Professor Israeli is a visiting academic who is an expert on radical Islam. He has studied the phenomenon of "Islamization"of various Eudopean communities. He stated that where the percentage of Moslems in the population reaches 10%, they start demanding changes in the laws of the country to accommodate Sharia laws. It was reported that he warned Australia no to allow this to happen,- given the largest Moslem country on its doorstep, so-to-speak, unless they are prepared to accept that this change will occur.
Melanie Phillips is an outspoken UK author and journalist who wrote a book "Londonistan" about the Islamization of British society and the anti-Semitism and anti-Zionism this has engendered. She is another visiting lecturer in Australia who warned against allowing "Multiculturalism" to run unchecked and unmonitored.There are responsibilities involved in pursuing one's own national and religious culture,- towards the host nation. But if a nation is weak in its national identity, the way is wide open to be taken over by the ideology of a large minority, such as the Islamic one.
The Jewish community in Australia is under siege and has to constantly be guarded against hostile anti-Semitic, mainly Islamo-Fascist fanatical terrorist threats. However, we must not remove ourselves from the rest of the community by pursuing anti-communal cohesion agendas and associate ourselves with those who would wish to cause dissensions between the peaceful, moderate members of the diverse Moslem communities and ourselves.
Colin Rubenstein explains this below.
www.theage.com.auHome » Opinion » Article
Moderates must not become apologists for radical Islam
Colin Rubenstein
February 26, 2007
A proper multiculturalism upholds the core values of Australian society.
THE Australia/Israel & Jewish Affairs Council (AIJAC) cancelled our planned participation in the program of Israeli professor Raphael Israeli after his controversial remarks about Muslim immigration and communities.
Characterising Muslim communities as a threat or danger per se is a sentiment we reject and with which we do not wish to be associated.
Professor Israeli has now repudiated earlier reports that he was calling for quotas or limits on Muslim immigration to Australia, but this is not enough. AIJAC vehemently opposes all discrimination based on ethnicity or religion in immigration, and singling out the Muslim community in the way he did was unacceptable.
It is true, however, that there is a serious problem in Australia and globally posed by an extremist totalitarian ideology generally known as Islamism. It asserts that all problems can be solved by the creation of a divinely sanctioned "caliphate", and that all means are justified in achieving this end. It also sets out to convince Muslims that Christians, Jews and other non-Muslims are inevitably and eternally hostile to all Muslims, and there is no alternative for Muslims except to join the Islamists in a ruthless struggle to the death against them.
Ideological affiliates of Islamism excel at spreading distorted claims about their critics, attempting to portray all criticisms of their ideology as racist attacks on all Muslims because this serves their political ends.
Sadly, even Australian moderates like Waleed Aly buy into elements of this radical program. Many of his claims (Opinion, 17/2) are examples of such distortions.
The furphy he raises about supposed advocacy of "interning Muslims" by American scholar Dr Daniel Pipes, whom we have hosted, is a case in point. Pipes has been the subject of a scare campaign for years, instigated primarily by the terrorist-linked American group the Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR). It seized on an article he wrote in 2004, arguing that the internment of Japanese-American citizens during World War II was unjustifiably making it unthinkable to put the proper focus on Islamist terrorists during the war on terror.
When critics tried to claim that this was a call for internment of Muslims, Pipes replied unequivocally, "I am not calling for the internment of Muslims. … I see anti-Islamist Muslims as critical to the war on radical Islam and far from wanting them interned, see their active participation as critical to winning the conflict."
Coincidentally, yet another distortion of Pipes' work appeared on the same page as Aly's. Contrary to Amin Saikal's claim that Pipes advocates an Iraqi civil war as part of a strategy of "divide and rule", Pipes' stance is that only Iraqis can prevent a civil war in Iraq, but such an outcome would be a humanitarian rather than a strategic disaster.
We understand that Waleed Aly sought to defend his community's interests. But we would like to see him try harder to overcome "defensiveness" per se, and avoid the traps that radicals have set for the moderates by attempting to brand all critics of Islamist totalitarianism as anti-Muslim racists.
Aly also misrepresents other critics of Islamism. He criticises the distinguished British historian Sir Martin Gilbert, whose sin appears to have been calling for Europeans to be aware in their immigration program of the need to preserve "Europe's true values: vibrant democracy, humanitarian free thinking, and social fair dealing" from those Muslim immigrants who seek to subvert them.
This is a legitimate issue, just as Australian multiculturalism has long sought to ensure all immigrants adhere to our society's "core values", such as rule of law, democracy and gender equality.
AIJAC believes that sentiments like Professor Israeli's play into the hands of the Islamists by helping them convince other Muslims that co-existence with non-Muslims is impossible. AIJAC also believes that a properly implemented policy of multiculturalism, which incorporates both rights and the responsibility to uphold the core values of Australian society, remains an important part of the strategy to counter all forms of political extremism.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dr Colin Rubenstein is executive director of the Australia/Israel & Jewish Affairs Council.
Monday, February 26, 2007
Tuesday, February 13, 2007
UNICEF report puts UK and US children at bottom of scale.
Carol Gould reflects on the damning report by UNICEF on the appalling state of Britain's children. The USA also gets a bad report. Jewish children the world over seem to skirt problems with drink, drugs and under-age sex. Why is this?
Read Carol's article and vote in our new poll at:
http://www.currentviewpoint.com
Contributed by : Carol Gould
WHY JEWISH CHILDREN CAN BE AN EXAMPLE TO THE WORLD
by Carol GouldLondon
Today the United Nations released a report compiled by UNICEF on the wellbeing of the world’s children living in developed countries.Reading the grim results that highlighted the bottom-end listing of British and American children, I was reminded of an incident several years ago at an interfaith retreat in Cambridge, England.A delightful and enlightened group of scholars, clergy and ordinary folk had gathered at the university to spend a weekend discussing the relative values of Judaism and Christianity in our Hollywood-dominated and reality-TV saturated modern world. No sooner had the first session started than an elderly Christian woman said ‘I do think it is appalling that Jewish children are subjected to that ghastly Bar-mitzvah ritual, or whatever they call it.’ I challenged her. She said ‘Imagine subjecting little boys and girls to years of studying Hebrew and wasting their youthful energies to learn something for a one-day event!’ I said this was a tradition going back centuries and she snapped, ‘They should be playing sport!’
