013Regimes that represented nothing but their Swiss bank accounts have fallen, and in their stead arises the only alternative — an Islam purified by decades in opposition to the secularists and distilled to a scorching 175 proof. What else is left?

 

The Quiet Unification of Jerusalem: Matti Friedman, Times of Israel, Mar. 3, 2013For Jerusalem, the key will lie not in dividing the city but in continuing the attempt to share it, he said. “The kind of urban planning we’re seeing can’t go along with the kind of solutions that are being discussed,” Feitelson said. “There’s a tremendous disconnect between the kind of solutions talked about in geopolitical terms and the kind of planning that we do in order to create a city where people want to live.”

 

On Topic Links

 

 

Is Jerusalem Really Negotiable?: Alan Baker, Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs, Feb. 2013
Israel is Not Isolated: Efraim Inbar, Begin-Sadat Center for Strategic Studies, Mar. 2013

Jerusalem Mayor Says the City’s in the Fast Lane: David Horovitz, Times of Israel, Feb. 11, 2013

 

 

 

MULLING OVER OUR NEW GOVERNMENT

Isi Leibler

Jerusalem Post, Mar. 14, 2013

 

 

Bravo! Unless there is an unanticipated last minute reversal, after six tortuous weeks of horse trading, spin and hypocrisy, Israel will have its 33rd government. Most of us, not already having written off our politicians, were thoroughly distressed that even during this crucial period for Israel our elected representatives still spent so much time jockeying for personal or political benefit.

 

The principal beneficiaries were Yesh Atid and Bayit Yehudi who set aside their major political differences and made a pact to negotiate jointly toward the formation of the government. They succeeded and thus foiled Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu’s efforts to play them against each other, ultimately obliging him to concede to their core demands.

 

The principal losers were the haredi parties who, despite Netanyahu’s extraordinary efforts to retain them, were excluded from the government. Reviled by most Israelis as extortionists willing to sell their votes to the highest bidder and seeking to impose the most stringent halachic interpretations on the entire nation, their exclusion was greeted with enthusiasm.

 

The outcome may have been different had they been more cooperative with respect to sharing the burden, in particular in relation to conscription and encouraging their youngsters to earn a livelihood, but they refused to concede an inch. Rabbi Ovadia Yosef, Shas’s spiritual mentor, even outraged the national-religious Bayit Yehudi leaders by calling them “goyim.” The haredi parties’ subsequent behavior, extending to vile threats by United Torah Judaism to boycott settlement produce – alienated whatever lingering sympathy remained.

 

As anticipated, in this government, Netanyahu will be in a weaker position and far more dependent on his coalition partners than was the case in the past.

 

Yet, if he plays his cards properly, this may prove to be a blessing in disguise. It could even represent a new dawn and provide him with a unique opportunity to stabilize Israel’s global position and implement crucial, overdue reforms in the social and economic arena that had been repeatedly vetoed by the ultra-Orthodox groups.

 

Netanyahu’s ministerial team includes some stunning new talent, but unfortunately, in some cases, politics prevented the best people from assuming positions optimally suited for them. Thus, Yair Lapid’s ascension to the Treasury is a huge risk. He has no financial or business background and it is a major gamble for a novice to take on such a role, especially when he must grapple with a massive opening deficit which will require resolute and unpopular cutbacks.

 

The choice of foreign minister, whose primary requirement must be to effectively promote Israel’s image and articulate the government’s policies, is also problematic, especially now as we confront such a hostile and biased world. Avigdor Liberman is a capable and talented politician who could take on any key ministry. But why does he insist on retaining the one portfolio in which, rightly or wrongly, he is regarded with hostility by most global leaders? The appointment of the respected former IDF chief of staff Moshe Ya’alon as defense minister will strengthen morale and signal to the Palestinians that they will pay a heavy price if they resume missile launches or terrorist attacks.

 

But despite such shortcomings, the presence of many talented young new faces augers well for the future if the parties concentrate on working for the betterment of the nation rather than scoring partisan political points.

