ZOHAR RAVIV (DR.)(PhD in Jewish thought and mysticism).
(Lecture Notes. 25 July 2007. Monash Uni. Caulfield.)
“Between science and theology”.
His interpretation of ‘religion’ is that it is about “dogma”, not religious thought.
THEOLOGY. (Belief in a reason for our being, thinking, rationalizing, etc. on earth!)
Is it due to a God? Who, what is it?
In understanding the meaning of “GOD”,- the divinity, it can be understood in the context of:
1. the METAPHYSICAL;
2. the THEOLOGICAL;
3. the RELIGIOUS- which is the lowest denominator in the discourse!
1.METAPHYSICAL: Most notions of “GOD” are that it is the “one”,-an absolute, -existing, being. Metaphysically this is not the way it is looked upon.
Zohar explained it as "a being" like the physical “Black Hole”,- it is defined by the rotating particles around it,- while there is nothing to actually see. The “nothing” one 'sees' in the ‘black hole’, is actually the “something”, i.e. it is the 'something' we call the ’black hole’.
Quote: (Maimonides )”comprehending God is comprehension of what we don’t know”. In other words, while we cannot see it, we can intellectualise that it is “something” that is there.
2. THEOLOGIANS are not concerned with the metaphysical. For them, God exists.; there is an intent in the meaning of creation. In that case, what is that “intent”,- what does God want in creating the universe?
When reading the Torah, e.g. the ethical discourse, can be interpreted in many ways. For example, TZEDAKA, is not charity,- but the equal distribution of ‘goodness” to bring everyone up to the same level before God!
In other words, the “divine intent” = the vindication of my existence (Zohar).
“Who am I ? How did I appear on earth? This is the level of discourse required.”
3. RELIGION on the other hand is in Zohar’s opinion, purely DOGMA.
The various trappings of religious observance vary from culture to culture within each religion, let alone from religion to religion. It is easy to forget as one gets involved in rituals, WHY one is doing whatever one does.
The rituals may be important to maintain the various groups and communities together, but those who propagate the dogmas are dangerous sometimes, while their followers may be even more dangerous! Those who claim to know the will of God are the most dangerous.(Dawkins). The flaw in religious dogma is that it is a triumph of ritual over meaning. Understanding the context, is far more important than immersion in rituals and “traditions”. These are not based on true “religious discourse”.
It should be based on “who am I?”,- how we define ourselves in this world!
SCIENCE; is based on inquiry: mind and matter. Which comes first,- where is the point of entry? “Our brain is not a BarMitzvah present”!
Zohar is afraid of scientists who claim that in time all existential questions will be answered.
“THERE IS AN ENIGMA ABOUT OUR HUMAN EXISTENCE, WHETHER WE FOLLOW THE SCIENTISTS OR THE THEOLOGIANS! E.g.” How do we explain gravity?
Therefore one can discuss God without a religious discourse. Because even in Bereshit, the Zoar interprets that “from nothing” the heaven and earth was created!
Jewish mythology “let there be light” (The magicians of old used the Aramaic words in ‘abraca dabra” for ‘creation out of nothing’!)
Thus interfaith discussions can be far more meaningful if discussed theologically e.g. about the meaning of ‘God’, than religiously!
“People who don’t want to abide by a religious dogma, should not throw out the baby with the bath water!”
NB. In question time, Mark Fajgenblatt, lecturer, took exception to religion being at the bottom,- saying that he comes to these issues from the top!
'Where do ethics come from?' (Not from dogma originally.) “Laws”- also dogma!
Monday, July 30, 2007
Friday, July 27, 2007
New Exodus to Israel from Darfur.
The Muslim Exodus From Darfur, Sudan, Egypt To Israel
By Joel Leyden
Israel News Agency
July 23, 2007
http://tinyurl.com/2jjb52
A young Sudanese refugee is examined by an Israeli doctor from Physicians for Human Rights in the town of Sderot, southern Israel. Photo: AP Jerusalem ----July 23 ..... One must step out of their comfort zone for this story. Yes, you need to leave your carpeted air conditioned office, marbled floored living room or Starbucks coffee house for just a few minutes. The TV and Internet will still be there with tales of Britney Spears and Harry Potter.
A modern day exodus is now taking place from the depths of Africa to the streets of Jerusalem.