What a start for what was meant to be a congenial weekend of Jewish-Christian interplay and reflection. Immediately the Jews in the group had been put on the defensive about an aspect of Jewish life and tradition that unites the otherwise discordant Orthodox and Reform movements. Bar, and more recently Bat-mitzvah are central to the life of most Jewish families and to the spiritual and intellectual development of their children.
When the British toddler Jamie Bulger was brutally murdered by a pair of teenagers there was much gnashing of teeth and hand-wringing about the depths to which the youth of the nation had sunk since the end of World War II. Orthodox Chief Rabbi Dr Jonathan Sacks said on national television that if children observe the Ten Commandments they will never go astray. It seemed a naïve approach at the time, but the UNICEF results raise the question of societal morals and how they affect children.
Jewish family life is unique. Except for a small minority family is central to the traditions and eating together is an integral part of the process of maturity. In the huge majority of Jewish homes meals are times for lively discussion and interplay. Because alcohol has a minimal presence in the life of Jews meals are civilised and often thought-provoking affairs. I would wager that in Muslim, Hindu and Far Eastern homes this is true as well, because the elderly and one’s parents are central to the life of the family. Jews have been sitting down to Shabbat dinner for thousands of years. The Passover Seder has been an annual feature of life in even the most secular of Jewish homes for centuries, as is the Rosh Hashanah meal and the break of Fast on Yom Kippur. What Jewish child can forget the first time they found the ‘Afikomen’ on Passover night? Who has not decorated a Sukkah or carried a little baby scroll on Simchat Torah? Even my secular Jewish friends and family never forget to light Chanukah candles for the week of that inspiring, ancient festival, nor do they fail to light Yahrzeit candles in honour of the dead. I remember having a furious row with a non-Jewish friend whilst on holiday, when it transpired that she and the friends she had arranged for us to meet at the hotel spent the entire week imbibing in endless gallons of alcohol. When I complained to her that there was more to life than being drunk and swearing in public, she tore into me about my uptight Jewy-Jewy nonsense.
Notwithstanding the hideous press Israel gets in the UK, Jewish children benefit from wonderful, character-building trips to the Holy Land where they work in punishing conditions as volunteers on kibbutzim, in soup kitchens ( yes, there are thousands of poor Jews in Israel) and old age communities. Israeli youngsters, male and female, all have to do army service. There are many youth organisations that cater to every political viewpoint in the worldwide Jewish community. From Habomin Dror on the Left to Betar on the Right Jewish children are afforded the opportunity to belong to groups that raise money for charities and teach character-building. At Hillel House and Jewish Ys around the world young people can join B’nai ‘B’rith Youth, Netzer, Chabad and other worthy organisations that keep them out of harm’s way. In the Diaspora ( Jewish communities outside Israel) Jewish children are encouraged to study for Confirmation after their bar or bat mitzvah. Again, this is a goal that builds self-confidence and the discipline to study.
How many British children know a second language? Most Jewish children do, because they study Hebrew from the time they are ten or so.In South Africa the two schools in which black children have been excelling are those funded and run by the Jewish community, the Mitzvah and MC Weiler. Rabbi Weiler was a Holocaust survivor who devoted his life to bettering the chances of black children in apartheid South Africa. Funds were raised for these schools through the tireless efforts of the Hadassah women.The Muslim Public Affairs Council UK can rail and rant all it wants about 'Zionazis,’ and British Respect Party activist Yvonne Ridley can fulminate about 'that vile little nation,' but it is Israeli charities like ORT and Hadassah that have provided invaluable educational aids to children around the world regardless of their faith.
The late ex-Prime Minister of Israel, Golda Meir, wanted to see every child in Africa literate and productive with a career ahead of them. So much for the evils of ‘Zionazis’ condemned by the Muslim websites these days.British children whose lives are less than pleasant, as described in the UNICEF report, seem to suffer from the evils of alcohol, drugs and delinquency. One of the elements that I believe has contributed to the decline of the wellbeing of children in the USA and UK is the absence of the mother. Women of my generation have put careers first; I do remember my resentment when my mother, a teacher, seemed more interested in the children in her class than in my own academic results. Then there is the church. I was disappointed that UNICEF’s findings put American children at the near-bottom of their league table. One of the aspects of American life that does not exist in Britain is the domination of organised religion. Pretty much everyone goes to church, and most Jews go to synagogue. Church activity has helped black children with careers in recent years. Christian Britain is secular and religion is treated with universal contempt by the media, alongside a worship of atheist gurus led by Dr Richard Dawkins. In both countries, one deeply religious and one relentlessly secular, it is regrettable that children are not experiencing wellbeing, according to UNICEF.
In the Jewish model the entire ethos in which the family evolves is a core factor in the success of Jewish children in society and their relative absence from the world of anti-social behaviour, alcohol and drug abuse and early-age sex and pregnancy. To bring pride to one’s family and not to shame them is essential to Jewish life. To read, be well educated, to stay sober and dine with one’s elders is almost a religion in itself.I have had my share of verbal abuse for decades from people who hate Jews and Israel. Perhaps the wider community in Britain, greeted by this appalling result from UNICEF, might look to the Jewish community for guidance instead of wasting so much energy on boycotts of Israel and anti-Semitic epithets. How sad that the rabbi of a central London synagogue, herself a convert from Christianity, recently told the congregation that she and her colleagues can no longer walk down a street in the West End wearing a skullcap without abuse from passersby, car drivers and diners in outdoor cafes. Those shouting the abuse are more than likely the parents of the bottom-of the-league children in the UNICEF study. Perhaps instead of spewing venom at Jews they might like to start learning what makes good Jewish kids tick and why they lead decent lives.
