Women of the Wall met for Rosh Hodesh Tammuz prayers this morning at the Western

July 8, 2016, Women of the Wall נשות הכותל http://womenofthewall.org.il (Israel)

Press Release

Women of the Wall met for Rosh Hodesh Tammuz prayers this morning at the Western Wall with 300 women in attendance in the women’s section and over 100 men in support.

Frannie Werner and her family came from Milwaukee, Wisconsin to celebrate her Bat Mitzvah ceremony, which they began planning over six months ago. This was the family’s first time in Israel and at the Western Wall. Women of the Wall vowed to ensure that Frannie would read from a Torah scroll, despite the attempts made by Rabbi Shmuel Rabinowitz, Administrator of the Western Wall, to prevent women and girls from accessing Torah scrolls at the holy site. There are over 100 scrolls for public use in the men’s section, and Rabbi Rabinowitz runs a lucrative Bar Mitzvah industry at the Kotel

HATE IS NOT A JEWISH VALUE -- Rabbis for Human Rights-North America

August 17, 2012, Rabbis for Human Rights רבנים למען זכויות האדם http://www.rhr-na.org (USA)

Rabbis for Human Rights-North America Calls on Rabbis, Jewish Leaders to Teach: Hate Is Not a Jewish Value


***For Immediate Release***

In the wake of a violent attack by Israeli teenagers on Palestinian youths, Rabbis for Human Rights-North America calls on rabbis, cantors, Jewish educators, and community leaders to teach our children that hate is not a Jewish value.

Today, a mob dozens of Israeli teens attacked three Palestinian youths in Jerusalem’s Zion Square. One of the victims was beaten so severely that he required resuscitation and remains in critical condition. Witnesses described the scene as a “lynching” and said that the perpetrators shouted “death to Arabs” and other racist epithets.

As rabbis and cantors, we are shocked and embarrassed by the behavior of these teens. Regardless of our political opinions or our desired resolution of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, we have a responsibility to teach our children that Judaism condemns the shedding of blood, as all people are equal creations in the divine image.

We applaud the swift action of the Acting Jerusalem Police Chief, General Menachem Yitzhaki, in already setting up a special investigative team for the case. We urge the police and prosecutors to thoroughly investigate and prosecute the perpetrators of this horrific hate crime. And we praise the Magen David Adom rescue team who administered first aid, and the doctors and staff at Hadassah Hospital who continue to care for the victims. These medical personnel embody the Torah’s command, “You shall not stand against the blood of your neighbor.”

On this Shabbat, as we enter the reflective period of the month of Elul, we ask rabbis, cantors, and educators to spend a few minutes speaking with our children and our communities about today’s incident in Jerusalem. These conversations should emphasize that political differences are no excuse for bigotry. We pray that our children will help us to realize a world free of hatred or violence.

For more information, contact Joshua Bloom, Rabbis for Human Rights-North America's Director of Israel Programs, at jbloom@rhr-na.org or 718-683-2548

----------------------


From Mondoweiss:

‘TODAY I SAW A LYNCH WITH MY OWN EYES, IN ZION SQUARE, IN THE CENTER OF JERUSALEM’

by Annie Robbins on August 17, 2012

Jerusalem 2012. The account first appeared on Facebook in Hebrew. Translated by Haaretz:
Dozens of Jewish youths attacked three young Palestinians in Jerusalem's Zion Square early on Friday morning, in what one witness described as "a lynch" on Facebook.

.......

The three were allegedly attacked by youths shouting "Death to the Arabs" at them, as well as other racial slurs. One of them fell on the floor, and his attackers continued to beat him until he lost consciousness. They subsequently fled from the scene.

Within a short period of time rescue volunteers and Magen David Adom rescue services arrived on the scene, and found the victim with no pulse and not breathing. After a lengthy resuscitation attempt, he was transferred to hospital.

Writing on her Facebook page, one eye witness decribed the attack as a lynch: "Its late at night, and I can't sleep. My eyes are full of tears for a good few hours now and my stomach is turning inside out with the question of the loss of humanity, the image of God in mankind, a loss that I am not willing to accept."

"But today I saw a lynch with my own eyes, in Zion Square, the center of the city of Jerusalem ….. and shouts of 'A Jew is a soul and Arab is a son of a –,' were shouted loudly and dozens (!!) of youths ran and gathered and started to really beat to death three Arab youths who were walking quietly in the Ben Yehuda street," the witness wrote.

"When one of the Palestinian youths fell to the floor, the youths continued to hit him in the head, he lost consciousness, his eyes rolled, his angled head twitched, and then those who were kicking him fled and the rest gathered in a circle around, with some still shouting with hate in their eyes."

"When two volunteers [from local charities] went into the circle, they tried to perform CPR the mass of youths standing around started to say resentfully that we are resuscitating an Arab, and when they passed near us and saw that the rest of the volunteers were shocked, they asked why we were so in shock, he is an Arab.

About Annie Robbins:
Annie Robbins is Writer at Large for Mondoweiss, a mother, a human rights activist and a ceramic artist. She lives in the SF bay area.

LATEST LUNACIES FROM THE ONLY DEMOCRACY IN THE MIDDLE EAST

May 15th, 2012, Tikun Olam תיקון עולם http://www.richardsilverstein.com/tikun_olam
(USA)

Today’s news brings two new lunacies from our friends in the Only Democracy in the Middle East™ . In the first instance, the Israeli tax authorities impounded a shipment of copies of the Arabic language edition of Yehuda HaLevy’s seminal work of medieval Jewish philosophy, The Kuzari. They did so because the books had been printed in Lebanon, one of the few places in the Middle East that prints Arabic books. The Israeli authorities claimed that allowing the books into Israel would constitute “trading with the enemy.”

The book, originally written in Judeo-Arabic, a medieval version of Arabic written using Hebrew characters (similar in concept to Yiddish), was translated as a seven-year, uncompensated labor of love by an Israeli-Palestinian PhD student at Ben Gurion University. He explained to Akiva Eldar that Israel often looks the other way when Arabic books are imported from nations in the region with whom Israel has strained relations, including Lebanon. In this case, they decided to make an example of poor Yehuda HaLevy. Why? Who knows. It may be precisely because it was a labor of love by an Israeli Palestinian and the police wish to make an example of him. It may be because they don’t like books in general. History is full of regimes which liked to make examples of books.

Or maybe it was this particular book. After all, it tells the famous tale of the Khazar king who was persuaded by a Jewish scholar to convert to Judaism. There are those among anti-Zionists who like to argue that contemporary Jews don’t trace a direct lineage back to ancient Israel, but rather to the Khazars. This is part of the ongoing battle between Zionists who feel the need to prove such a connection in order to justify the Jewish claim on Israel; and between those who feel that severing that historical connection of the Jews to the land of Israel will weaken their historical claims.

It’s entirely possible that some Shin Bet agent has studied a little too much medieval philosophy (not enough to understand the true power of the work, but too much to ignore it), and decided that the Kuzari is part of the Palestinian project of delegitimization of Israel. As a result, Israel appears to be engaging in a cultural boycott not only of Arabic language books, but of one of the great Jewish medieval poets and philosophers.

Another terrible irony of this entire mess is that the original book and author represented the pinnacle of medieval Jewish learning and intellectual achievement. This achievement happened in good part because of the environment in which Ha-Levi lived, which allowed Jews and Arabs to co-exist peacefully, even fruitfully. Could this be yet another unconscious reason Israel feels the need to suppress an Arabic-language edition? It needs to stamp out the historical example of a Jewish book written within an Arab society and in a language that combined both Arabic and Hebrew. That much peaceful co-existence and cultural interchange could be scary to Israeli officials who prefer their state to be Arab-rein.

If this weren’t so insane it would actually be mordantly funny.

(Photo: Keeping out the immigrant hordes/AP)

The Jerusalem Post reports that the Ministry of the Environment has taken the pro-active step of commissioning scientists to examine the effect that climate change will have on Israel and the Middle East. So far so good. Until you recognize that the minister is Gilad Erdan, the very same Likud henchman who tried to skewer Meir Dagan in New York by calling him a political hack for questioning Bibi’s threats of war against Iran. Knowing that Erdan is such a lap dog will explain the mockery that his ministry has made of the science of climate change.

In this country, red-neck anti-science Republicans have similarly made a political football out of climate change. But at least they’ve made a pretense of arguing scientific principles. The Israeli report dispenses with science altogether and views climate change through the prism of the national security and the Israeli-Arab conflict:

In order to combat increased waves of illegal migration that will likely accompany climate change, Israel must secure its borders through impassable barriers, including “sea fences” along the Mediterranean and Red Sea, experts have concluded.

“The lack of water, warming and sea level rise, even if it will occur on a different schedule, will bring migration movements from all impoverished regions to every place where it is possible to escape this,” wrote a team of academics, led by Prof. Arnon Soffer and Dr. Anton Berkovsky of the University of Haifa’s Geography Department…

Among its suggestions for how to handle the geo-strategic implications of climate change, the team…called for a complete enclosure of Israel from all directions, including establishing sea fences along the Mediterranean and Red seas. In addition, the experts said that additional law enforcement will be required to deal with the ramifications of securing the Egyptian and Jordanian borders, as economic crisis might ensue for Negev Beduins who trade across these turfs. While securing Israel from all sides, however, the authorities must ensure for the safe passage of animals and plants.

…Soffer explained that the most troublesome spot in terms of migration to Israel is the Nile basin area, where a mixture of drastic climate changes and demographic explosions are pushing people to move northward. Meanwhile, they recognize that “Europe is completely under siege by the navvies,” so they cannot move in that direction.