Black, Muslim civilians have escaped the genocide war in Sudan between Christians and Muslims to find sanctuary - in all places - Israel. And here in Israel we actually have a few people debating whether or not to allow these young, breast feeding mothers and the gray elderly, barely able to walk on their sticks into the Jewish state.
We hear of thousands dying in the Sudan and yet we turn the news channel. It just ain't good news. We would rather escape into a Bruce Willis movie, place another burger on the grill or sip a cool Long Island Ice Tea cocktail by the pool. Sudan is like mud. We don't want it on us. We don't want to know about it.
Perhaps that's how many felt about the Jews during the 30's and 40's in Holocaust Europe?
Sudan is the largest and one of the most diverse countries in Africa. Sudan is home to deserts, mountain ranges, swamps and rain forests. It has emerged from a 21-year civil war between the mainly Muslim north and the Animist and Christian south which is said to have cost the lives of 1.5 million people. Prior to independence Sudan was occupied by both Egypt and Britain in what was known as the Anglo-Egyptian Sudan between 1898 and 1955.
Fast forward - after two years of bargaining the Sudan government and rebels signed a comprehensive peace deal in January 2005. But this peace was short lived.
As the government and southern rebels inched closer to peace, fighting broke out in the north western region of Darfur in early 2003 when rebels seeking greater autonomy began an insurrection.
The UN says more than two million people have fled their homes and more than 200,000 have been killed. Pro-government Arab militias are accused of carrying out a campaign of ethnic cleansing against non-Arab groups in the region.
The barbaric and seemingly endless civil war in Darfur is seen as "one of the worst nightmares in recent history".
You had now better check your steak, burgers and hot dogs, you don't want them to burn.
Sudan's name comes from the Arabic "bilad al-sudan", or land of the blacks. Arabic is the official language and Islam is the religion of the state, but the country has a large non-Arabic speaking and non-Muslim population in the south which has rejected attempts by the government in Khartoum to impose Islamic Sharia law on the country as a whole.
As for politics and blood stained egos, Sudan President Omar al-Bashir has been locked in a power struggle with Hassan al-Turabi, his former mentor and the main ideologue of Sudan's Islamist government. Since 2001 Turabi has spent periods in detention and has been accused, but not tried, over an alleged coup plot.
What does this all have to do with Israel and your steak?
The Sudan is located next to Egypt. This is where many of the innocent African civilians have fled, but the Egyptian government did not exactly put out the welcoming mat.
Recently, Israel Prime Minister Ehud Olmert asked Egypt President Hosni Mubarak to stop African refugees from crossing the border. The two leaders also agreed that most of the African refugees who are currently in Israel would be deported to Egypt. But opinion is changing in Israel. There may be no deportation, only blankets, food and smiles for the weary.
The Israel Prime Minister's Office said the Egypt government repeatedly guaranteed the refugees' safety. Local Egyptian sources, however, have increasingly reported human rights abuses against the refugees. In addition to more than a dozen refugees from Sudan who have been shot and wounded while trying to cross the border, 25 refugees were shot and killed in a Cairo protest last December.
"The escalating violence that the refugees of Sudan are facing in Egypt has led us to recommend that the Israel government not deport these people," said Ilan Lonai, a campaign coordinator for Amnesty International (AI).
More than 100 refugees have been caught trying to cross the Egyptian border this month.
Joining the thousands, some 45 African refugees managed to cross the border and were abandoned in the streets of Beersheba, Israel. This was after the Israel Defense Forces was supposed to bring them to the Ketziot prison.
Last week, the IDF began transferring refugees directly to the prison, which has built a temporary caravan park that can hold up to 300 refugees, until a larger "camp site" is built adjacent to the prison.
That refugee camp site would hold more than 1,000 refugees, according to Israel Prisons Services.
"Israel only has walls against terrorism, with open doors for the poor, the hungry and homeless," said a member of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. "What do the children of the Sudan know about Israel that those who boycott us from England do not know? For those who think to boycott Israel, let them speak to the starving children of Sudan who we feed, blanket and provide security to."
Beersheba, a desert Negev town, which has taken in hundreds of refugees from Sudan over the past year, recently refused to take charge of any more, claiming that the African refugees were the government's responsibility.
So as those from Darfur survived hot desert treks and perilous nights evading thieves, rapists and wild animals, debate starts in Israel whether or not to allow these desperate souls to enter and stay in Israel.