The UNICEF result is a disgrace and should set British parents thinking. Visiting a synagogue and meeting Jewish parents might be a worthwhile start. Sending their children to Israel for a gap year would also be a valuable exercise, although the Israeli authorities would not tolerate the kind of rowdy drunkenness, violence and promiscuity in which British youth engage at home. This will never happen, because I know to my horror how much most British non-Jews hate Israel, a country for which only the ugliest comments are reserved at ‘polite’ dinner parties.Learning from other communities is the only way British parents can pull their children out of the hell the UNICEF study has revealed. I would like to see the Jewish community reach out to non-Jews and I would also like to see the British Christian clergy find a way back into the soul of Britain, a country I see sinking into a secular morass of alcohol and vulgarity that can only bring down its children with it if something drastic is not done now.
***************
*Carol Gould is a documentary maker and writer; her book 'Spitfire Girls' is about the women pilots of WWII. She is Editor of 'Current Viewpoint' and recently appeared on BBC Radio's 'Any Questions?' hosted by Jonathan Dimbleby.
--------------------------------------------------------
To
Read Carol's article and vote in our new poll at:
http://www.currentviewpoint.com
Contributed by : Carol Gould
WHY JEWISH CHILDREN CAN BE AN EXAMPLE TO THE WORLD
by Carol GouldLondon
Today the United Nations released a report compiled by UNICEF on the wellbeing of the world’s children living in developed countries.Reading the grim results that highlighted the bottom-end listing of British and American children, I was reminded of an incident several years ago at an interfaith retreat in Cambridge, England.A delightful and enlightened group of scholars, clergy and ordinary folk had gathered at the university to spend a weekend discussing the relative values of Judaism and Christianity in our Hollywood-dominated and reality-TV saturated modern world. No sooner had the first session started than an elderly Christian woman said ‘I do think it is appalling that Jewish children are subjected to that ghastly Bar-mitzvah ritual, or whatever they call it.’ I challenged her. She said ‘Imagine subjecting little boys and girls to years of studying Hebrew and wasting their youthful energies to learn something for a one-day event!’ I said this was a tradition going back centuries and she snapped, ‘They should be playing sport!’
What a start for what was meant to be a congenial weekend of Jewish-Christian interplay and reflection. Immediately the Jews in the group had been put on the defensive about an aspect of Jewish life and tradition that unites the otherwise discordant Orthodox and Reform movements. Bar, and more recently Bat-mitzvah are central to the life of most Jewish families and to the spiritual and intellectual development of their children.
When the British toddler Jamie Bulger was brutally murdered by a pair of teenagers there was much gnashing of teeth and hand-wringing about the depths to which the youth of the nation had sunk since the end of World War II. Orthodox Chief Rabbi Dr Jonathan Sacks said on national television that if children observe the Ten Commandments they will never go astray. It seemed a naïve approach at the time, but the UNICEF results raise the question of societal morals and how they affect children.
Jewish family life is unique. Except for a small minority family is central to the traditions and eating together is an integral part of the process of maturity. In the huge majority of Jewish homes meals are times for lively discussion and interplay. Because alcohol has a minimal presence in the life of Jews meals are civilised and often thought-provoking affairs. I would wager that in Muslim, Hindu and Far Eastern homes this is true as well, because the elderly and one’s parents are central to the life of the family. Jews have been sitting down to Shabbat dinner for thousands of years. The Passover Seder has been an annual feature of life in even the most secular of Jewish homes for centuries, as is the Rosh Hashanah meal and the break of Fast on Yom Kippur. What Jewish child can forget the first time they found the ‘Afikomen’ on Passover night? Who has not decorated a Sukkah or carried a little baby scroll on Simchat Torah? Even my secular Jewish friends and family never forget to light Chanukah candles for the week of that inspiring, ancient festival, nor do they fail to light Yahrzeit candles in honour of the dead. I remember having a furious row with a non-Jewish friend whilst on holiday, when it transpired that she and the friends she had arranged for us to meet at the hotel spent the entire week imbibing in endless gallons of alcohol. When I complained to her that there was more to life than being drunk and swearing in public, she tore into me about my uptight Jewy-Jewy nonsense.
Notwithstanding the hideous press Israel gets in the UK, Jewish children benefit from wonderful, character-building trips to the Holy Land where they work in punishing conditions as volunteers on kibbutzim, in soup kitchens ( yes, there are thousands of poor Jews in Israel) and old age communities. Israeli youngsters, male and female, all have to do army service. There are many youth organisations that cater to every political viewpoint in the worldwide Jewish community. From Habomin Dror on the Left to Betar on the Right Jewish children are afforded the opportunity to belong to groups that raise money for charities and teach character-building. At Hillel House and Jewish Ys around the world young people can join B’nai ‘B’rith Youth, Netzer, Chabad and other worthy organisations that keep them out of harm’s way. In the Diaspora ( Jewish communities outside Israel) Jewish children are encouraged to study for Confirmation after their bar or bat mitzvah. Again, this is a goal that builds self-confidence and the discipline to study.
How many British children know a second language? Most Jewish children do, because they study Hebrew from the time they are ten or so.In South Africa the two schools in which black children have been excelling are those funded and run by the Jewish community, the Mitzvah and MC Weiler. Rabbi Weiler was a Holocaust survivor who devoted his life to bettering the chances of black children in apartheid South Africa. Funds were raised for these schools through the tireless efforts of the Hadassah women.The Muslim Public Affairs Council UK can rail and rant all it wants about 'Zionazis,’ and British Respect Party activist Yvonne Ridley can fulminate about 'that vile little nation,' but it is Israeli charities like ORT and Hadassah that have provided invaluable educational aids to children around the world regardless of their faith.
The late ex-Prime Minister of Israel, Golda Meir, wanted to see every child in Africa literate and productive with a career ahead of them. So much for the evils of ‘Zionazis’ condemned by the Muslim websites these days.British children whose lives are less than pleasant, as described in the UNICEF report, seem to suffer from the evils of alcohol, drugs and delinquency. One of the elements that I believe has contributed to the decline of the wellbeing of children in the USA and UK is the absence of the mother. Women of my generation have put careers first; I do remember my resentment when my mother, a teacher, seemed more interested in the children in her class than in my own academic results. Then there is the church. I was disappointed that UNICEF’s findings put American children at the near-bottom of their league table. One of the aspects of American life that does not exist in Britain is the domination of organised religion. Pretty much everyone goes to church, and most Jews go to synagogue. Church activity has helped black children with careers in recent years. Christian Britain is secular and religion is treated with universal contempt by the media, alongside a worship of atheist gurus led by Dr Richard Dawkins. In both countries, one deeply religious and one relentlessly secular, it is regrettable that children are not experiencing wellbeing, according to UNICEF.