…“I am one that fights for building fences all around Israeli borders,” he said. “We are an island – we don’t belong to this region, and we have to defend Israel from waves of migration from Egypt from Jordan and maybe from Syria. If we want to keep Israel a Jewish State, we will have to defend ourselves from what I call ‘climate refugees,’ exactly as Europe is doing now.”

After reading a passage like this you begin to wonder whether Soffer is a Stephen Colbert pseudo-scientist parody:

While the fences around Israel are necessary, according to Soffer, so too are corridors to allow the free passage of animals. Such passages, he said could be guarded by groups of soldiers for days at a time to allow the animals, such as snakes, to cross both ways.

So Israel will seal itself off from human aliens, but bestow mercy on the animals (non-human ones, that is).

Think of the psychological profile of a supposed learned scholar who thinks in such deeply paranoid ways of those surround Israel. Think of the delusional thinking that allows him to believe that the solution to an epidemic is to turn Israel into a battleship that can fight off those who threaten it. This, in effect is a transference of Israeli security policy into the realm of climate science. Just as security policy is bankrupt so is this approach to a coming major catastrophe.

Note that Soffer doesn’t propose that Israel contribute scientifically so solving the problems of climate change. He doesn’t suggest decreasing Israel’s carbon footprint or devising ways of lessening the world’s carbon emissions, all of which would help avert the crisis. Instead, he merely suggests who to weather the human storm it will cause. Soffer gives his nation, his discipline and science in general a bad name. How can such racism infect someone who’s earned a position at a major Israeli university?

2,000 PALESTINIANS ARE ON HUNGER STRIKE – TELL HILARY TO BREAK HER SILENCE!

May 13, 2012 Shalom Rav http://rabbibrant.com (USA)
A Blog by Rabbi Brant Rosen

Protest tent, Nablus, May 11, 2012. (Photo: Ahmad Al-Bazz/ActiveStills)

Did you know that two thousand plus imprisoned Palestinians have been on an hunger strike for months demanding basic human rights and an end to detention without trial? Did you know that two of them have not eaten since February 28 and are hovering between life and death? Did you know that thousands of Palestinians have been protesting in support of the strikers in growing demonstrations throughout the West Bank?

Alas, while it’s been reported fairly regularly via the world media, there’s been a near-total silence from the American government on the matter. Actually, that’s not quite correct – at a recent press briefing, spokesperson Victoria Nuland remarked that the State Department doesn’t “have anything to say (about it) one way or the other.”

As journalist Robert Naiman recently observed, the State Department did manage to speak out in support of Bahrainian Abdulhadi al-Khawaja, also on hunger strike to oppose his unjust detention. Yet 2,000 Palestinian hunger strikers do not rate even an official acknowledgement?

At present, Egypt is attempting to broker a solution – and as Naiman rightly points out, “a few words from the State Department could help tip the balance toward a more positive resolution.” I encourage you to join me in signing this petition urging Hilary Clinton to end her silence and use her good offices to help save the lives of these nonviolent Palestinian protesters.

For a deeply moving meditation on the hunger strikers campaign, I commend to you this post by Vicky at Bethlehem Blogger:

Through the hunger strike, the prisoners have demonstrated that there are some things that can never be taken from them – dignity first of all. Maher Halahleh, whose brother Thaer is in a critical condition after seventy-four days without food, said today, “This is a new weapon that is stronger than a nuclear bomb. Israel is fighting people who have no weapons, only their will.”

My Latest Tweets:

• New on Palestinian Talmud: "Administrative Detention is Not Judaism" wp.me/p22JUE-3Z by @velveteenrabbi 4 hours ago

• I stand w 1000s of Palestinians on hunger strike against detention w/o charge. #Palhunger bit.ly/HungerSolidari… via @jvplive 6 hours ago

• New on Palestinian Talmud! Rabbi Alissa Wise on Pal Hunger Strikers and "Sacred Decisiveness" wp.me/p22JUE-3N 6 hours ago

• 2,000 Palestinians are on Hunger Strike - Tell Hilary to Break Her Silence! wp.me/p1Xax-33q 1 day ago

DEBUNKING ANTI-IRAN PROPAGANDA: THE MYTH OF THE "NEW HOLOCAUST"

By Benjamin Schett*

6 March 2012, The Centre for Research on Globalisation -- CRG http://www.globalresearch.ca (Canada)

URL of this article: www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=29626

In a pattern of propaganda now well-established in the mainstream media, fear-mongering against Iran is reaching an all-time peak. A case in point includes ongoing accusations that Iran is in violation of the nuclear non-proliferation treaty, despite statements to the contrary from U.S. Defence Secretary Leon Panetta as well as a number of American intelligence officials[1].

In addition, claims that Iran is involved in terrorist activities were released by the Obama administration, fabricating an Iranian conspiracy with the goal to assassinate the Saudi Ambassador to the U.S.

(For details, see: http://globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=27094)
Most recently, Israel's Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has accused Iran of having planned terrorist attacks in India, Georgia and Thailand.

(For details, see: http://globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=29320)
As it stands, the intensification of propaganda is fuelling an anti-Iranian proxy conflict in Syria and creating the serious danger of aggression against Iran in the coming months by Israel's extremist government and/or the Obama administration. These media fabrications also do not question why the prospect of a nuclear-armed Iran would increase worldwide tensions so much more than the hyper-developed nuclear weapons programs of countries like Israel and the United States. (Notwithstanding the fact that there is no existing proof that suggests that Iran is doing anything other than developing a peaceful civilian atomic program.)

Opponents of possible armed aggression against Iran are regularly accused of repeating the mistakes from the period prior to World War II, namely of not taking seriously the purportedly dangerous eliminatory "anti-Semitism" of the Iranian regime. This charge is echoed by the Anti-Defamation League, one of the biggest pro-Zionist U.S. groups, who is lobbying for taking any "necessary" measures in order to overthrow the Iranian government and its president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad:

"Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's anti-Semitic and anti-Israel views place him and the Iranian regime among the foremost threats to Jews and the state of Israel."[2]
Moreover, Israeli President Shimon Peres called Iran a "danger to the entire world" while addressing the German Bundestag in a speech marking Holocaust Remembrance Day in 2010.

The symbolism of such actions is clear: whoever refuses to participate in the campaign against Iran is neglecting the threat of a new Holocaust, the insinuation being that if Iran were to get nuclear weapons, it would use them against the state of Israel.

First of all, suggesting that the current situation in Iran is even remotely comparable to the crimes committed by the Nazis inexcusably downplays the suffering of Jews, Roma, Communists, Slavic nations and other victims of Fascism.

In addition, while the strategic motivation behind arguments made by Israeli decision-makers is clear, the facts are not. In fact, the alleged statements made by Ahmadinejad calling for Israel to be "wiped of the map" were proven to be fake thanks to a false translation from Farsi into English. (See: http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2006/jun/14/post155) This has been well known already for some time, although it does not seem to faze the war propagandists.

The other question that should be asked by anyone investigating accusations against the Iranian government of being the "foremost threat against Jews" is how do Jews actually live in Iran? If the Iranian president is supposed to be some kind of reborn Hitler, would that not be reflected in imposed anti-Jewish legislature in his country, calls for pogroms, etc.?

The evidence on Jewish life in Iran, from various sources, including Jewish and American mainstream is revealing. For example, a website belonging to the Foundation for the Advancement of Sephardic Studies and Culture (FASSAC) acknowledges that:

"While Jewish communities in Syria, Iraq, Yemen, Egypt, Morocco and Algeria have all but vanished, Iran is home to 25,000 – some here say 35,000 – Jews."[3]

This makes Iran’s Jewish community the largest in the Middle East, outside of Israel. Furthermore, many Iranian Jews show pride in their mixed Jewish-Iranian heritage and would not consider emigration:

"Jewish leaders say their community has far stronger roots in Iran than other Middle East Jewish communities, which were virtually eradicated by massive immigration to Israel in the 1940s and 1950s. Esther, the biblical Jewish queen who saved her people from persecution in the fifth century B.C., is reputed to be buried in Hamadan, in western Iran. The grave of the Old Testament prophet Daniel lies in southwestern Iran."

As we see, Jewish roots in Iran date back to biblical times: "The Jews trace their heritage in Iran to the Babylonian Exile of the 6th century BC..."[4]. Indeed, several Persian kings enjoy a positive reputation in the Old Testament because of their friendly attitude towards the Hebrew people.

Today, Jewish religion and culture is still present in everyday life in Iran:

"Tehran has 11 functioning synagogues, many of them with Hebrew schools. It has two kosher restaurants, and a Jewish hospital, an old-age home and a cemetery. There is a Jewish representative in the Iranian parliament. There is a Jewish library with 20,000 titles..."

It can't be denied that there must have been considerable concern among Iranian Jews in the time following the Islamic Revolution in 1979, as it was hard to predict how things would develop under the new radically anti-Zionist leadership, and many chose to emigrate on this account. Nonetheless:

"Khomeini [the spiritual leader of the Islamic Revolution] met with the Jewish community upon his return from exile in Paris and issued a ''fatwa'' decreeing that the Jews were to be protected. Similar edicts also protect Iran's tiny Christian minority."

The Iranian leadership seems to draw a clear line between Zionism as a political ideology (inspired by Western European colonialist ideas in the 19th century), and Judaism. This conclusion can be underlined by several statements President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has made throughout recent years. In a Christmas message to the people of Great Britain, broadcast by Channel Four, Ahmadinejad started his speech with the following lines:

"Upon the anniversary of the birth of Jesus, Son of Mary, the Word of God, the Messenger of mercy, I would like to congratulate the followers of Abrahamic faiths, especially the followers of Jesus Christ, and the people of Britain."