 

Although the likelihood of being obliged to formulate major or controversial decisions in relation to the peace process is remote, the inclusion of Yesh Atid (and Tzipi Livni, who will now be marginalized) may somewhat ease the international hostility against Israel by demonstrating that the government is not an inflexible right-wing party but represents a broad cross-section of Israelis.

 

Yair Lapid is a genuine centrist committed to a twostate policy, but supports the retention of the settlement blocs, Ariel and a united Jerusalem. This would hardly qualify him as a left-winger and Netanyahu would find him a kindred spirit on most issues.

 

Besides, the Palestinians will undoubtedly maintain their intransigent attitude and refuse to negotiate or, if not, Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas will remain unwilling to minimally compromise on any substantive issue.

 

The government’s most urgent domestic challenge must be to introduce painful remedial measures to ensure that our economy does not suffer a meltdown and follow the disastrous example of many European countries.

 

It must take advantage of this historic opportunity to deal with outstanding issues relating to religion and state, especially the profoundly emotional issue of equalizing the burden in relation to the draft. In the latest compromise, national service will become universal in gradual stages over a five-year period.

 

Up to 2,000 yeshiva students will continue receiving exemptions and state subsidies.

 

More importantly, all subsidized education will be required to incorporate secular core studies of math, English, civics and history, creating constructive citizens who will seek gainful employment rather than subsisting on welfare. Although haredim should be treated with courtesy and respect, they will no longer be a law unto themselves and will be obliged to share the burden as well as benefits of citizenship.

 

Today, for the first time in decades, there are more religious Zionist than haredi MKs in the Knesset. Bayit Yehudi has the opportunity of reversing the tide of haredi domination of religious instrumentalities like the Chief Rabbinate and promoting Zionist rabbis to occupy state roles, making Judaism more attractive to non-observant Israelis by example rather than coercion.

 

They must ensure that conversion, marriage and divorce, and other life cycle events are conducted with compassion by enlightened rabbis who have the capacity to make Judaism more inclusive.

 

This government has the obligation to amend the electoral system and reduce the number of parties. It must also devise a new method of selecting MKs and eradicate the current system of primaries which is being abused and riddled with corrupt practices.

 

Despite the fact that Lapid has introduced some talented new personnel into the Knesset, a system must be devised in which Knesset candidates are not simply recruited according to the predilections of individual party leaders. There is no perfect democratic solution but a structure could be devised by which committees are elected which will subsequently preselect candidates and avoid the abuse and corruption associated with the primaries.

 

There should also be an arrangement whereby at least the majority of Knesset members are directly accountable to those who elected them rather than to party leaders. Netanyahu must now set aside party politics and act as a national leader, solely focused on governing the country. He should not concern himself with the next election. He has four critical years in which basic decisions affecting the future of Israel may well be determined.

 

If he convinces his coalition to set aside the past and concentrates on devising long-term strategies, both in terms of the peace process as well as implementing the long overdue domestic social, economic and electoral reforms, he will establish a legacy that could enable him to be regarded as one of the greatest leaders of the nation. But to achieve this he must resolve to set aside the sleazy political infighting and concentrate exclusively on serving the national interest. If he fails to do so, the new government’s lifespan will be extremely limited.

 

Top of Page

 

 

 

GHOST CITIES

Mark Steyn

National Review, Feb. 26, 2013

 

Regimes that represented nothing but their Swiss bank accounts have fallen, and in their stead arises the only alternative — an Islam purified by decades in opposition to the secularists and distilled to a scorching 175 proof. What else is left?
 