In the Jewish model the entire ethos in which the family evolves is a core factor in the success of Jewish children in society and their relative absence from the world of anti-social behaviour, alcohol and drug abuse and early-age sex and pregnancy. To bring pride to one’s family and not to shame them is essential to Jewish life. To read, be well educated, to stay sober and dine with one’s elders is almost a religion in itself.I have had my share of verbal abuse for decades from people who hate Jews and Israel. Perhaps the wider community in Britain, greeted by this appalling result from UNICEF, might look to the Jewish community for guidance instead of wasting so much energy on boycotts of Israel and anti-Semitic epithets. How sad that the rabbi of a central London synagogue, herself a convert from Christianity, recently told the congregation that she and her colleagues can no longer walk down a street in the West End wearing a skullcap without abuse from passersby, car drivers and diners in outdoor cafes. Those shouting the abuse are more than likely the parents of the bottom-of the-league children in the UNICEF study. Perhaps instead of spewing venom at Jews they might like to start learning what makes good Jewish kids tick and why they lead decent lives.
The UNICEF result is a disgrace and should set British parents thinking. Visiting a synagogue and meeting Jewish parents might be a worthwhile start. Sending their children to Israel for a gap year would also be a valuable exercise, although the Israeli authorities would not tolerate the kind of rowdy drunkenness, violence and promiscuity in which British youth engage at home. This will never happen, because I know to my horror how much most British non-Jews hate Israel, a country for which only the ugliest comments are reserved at ‘polite’ dinner parties.Learning from other communities is the only way British parents can pull their children out of the hell the UNICEF study has revealed. I would like to see the Jewish community reach out to non-Jews and I would also like to see the British Christian clergy find a way back into the soul of Britain, a country I see sinking into a secular morass of alcohol and vulgarity that can only bring down its children with it if something drastic is not done now.
***************
*Carol Gould is a documentary maker and writer; her book 'Spitfire Girls' is about the women pilots of WWII. She is Editor of 'Current Viewpoint' and recently appeared on BBC Radio's 'Any Questions?' hosted by Jonathan Dimbleby.
--------------------------------------------------------
To
Thursday, February 08, 2007
ISRAEL IS A FAR CRY FROM SOUTH AFRICA
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/printpage/0,5942,21194124,00.html
Irshad Manji: Modern Israel is a far cry from old South Africa.
It's absurd to apply the term apartheid to one of the most progressive states in the world, maintains Irshad Manji
09feb07
IN the past year, a stream of thinkers across the West - from Australian writer Antony Loewenstein to US academics John Mearsheimer and Stephen Walt - has punctured the usual parameters of debate about Israel. I, for one, welcome any effort to prevent ideas from calcifying into ideologies. As a Muslim refusenik, that's what I do by defying the conventional prejudices of my fellow Muslims. Why would I resent refuseniks of a different kind?It's precisely because I embrace intellectual pluralism that I respectfully challenge Jimmy Carter's recent critique of Israel as an apartheid state.
To be sure, I've long admired the former US president. In my book The Trouble with Islam Today I cite him as an example of how religion can be invoked to tap the best of humanity. In no small measure, it was Carter's appreciation of spiritual values that brought together Israeli prime minister Menachem Begin and Egyptian president Anwar Sadat, compelling these former foes to clasp hands over a peace deal.
Which is why Carter's new book disappoints so many of us who champion co-existence. Entitled Palestine: Peace Not Apartheid, the book argues that Israel's conduct towards Palestinians mimics South Africa's long-time demonisation of blacks. Of course, certain Israeli politicians have spewed venom at Palestinians, as have some Arab leaders towards Jews, but Israel is far more complex - and diverse - than slogans about the occupation would suggest.
In a state practising apartheid, would Arab Muslim legislators wield veto power over anything? At only 20per cent of the population, would Arabs even be eligible for election if they squirmed under the thumb of apartheid? Would an apartheid state extend voting rights to women and thepoor in local elections, which Israel didfor the first time in the history of Palestinian Arabs?
Would the vast majority of Arab Israeli citizens turn out to vote in national elections, as they've usually done? Would an apartheid state have several Arab political parties, as Israel does? In recent Israeli elections, two Arab parties found themselves disqualified for expressly supporting terrorism against the Jewish state. However, Israel's Supreme Court, exercising its independence, overturned both disqualifications. Under any system of apartheid, would the judiciary be free of political interference?
Would an apartheid state award its top literary prize to an Arab? Israel honoured Emile Habibi in 1986, before the intifada might have made such a choice politically shrewd. Would an apartheid state encourage Hebrew-speaking schoolchildren to learn Arabic? Would road signs throughout the land appear in both languages? Even my country, the proudly bilingual Canada, doesn't meet that standard.
Would an apartheid state be home to universities where Arabs and Jews mingle at will, or apartment blocks where they live side by side? Would an apartheid state bestow benefits and legal protections on Palestinians who live outside of Israel but work inside its borders? Would human rights organisations operate openly in an apartheid state? They do in Israel.
For that matter, military officials go public with their criticisms of government policies. In October 2003, the Israel Defence Forces' chief of staff told the press that road closures in the West Bank and Gaza were feeding Palestinian anger. Two weeks later, four former heads of the Shin Bet security service blasted the occupation and called on Ariel Sharon to withdraw troops unilaterally, which later happened in Gaza. Would an apartheid state stomach so much dissent from those mandated to protect the state?