The religious pathos might not be to everybody's taste, but the more relevant question would be whether these could realistically be the lines of a fanatical preacher of hate, as he is portrayed by mainstream media in the West. In fact, by addressing the "followers of Abrahamic faith", president Ahmadinejad expresses his respect for the three religions of the book: Judaism, Christianity and Islam.

Critics might argue that a conciliatory message prepared for a Western audience might serve the purpose of leaving the people outside Iran in the dark about its real hidden agenda. Thanks to the Internet, it is not necessary to speak Farsi to get an impression of what Ahmadinejad is saying in front of an audience in his own country. In a speech delivered in May 2007 in the city of Esfahan (available on YouTube with English subtitles), he explains to the crowd what his response is to people who accuse him of being anti-Semitic on account of his heavy criticism of the Israeli regime:

"Some officials from that country (USA)... said all kinds of things. One of them was: "They [the Israeli leaders] are Jewish, why are you anti-Jewish?" I said: I am not anti-Jewish at all... But they are lying. They are not Jewish, but a bunch of corrupt criminals abusing the name of Judaism."[5]

In May 2006, the National Post published an article claiming that the Iranian parliament had passed a sumptuary law forcing religious minorities, Jews included, to follow a specific dress code:

"It also envisages separate dress codes for religious minorities, Christians, Jews and Zoroastrians, who will have to adopt distinct colour schemes to make them identifiable in public. The new codes would enable Muslims to easily recognize non-Muslims so that they can avoid shaking hands with them by mistake, and thus becoming najis (unclean)."[6]

However, the story turned out to be a hoax and the National Post issued an apology by its editor-in-chief[7]. But the intention of this falsification is obvious: it was meant to remind people of the yellow star that Jews were forced to wear in Nazi Germany, and thereby create fears of similar events happening in Iran that might lead to some kind of new Holocaust.

One of the particularly critical Jewish responses to this provocation came from Iran’s Jewish Member of Parliament, Moris Motamed. (It should be noted that Jews, Christians and Zoroastrians all have their own guaranteed seat in the Iranian Parliament (Majilis), which is one of the results of Khomeini's fatwa calling for the protection of these religious minorities). As Motamed outlined in an interview with Counterpunch:

"Unfortunately, this was fake news published in a Canadian newspaper. I considered this news a big insult to the religious minorities of Iran. I refuted the story vigorously, to the point that the source of the news and the Canadian government officially apologized to the Iranian government."[8]

The same Motamed, who officially represents the Iranian Jewish community, does not criticize Iran’s nuclear program, unlike many foreigners who claim to act in favour of Judaism by encouraging "strikes on Iranian nuclear facilities":

"As a Jewish Iranian, I consider enrichment of peaceful nuclear technology the obvious right of Iranian society. What is sad here — and I’m so sorry about it — is that before the Islamic Revolution, we witnessed... western Europe and America pressuring Iran to obtain nuclear technology and establish a nuclear power plant. Now the idea is brought up: "Why do you want nuclear technology? What is the point of nuclear technology for you when you have rich resources like fuel and gas and oil?" My question here is why at that earlier time, the problem of natural resources was not brought up?"

In further demonizing the Iranian state, Western media and pro-Zionist lobbyists accuse Ahmadinejad of making ambiguous statements about the Holocaust. Clearly, however, holocaust denial does not represent the official position of the Islamic Republic of Iran. Otherwise it couldn't be explained why in 2007 the Iranian state television broadcast a series emphasising the suffering of Europe’s Jews in the Second World War, in what can be likened to an Iranian version of "Schindler’s List":

"The central character is an Iranian diplomat, who provides false Iranian passports to enable Jews to flee the Nazi-occupied France, a sort of Iranian Schindler. He even has a love affair with a Jewish woman."[9]

This Iranian diplomat saving Iranian Jews, named Abdol Hossein Sardari, actually existed in real life and has been honoured in past decades by Jewish organisations, including the Simon Wiesenthal Centre.[10]

It should not be the goal of this article to make a final judgement on Jewish life in Iran, because this would be an almost impossible enterprise without having the personal experience of how life looks when belonging to a religious minority in a very religious country. But it is important to put the collected information into perspective. It is apparent Iranian Jews have the right to freely practice their religion and to maintain their culture and traditions. Jewish institutions such as synagogues, Jewish libraries, hospitals and restaurants are well-established across the country.

By contrast, the impression we get from one of America's closest Middle Eastern allies, the totalitarian Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (a rival of Iran), looks very different. Neither Jewish nor Christian worship is allowed, and Saudi school textbooks spread hateful messages such as the following, according to Daily Mail:

"In one, for ninth-graders, students are taught the annihilation of the Jewish people is imperative. One text reads in part: 'The hour (of judgment) will not come until the Muslims fight the Jews and kill them. There is a Jew behind me come and kill him.'"[11]
This is not the first time that the U.S. government is fighting alongside extremists against states that they perceive as barriers to the proliferation of their economic, geopolitical and imperial agendas, while at the same time pretending to combat "terrorism", "ethnic cleansing" and other crimes against humanity.

All things considered, the hypocrisy is plainly clear. It is therefore not only necessary but also imperative to oppose the dangerous propaganda and warmongering spread by the most aggressive factions within the U.S. and Israeli establishments, and ensure that truth prevails over rampant militarization.

*Benjamin Schett is an independent Swiss-based researcher and student of East European History at the University of Vienna. He can be reached at schettb@gmail.com

Notes

[1] http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/story/2012-01-08/iran-nuclear-weapons/52451620/1.
[2] http://www.adl.org/main_International_Affairs/ahmadinejad_words.htm.
[3] http://www.sephardicstudies.org/iran.html.
[4] http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/293359/Iran.
[5] http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QEDqygQMoZ8&feature=results_video&playnext=1&list=PL77FD8F72F884C7F8.
[6] Original article: http://www.canada.com/nationalpost/news/story.html?id=398274b5-9210-43e4-ba59-fa24f4c66ad4&k=28534&p=1.
[7] http://www.canada.com/nationalpost/news/story.html?id=6df3e493-f350-4b53-bc16-53262b49a4f7
[8] http://www.counterpunch.org/2008/07/14/talking-to-iran-s-only-jewish-member-of-parliament.
[9] http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/7119474.stm.
[10] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abdol_Hossein_Sardari.
[11] http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2077658/The-Arabic-textbooks-children-chop-hands-feet-Sharia-law.html.

STORM OVER HEBRON

11 February 2012, Gush Shalom גוש שלום (Israel)

Uri Avnery אורי אבנרי

THERE SEEMS to be no limit to the troubles caused by the town of Hebron.
This time, the reason is as innocent as can be: the organized visits of schoolchildren to the Cave of Machpelah, where our patriarchs are supposed to be buried.

By rights, Hebron should be a symbol of brotherhood and conciliation. It is the town associated with the legendary figure of Abraham, the common ancestor of both Hebrews and Arabs. Indeed, the name itself connotes friendship: the Hebrew name Hebron stems from the same root as “haver”, friend, comrade, while the town’s Arab name - al-Halil - means “friend”. Both names refer to Abraham being the friend of God.

Abraham’s firstborn, Ishmael, was the son of the concubine Hagar, who was driven out into the desert to die there, when the legitimate son, Isaac, was born to Sarah. Ishmael, the patriarch of the Arabs, and Isaac, the patriarch of the Jews, were enemies, but when their father died, they came together to bury him: “Then Abraham gave up the ghost and died in a good old age, an old man and full of years (175), and was gathered to his people. And his two sons, Isaac and Ishmael, buried him in the cave of Machpelah…” (Genesis, 25)

IN RECENT times, Hebron has acquired a very different reputation.

For centuries, a small Jewish community lived there in peace, in perfect harmony with the Muslim inhabitants. But in 1929, something awful happened. A group of Jewish fanatics staged an incident in Jerusalem, when they tried to change the delicate status quo at the Western Wall. Religious riots broke out throughout the country. In Hebron, Muslims massacred 59 Jews, men, women and children, an event that left an indelible mark on Jewish memory. (Less well known is the fact that 263 Jews were saved by their Arab neighbors.)

Shortly after the occupation of the West Bank in the Six-day War, a group of fanatical messianic Jews infiltrated Hebron by stealth and founded the first Jewish settlement. This grew into a veritable nest of extremism, including some out and out fascists. One of them was the mass-murderer Baruch Goldstein, who slaughtered 29 Muslims at prayer in the Cave of Machpelah – actually no cave at all, but a fortress-like building, perhaps built by King Herod.

Since then, there has been endless trouble between the 500 or so Jewish settlers in the city, who enjoy the protection of the army, and the 165,000 Arab inhabitants, who are completely at their mercy, devoid of any human or civil rights.

IF THE schoolchildren had been sent there to listen to both sides and learn something about the complexity of the conflict, that would be fine. But this was not the intention of the Minister of Education, Gideon Sa’ar.

Personally, Sa’ar (the name means “storm”) is a nice person. In fact, he started his career in my magazine, Haolam Hazeh. However, he is a fanatical right-winger, who believes that his job is to cleanse Israeli children of the rotten cosmopolitan liberalism that he imagines their teachers are steeped in, and to turn them into uniform, loyal patriots, ready to die for the fatherland. He is sending army officers to preach in the classrooms, demands that teachers instill “Jewish values” (i.e. nationalist religiosity) even in secular schools, and now wants to send them to Hebron and other “Jewish” places, so their “Jewish roots” grow more robust.

The children sent there see the “Jewish” Cave of Machpelah (which was for 13 centuries a mosque), the settlers, the streets that have become empty of Arabs, and listen to the indoctrination of patriotic guides. No contact with Arabs, no other side, no others at all.