In a dispute between Hamas and Fatah, it's tempting to take the old Kissinger line re the Iran–Iraq War: It's a shame they can't both lose. But, in fact, only one side wins: In Gaza, al-Aqsa University has just announced that female students will be required to attend in proper Muslim garb from head to toe — i.e., the full body bag. At present, some still wear headscarf, trousers, and a long coat, but that's too revealing for the new Gaza, so time to get fitted for your burka, niqab, or abaya. Al-Aqsa University is funded by the Palestinian Authority — i.e., Yasser Arafat's old Fatah — but it's controlled by Hamas. The higher-education minister, Ali Jarbawi, fumed impotently from Ramallah that the new dress code is illegal and must not be implemented, but the hard men on the ground in the Gaza Strip regard him as just another irrelevant member of a shriveling personality cult for a dead kleptocrat with a taste for Aryan rent boys.

 

And so it goes across the region: Regimes that represented nothing but their Swiss bank accounts have fallen, and in their stead arises the only alternative — an Islam purified by decades in opposition to the secularists and distilled to a scorching 175 proof. What else is left?

 

Some years ago, for a telly documentary, the BBC sent the novelist Lawrence Durrell back to Alexandria, the setting of his eponymous Alexandria Quartet, his "prose poem to one of the great capitals of the heart." Durrell had lived in Egypt during the war years, and did not enjoy his return. "The city seemed to him listless and spiritless, its harbor a mere cemetery, its famous cafés no longer twinkling with music and lights," wrote Michael Haag in Alexandria, City of Memory. "His favourite bookshop, Cité du Livre on the rue Fuad, had gone, and in others he found a lamentable stock."

 

Only on the Western fringe of the Ummah, in a few Moroccan redoubts, can you still discern the flickers of the way it was. Otherwise, to anyone who knew the "Muslim world" of the mid–20th century, today's Maghreb and Levant are dull places, drained of everything but Islam. And Durrell was returning in 1977: Another third of a century on, and Alexandria's stock is even more lamentable. Indeed, his cast of characters would be entirely bewildering to contemporary Alexandrians: an English writer (of course), a Greek good-time girl, a homosexual Jew, a wealthy Copt. In the old days, Alexandria bustled with Britons, Italians, and lots and lots of Greeks. All gone. So are the Jews, homo- and hetero-, from a community 50,000 strong down to some four dozen greybeards keeping their heads down. I got an e-mail a year or so back from the great-grandson of Joseph Cattaui, a Jew and Egypt's finance minister back in the Twenties: These days, the family lives in France — because it's not just that in Egypt a Jew can no longer be finance minister, but that in Egypt a Jew can no longer be. Now, in the absence of any other demographic groups to cleanse, it's the Copts' turn to head for the exits — as in Tripoli and Benghazi it's the blacks'. In the once-cosmopolitan cities of the Arab world, the minority communities are confined to the old graveyards, like the rubbish-strewn Jewish cemetery of broken headstones, squawking chickens, and hanging laundry I wandered through in Tangiers a while back. Islam is king on a field of corpses.

 

Nowadays, for the cosmopolitan café society Durrell enjoyed, you have to go to the cities of multicultural Europe, where "diversity" is not a quirk of fate but the cardinal virtue. At Westminster, the House of Commons has just voted in favor of same-sex marriage. Almost simultaneously, a group calling itself the Muslim London Patrol posted a YouTube video of its members abusing a young man for "walking in a Muslim area dressed like a fag." Another Londoner is made to empty his beer can: "No drink in this area." An insufficiently covered woman is warned, "This is not so Great Britain. This is a Muslim area."

 

The "moderate Muslim" Maajid Nawaz writes in the New York Times that his youthful European-born coreligionists, back from Islamic adventuring during the Arab Spring, are anxious to apply the lessons learned abroad. The Danish group Kaldet til Islam (Call to Islam) has introduced "Sharia-controlled zones" in which "morality patrols" of young bearded men crack down on underdressed and bibulous blondes. In the Balearic Islands, Muslims took against the local meter maids, and forced the government to withdraw them. In Dagenham, 20-year-old Naomi Oni, a black Londoner, suffered horrific burns after a woman in a niqab hurled acid in her face. She was returning home from her job at Victoria's Secret. Not secret enough.