Above all, would media debate the most basic building blocks of the nation? Would a Hebrew newspaper in an apartheid state run an article by an Arab Israeli about why the Zionist adventure has been a total failure? Would it run that article on Israel's independence day? Would an apartheid state ensure conditions for the freest Arabic press in the Middle East, a press so free that it can demonstrably abuse its liberties and keep on rolling? To this day, the East Jerusalem daily Al-Quds hasn't retracted an anti-Israel letter supposedly penned by Nelson Mandela but proven to have been written by an Arab living in The Netherlands.
Even the eminence grise of Palestinian nationalism, the late Edward Said, stated flat out that "Israel is not South Africa". How could it be when an Israeli publisher translated Said's seminal work, Orientalism, into Hebrew? I'll cap this point with a question that Said himself asked of Arabs: "Why don't we fight harder for freedom of opinions in our own societies, a freedom, no one needs to be told, that scarcely exists?"
I disagree: some people still need to be told that Arab "freedoms" don't compare to those of Israel. The people who need reminding are those who now push the South Africa analogy a step further by equating Israel with Nazi Germany. To them, Zionists are committing hate crimes under the totalitarian nightmare that they dub "Zio-Nazism" (like neo-Nazism).
When it comes to granting citizenship, Israel discriminates in the same way as an affirmative action policy, giving the edge to a specific minority that has faced genocidal injustice. Does this amount to Nazism? Spare me. As a Muslim, I could become a citizen of Israel without having to convert. After all, Israel was one of the few countries anywhere to grant shelter, then citizenship, to the Vietnamese boatpeople who sought political asylum in the late 1970s. I don't have to wonder how Syria compares on that score.
Now for the ultimate proof of Israel's flimsy credentials as a bunker of Hitlerian hate: It's the only country in the Middle East to which Arab Christians are voluntarily migrating. And they are also thriving there, notching much higher university attendance rates than the Arab Muslim citizens of Israel, and enjoying better overall health than Jews.
The Holy Land is gut-wrenching and complicated. As much as I applaud Israel's efforts to foster pluralism, I condemn its illegal Jewish settlements and less visible crimes such as the diversion of water away from Palestinian towns. These contradictions of the Israeli state should be exposed, discussed, even pilloried. And they are: openly as well as often. So there's little point in deciding whose camp is the paragon of vice or virtue. The better question might be: who's willing to hear what they don't want to hear? That's the test of whether a country is more than black or white.
Irshad Manji is author of The Trouble with Islam Today: A Muslim's Call for Reform in Her Faith (Random House Australia).
privacy terms © The Australian
Irshad Manji: Modern Israel is a far cry from old South Africa.
It's absurd to apply the term apartheid to one of the most progressive states in the world, maintains Irshad Manji
09feb07
IN the past year, a stream of thinkers across the West - from Australian writer Antony Loewenstein to US academics John Mearsheimer and Stephen Walt - has punctured the usual parameters of debate about Israel. I, for one, welcome any effort to prevent ideas from calcifying into ideologies. As a Muslim refusenik, that's what I do by defying the conventional prejudices of my fellow Muslims. Why would I resent refuseniks of a different kind?It's precisely because I embrace intellectual pluralism that I respectfully challenge Jimmy Carter's recent critique of Israel as an apartheid state.
To be sure, I've long admired the former US president. In my book The Trouble with Islam Today I cite him as an example of how religion can be invoked to tap the best of humanity. In no small measure, it was Carter's appreciation of spiritual values that brought together Israeli prime minister Menachem Begin and Egyptian president Anwar Sadat, compelling these former foes to clasp hands over a peace deal.
Which is why Carter's new book disappoints so many of us who champion co-existence. Entitled Palestine: Peace Not Apartheid, the book argues that Israel's conduct towards Palestinians mimics South Africa's long-time demonisation of blacks. Of course, certain Israeli politicians have spewed venom at Palestinians, as have some Arab leaders towards Jews, but Israel is far more complex - and diverse - than slogans about the occupation would suggest.
In a state practising apartheid, would Arab Muslim legislators wield veto power over anything? At only 20per cent of the population, would Arabs even be eligible for election if they squirmed under the thumb of apartheid? Would an apartheid state extend voting rights to women and thepoor in local elections, which Israel didfor the first time in the history of Palestinian Arabs?
Would the vast majority of Arab Israeli citizens turn out to vote in national elections, as they've usually done? Would an apartheid state have several Arab political parties, as Israel does? In recent Israeli elections, two Arab parties found themselves disqualified for expressly supporting terrorism against the Jewish state. However, Israel's Supreme Court, exercising its independence, overturned both disqualifications. Under any system of apartheid, would the judiciary be free of political interference?
Would an apartheid state award its top literary prize to an Arab? Israel honoured Emile Habibi in 1986, before the intifada might have made such a choice politically shrewd. Would an apartheid state encourage Hebrew-speaking schoolchildren to learn Arabic? Would road signs throughout the land appear in both languages? Even my country, the proudly bilingual Canada, doesn't meet that standard.
Would an apartheid state be home to universities where Arabs and Jews mingle at will, or apartment blocks where they live side by side? Would an apartheid state bestow benefits and legal protections on Palestinians who live outside of Israel but work inside its borders? Would human rights organisations operate openly in an apartheid state? They do in Israel.
For that matter, military officials go public with their criticisms of government policies. In October 2003, the Israel Defence Forces' chief of staff told the press that road closures in the West Bank and Gaza were feeding Palestinian anger. Two weeks later, four former heads of the Shin Bet security service blasted the occupation and called on Ariel Sharon to withdraw troops unilaterally, which later happened in Gaza. Would an apartheid state stomach so much dissent from those mandated to protect the state?
Above all, would media debate the most basic building blocks of the nation? Would a Hebrew newspaper in an apartheid state run an article by an Arab Israeli about why the Zionist adventure has been a total failure? Would it run that article on Israel's independence day? Would an apartheid state ensure conditions for the freest Arabic press in the Middle East, a press so free that it can demonstrably abuse its liberties and keep on rolling? To this day, the East Jerusalem daily Al-Quds hasn't retracted an anti-Israel letter supposedly penned by Nelson Mandela but proven to have been written by an Arab living in The Netherlands.