When a rebellious school invited members of the peace-oriented ex-soldiers’ group “Breaking the Silence” to accompany them and show them the other side, police intervened and prevented them from visiting the town. Now some 200 teachers and principals have signed an official protest against the Education Minister's project and demanded its cancellation.

Sa’ar is upset. With flaming eyes behind his glasses, he fervently denounced the teachers. How could such traitors be allowed to educate our precious children?
ALL THIS reminded me of my late wife, Rachel. I may have told the story before. If so, I must ask for indulgence. I just can’t help recounting it again.

Rachel was for many years a teacher of the first and second grade. She believed that after that, nothing further could be done to mould the character of a human being.

Like me, Rachel loved the Bible – not as a religious text or a book of history (which it most decidedly is not) but as a superb literary work, unequalled in its beauty.

The Bible tells how the mythological Abraham bought the Cave of Machpelah to bury his wife, Sarah. It is a wonderful story, and, as was her wont, Rachel had the children play it in class. This not only brought the story to life, but also allowed her to push forward timid boys and girls who lacked self-confidence. When they were chosen for an important role in one of these improvised plays, they would gain self-respect and suddenly bloom. Some had their whole life changed (as they confided to me decades later).

The Bible (Genesis 23) has it that Abraham asked the people of Hebron for a plot to bury his wife, when she died at the ripe old age of 127. All the Hebronites offered their fields for free. But Abraham wanted to buy the field of Ephron, the son of Zohar, “for as much money as it is worth”.

Ephron, however, refused to accept any money and insisted on giving the honored guest the field as a gift. After much exchange of pleasantries, Ephron finally came to the point: “My lord, hearken unto me: the land is worth four hundred shekels of silver, what is that betwixt you and me?”

The scene was duly enacted, with one 7-year old boy with a long beard playing Abraham and another playing Ephron, with the rest of the class as the people of Hebron, who were the witnesses to the transaction, as Abraham had requested.

Rachel explained to the children that this was an ancient way of conducting business, not coming straight to the crass matter of money, but first exchanging polite words and protestations, and then gradually working towards a compromise. She added that this civilized procedure is still followed in the Arab world, and especially among the Bedouins, even in Israel. For the children, who had probably never heard a good word about Arabs before, this was a revelation.

Afterwards, Rachel asked the teacher of the parallel class how she had told the same story. “What do you mean,” the woman replied, “I told them the truth, that Arabs always lie and cheat. If Ephron wanted 400 shekels, why didn’t he say so straight away, instead of pretending to be ready to give it as a gift?”

IF TEACHERS like Rachel could take their children to Hebron and show them around, letting them visit the Arab spice market and the workshops which for centuries have been producing the unique blue Hebron glass, it would be wonderful. If children could speak with Arabs and Jews, including even the fanatics of both sides, it could be highly educational. Visiting the tombs of the patriarchs (which, most serious archaeologists believe, are actually the graves of Muslim Sheiks) which are sacred to both Muslims and Jews, could convey a message. Jewish Israelis are quite unaware that Abraham also figures as a prophet in the Koran.

Before conquering Jerusalem and declaring it his capital, the mythological King David (also revered as a prophet in Islam) had his capital in Hebron. Indeed, the town, which is located 930 meters above sea level, enjoys wonderful air and agreeable temperatures in both summer and winter.

This whole episode brings me back to an old hobbyhorse of mine: the need for all Israeli schoolchildren, Jews and Arabs, to learn the history of the country.

This seems self-evident, but is not. Far from it. Arab children in Israel learn Arab history, starting with the birth of Islam in far-away Mecca. Jewish children learn Jewish history, which played no significant role in this country for almost 2000 years. Big chunks of the country’s history are unknown to one side or to both. Jewish pupils know nothing about the Mamluks and next to nothing about the Crusaders (except that they butchered the Jews in Germany on their way here), Arab pupils know very little about the Canaanites and the Maccabees.

Learning the history of the country in its entirety, including its Jewish and Muslim phases, would create a unified common view which would bring the two peoples much closer to each other, and make peace and reconciliation easier. But this prospect is as distant today as it was 40 years ago, when I raised it for the first time in the Knesset, earning the nickname “the Mamluk” from the then Education Minister, Zalman Aran of the Labor Party.

In a different atmosphere, Hebron would be seen as it should be: a fascinating town, sacred to both peoples, the second most holy city of Judaism (after Jerusalem) and one of the four sacred cities of Islam (with Mecca, Medina and Jerusalem). With mutual tolerance and without the fanatics of both sides, what a wonderful place that could be for children to visit!

THE SACRED HANDIWORK OF POETRY PALS

9 December 2011, Shalom Rav http://rabbibrant.com (USA)

By Rabbi Brant Rosen

This past week I had the pleasure of visiting the Muslim Community Center school (MCC) in Morton Grove, IL to witness an inspiring session of Poetry Pals in action.

PP is a non-profit that brings children together from diverse and interfaith communities for partnership, expression and friendship through poetry, spoken word, music and art. At this particular workshop, fourth graders from MCC, Solomon Schecter Jewish Day School and Sacred Heart Catholic School gathered together in the MCC gym. After a brief learning session and tour from the principal, they came back together to get to know one another by engaging in a variety of creative poetry writing exercises.

So simple and yet so very powerful. With news about religious intolerance blaring at us from every corner, I wish I could start every day this way: watching children wearing hijabs, kippot and Catholic school uniforms talking, playing, laughing and writing poetry together. I am so grateful to PP founder (and JRC member) Donna Yates for inviting me to witness their sacred handiwork.

Local efforts such as Poetry Pals are eminently worthy of our support. Click here to do so.

Israeli parents protest growing extremist bent in religious schools

18 November 2011, Haaretz הארץ (Israel)

Parents of some 400 children are protesting issues such as prohibition against kindergarten girls singing.

By Talila Nesher

Parents of some 400 children in the state religious school system have banded together to protest what they view as the extreme bent the system has taken.
"People are angry over the issue of women [prohibited from] singing in the IDF, but our outcry is over the prohibition against kindergarten girls singing," Ariela Miller, the mother of three children in the Orthodox state school system, told Haaretz.

"Children are habituated to rabbis being the only source of authority, much before educators. No wonder that when they come to crossroads in life, they cannot use their own judgment," Miller said.

Unlike Miller, most of the parents are afraid to reveal their names for fear of a negative impact on their children's schooling. One activist, who works for the Education Ministry, said she was summoned for a talking-to and told to stop her activities against the Education Ministry.

Another mother said that the main extremist influence was coming from organized groups of Orthodox people moving into a community with the purpose of increasing religious observance in that community. "But make no mistake, the Education Ministry is a full partner and is pushing them forward," she said.

Parents are brimming with examples of increasing extremism in state religious schools. One father who has children in Tel Aviv's Moriah school said: "On the last Memorial Day, some of the girls did not sing in the ceremony because 'it is not modest,' and they have already begun talking about the fact that at the end of the year event the fathers won't be able to see the girls perform and that there will even be separate events for boys and girls."

Another father said the school principal has no choice but to accede to the demands of the parents of the ultra-Orthodox group that has moved in, "and if an instruction is not implemented, it comes later from above - from [the Education Ministry's] supervisor."

The father added that when he complained he was told that if he did not like it, he could take his daughter to another school.

A mother from a state religious kindergarten in Kiryat Gat said that when she asked if a date had been set for the class Hanukkah party, the teacher said the event was being organized by the Orthodox residents' group, and that fathers would not be invited because "it is not modest for girls to dance and sing in the presence of the fathers, which would [also] prevent the mothers from dancing."

Classroom hours have also been changed unrecognizably, the father of a child at the Shilo school in Kiryat Ono says. When the parents first received the schedule of classes, it seemed alright, he said. "Only later did we realize that there are sacred studies disguised as secular studies: homeroom, for example, is suddenly being taught by the school rabbi, who certainly doesn't deal with civics, but rather with Jewish law."

The father said his daughter showed him a book that the school had purchased for the children, which he said was "completely ultra-Orthodox." The father said the male figures in the book were depicted with ultra-Orthodox skullcaps and sidelocks and on the page teaching about showing respect to parents "there was only a father, no mother at all."

A project to further classic Israeli literature at the Tomer kindergarten in Ramat Hasharon by subsidizing the purchase of books was scrapped last year, a parent said, after the group of Orthodox people who had moved into the community to further its religious observance said Haim Nahman Bialik and Lea Goldberg were "not modest."

A mother of a child in the Tomer kindergarten said the group of Orthodox residents "impose censorship instead of the Education Ministry" in checking the plays the school was paying for the children to see.

A parent from the Moriah school said: "One fine day they decided to separate the children on the bus: the boys in the front and the girls in the back. Recess is also taken in different yards."

Parents from Kiryat Gat said that on the first day of kindergarten they were given a flyer in which mothers were instructed "to come to the kindergarten in modest dress (skirt or dress, no pants and certainly not without sleeves)."

Before the beginning of the school year at the Morasha school in Petah Tikva, a group of parents petitioned the High Court of Justice over what they perceived as forced gender separation beginning in the first grade. "The High Court ordered the situation to remain as it is until a committee studies the issue," Idit, one of the mothers said. "But the High Court doesn't know that it is being tricked, because last year we were forced to separate them under the assumption that it was for one year, so leaving the situation as it is means continuing the separation."

The Education Ministry responded: "State religious education provides solutions to a variety of communities and the various groups studying in its framework. Discussions are underway to study the matter in all its aspects."