 

Meanwhile, the BBC reports that February 1 was the first World Hijab Day, in which non-Muslim women from 50 countries took a stand against "Islamophobia" and covered themselves to show how much they objected to society's prejudice against veiled women. From Gaza to Alexandria to Copenhagen to London, I don't think we'll have to worry about that. As Balthazar, Durrell's homosexual Jew, muses, "Narouz once said to me that he loved the desert because there 'the wind blew out one's footsteps like candle-flames.' So it seems to me does reality" — for the footsteps of Copts in Egypt, meter maids in Majorca, and Victoria's Secret clerks on the streets of the East End.

 

Top of Page

 

 

 

THE QUIET UNIFICATION OF JERUSALEM

Matti Friedman

Times of Israel, Mar. 3, 2013

 

A passenger boards the Jerusalem light rail at its first stop in Pisgat Ze’ev, a suburb built in the West Bank after 1967, and glides past the local mall. A Russian girl gets on in high boots and works the aisle like a runway, trailing perfume. A toddler with a shiny pink purse sits next to her mother, who wears the long dark coat and hair covering of a religious Muslim. After the car stops in Beit Hanina, a middle class Palestinian neighborhood, the tinny electronic music of a video game becomes audible from the vicinity of two Arab kids and an iPhone.

 

The train passes Eiffel Sweets, on the main drag through the Palestinian neighborhood of Shuafat, and the Stylish Salon. Outside the battle memorial at Ammunition Hill, three men kneel toward Mecca in a parking lot. Two women board with a gaggle of small boys in black velvet skullcaps and girls in skirts. The Ottoman walls of the Old City pass by before the train reaches the downtown bustle of Jaffa Road, where a crush of everyday Jerusalemites presses on with a backpacking couple in North Face jackets, and the car moves again. The train empties at the central bus station, where Jerusalem has begun to claim the new benches and walls of the light rail stop as its own with grime and graffiti, then fills up again, and travels onward to its final stop near the gravesite of Theodor Herzl.

 

Beginning in the early 1990s, much of the planning work on Jerusalem focused on how the city could be divided between Israelis and Palestinians. Various schemes imagined walls down the center of main thoroughfares, crossing points, and a border meandering among neighborhoods and cutting residents off from each other.

 

In recent years, however, new infrastructure projects have quietly but dramatically created a reality that flies in the face of those plans. The light rail system, an upscale shopping plaza outside the Old City, a new bike trail, the sheer force of everyday life and business — these things are slowly but surely drawing the city’s disparate parts closer together.

 

There is still no great love among the city’s different groups. There are steep inequalities in municipal services and funding between Israeli citizens and the one-third of the city’s residents who are Palestinian Arabs. The meeting of the different groups is often charged and occasionally violent. But Jerusalem in 2013 is a more integrated city than it has been in decades.

 

A passenger who rides the length of Jerusalem’s light rail line, even one who has spent much of his life here, might be surprised by what he sees out the window. Jerusalem’s different areas have traditionally been served by their own transportation services with their own centers, routes and destinations — Palestinians, for example, have their transportation hub at Damascus Gate, while the ultra-Orthodox have taken to using private buses departing from their own neighborhoods to get to ultra-Orthodox suburbs. The light rail, which opened just over a year ago and whose effects are only beginning to register in earnest, is the first major transportation project in the city to purposely violate those lines and link the different pieces. Early on, that made it the target of criticism from Palestinian Authority officials and advocates of anti-Israel boycotts who saw it, correctly, as a project that would bind Jerusalem’s residents more tightly to each other and ease their lives in the present-day city controlled by Israel.

 

 

By doing no more than carrying out the necessary urban task of moving people to work and home again, the train ends up reprogramming the way passengers view Jerusalem. Anyone attentive enough to look out the window encounters a place that is home to ultra-Orthodox Jews, mainstream Israelis of various shades, Palestinian Christians and Muslims, soldiers, policemen, clergy, all living in close proximity to each other and moving in and out of the city’s shared spaces. This is a city unrecognizable in the newspaper headlines and peace plans that tend to portray Jerusalem as a problem to be solved or a kind of geopolitical puzzle, rather than as what it is: A fractured but distinct urban organism full of people going about their business — one city, indivisible.