Some are concerned that Israel's humanitarian gestures might create a "future nightmare" as the Jewish state becomes diluted. But this is either ignorance or racism speaking. Those from Darfur would be granted residency status and nothing more. They would not be able to vote the Jews out of Israel.
Furthermore, the extreme religious right in Israel is now being reminded by the gentle and sometimes Disneyland Left of the most basic principles of Judaism. Every effort must be made to save life, according to Jewish law, unless it involves violating the cardinal negative precepts of murder, idolatry, incest, or adultery. The talmudic rabbis interpret the verse "You shall not stand idly by the blood of your neighbor" (Leviticus 19:16) to mean that if a person is in danger of drowning, it is the duty of all who can swim to dive in to save him.
The preservation of human life takes precedence over all the other commandments in Judaism. The Talmud emphasizes this principle by citing the verse from Leviticus [18:5]: "You shall therefore keep my statutes…which if a man do, he shall live by them." The rabbis add: "That he shall live by them, and not that he shall die by them."
(Babylonian Talmud, Yoma 85b).
"The Jews were victims of the Holocaust, I am a victim of the Darfur genocide. Please let me stay," said Ismail at his latest makeshift home opposite the Israel parliament.
His new home is the tranquil Rose Garden in Jerusalem, between the Knesset building and the prime minister's office, an area that is today dotted with tents, mattresses, piles of clothes, cans of food and picnic boxes.
Forty-two-year-old Ismail was bused there along with his family and dozens of other Sudanese by the authorities in Beersheva in Israel's south, a city exasperated over a lack of government resources to deal with the refugees.
The refugees are caught in the middle as the country debates what to do with the estimated 300 people who fled Sudan's civil war-ridden Darfur region and then crossed illegally crossed into Israel from Egypt.
The debate highlights a moral dilemma touching on the nation's sensitive memory of the Nazi Holocaust and the core of its identity as a home for Jewish refugees.
Should a country sworn to provide a safe haven for Jews open its gates to Africans fleeing the murderous conflict in Sudan?
"Israel, which came into being after the Holocaust, cannot stand idly by in the face of the suffering of Darfur's refugees," the daily Haaretz newspaper wrote in a recent editorial, adding that the absence of diplomatic ties with Sudan "should not be an obstacle."
"I chose Israel because I thought Israel was a country which was once in a situation like Darfur and they would understand me. I am asking the Israeli government to accept us, the people of Darfur," said Ismail who declined to give his full name.
The government says some 2,800 people have crossed illegally into Israel from Egypt over the past 18 months. Most are African and 1,000 of them are Sudanese - including 300 from Darfur.
The refugee influx caught by surprise a government used to dealing with willing immigrants from the worldwide Jewish Diaspora.
"Israel is a country that was built on millions of refugees who were Jews and who immediately got citizenship. We never faced a situation of illegal migrants from Africa," government spokeswoman Miri Eisin said.
"Israel only has walls against terrorism, with open doors for the poor, the hungry and homeless," said a member of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. "What do the children of the Sudan know about Israel that those who boycott us from England do not know? For those who think to boycott Israel, let them speak to the starving children of Sudan who we feed, blanket and provide security to."
Tom Hickey, chair of the English University and Colleges Union (UCU), and a Philosophy lecturer at Brighton University, proposed the boycott resolution against Israel in May, which called on British academics to "consider the moral implications of links with Israel academic institutions".
Perhaps it's time for Tom to have a reality check in Jerusalem's Rose Garden. To enjoy a friendly chat with a man, woman or child from Sudan who is being sheltered and cared for by both the Israel government and the common man in Israel.
Yes, it's an excellent public relations opportunity for Israel. To illustrate how Jews in Israel care more for Muslims from Sudan than those who ignore Sudan from Saudi Arabia, Iran and Syria.
But Israel is inept in the art of PR. This country has only a handful of professional public relations and public affairs professionals working in government. And they are overworked and underpaid.
Perhaps if those Jews who donate millions of dollars for such excellent Israel Aliya immigration programs as Birthright Taglit and Nefesh B'Nefesh put aside the expenses of four or five airplane seats to illustrate the humanity and genoristy for which is Israel, it would enhance Israel's image and perhaps encourage even more Jewish immigration to Israel.