More on this topic
Hundreds across Israel protest against religious marginalization of women in Jerusalem
Jerusalem & Babylon / Ultra-Orthodox need not protest Israel, they run it

Organized Political Terrorism: The Norwegian Massacre, the State, the Media and Israel

By Prof. James Petras

31 July 2011, Global Research http://www.globalresearch.ca (Canada)

“So let us fight together with Israel , with our Zionist brothers against all anti-Zionists, against all cultural Marxists/Multiculturalists”. Anders Behring Breivik’s Manifesto

“. . . two more cells exist in my organization”. . . Ander Behring Breivik in police custody (Reuters 7/25/11)

Introduction:
The July 22, 2011, bombing of the office of the Norwegian Prime Minister, Labor Party Jen Stoltenberg, which killed 8 civilians, and the subsequent political assassination of 68 unarmed activists of the Labor Party Youth on Utoeya Island, just 20 minutes from Oslo, by militant neo-fascist Christian-Zionists, raises fundamental questions about the growing links between the legal Far-Right, the ‘mainstream media’, the Norwegian police, Israel and rightwing terrorism.

The Mass Media and the Rise of Rightwing Terrorism:
The leading English language newspapers, The New York Times (NYT), the Washington Post (WP), the Wall Street Journal (WSJ) and the Financial Times (FT), as well as President Obama, blamed “Islamic extremists”, upon the first police reports of the killings, publishing a series of incendiary (and false) headlines and reports, labeling the event as ‘Norway’s 9-11’,in terms, which echoed the ideological motivation and justifications cited by the Norwegian Christian-Zionist political assassin, Anders Behring Breivik himself,. The July 23/24 front page of the Financial Times (of London ), read “Islamist extremism fears: Worst Europe strike since 2005”. Obama immediately cited the terrorist attack in Norway to further justify his overseas wars against Muslim countries. The FT, NYT, WP and WSJ trotted out their self-styled “experts” who debated over which Arab/Islamic leaders or movements were responsible – despite Norwegian press reports of ‘the arrest of a Nordic man in police uniform’.

Clearly, the US mass media and political elite were eager to use the bombing and assassinations to justify ongoing overseas imperial wars, ignoring the burgeoning domestic extremist rightwing organizations and violent individuals who are the outgrowth of official Islamophobic hate propaganda.

When Anders Breivik, a known neo-fascist extremist, handed his weapons over to Norwegian police without resistance and claimed credit for the bombing and massacre, the second phase of the official cover-up took place: He was immediately described as “a lone wolf assassin”, who “acted alone” (BBC July 24, 2011) or as mentally deranged, downplaying his political networks, his American, European and Israeli ideological mentors and commitments, which led to his acts of terrorism. Even more outrageous, the media and officials ignored the fact that this complex, multiphase terrorist attack was beyond the capacity of one ‘deranged’ person.

Anders Behring Breivik had been a dues-paying member of a Far-Right political party, The Progress Party and a collaborator and contributor to an overtly neo-Nazi web site. He frequently focused his hatred on the ruling Labor Party for its relative tolerance of immigrants. He despised immigrants especially, Muslims, and was an ardent Christian-Zionist supporter of Israeli repression and terror against the Palestinian people. His criminal action was political in essence and embedded in a much wider political network.

The political elite and media have scrambled to deny the overlapping links between ‘legal’ ideological Islamophobes, like the American Zionists Daniel Pipes, David Horowitz, Robert Spencer and Pamela Geller, the Dutch far-right Party of Freedom led by the hate-monger Geert Wilders and their counterparts in the Norwegian Progress Party who rail against the “Muslim threat”. The “direct action” terrorists take their cues from electoral parties, like the Progress Party, who recruit and indoctrinate activists, like Behring Breivik, who then leave the ‘electoral road’ to carry out their bloody carnage, allowing the ‘respectable’ hate-mongers to hypocritically condemn him… after the outrage.

The Lone Assassin: A Fascist Superman Travels Faster than a Speeding Bullet Versus the Police Moving Slower than an Arthritic Turtle:
The case for the “lone wolf terrorist” defies credence. It is a tissue of lies used to cover up state complicity, intelligence malfeasance, and the sharp right-turn in the domestic and foreign policies of NATO countries.

There is no basis to accept Breivik’s initial claim that he acted alone for several outstanding reasons: First, the car bomb, which devastated downtown Oslo, was a highly complex weapon requiring expertise and coordination – the kind available to state or intelligence services, like the Mossad, which specialize in devastating car bombs. Amateurs, like Breivik, with no training in explosives, usually blow themselves up or lack the skill required to connect the electronic timing devices or remote detonators (like the unsuccessful ‘shoe’, ‘underpants’ and ‘Times Square’ bombers have proved) .

Secondly, the details of (a) moving the bomb, (b) obtaining (stealing) a vehicle, (c) placing the device at the strategic site, (d) successfully detonating it and (e) then gowning up in an elaborate special police uniform with an arsenal of hundreds of rounds of ammunition and driving off in another vehicle to Utoeya Island, (f) waiting patiently while armed to the teeth for a ferry boat, g) crossing with other passengers in his police uniform, (h) rounding up the Labor youth activists and commencing the massacre of scores of unarmed youth and finally (i) finishing off the wounded and hunting for those trying to hide or swim away - is not the activity of a lone zealot. Even the combination of Superman, Einstein and a world class marksman could not perform those tasks.

The media and NATO leaders must view the public as passive morons to expect them to believe that Anders Behring Breivik “acted alone”. He is willing to take a 20 year prison sentence if it means, as he maintains, that their collective action is the spark that ignites his comrades and advances the agenda of the violent and legal far rightwing parties. Facing a Norwegian judge on July 25, he publicly declared the existence of “two more cells in my organization”. According to witness testimony on Utoeya Island shots from two distinct weapons were heard from different directions during the massacre. The police say they are… “investigating”. Needless to say the police have found nothing; instead they put on a “show” to cover their inaction by raiding two houses far from the massacre and quickly released the suspects.

The most serious political implication of the terrorist action, however, is the conspicuous complicity of top police officials. The police took 90 minutes to arrive at Utoeya Island , located less than 20 miles from Oslo , 12 minutes by helicopter and 25 to 30 minutes by car and boat. The delay allowed the right wing assassins to use up the ammunition, maximizing the death toll of young, anti-fascist activists and devastating the Labor youth movement. The police chief, Sveinung Sponheim, made the feeblest excuse and cover-up, claiming “problems with transport”. Sponheim argued that a helicopter “wasn’t on standby” and they “could not find a boat” (Associated Press, July 24, 2011).

Yet a helicopter was available; it managed to fly to Utoeya and film the ongoing slaughter, and over half of Norwegians, a seafaring people for millennia, own or have access to a boat. A police force, faced with what the Prime Minister calls the ‘worst atrocity since the Nazi occupation’, moving at the pace of an arthritic turtle to rescue youth activists, raises the suspicion of some level of complicity. The obvious question arises as to the degree to which the ideology of right wing extremism – neo-fascism – has penetrated the police and security forces, especially the upper echelons? This level of “inactivity” raises more questions than it answers. What it suggests is that the Social Democrats only control part of the Government – the legislative, while the neo-fascists influence the state apparatus.

The plain fact is that the police did not save a single life. When they finally arrived, Anders Behring Breivik had run out of ammunition and surrendered turning himself over to the police. The police literally did not fire a single shot; they did not even have to hunt or capture the assassin. An almost choreographed scenario: Hundreds wounded, 68 unarmed, peaceful activists killed and the Labor youth movement decimated.

The police can claim “crime solved” while the mass media prattles about a “lone assassin”. The far right has a “martyr” to mask a further advance in their anti-Muslim, pro Israel crusade. (It is reminiscent of the celebrated Israeli-American fascist mass murderer, Dr. Baruch Goldstein, who slaughtered dozens of unarmed Palestinian men and boys at prayer in 1994).

Only two days before the political murders, the head of the Labor Party Youth Movement, Eskil Pederson, gave an interview to the Dagbladet, Norway’s second largest tabloid, in which he announced a “unilateral economic embargo of Israel from the Norwegian side” (Gilad Atzmon, July 24, 2011).

The fact of the matter is that the Norwegian military has no problem promptly dispatching 500 troops to Afghanistan, half way around the world and providing six Norwegian Air Force jets and pilots to bomb and terrorize Libya . And yet they can’t find a helicopter or a row boat to transport their police a couple hundred yards to stop a domestic right wing terrorist – whose murderous rampage was being described second by second by the terrorized young victims on their cell phones to their frantic parents?

The Imperial Roots of Domestic Fascism: Conclusion
Clearly, the decisions of Norway and other Scandinavian nations to participate in the US imperial crusades against Muslim and especially Arab people in the Middle East have aroused and energized the neo-fascist right. They now want to “bring the war home”; they want Norway to go further, to ‘cleanse the nation’ by expelling Muslims. They want to “send a message” to the Labor Party: Either it must accept a full neo-fascist pro-Israeli agenda or expect more massacres, more elected fascists, more followers of Anders Behring Breivik.

The “Progress Party” is now the second largest political party in Norway . If a “conservative” coalition defeats Labor, neo-fascists will probably sit in the Government. Who knows, after a few years of good behavior, they might find an excuse to commute their ex-comrade's sentence . . . or proclaim him mentally rehabilitated and freed.