 

The idea of an “east” and “west” Jerusalem has always been more a theoretical shorthand than a workable description of reality. There are Jewish neighborhoods to the east of the Arab ones of “east” Jerusalem, and Arab neighborhoods to the west of Jewish ones in the “west.” But the recent developments are additional proof — at least for some of those concerned about the city as a place where people live rather than as a chip on the poker table of the peace process — that Jerusalem’s urban health lies in the integration of its parts, and that any solution will have to involve sharing the city, not splitting it.

 

“The geopolitical solutions and a functioning city — it’s either one or the other,” said Eran Feitelson, a geography professor and expert on urban planning at Hebrew University.

 

Naomi Tsur, the city’s deputy mayor in charge of planning, conservation and the environment, is a former head of the Society for the Protection of Nature in Israel, the country’s premier environmental group. She was born in Bristol, England, and is certainly one of the only politicians in the country to favor long tweed skirts. Tsur’s thinking is driven by urban considerations, not by international politics; she seems intent on insisting that Jerusalem is a city like other cities and that progressive planning can thus be applied here as well. One of the buzzwords is “connectivity.” The common sense of an urban planner says trails, parks, signs and public transportation must link Jerusalemites to the different parts of their landscape, a process she calls “connecting the dots.”

 

“It is one of the achievements of this administration to create a language of communication and transport and mobility through the city,” she said. Tsur was a key force behind one of the most striking new additions to the cityscape — a 5-mile walking and biking path along a defunct rail line in southern Jerusalem. The path, which opened in part last year and is now nearing completion, begins at the old British Mandate rail station in the German Colony, passes through the working-class apartment blocks of the Katamonim and behind the city’s main industrial zone before terminating at the shopping mall at Malha. On the way, it runs through Beit Safafa, an Arab village once split between Israel and Jordan and reunited after the 1967 war; a first-time visitor might be surprised to find himself suddenly next to the village’s mosque and well-tended soccer field.

 

Eventually, the path is supposed to be part of a ring of bike trails around much of west Jerusalem, linking Beit Safafa and the German Colony to the Valley of the Cross, the Knesset, the central bus station, downtown, and the Old City. “I often wonder how the world thinks it’s going to do what it’s going to do,” Tsur said: A division of the city “is not urbanly possible.We’re not an apple that can be cut in half,” she said.

 

At Mamilla, outside the Old City’s Jaffa Gate, a new row of luxury shops and cafes has become a bridge between Jewish and Arab areas and the scene of mixing between the city’s populations. Marik Shtern, a Jerusalem media consultant active in local politics, investigated the interaction there as part of a Masters thesis at Hebrew University’s department of geography. Shtern interviewed 60 people at each of three commercial areas in the city where Jews and Arabs mingle – the shopping mall at Malha, the main Arab market in the Old City’s Christian and Muslim quarters, and the Mamilla plaza, where the first stores opened in 2007. ‘The reality is that the city is becoming more and more integrated, de facto. But it’s done in a way that isn’t planned, and I expect there to be more friction as a result’

 

At Malha, located in a Jewish commercial and residential area, Jews and Arabs felt threatened by the other, he found. In the Old City market, an Arab commercial and residential area frequented by Jewish shoppers, the same was the case. On its home turf, each side felt the other was invading its space, and on the other side’s territory each side felt at risk.

 

At Mamilla, however, the results were different. “The two groups reported a high sense of security and a high level of tolerance for the other group,” Shtern said. In part, he believes, this is because the pronounced presence of tourists lends Mamilla the ex-territorial feel of a place not quite on anyone’s home turf, and because shoppers there, Jews and Arabs, tend to be relatively well-off. But it is also because its location along the border between the city’s Jewish and Arab areas means both groups feel they are close to their own safety zone; because security guards are present, which helps reassure Israelis; and because there is no security check at the entrance, a common feature in Jewish areas because of terrorism fears, and one which tends to make Arabs feel unwelcome.