Even the eminence grise of Palestinian nationalism, the late Edward Said, stated flat out that "Israel is not South Africa". How could it be when an Israeli publisher translated Said's seminal work, Orientalism, into Hebrew? I'll cap this point with a question that Said himself asked of Arabs: "Why don't we fight harder for freedom of opinions in our own societies, a freedom, no one needs to be told, that scarcely exists?"
I disagree: some people still need to be told that Arab "freedoms" don't compare to those of Israel. The people who need reminding are those who now push the South Africa analogy a step further by equating Israel with Nazi Germany. To them, Zionists are committing hate crimes under the totalitarian nightmare that they dub "Zio-Nazism" (like neo-Nazism).
When it comes to granting citizenship, Israel discriminates in the same way as an affirmative action policy, giving the edge to a specific minority that has faced genocidal injustice. Does this amount to Nazism? Spare me. As a Muslim, I could become a citizen of Israel without having to convert. After all, Israel was one of the few countries anywhere to grant shelter, then citizenship, to the Vietnamese boatpeople who sought political asylum in the late 1970s. I don't have to wonder how Syria compares on that score.
Now for the ultimate proof of Israel's flimsy credentials as a bunker of Hitlerian hate: It's the only country in the Middle East to which Arab Christians are voluntarily migrating. And they are also thriving there, notching much higher university attendance rates than the Arab Muslim citizens of Israel, and enjoying better overall health than Jews.
The Holy Land is gut-wrenching and complicated. As much as I applaud Israel's efforts to foster pluralism, I condemn its illegal Jewish settlements and less visible crimes such as the diversion of water away from Palestinian towns. These contradictions of the Israeli state should be exposed, discussed, even pilloried. And they are: openly as well as often. So there's little point in deciding whose camp is the paragon of vice or virtue. The better question might be: who's willing to hear what they don't want to hear? That's the test of whether a country is more than black or white.
Irshad Manji is author of The Trouble with Islam Today: A Muslim's Call for Reform in Her Faith (Random House Australia).
privacy terms © The Australian
Innocent seduction: ICJW challenges beauty stereotypes that damage girls' self-esteem.
"The Australian", 8/2/07, has reproduced and expanded on Caroline Everington's report on her blog about the advertising of children's clothing (see below). International Council of Jewish Women, (ICJW) together with 52 other women's organisations has presented a Statement to UNESCO about the girl-child and her body image.
Making pictures look sexy for comercial purposes has become the norm in every industry.
Paedophiles will probably look at all children in a different way to normal people. Should we become paranoid abut it? On the other hand, the effect on the girls themselves,- "the little models",- is that a problem for some? Do we need to hide under a burka all girls and women,- just in case it damages some girls' self-esteem?
Body image is a real problem for older women and young ones will always copy their older sisters. But commercial exploitation is another matter.
MM
-----------------------------------------------------------------
PRESS RELEASE
January 20, 2007
ICJW Challenges Beauty Stereotypes
that Damage Girls’ Self Esteem
The International Council of Jewish Women (ICJW) will present a Statement to the UN Commission on the Status of Women, on behalf of 52 Jewish women’s organizations around the world, urging the UN’s Economic and Social Council to protect the girl-child from damaging stereotypes and pressures which impede her healthy psychological development.
The Statement has been endorsed by 12 other Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs) and has been submitted to the 51st Session of the Commission on the Status of Women, taking place in New York from 26 February to 9 March 2007. The Commission will consider “The Elimination of all Forms of Discrimination and Violence against the Girl Child” as its priority theme.
The Statement condemns media, advertisements, and popular culture worldwide for promising perfect beauty and promoting stereotypes which can create anxiety, lack of self-esteem and loss of confidence, and impede development of a healthy self-image. Girls should be celebrated for who they are and not how they look. The next generation of girl-children must grow up without the pressure and consequences of having to live up to unrealistic beauty ideals.
The Statement urges support for educational programs to help girls form a healthy self-image, build self-confidence and develop leadership skills, together with mentoring programs, the selection of better role-models, and encouraging parents to reinforce their daughters’ confidence. It also calls for commercial media interests to promote “real beauty” among “real girls”, to prove that beauty comes in different shapes, sizes, and looks.
Says ICJW President Leah Aharonov: “Just as the struggle for women’s rights began with massive consciousness-raising, the issue of self-image must also become a topic of public debate. Let us help the girl-child stop chasing a mirage and get back to reality.”
The ICJW Statement is endorsed and supported by various NGOs in Consultative Status with ECOSOC: Anglican Consultative Council; Armenian International Women’s Association; Associated Country Women of the World; Gray Panthers; Hadassah, the Women’s Zionist Organization of America; International Federation for Home Economics; International Federation on Ageing; International Health Awareness Network; International Immigrants Foundation; International Presentation Association of the Sisters of the Presentation; Perhaps…Kids Meeting Kids Can Make a Difference; Soroptimist International; Women’s American ORT/World ORT.
Note to Editors:
1) The full text of the ICJW Statement can be found at http://www.icjw.org/
2) The International Council of Jewish Women (ICJW) represents 52 Jewish women’s organizations, advocating issues and acting on their behalf to address challenges that relate to all women, worldwide, in international forums such as the United Nations.
3) The ICJW will be hosting a special reception during the CSW for other delegations.
4) For more information, please contact press@icjw.org
Commission on the Status of Women
Fifty-first Session
26 February-10 March 2007
Statement prepared and submitted by: The International Council of Jewish Women,
NGO in Special Consultative Status with ECOSOC
Statement endorsed and supported by the following NGOs in Consultative Status with ECOSOC: Anglican Consultative Council; Armenian International Women’s Association; Associated Country Women of the World; Gray Panthers; Hadassah, the Women’s Zionist Organization of America; International Federation for Home Economics; International Federation on Ageing; International Health Awareness Network; International Immigrants Foundation; International Presentation Association of the Sisters of the Presentation; Perhaps…Kids Meeting Kids Can Make a Difference; Soroptimist International; Women’s American ORT/World ORT
We, the above NGO’s, reaffirm the Beijing Platform of Action where girls won their place on the agenda in Section L. There, governments promised to eliminate all forms of discrimination against the girl-child by addressing harmful cultural attitudes and practices, and to promote active participation for girls in their own life decisions. The inclusion of Section L acknowledged that women’s advancement would not be sustainable without attention to the rights and dignity of the girl-child.