But for the present the reality one sees coming from Israel is that of pure humanitarian gesture. No spin. No advertising. No PR soundbytes. Just one human being caring for another. In this case - it is one from Israel, a Jew who opens his doors. Even though one of three Israel children suffer in poverty. We here in Israel place and cherish life first and foremost. Jews do not teach their children hate, we do not have a Hamas or Islamic Jihad Mickey Mouse on TV inciting young children that one religion is better than another, that all Jews should be murdered, that it is better to be a martyr (shahid) in a global Islamic war than to embrace life and peace. We do not believe in 72 virgins and a paradise awaiting us after setting off a terror suicide bomb in a restaurant, shopping center or bus.
Israel has consistently reached out for peace and compromise with both those who call themselves Palestinians and our neighbors since modern day Israel was created in 1948. The answer to Israel's appeals for peace - such as a unilateral withdrawal from Gaza - has been with Kassam and Katusha rockets, mortars, grenades, sniper fire and words of war from Iran and Syria.
In the film, Cast A Giant Shadow, there is a 1947 scene where Jewish Holocaust refugees land on a beach in Israel. The British troops line up on the sand to fire on them. One English officer says to another: "well now is the time to find out if we are bloody Nazis."
The same can be said of the Israel Defense Forces and the Israel police as they find water, food and shelter for those from Darfur, Sudan. No one is calling the Israeli a Nazi today.
At least, not those from Muslim Africa.
Related Web sites:
How to lose hearts and minds - The Jerusalem Post
www.israelfordarfur.org/index.html
__._,_.___
By Joel Leyden
Israel News Agency
July 23, 2007
http://tinyurl.com/2jjb52
A young Sudanese refugee is examined by an Israeli doctor from Physicians for Human Rights in the town of Sderot, southern Israel. Photo: AP Jerusalem ----July 23 ..... One must step out of their comfort zone for this story. Yes, you need to leave your carpeted air conditioned office, marbled floored living room or Starbucks coffee house for just a few minutes. The TV and Internet will still be there with tales of Britney Spears and Harry Potter.
A modern day exodus is now taking place from the depths of Africa to the streets of Jerusalem.
Black, Muslim civilians have escaped the genocide war in Sudan between Christians and Muslims to find sanctuary - in all places - Israel. And here in Israel we actually have a few people debating whether or not to allow these young, breast feeding mothers and the gray elderly, barely able to walk on their sticks into the Jewish state.
We hear of thousands dying in the Sudan and yet we turn the news channel. It just ain't good news. We would rather escape into a Bruce Willis movie, place another burger on the grill or sip a cool Long Island Ice Tea cocktail by the pool. Sudan is like mud. We don't want it on us. We don't want to know about it.
Perhaps that's how many felt about the Jews during the 30's and 40's in Holocaust Europe?
Sudan is the largest and one of the most diverse countries in Africa. Sudan is home to deserts, mountain ranges, swamps and rain forests. It has emerged from a 21-year civil war between the mainly Muslim north and the Animist and Christian south which is said to have cost the lives of 1.5 million people. Prior to independence Sudan was occupied by both Egypt and Britain in what was known as the Anglo-Egyptian Sudan between 1898 and 1955.
Fast forward - after two years of bargaining the Sudan government and rebels signed a comprehensive peace deal in January 2005. But this peace was short lived.
As the government and southern rebels inched closer to peace, fighting broke out in the north western region of Darfur in early 2003 when rebels seeking greater autonomy began an insurrection.
The UN says more than two million people have fled their homes and more than 200,000 have been killed. Pro-government Arab militias are accused of carrying out a campaign of ethnic cleansing against non-Arab groups in the region.
The barbaric and seemingly endless civil war in Darfur is seen as "one of the worst nightmares in recent history".
You had now better check your steak, burgers and hot dogs, you don't want them to burn.
Sudan's name comes from the Arabic "bilad al-sudan", or land of the blacks. Arabic is the official language and Islam is the religion of the state, but the country has a large non-Arabic speaking and non-Muslim population in the south which has rejected attempts by the government in Khartoum to impose Islamic Sharia law on the country as a whole.
As for politics and blood stained egos, Sudan President Omar al-Bashir has been locked in a power struggle with Hassan al-Turabi, his former mentor and the main ideologue of Sudan's Islamist government. Since 2001 Turabi has spent periods in detention and has been accused, but not tried, over an alleged coup plot.