The city, Shtern says, has to think carefully about the areas where Jerusalem’s different groups meet — how to plan them, how to secure them, and how to create safe spaces where mixing can take place. “In Mamilla people aren’t hugging each other or anything like that, but it’s enough that there’s an area where Israelis and Palestinians don’t feel tense around each other — that’s an accomplishment,” he said. Mamilla is a “bubble,” Shtern said, “but it is one that could be replicated in other variations.”

 

If the city doesn’t invest enough thought in how the integration happens, however, Shtern believes the result will be increased tensions. He pointed to instances of violence on the light rail, mainly on the northern part of the line near the stops in the Palestinian neighborhoods of Shuafat and Beit Hanina and the post-1967 Jewish neighborhoods of Pisgat Zeev and French Hill. The incidents are the exception, not the rule, but are nonetheless notable: A light rail security guard used pepper spray on Arab passengers in one case; in another, a Palestinian assailant stabbed a 19-year-old woman soldier, and last week saw an attack by several Jewish teenagers against an Arab woman. There have been several brawls on the light rail, in addition to sporadic flare-ups elsewhere in the city — attacks on Arab teens downtown, ongoing tensions between Palestinians and Jews moving into Arab neighborhoods, and most recently, anger among residents of Beit Safafa over the expansion of a municipal expressway through their neighborhood.

 

“The reality is that the city is becoming more and more integrated, de facto,” Shtern said. “But it’s done in a way that isn’t planned, and I expect there to be more friction as a result.” The new developments are occurring, not coincidentally, during a relative lull in Israeli-Palestinian violence, and with other factors — like the security barrier, which has severed east Jerusalem from its natural hinterland in the West Bank — serving to push Arab Jerusalemites toward some form of integration with the Israeli side of the city. As Nir Hasson reported in Haaretz in December, the numbers of east Jerusalem Palestinians requesting Israeli citizenship and taking the Israeli high school matriculation exams are up, and more Palestinians are visible downtown and in other Jewish areas. He called the process a “tectonic shift” in the city.

 

“These processes can be described as ‘Israelization,’ ‘normalization’ or just plain adaptation,’” Hasson wrote. Eran Feitelson, the Hebrew University urban planning expert, remembered roaming around the Old City and Jerusalem’s Arab areas in the years after the city’s reunification in 1967. As a youth group leader in the 1970s, he led night hikes near the east Jerusalem neighborhood of Silwan, and took Palestinian buses from Jerusalem to Bethlehem. That openness was killed in the late 1980s by the first intifada and buried after 2000 by the second. Today, such activities would be all but unimaginable for a Jewish Israeli.

 

There has been no research done so far on changes to the “mental maps” of Jerusalem residents after the advent of the light rail and the other new projects, Feitelson said. But though the city is not back where it was in the 1970s, he said, “by local standards, we’re in a good period.”

 

For Jerusalem, the key will lie not in dividing the city but in continuing the attempt to share it, he said. “The kind of urban planning we’re seeing can’t go along with the kind of solutions that are being discussed,” Feitelson said. “There’s a tremendous disconnect between the kind of solutions talked about in geopolitical terms and the kind of planning that we do in order to create a city where people want to live.”

 


Top of Page
 

 

Is Jerusalem Really Negotiable?: Alan Baker, Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs, Feb. 2013On August 21, 2012, Palestinian Authority leader Mahmoud Abbas, referring to “the alleged [Jewish] Temple” in Jerusalem, stated that “there will be no peace, security, or stability unless the occupation, its settlements and settlers will be evacuated from our holy city and the eternal capital of our state.”

 

Israel is Not Isolated: Efraim Inbar, Begin-Sadat Center for Strategic Studies, Mar. 2013A close look at Israel's interaction with countries near and far, as well as with international institutions, belies the claim that it is isolated. In fact, Israel is increasingly acknowledged as a world player in view of its social, economic, technological, financial, and diplomatic achievements.
 