The theme for CSW51 - The elimination of all forms of discrimination and violence against the girl-child - is a reminder to governments and civil society of promises made that the safety and protection of the girl-child will be preserved.
Media, advertisements, and popular culture worldwide promote perfect beauty during a time of intense emotional and physical change for the girl-child. It has been shown that girls, even as young as six, are aware of these messages. These stereotypes can create anxiety, lack of self-esteem and loss of confidence, and surely impede development of a healthy self-image. They have been shown to contribute to the rapid increase in dieting and eating disorders. The problem is widespread across the globe, but due to cultural differences, it is not publicly acknowledged.
Girls should be celebrated for who they are and not how they look. These images and standards of beauty contradict good health practices and contribute to negative feelings about physical appearance. The still-malleable girl-child is defining herself and her self-worth by false standards. In too many countries, girls withdraw from normal activities of life because they are troubled about the appearance of their bodies.
The next generation of girl-children must grow up without the pressure and consequences of having to live up to unrealistic and unhealthy beauty ideals. We therefore urge governments and civil society to:
- Initiate grass-roots programs that will help individual girls form a healthy self-image: talk to girls early in life about real beauty; support healthy eating; link women’s organizations with schools, youth groups, and community centers to promote discussions on role models, if they are real, and why; educate to achieve independent thinking and a critical view of the media and their messages;
- Encourage schools to develop workshops and mentoring programs for girls to help foster a healthy relationship with their bodies; select role models to surround them with alternative values; connect business with educational institutions to focus on popular culture and the effect it has on the girl-child;
- Educate parents on the importance of reinforcing their daughters’ confidence;
- Enable girls to be their own advocates for change; to actively plan and run programs for changing images; help girls to build self confidence and develop leadership skills;
- Encourage commercial media interests to promote “real beauty” among “real girls” to prove that beauty comes in different shapes, sizes, and looks; marketing and outreach should portray real and authentic women who don’t fit into specific beauty stereotypes;
- Encourage commercial interests to create women’s forums to participate in a dialogue and debate about the definition and standards of beauty in society;
- Develop realistic standards for media, advertising and the communication industries.
Just as the struggle for women’s rights began with massive consciousness-raising, the issue of self-image must become a topic of public debate. Let us help the girl-child stop chasing a mirage and return to a healthy reality.
THE AUSTRALIAN
Thursday, February 8, 2006.
Sugar and spice... or kiddie porn?
(Blog Tuesday, October 10, 2006) Caroline Overington
LITTLE girls love to play dress ups. Left alone, they will ransack your wardrobe and come tottering down the staircase, wearing your high heels.
Give them a lipstick, and they will smear it all over their face.
Until recently, I thought this was harmless, just like girls playing make believe.
Then, yesterday, the Australia Institute in Canberra put out an alarming report on the so-called “sexualisation of children”.
Apparently, it’s now possible to buy kiddie lip-gloss, fake fingernail polish and pink plastic heels for children - and it is all part of a creeping plot to sexualise the young.
The report, by Dr Emma Rush of the Australia Institute, says major department stories, like David Jones and Myer, are posing children like adults, presenting them with hips thrust out and lips wet with gloss and slightly parted, forcing them to see themselves as sexual beings before they even reached puberty.
Some of the images she finds offensive are here (Corporate Paedophilia: Sexualisation of children in Australia). According to Dr Rush, the girl in Figure 14 from the Frangipani Rose summer range, is: “leaning forward, with legs astride. Both pose and angle are reminiscent of porn shots”.
She’s also deeply critical of Figure 15 (also Frangipani Rose), saying the girl is photographed “wearing a see-through white singlet with a white bra underneath rather than just a normal tee-shirt.
“The setting, where the girl is apparently alone in the bush, combined with the skimpy attire, suggests sexual vulnerability,” she adds.
Well, it’s either that, or else they are pictures of kids on the beach, wearing shorts and skirts. Are they offensive? Are they pornographic?
Have a look, and tell us what you think.
Making pictures look sexy for comercial purposes has become the norm in every industry.
Paedophiles will probably look at all children in a different way to normal people. Should we become paranoid abut it? On the other hand, the effect on the girls themselves,- "the little models",- is that a problem for some? Do we need to hide under a burka all girls and women,- just in case it damages some girls' self-esteem?
Body image is a real problem for older women and young ones will always copy their older sisters. But commercial exploitation is another matter.
MM
-----------------------------------------------------------------
PRESS RELEASE
January 20, 2007
ICJW Challenges Beauty Stereotypes
that Damage Girls’ Self Esteem
The International Council of Jewish Women (ICJW) will present a Statement to the UN Commission on the Status of Women, on behalf of 52 Jewish women’s organizations around the world, urging the UN’s Economic and Social Council to protect the girl-child from damaging stereotypes and pressures which impede her healthy psychological development.
The Statement has been endorsed by 12 other Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs) and has been submitted to the 51st Session of the Commission on the Status of Women, taking place in New York from 26 February to 9 March 2007. The Commission will consider “The Elimination of all Forms of Discrimination and Violence against the Girl Child” as its priority theme.
The Statement condemns media, advertisements, and popular culture worldwide for promising perfect beauty and promoting stereotypes which can create anxiety, lack of self-esteem and loss of confidence, and impede development of a healthy self-image. Girls should be celebrated for who they are and not how they look. The next generation of girl-children must grow up without the pressure and consequences of having to live up to unrealistic beauty ideals.
The Statement urges support for educational programs to help girls form a healthy self-image, build self-confidence and develop leadership skills, together with mentoring programs, the selection of better role-models, and encouraging parents to reinforce their daughters’ confidence. It also calls for commercial media interests to promote “real beauty” among “real girls”, to prove that beauty comes in different shapes, sizes, and looks.