What does this all have to do with Israel and your steak?
The Sudan is located next to Egypt. This is where many of the innocent African civilians have fled, but the Egyptian government did not exactly put out the welcoming mat.
Recently, Israel Prime Minister Ehud Olmert asked Egypt President Hosni Mubarak to stop African refugees from crossing the border. The two leaders also agreed that most of the African refugees who are currently in Israel would be deported to Egypt. But opinion is changing in Israel. There may be no deportation, only blankets, food and smiles for the weary.
The Israel Prime Minister's Office said the Egypt government repeatedly guaranteed the refugees' safety. Local Egyptian sources, however, have increasingly reported human rights abuses against the refugees. In addition to more than a dozen refugees from Sudan who have been shot and wounded while trying to cross the border, 25 refugees were shot and killed in a Cairo protest last December.
"The escalating violence that the refugees of Sudan are facing in Egypt has led us to recommend that the Israel government not deport these people," said Ilan Lonai, a campaign coordinator for Amnesty International (AI).
More than 100 refugees have been caught trying to cross the Egyptian border this month.
Joining the thousands, some 45 African refugees managed to cross the border and were abandoned in the streets of Beersheba, Israel. This was after the Israel Defense Forces was supposed to bring them to the Ketziot prison.
Last week, the IDF began transferring refugees directly to the prison, which has built a temporary caravan park that can hold up to 300 refugees, until a larger "camp site" is built adjacent to the prison.
That refugee camp site would hold more than 1,000 refugees, according to Israel Prisons Services.
"Israel only has walls against terrorism, with open doors for the poor, the hungry and homeless," said a member of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. "What do the children of the Sudan know about Israel that those who boycott us from England do not know? For those who think to boycott Israel, let them speak to the starving children of Sudan who we feed, blanket and provide security to."
Beersheba, a desert Negev town, which has taken in hundreds of refugees from Sudan over the past year, recently refused to take charge of any more, claiming that the African refugees were the government's responsibility.
So as those from Darfur survived hot desert treks and perilous nights evading thieves, rapists and wild animals, debate starts in Israel whether or not to allow these desperate souls to enter and stay in Israel.
Some are concerned that Israel's humanitarian gestures might create a "future nightmare" as the Jewish state becomes diluted. But this is either ignorance or racism speaking. Those from Darfur would be granted residency status and nothing more. They would not be able to vote the Jews out of Israel.
Furthermore, the extreme religious right in Israel is now being reminded by the gentle and sometimes Disneyland Left of the most basic principles of Judaism. Every effort must be made to save life, according to Jewish law, unless it involves violating the cardinal negative precepts of murder, idolatry, incest, or adultery. The talmudic rabbis interpret the verse "You shall not stand idly by the blood of your neighbor" (Leviticus 19:16) to mean that if a person is in danger of drowning, it is the duty of all who can swim to dive in to save him.
The preservation of human life takes precedence over all the other commandments in Judaism. The Talmud emphasizes this principle by citing the verse from Leviticus [18:5]: "You shall therefore keep my statutes…which if a man do, he shall live by them." The rabbis add: "That he shall live by them, and not that he shall die by them."
(Babylonian Talmud, Yoma 85b).
"The Jews were victims of the Holocaust, I am a victim of the Darfur genocide. Please let me stay," said Ismail at his latest makeshift home opposite the Israel parliament.
His new home is the tranquil Rose Garden in Jerusalem, between the Knesset building and the prime minister's office, an area that is today dotted with tents, mattresses, piles of clothes, cans of food and picnic boxes.
Forty-two-year-old Ismail was bused there along with his family and dozens of other Sudanese by the authorities in Beersheva in Israel's south, a city exasperated over a lack of government resources to deal with the refugees.
The refugees are caught in the middle as the country debates what to do with the estimated 300 people who fled Sudan's civil war-ridden Darfur region and then crossed illegally crossed into Israel from Egypt.
The debate highlights a moral dilemma touching on the nation's sensitive memory of the Nazi Holocaust and the core of its identity as a home for Jewish refugees.
Should a country sworn to provide a safe haven for Jews open its gates to Africans fleeing the murderous conflict in Sudan?
"Israel, which came into being after the Holocaust, cannot stand idly by in the face of the suffering of Darfur's refugees," the daily Haaretz newspaper wrote in a recent editorial, adding that the absence of diplomatic ties with Sudan "should not be an obstacle."