Clearly what is needed is the immediate withdrawal of all troops from imperial wars and a systematic, coherent and organized fight against domestic right-wing terrorists and their intellectual godparents, in America , Israel and Europe . Labor youth must go press on with their demand that the Labor Government, under Prime Minister Jen Stoltenberg, recognize the nation of Palestine and implement a total boycott of Israeli goods and services. A national and international political-educational campaign must be organized to expose the links between respectable electoral fascists and violent terrorists. The Labor Youth martyrs of Utoeya Island should be cherished and their ideals taught in all the schools. Their far-right enemies and supporters whether overt, covert or directly complicit, should be exposed and condemned. The best weapon against the renewed neo-fascist onslaught is a political and educational offensive, taking up the anti-fascist, anti-Quisling (Norway ’s notorious Nazi collaborator) fighting traditions of their grandparents’ era. It’s not too late – if the Labor Party, the Norwegian trade unions and the anti-fascist youth act now before the flood of resurgent fascism.

IJV RESPONSE TO KAIROS PALESTINE DOCUMENT*

A Moment of truth: A word of faith, hope and love from the heart of palestinian suffering

22 July 2011, Independent Jewish Voices-Canada (IJV) http://ijvcanada.org (Canada)

Introduction

Independent Jewish Voices-Canada (IJV) is a national organization of Jews committed to a resolution of the conflict in Israel/Palestine based on the application of international law and respect for the human rights of all people.

Independent Jewish Voices wholeheartedly endorses the analysis and recommendations of A moment of truth: A word of faith, hope and love from the heart of Palestinian suffering, a seminal document drafted by senior church leaders in Israel/Palestine, and circulated by the ecumenical group, Kairos Palestine.

In addition, IJV strongly supports the document’s call for the world’s churches to join the international, non-violent, ethically-based campaign of Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions (BDS), an initiative whose goal is to pressure Israel to comply with international law and respect Palestinians’ human rights. We believe that this campaign has the potential to pressure Israel to adopt more ethical and just practices.1

In the following, we outline specific responses to A moment of truth. In the subsequent section, we include a brief critique of the Canadian Jewish Congress (CJC) response to A moment of truth (2010).2

The IJV Response to A moment of truth

IJV strongly endorses the analysis and recommendations contained in the Kairos Palestine document. We see it as a profoundly compassionate call to the peoples of the world – including the people of Israel – to help Israel turn away from the crimes and injustices rooted in its ongoing occupation. The document calls on Israel to become “a state for all its citizens, with a vision constructed on respect for religion but also equality, justice, liberty and respect for pluralism and not on domination by a religion or a numerical majority”. Kairos Palestine, 2009:16

We see many parallels between the position of the Kairos Palestine writers and the point of view of IJV. Throughout its long history, Judaism, like Christianity, has included both those who promote justice and compassion, and those who protect the powerful at the expense of justice and the less strong. Marc Ellis, the Jewish theologian, describes those who promote justice and peace as Jews of conscience, in contrast to those who pursue power at all costs, whom he labels “Constantinian Jews” (2009:xii)

Although IJV is a human rights organization, and not religiously-based, we are committed to acting as Jews of conscience. Like Kairos Palestine, our members are united by a commitment to pursue social justice, the universal of human rights, and the rigorous application of international law.

IJV members who are religiously inclined can point to core Jewish religious values in the Torah which reflect this perspective. For example, the injunction “do not ill-treat a stranger [i.e., the non-Jew] or oppress him, for you were strangers in the land of Israel” (Exodus 22:21) appears 36 times in the Torah. In 2002, British Chief Rabbi Jonathan Sacks declared “I regard this as one of the core projects of a state that is true to Judaic principles” (quoted in Freedland, 2002). Rabbi Simean ben Gamaliel, one of Judaism’s most respected sages, quoted Zacharia 8:16: “Execute truth, justice and peace, within your gates,” and emphasized that “these three are interlinked when justice is done, truth is achieved, and peace is established” (Pirke Avot, 1:18). In addition, there is a long tradition of secular Jewish movements which have promoted universal justice and equality (Klug, 2008). However, as Mike Marquesee’s excellent historical study noted, “both Zionists and anti-Zionists, liberals and fundamentalists can find succour in the prophetic texts” (2008:231). Many Israeli rabbis (and politicians) cite scripture to justify Israel’s claims to all the land mentioned in the Bible and use it to attempt to sanctify the violent expulsion of the Palestinians from their land (Shahak, 2002). For example, Rabbi Zvi Yehud Kook said “This land is ours, there are no Arab lands here…within its entire biblical borders it belongs to Israeli rule…this is the decision of divine politics which no earthly politics can overcome” (quoted in Arieli, 2011).

It is our view that all people have an ethical obligation to reject such expedient arguments. Instead we must dedicate ourselves to the pursuit of peace rooted in social justice and compassion. A moment of truth reflects these values and we therefore enthusiastically support it. IJV agrees with the Kairos document that the international campaign of Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions constitutes an ethical and non-violent response to the crimes it enumerates. The campaign is rooted, not in a desire to damage Israel, but, rather, to help liberate Israel from the dangerously destructive (and self-destructive) path that it has pursued for many years. Our belief in the moral and practical force of BDS motivated our organization’s 2009 decision to adopt a resolution supporting BDS. Support for BDS campaigns is now one of IJV’s highest priorities.

More specifically, we endorse the view of A moment of truth that:

1. Israel’s occupation of Palestine and its many oppressive elements – the separation wall, the blockade of Gaza, the ever-expanding system of Israeli colony-settlements, the proliferation of military checkpoints on Palestinian lands, the enforced separation of family members, the restriction of the exercise of religious liberty, the denial of refugees’ right of return, the arbitrary arrest and torture of prisoners, the expulsion of Palestinians from Jerusalem and the related pressure on them to emigrate, the disregard for international law and United Nations resolutions, the application of collective punishment, and other egregious actions – constitute serious ethical, moral and legal violations. Along with economic and other consequences, these violations directly injure and kill Palestinians. Simultaneously, these actions blight the lives of Israelis as well as those who are not directly involved,inuring them to systematic and ongoing violations of ethics and integrity.

2. While all human-rights violations must be condemned, we believe that it is necessary to situate the Palestinian violence that exists – as well as some of the major internal political conflicts within Palestinian society – in the context of overwhelming oppression rooted in decades of Israel’s occupation. We believe it is relevant in this context to acknowledge that Israel has for decades been free to act with impunity. This is due, in large part, to the enormous political and financial support it has enjoyed from the international community. As A moment of truth argues, ending the occupation and the associated injustices through the application of non-violent, ethical tools like BDS will eliminate the most significant causes of Palestinian violence.

3. Israel cannot ethically justify its systematic abuse of the Palestinian people by characterizing legitimate Palestinian resistance as “terrorism” or by pointing to the human-rights failings of other Middle Eastern countries. The requirement to act ethically and morally is an imperative which cannot be abandoned by reference to the real or imagined failings of others. Members of civil society – all of us! – have an ethical obligation to speak out and to take action against injustice and to promote justice, peace and dignity. Resistance against oppression is an ethical obligation not only for the oppressed, but also for those who have made oppression possible by supporting, condoning, or simply ignoring it.

4.Israel cannot claim Biblical justification for the sins associated with its occupation. For a detailed analysis of theologically-based Jewish opposition to Zionism, readers are referred to A Threat from Within: A Century of Jewish Opposition to Zionism, written by IJV member and University of Montreal professor, Yakov Rabkin (2006). Nur Masalha’s The Bible and Zionism (2007) exposes the historically inaccurate Biblical basis for Israel’s claims to Jewish ownership of the land.

5. The Bible does not provide Jewish Israelis with a legal claim to the land. Jews from Europe, the United States, Canada, Russia, and elsewhere, who have chosen to settle in Israel cannot invoke a legitimate aboriginal claim to this land. As the Canadian philosopher Michael Newman argues, “Each individual person certainly has a right to live somewhere, but an ethnic group has no right to live somewhere together.… [N]o one seems to think that all Italians, all over the world, have a right to live in one huge nation, excluding all others. If they all want to go back to Italy, fine, but certainly they [don’t have the right to] to expel others to make room in their ‘homeland,’ or expand that homeland to fulfill the project of reversing their Diaspora” (2005:12).

The IJV response to the Canadian Jewish Congress reaction to A moment of truth

In stark contrast to the thoughtful, compassionate and balanced tone of the Kairos Palestine document, the Canadian Jewish Congress’s response is hostile, defensive and logically inconsistent. The CJC response repeatedly responds to concerns raised in the Kairos Palestine document by setting up straw men and knocking them down. Rather than a meaningful and methodical engagement with the arguments made in A moment of truth, a reflective document which takes as its starting point the consequences of Israel’s long occupation, the CJC response deploys the time-worn language of hasbara – the Hebrew word used by the Israel government and its supporters to describe efforts to explain the government’s actions and to promote and defend Israel in the face of criticism. The term is a euphemism for pro-Israel propaganda. IJV regrets that there is little intellectual depth to the CJC critique, and notes that while there is an apparent attempt to link the CJC’s comments to the observations in the Kairos document, any such link is illusory.

It is clear to us that the CJC responders refused to hear the words so eloquently put forward by the authors of the Kairos document. On the basis of what is presented in the CJC’s response, we are forced to conclude that the serious dialogue initiated by those who drafted the Kairos document has fallen on
deaf ears. The consequence of this refusal to hear is that the CJC piece amounts to little more than a tired rehashing of traditional rationalizations of Israeli intransigence. It does not constitute a worthy response to the heartfelt cry for justice embodied in A moment of truth.

In addition to its other failings, what comes across from the CJC authors is an apparently deep-seated desire to “even the score” with the writers of the Kairos document. This is not surprising. Those who attempt to defend or rationalize injustice often respond angrily when others recognize that what they are doing is unjust. In situations such as this, it is advantageous to turn the tables – to deny misdeeds and to minimize or rationalize those that cannot be denied; to blame the victim for whatever has transpired; to feign victimhood oneself; to invoke guilt to silence outside observers; and finally, if all else fails, to threaten those who continue to insist that the injustice must be addressed. It is our observation that the CJC document and, indeed, hasbara in general, is characterized by the use of such techniques.