Says ICJW President Leah Aharonov: “Just as the struggle for women’s rights began with massive consciousness-raising, the issue of self-image must also become a topic of public debate. Let us help the girl-child stop chasing a mirage and get back to reality.”
The ICJW Statement is endorsed and supported by various NGOs in Consultative Status with ECOSOC: Anglican Consultative Council; Armenian International Women’s Association; Associated Country Women of the World; Gray Panthers; Hadassah, the Women’s Zionist Organization of America; International Federation for Home Economics; International Federation on Ageing; International Health Awareness Network; International Immigrants Foundation; International Presentation Association of the Sisters of the Presentation; Perhaps…Kids Meeting Kids Can Make a Difference; Soroptimist International; Women’s American ORT/World ORT.
Note to Editors:
1) The full text of the ICJW Statement can be found at http://www.icjw.org/
2) The International Council of Jewish Women (ICJW) represents 52 Jewish women’s organizations, advocating issues and acting on their behalf to address challenges that relate to all women, worldwide, in international forums such as the United Nations.
3) The ICJW will be hosting a special reception during the CSW for other delegations.
4) For more information, please contact press@icjw.org
Commission on the Status of Women
Fifty-first Session
26 February-10 March 2007
Statement prepared and submitted by: The International Council of Jewish Women,
NGO in Special Consultative Status with ECOSOC
Statement endorsed and supported by the following NGOs in Consultative Status with ECOSOC: Anglican Consultative Council; Armenian International Women’s Association; Associated Country Women of the World; Gray Panthers; Hadassah, the Women’s Zionist Organization of America; International Federation for Home Economics; International Federation on Ageing; International Health Awareness Network; International Immigrants Foundation; International Presentation Association of the Sisters of the Presentation; Perhaps…Kids Meeting Kids Can Make a Difference; Soroptimist International; Women’s American ORT/World ORT
We, the above NGO’s, reaffirm the Beijing Platform of Action where girls won their place on the agenda in Section L. There, governments promised to eliminate all forms of discrimination against the girl-child by addressing harmful cultural attitudes and practices, and to promote active participation for girls in their own life decisions. The inclusion of Section L acknowledged that women’s advancement would not be sustainable without attention to the rights and dignity of the girl-child.
The theme for CSW51 - The elimination of all forms of discrimination and violence against the girl-child - is a reminder to governments and civil society of promises made that the safety and protection of the girl-child will be preserved.
Media, advertisements, and popular culture worldwide promote perfect beauty during a time of intense emotional and physical change for the girl-child. It has been shown that girls, even as young as six, are aware of these messages. These stereotypes can create anxiety, lack of self-esteem and loss of confidence, and surely impede development of a healthy self-image. They have been shown to contribute to the rapid increase in dieting and eating disorders. The problem is widespread across the globe, but due to cultural differences, it is not publicly acknowledged.
Girls should be celebrated for who they are and not how they look. These images and standards of beauty contradict good health practices and contribute to negative feelings about physical appearance. The still-malleable girl-child is defining herself and her self-worth by false standards. In too many countries, girls withdraw from normal activities of life because they are troubled about the appearance of their bodies.
The next generation of girl-children must grow up without the pressure and consequences of having to live up to unrealistic and unhealthy beauty ideals. We therefore urge governments and civil society to:
- Initiate grass-roots programs that will help individual girls form a healthy self-image: talk to girls early in life about real beauty; support healthy eating; link women’s organizations with schools, youth groups, and community centers to promote discussions on role models, if they are real, and why; educate to achieve independent thinking and a critical view of the media and their messages;
- Encourage schools to develop workshops and mentoring programs for girls to help foster a healthy relationship with their bodies; select role models to surround them with alternative values; connect business with educational institutions to focus on popular culture and the effect it has on the girl-child;
- Educate parents on the importance of reinforcing their daughters’ confidence;
- Enable girls to be their own advocates for change; to actively plan and run programs for changing images; help girls to build self confidence and develop leadership skills;
- Encourage commercial media interests to promote “real beauty” among “real girls” to prove that beauty comes in different shapes, sizes, and looks; marketing and outreach should portray real and authentic women who don’t fit into specific beauty stereotypes;
- Encourage commercial interests to create women’s forums to participate in a dialogue and debate about the definition and standards of beauty in society;
- Develop realistic standards for media, advertising and the communication industries.
Just as the struggle for women’s rights began with massive consciousness-raising, the issue of self-image must become a topic of public debate. Let us help the girl-child stop chasing a mirage and return to a healthy reality.
THE AUSTRALIAN
Thursday, February 8, 2006.
Sugar and spice... or kiddie porn?
(Blog Tuesday, October 10, 2006) Caroline Overington
LITTLE girls love to play dress ups. Left alone, they will ransack your wardrobe and come tottering down the staircase, wearing your high heels.
Give them a lipstick, and they will smear it all over their face.
Until recently, I thought this was harmless, just like girls playing make believe.
Then, yesterday, the Australia Institute in Canberra put out an alarming report on the so-called “sexualisation of children”.
Apparently, it’s now possible to buy kiddie lip-gloss, fake fingernail polish and pink plastic heels for children - and it is all part of a creeping plot to sexualise the young.
The report, by Dr Emma Rush of the Australia Institute, says major department stories, like David Jones and Myer, are posing children like adults, presenting them with hips thrust out and lips wet with gloss and slightly parted, forcing them to see themselves as sexual beings before they even reached puberty.
Some of the images she finds offensive are here (Corporate Paedophilia: Sexualisation of children in Australia). According to Dr Rush, the girl in Figure 14 from the Frangipani Rose summer range, is: “leaning forward, with legs astride. Both pose and angle are reminiscent of porn shots”.
She’s also deeply critical of Figure 15 (also Frangipani Rose), saying the girl is photographed “wearing a see-through white singlet with a white bra underneath rather than just a normal tee-shirt.
“The setting, where the girl is apparently alone in the bush, combined with the skimpy attire, suggests sexual vulnerability,” she adds.
Well, it’s either that, or else they are pictures of kids on the beach, wearing shorts and skirts. Are they offensive? Are they pornographic?
Have a look, and tell us what you think.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)