Jerusalem Mayor Says the City is in the Fast Lane: David Horovitz, Times of Israel Feb. 11, 2013Last month, for the fourth year in succession, Jerusalem’s Great Synagogue hosted a public interview in which David Horovitz questioned Mayor Nir Barkat about running what we’ve come to describe as the world’s most complex city.

 

Top of Page

 

 

 

Visit CIJR’s Bi-Weekly Webzine: Israzine.

CIJR’s ISRANET Daily Briefing is available by e-mail.
Please urge colleagues, friends, and family to visit our website for more information on our ISRANET series.
To join our distribution list, or to unsubscribe, visit us at http://www.isranet.org/.

The ISRANET Daily Briefing is a service of CIJR. We hope that you find it useful and that you will support it and our pro-Israel educational work by forwarding a minimum $90.00 tax-deductible contribution [please send a cheque or VISA/MasterCard information to CIJR (see cover page for address)]. All donations include a membership-subscription to our respected quarterly ISRAFAX print magazine, which will be mailed to your home.

CIJR’s ISRANET Daily Briefing attempts to convey a wide variety of opinions on Israel, the Middle East and the Jewish world for its readers’ educational and research purposes. Reprinted articles and documents express the opinions of their authors, and do not necessarily reflect the viewpoint of the Canadian Institute for Jewish Research.

 

 

Ber Lazarus, Publications Editor, Canadian Institute for Jewish ResearchL'institut Canadien de recherches sur le Judaïsme, www.isranet.org

Tel: (514) 486-5544 – Fax:(514) 486-8284 ; ber@isranet.org

JÉRUSALEM : UN IMPÉRATIF JUIF ET SIONISTE

 

 

 

 

Construire à Jérusalem : un impératif juif et sioniste
Éditorial
upjf.org, 19 décembre 2012

 

Les condamnations internationales et européennes faisant suite à l’annonce de la construction de 1500 logements à Ramat Shlomo ne sont pas une surprise, mais il est utile de rappeler à cette occasion quelques vérités occultées par les médias, en France notamment. Comme l’a déclaré le Premier ministre israélien Binyamin Nétanyahou, la construction à Jérusalem est une politique constante de tous les gouvernements israéliens depuis 1967, qui jouit d’un large consensus au sein de la population israélienne.

 

Contrairement à ce que qu’affirment les dépêches mensongères de l’AFP, le quartier de Ramat Shlomo n’est pas situé à « Jérusalem-Est », ni dans un « quartier de colonisation », mais au nord de la capitale israélienne, dans une zone urbaine habitée en majorité par des Juifs religieux au taux de natalité élevé.

 

La construction de logements d’habitation dans sa capitale est non seulement le droit élémentaire de tout gouvernement souverain, mais c’est aussi une nécessité vitale pour répondre à la pénurie de logements à Jérusalem.

 

Le fait que cette décision purement administrative soulève les condamnations internationales est difficilement compréhensible et s’explique par ce que le général Michel Darmon appelait la « croisade contre Jérusalem » de la communauté internationale et de la diplomatie française en particulier.

 

Les Juifs du monde entier sont indéfectiblement attachés à Jérusalem, capitale du peuple Juif depuis l’aube de son histoire plurimillénaire. Face à des ennemis voués à la haine et à la destruction, Israël construit, édifie et embellit sa capitale, Jérusalem, ville de paix où coexistent – depuis sa réunification en 1967 et pour la première fois dans l’histoire – Juifs, chrétiens et musulmans.

 

« Les chiens aboient, la caravane passe » dit le proverbe. Malgré les condamnations internationales, la construction à Jérusalem se poursuivra, car elle n’est pas seulement un droit, mais aussi un impératif juif et sioniste. Am Israël Haï ! Le peuple Juif est vivant !