Ultimately, all hasbara-based strategy is designed to avoid engaging with the issues raised and to disclaim responsibility. Thus, if the victim of injustice is provoked to act against his oppression, the victimizer can respond by arguing that it is he who is the innocent victim.

This is not the place for a detailed refutation of the time-worn “explanations” contained in the CJC document; many other writers, some of whom we reference here, have prepared full and nuanced analyses on the subject.

Conclusion
With Kairos Palestine, IJV affirms that it is a moral and ethical imperative to acknowledge the reality of Israel’s oppression of Palestinian people and to take action to end that oppression. This is essential, as much for the moral integrity and long-term security of Jewish Israelis, as it is for the well-being of the Palestinians. IJV therefore wholeheartedly endorses the A moment of truth: A word of faith, hope and love from the heart of Palestinian suffering. We join with the framers of the Kairos Palestine document in calling for the implementation of BDS and other actions to encourage Israel to abandon its unconscionable practices and policies.

1IJV recognizes that the “Boycott Law,” passed in the Israel Knesset on 11 July 2011 complicates matters. We note, however, that challenges to the law were filed in Israel’s High Court of Justice on 12 July 2011 by Israel human rights and pro-peace organizations.

2 On 1 July 2011, the Canadian Jewish Congress ceased independent activities. Its functions have been taken over by the Canadian Council for Israel and Jewish Advocacy.

References and Readings

Amit, Zalman and Daphna Levit. (2011). Israeli Rejectionism: A hidden agenda in the Middle East Peace Process. New York: Pluto Press.

Arieli, Shaul. “We must Stop Israel from becoming a theocracy,” Ha’Aretz, 6 July 2011.

Canadian Jewish Congress. (2010). “ CJC Response to KAIROS Palestine’s policy paper, ‘A Moment of Truth’ ”

Ellis, Marc. (2009). Judaism does not equal Israel. New York: The New Press.

Engler, Yves. (2010). Canada and Israel: Building Apartheid. Halifax: Fernwood.

Freedland, Jonathan. “‘Israel Set on Tragic Path,’ says Chief Rabbi,” The Guardian, 27 August 2002.

Hassan, Zaha and Steven Goldberg. (n.d.). “Israel’s Wall: An Analysis of its Legal Validity under U.S. and International Law.” Website of U.S. Campaign to End the Israeli Occupation.

Kairos Palestine. (2009). “A moment of truth: A word of faith, hope and love from the heart of Palestinian suffering.”

Klug, Francesca (2008). “Lessons from History.” In Anne Karpf, Brian Klug, Jacqueline Rose and Barbara Rosenbaum (eds.), A time to speak out: Independent Jewish Voices on Israel, Zionism and Jewish Identity. London: Verso.

Marquesee, Mike. (2008). “The Jews and the Left.” In Anne Karpf, Brian Klug, Jacqueline Rose and Barbara Rosenbaum (eds.), A Time to Speak Out: Independent Jewish Voices on Israel, Zionism and Jewish Identity. London: Verso.

Masalha, Nur. (2007). The Bible and Zionism: Invented traditions, archaeology and post-colonialism in Israel-Palestine. London: Zed Books.

Newman, Michael. (2005). “The Case Against Israel.” Petrolia, California: Counterpunch.

Pesikta Kahana. (Various dates). 140 b;cf, Pirke Avot (Ethics of the Fathers) 1:18.

Rabkin, Yakov M. (2006). A Threat from Within: A Century of Jewish Opposition to Zionism (translated by Fred A. Reed).Halifax: Fernwood.

Shahak, Israel. (2002)

1IJV recognizes that the “Boycott Law,” passed in the Israel Knesset on 11 July 2011 complicates matters. We note, however, that challenges to the law were filed in Israel’s High Court of Justice on 12 July 2011 by Israel human rights and pro-peace organizations.

2 On 1 July 2011, the Canadian Jewish Congress ceased independent activities. Its functions have been taken over by the Canadian Council for Israel and Jewish Advocacy.

). Jewish History, Jewish Religion: The Weight of Three Thousand Years. London: Pluto Press.

---------------------

*Kairos Palestine Document “A Moment of truth: A word of faith, hope and love from the heart of palestinian suffering” http://www.kairospalestine.ps/sites/default/Documents/English.pdf (Shalom 1492)

A moment before boarding the next flotilla

24 June 2011, Haaretz הארץ (Israel)

I’d rather use my influence and power, in concert with other members of American civil society, to actively and nonviolently resist policies I consider abominable.

By Gabriel Matthew Schivone*

You might wonder what would motivate a Jewish American college student to participate in what may be the most celebrated - and controversial - sea voyage of the 21st century, one that aims to nonviolently challenge U.S.-supported Israeli military power in the occupied territories. I simply cannot sit idle while my country aids and abets Israel's siege, occupation and repression of the Palestinians. I would rather use my personal influence and power, in concert with other members of American civil society, to actively and nonviolently resist policies that I consider abominable. So, next week, I and more than 30 other American civilians will be sailing on the U.S. ship the Audacity of Hope, to break the Israeli blockade of Gaza.

I am one of a growing number of young American Jews who are determined to shake off an assumed - and largely imposed - association with Israel. Prominent advocacy organizations, such as the American Jewish Committee, which proudly proclaim their unconditional support of Israel, for several years have been declaring their "serious concern" over the increasing "distancing" of young American Jews from the state.

But what Israel apologists like the AJC view as a crisis, I see as a positive development for American Jews, who, like other parts of U.S. society, are shifting from blind support for Israel to a more critical position that reflects opposition to our country's backing for Israel's policies.

If Israel's apologists in the U.S. are alarmed by a falling off in unconditional support for Israel, they should be even more concerned that such a diverse range of youth - especially young Jews - are joining up with constituencies that actively organize against America's role in the occupation. Today, the so-called crisis has expanded from the coasts to such places as Arizona. It probably was just a matter of time before a Jewish anti-occupation group emerged in my home state, given that a fairly substantial portion of the Students for Justice in Palestine chapter on the University of Arizona campus (in Tucson) were Jewish. For our part, we Jews launched an initial chapter of Jewish Voice for Peace at the UA campus in spring 2010 - one of nearly 30 JVP chapters throughout the country, which has a mailing list of 100,000 - and thereafter branches in the general Tucson and Northern Arizona communities, and at Arizona State University, in Phoenix.

Through JVP, I discovered there were a great many others like me, who were experiencing profound internal conflicts regarding Israel. They included people who had been intimidated from expressing public criticism of Israel, and others who were afraid to speak out in defense of Palestinian rights for fear of being labeled anti-Semitic.

It was clear that a campus JVP opened up a powerful, organic outlet through which Jewish students could safely exchange and process - without fear, intimidation or a need for self-censorship - their critiques, concerns, ideas, knowledge, questions, discoveries and plans to promote achievement of a genuinely mutual peace in Palestine/Israel. Before JVP came along, it wasn't possible to have an open discussion, or feel that we as Jews had an alternative to either unquestioning support of Israel (the status quo) or staying silent and thus supporting it by default. I myself was silent and timid for much too long.

We are committed to acting out of Jewish ethical traditions, while holding Israel to the same standard as any other state in the international system - no more, no less. Before JVP, there was nothing on my campus that was critical of Israel from an American Jewish perspective. Zero. The group's success demonstrated that young Jews - moved by their cultural or religious values, which include a belief in universal human rights - have been on campus all the while, ready and willing to join a human rights-based cause for justice in Palestine/Israel. All it took to gain support on campus and elsewhere in the state was a potent sprinkling of opportunity, initiative and political will.

In Athens, as I write, waiting to board the Audacity of Hope, I am wearing a Star of David amulet around my neck, which was given to me the night before I left Arizona by a dear friend and fellow JVP organizer. She got it from a silversmith in Haifa while on a "Birthright" trip as an adolescent. For her, it had always been the reminder of the crude brainwashing she felt she had encountered on that trip. But when she came across the star recently, she decided it might be put to good use if I were to wear it on my journey. And so that's what I'm doing.

I wear it as a symbol of the basic values of Judaism that I feel are not emphasized sufficiently today: the imperative to welcome the stranger as you would want to be welcomed; and of helping to free the slave from a bondage that you would not wish to suffer.

As a consequence of various nonviolent actions undertaken all over the world, led crucially by Palestinians on the ground, the Israeli occupation will one day end. Those of us who face up to the unavoidable choice of either tolerating or resisting these crimes will determine how long the death and suffering of mainly Palestinian noncombatants continues, and how long a lasting peace in Palestine/Israel remains out of reach.

*Gabriel Matthew Schivone is a Chicano-Jewish American from Tucson, and coordinator of Jewish Voice for Peace at the University of Arizona.

Deny! Deny!

18 June 2011, Gush Shalom גוש שלום http://zope.gush-shalom.org (Israel)

Uri Avnery אורי אבנרי‎

I AM fed up with all this nonsense about recognizing Israel as the “Jewish State”.
It is based on a collection of hollow phrases and vague definitions, devoid of any real content. It serves many different purposes, almost all of them malign.

Binyamin Netanyahu uses it as a trick to obstruct the establishment of the Palestinian state. This week he declared that the conflict just has no solution. Why? Because the Palestinians do not agree to recognize etc. etc.

Four rightist Members of the Knesset have just submitted a bill empowering the government to refuse to register new NGOs and to dissolve existing ones if they “deny the Jewish character of the state”.

This new bill is only one of a series designed to curtail the civil rights of Arab citizens, as well as those of leftists.