 

La Shoah et le silence des intellectuels juifs américains
Blogue Philosémitisme, 22 décembre 2012

 

L'antisémitisme, brièvement discrédité par l'Holocauste, est devenu l'idéologie "par défaut" de l'Europe. L'Europe pourrait devenir judenrein dans la prochaine décennie. 

 

Edward Alexander, professeur émérite d'anglais à l'Université de Washington, vient de publier un nouvel ouvrage “The State of the Jews: A Critical Appraisal” (L'État des Juifs: une évaluation critique). Le Professeur Alexander a accordé une interview à Peter Kelley pour l'Algemeiner.
 
Le titre du livre est volontairement ambigu et se réfère à la Terre d'Israël, au peuple d'Israël, et à la relation entre eux. C'est un sujet très ancien, défini dans sa forme la plus spectaculaire et accusatoire par Moïse lui-même quand il reproche aux fils de Gad et de Ruben: "Vos frères iront-ils à la guerre, et vous, resterez-vous ici?"
 
Edward Alexander rappelle que, pendant la persécution et l'extermination des Juifs d'Europe par les nazis et leurs collaborateurs, les intellectuels juifs américains y ont prêté peu d'attention, voire pas d'attention du tout. Irving Howe a reconnu que ce fut un manquement moral. Et Saul Bellow a reconnu que personne en Amérique n'avait pris toute la mesure de l'extermination des Juifs. Que par ailleurs seulement quelques juifs, comme Primo Levi, avaient vraiment compris ce qui était arrivé.  Bellow explique que les intellectuels se sont mutuellement fait des reproches et que toute personne ayant un peu de conscience se rend compte de la honte d'un tel comportement.
 
Non seulement les intellectuels juifs firent preuve d'une indifférence terrible envers le sort de leurs frères d'Europe mais également envers ce que les Juifs de Palestine avaient accompli. Or quelques années après la destruction des Juifs d'Europe, le peuple juif avait créé l'Etat d'Israël. Une création qui provoqua l'admiration de Winston Churchill que la qualifia de: "événement dans l'histoire du monde à être considéré dans la perspective, non pas d'une génération ou d'un siècle, mais dans la perspective de mille, deux mille ou trois mille ans."
 
La conviction qui sous-tend le livre du Professeur Alexander est que le peuple paria est devenu l'État paria, et que la question nazie – "Les Juifs ont-ils le droit de vivre?" – a été remplacée par la question "anti-sioniste", une question habituellement posée par les "progressistes": "Israël a-t-il le droit d'exister?" En d'autres termes, les Juifs, parce qu'ils sont Juifs, ne peuvent pas encore considérer le droit de vivre comme un droit naturel.

 

Pakistan: homme brûlé vif par 200 musulmans pleins d’amour et de tolérance
Jean-Patrick Grumberg

dreuz.info, 22 décembre 2012

 

Brûler un homme est moins terrible que brûler un coran, selon les musulmans.
 
Un homme qui a été accusé d’avoir brûlé un Coran au Pakistan a été brûlé vif par la foule qui a forcé les portes du commissariat où il était détenu.
 
Il avait passé la nuit dans une mosquée de Seeta, dans la province du Sindh (sud), et l’imam a retrouvé des restes carbonisés du coran le lendemain matin.
 
« Il était seul dans la mosquée durant la nuit, il n’y avait personne d’autre pour faire cette terrible chose », a déclaré l’imam, Maulvi Memon, qui n’a pas considéré que brûler un homme soit aussi terrible que brûler le coran.
 
Les villageois avaient déjà lynché l’homme avant de le remettre à la police mais quelques heures plus tard, 200 personnes est revenu sur place, et a fracturé le commissariat, traîné l’homme dehors, et brûlé vif.
 
Lorsque les musulmans brûlent une mosquée, comme à Bruxelles en avril dernier, de nombreux coran sont détruits, mais là, miracle !, aucun musulman ne proteste jamais. Et c’est parce que je dénonce ces atrocités que la police de la pensée me traite de fasciste, jamais ceux qui les commettent. Cela m’encourage d’ailleurs à continuer.