If the late Dr. Samuel Johnson were living in present-day Israel, he would phrase his famous dictum about patriotism differently: “Recognition of the Jewish Character of the state is the last refuge of a scoundrel.”

IN ISRAELI parlance, denying the “Jewish Character” of the state is tantamount to the worst of all political felonies: to claim that Israel is a “State of all its Citizens”.

To a foreigner, this may sound a bit weird. In a democracy, the state clearly belongs to all its citizens. Mention this in the United States, and you are stating the obvious. Mention this in Israel, and you are treading dangerously close to treason. (So much for our much-vaunted “common” values”.)

As a matter of fact, Israel is indeed a state of all its citizens. All adult Israeli citizens – and only they – have the right to vote for the Knesset. The Knesset appoints the government and determines the laws. It has enacted many laws declaring that Israel is a “Jewish and democratic state”. In ten or in a hundred years, the Knesset could hoist the flag of Catholicism, Buddhism or Islam. In a democracy, it is the citizens who are sovereign, not a verbal formula.

WHAT FORMULA? - one may well ask.

The courts favor the words “Jewish and democratic state”. But that is far from being the only definition around.

The most widely used is just “Jewish State”. But that is not enough for Netanyahu and Co., who speak about “the nation-state of the Jewish people”, which has a nice 19th century ring. The “state of the Jewish people” is also quite popular.

The one thing that all these brand-names have in common is that they are perfectly imprecise. What does “Jewish” mean? A nationality, a religion, a tribe? Who are the “Jewish people”? Or, even more vague, the “Jewish nation”? Does this include the Congressmen who enact the laws of the United States? Or the cohorts of Jews who are in charge of US Middle East policy? Which country does the Jewish ambassador of the UK in Tel Aviv represent?

The courts have been wrestling with the question: where is the border between “Jewish” and “democratic”? What does “democratic” mean in this context? Can a “Jewish” state really be “democratic”, or, for that matter, can a “democratic” state really be “Jewish”? All the answers given by learned judges and renowned professors are contrived, or, as we say in Hebrew, they “stand on chickens’ legs”.

LETS GO back to the beginning: the book written in German by Theodor Herzl, the founding father of Zionism, and published in 1896. He called it “Der Judenstaat”.

Unfortunately, this is a typical German word that is untranslatable. It is generally rendered in English as “The Jewish State” or “The State of the Jews”. Both are quite false. The nearest approximation would be “The Jewstate”.

If this sounds slightly anti-Semitic, this is not by accident. It may come as a shock to many, but the word was not invented by Herzl. It was first used by a Prussian nobleman with an impressive name - Friedrich August Ludwig von der Marwitz, - who died 23 years before Herzl was even born. He was a dedicated anti-Semite long before another German invented the term “anti-Semitism” as an expression of the healthy German spirit.

Marwitz, an ultra-conservative general, objected to the liberal reforms proposed at the time. In 1811 he warned that these reforms would turn Prussia into a “Judenstaat”, a Jewstate. He did not mean that Jews were about to become a majority in Prussia, God forbid, but that moneylenders and other shady Jewish dealers would corrupt the character of the country and wipe out the good old Prussian virtues.

Herzl himself did not dream of a state that belongs to all the Jews in the world. Quite the contrary - his vision was that all real Jews would go to the Judenstaat (whether in Argentina or Palestine, he had not yet decided). They – and only they - would thenceforth remain “Jews”. All the others would become assimilated in their host nations and cease altogether to be Jews.

Far, far indeed from the notion of a “nation-state of the Jewish people” as envisioned by many of today’s Zionists, including those millions who do not dream of immigrating to Israel.

WHEN I was a boy, I took part in dozens of demonstrations against the British government of Palestine. In all of them, we chanted in unison “Free immigration! Hebrew State!” I don’t remember a single demonstration with the slogan “Jewish State”.

That was quite natural. Without anyone decreeing it, we made a clear distinction between us Hebrew-speaking people in Palestine and the Jews in the Diaspora. Some of us turned this into an ideology, but for most people it was just a natural expression of reality: Hebrew agriculture and Jewish tradition, Hebrew underground and Jewish Religion, Hebrew kibbutz and Jewish Shtetl. Hebrew Yishuv (the new community in the country) and Jewish Diaspora. To be called a “Diaspora Jew” was the ultimate insult.

For us this was not anti-Zionist by any means. Quite the contrary: Zionism wanted to create an old-new nation in Eretz Israel (as Palestine is called in Hebrew), and this nation was of course quite distinct from the Jews elsewhere. It was only the Holocaust, with its huge emotional impact, which changed the verbal rules.

So how did the formula “Jewish State” creep in? In 1917, in the middle of World War I, the British government issued the so-called Balfour Declaration, which proclaimed that “His Majesty’s Government views with favor the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people…”

Every word was carefully chosen, after months of negotiations with Zionist leaders. One of the main British objects was to win American and Russian Jews for the Allied cause. Revolutionary Russia was about to get out of the war, and the entry of isolationist America was essential.

(By the way, the British rejected the words “the turning of Palestine into a national home for the Jewish people”, insisting on “in Palestine” – thus foreshadowing the partition of the country.)

IN 1947 the UN did decide to partition Palestine between its Arab and Jewish populations. This said nothing about the character of the two future states – it just used the current definitions of the two warring parties. About 40% of the population in the territory allocated to the “Jewish” state was Arab.

The advocates of the “Jewish state” make much of the sentence in the “Declaration of the Establishment of the State of Israel” (generally called the “Declaration of Independence”) which indeed includes the words “Jewish State”. After quoting the UN resolution which called for a Jewish and an Arab state, the declaration continues: “Accordingly we … on the strength of the resolution of the United Nations General Assembly, hereby declare the establishment of a Jewish state in Eretz Israel, to be known as the State of Israel.”

This sentence says nothing at all about the character of the new state, and the context is purely formal.

One of the paragraphs of the declaration (in its original Hebrew version) speaks about the “Hebrew people”: “We extend our hands to all neighboring states and their peoples in an offer of peace and good neighborliness, and appeal to them to establish bonds of cooperation and mutual help with the independent Hebrew people in its land.” This sentence is blatantly falsified in the official English translation, which changed the last words into “the sovereign Jewish people settled in its own land.”

As a matter of fact, it would have been quite impossible to reach agreement on any ideological formula, since the declaration was signed by the leaders of all factions, from the anti-Zionist ultra-Orthodox to the Moscow-oriented Communist Party.

ANY TALK about the Jewish State leads inevitably to the question: What are the Jews – a nation or a religion?

Official Israeli doctrine says that “Jewish” is both a national and a religious definition. The Jewish collective, unlike any other, is both national and religious. With us, nation and religion are one and the same.

The only door of entry to this collective is religious. There is no national door.

Hundreds of thousands of non-Jewish Russian immigrants have come to Israel under the Law of Return with their Jewish relatives. This law is very broad. In order to attract the Jews, it allows even distant non-Jewish relatives to come with them, including the spouse of the grandchild of a Jew. Many of these non-Jews want to be Jews in order to be considered full Israelis, but have tried in vain to be accepted. Under Israeli law, a Jew is a person “born to a Jewish mother or converted, who has not adopted another religion”. This is a purely religious definition. Jewish religious law says that for this purpose, only the mother, not the father, counts.

It is extremely difficult to be converted in Israel. The rabbis demand that the convert fulfill all 613 commandments of the Jewish religion – which only very few recognized Israelis do. But one cannot become an official member of the stipulated Jewish “nation” by any other door. One becomes a part of the American nation by accepting US citizenship. Nothing like that exists here.

We have an ongoing battle about this in Israel. Some of us want Israel to be an Israeli state, belonging to the Israeli people, indeed a “State of all its Citizens”. Some want to impose on us the religious law supposedly fixed by God for all times on Mount Sinai some 3200 years ago, and abolish all contrary laws of the democratically elected Knesset. Many don’t want any change at all.

But how, in God’s name (sorry), does this concern the Palestinians? Or the Icelanders, for that matter?

THE DEMAND that the Palestinians recognize Israel as “the Jewish State” or as “the Nation-State of the Jewish people” is preposterous.

As the British would put it, it’s none of their bloody business. It would be tantamount to an intervention in the internal affairs of another country.

But a friend of mine has suggested a simple way out: the Knesset can simply resolve to change the name of the state into something like “The Jewish Republic of Israel”, so that any peace agreement between Israel and the Arab State of Palestine will automatically include the demanded recognition.

This would also bring Israel into line with the state it most resembles: “The Islamic Republic of Pakistan”, which came into being almost at the same time, after the partition of India, after a gruesome mutual massacre, after the creation of a huge refugee problem and with a perpetual border war in Kashmir. And the nuclear bomb, of course.

Many Israelis would be shocked by the comparison. What, us? Similar to a theocratic state? Are we getting closer to the Pakistani model and further from the American one?

What the hell, let’s simply deny it!


-----------------------


From WIKIPEDIA
Uri Avnery (Hebrew: אורי אבנרי‎, also transliterated Uri Avneri, born 10 September 1923) is an Israeli writer and founder of the Gush Shalom peace movement. A member of the Irgun as a teenager, Avnery sat in the Knesset from 1965–74 and 1979–81.[1] He was also the owner of HaOlam HaZeh, an Israeli news magazine, from 1950 until it closed in 1993.

He is famous for crossing the lines during the Battle of Beirut to meet Yassir Arafat on 3 July 1982, the first time the Palestinian leader ever met with an Israeli. Avnery is the author of several books about the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, including 1948: A Soldier’s Tale, the Bloody Road to Jerusalem (2008); Israel’s Vicious Circle (2008); and My Friend, the Enemy (1986).