"I chose Israel because I thought Israel was a country which was once in a situation like Darfur and they would understand me. I am asking the Israeli government to accept us, the people of Darfur," said Ismail who declined to give his full name.
The government says some 2,800 people have crossed illegally into Israel from Egypt over the past 18 months. Most are African and 1,000 of them are Sudanese - including 300 from Darfur.
The refugee influx caught by surprise a government used to dealing with willing immigrants from the worldwide Jewish Diaspora.
"Israel is a country that was built on millions of refugees who were Jews and who immediately got citizenship. We never faced a situation of illegal migrants from Africa," government spokeswoman Miri Eisin said.
"Israel only has walls against terrorism, with open doors for the poor, the hungry and homeless," said a member of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. "What do the children of the Sudan know about Israel that those who boycott us from England do not know? For those who think to boycott Israel, let them speak to the starving children of Sudan who we feed, blanket and provide security to."
Tom Hickey, chair of the English University and Colleges Union (UCU), and a Philosophy lecturer at Brighton University, proposed the boycott resolution against Israel in May, which called on British academics to "consider the moral implications of links with Israel academic institutions".
Perhaps it's time for Tom to have a reality check in Jerusalem's Rose Garden. To enjoy a friendly chat with a man, woman or child from Sudan who is being sheltered and cared for by both the Israel government and the common man in Israel.
Yes, it's an excellent public relations opportunity for Israel. To illustrate how Jews in Israel care more for Muslims from Sudan than those who ignore Sudan from Saudi Arabia, Iran and Syria.
But Israel is inept in the art of PR. This country has only a handful of professional public relations and public affairs professionals working in government. And they are overworked and underpaid.
Perhaps if those Jews who donate millions of dollars for such excellent Israel Aliya immigration programs as Birthright Taglit and Nefesh B'Nefesh put aside the expenses of four or five airplane seats to illustrate the humanity and genoristy for which is Israel, it would enhance Israel's image and perhaps encourage even more Jewish immigration to Israel.
But for the present the reality one sees coming from Israel is that of pure humanitarian gesture. No spin. No advertising. No PR soundbytes. Just one human being caring for another. In this case - it is one from Israel, a Jew who opens his doors. Even though one of three Israel children suffer in poverty. We here in Israel place and cherish life first and foremost. Jews do not teach their children hate, we do not have a Hamas or Islamic Jihad Mickey Mouse on TV inciting young children that one religion is better than another, that all Jews should be murdered, that it is better to be a martyr (shahid) in a global Islamic war than to embrace life and peace. We do not believe in 72 virgins and a paradise awaiting us after setting off a terror suicide bomb in a restaurant, shopping center or bus.
Israel has consistently reached out for peace and compromise with both those who call themselves Palestinians and our neighbors since modern day Israel was created in 1948. The answer to Israel's appeals for peace - such as a unilateral withdrawal from Gaza - has been with Kassam and Katusha rockets, mortars, grenades, sniper fire and words of war from Iran and Syria.
In the film, Cast A Giant Shadow, there is a 1947 scene where Jewish Holocaust refugees land on a beach in Israel. The British troops line up on the sand to fire on them. One English officer says to another: "well now is the time to find out if we are bloody Nazis."
The same can be said of the Israel Defense Forces and the Israel police as they find water, food and shelter for those from Darfur, Sudan. No one is calling the Israeli a Nazi today.
At least, not those from Muslim Africa.
Related Web sites:
How to lose hearts and minds - The Jerusalem Post
www.israelfordarfur.org/index.html
__._,_.___
Sunday, July 22, 2007
PALESTINIANS: 10 ideas that would help their people.
[If the Palestinian people could agree on anything other than the self-delusional idea that they must destroy Israel so that then they would be able to claim their previous homes or land,- they would have been well on the way to be happily resettled all over the other Arab countries long ago. Unfortunately for them, they chose the hard road to questionable, eventual self-determination, with many generations going through traumas, in-fighting, poverty, misery, as pawns in others' Islamic ambitions and wars, leading to ever more loss of self-respect. The idealised vision and advice offered below is for "normal" people who care for themselves and their families' lives, now and in the future. It is not suitable for a people full of hate and evil visions of death and destruction to lead them to their idea of "salvation",- one obviously formulated in hell! MM]
10 IDEAS THAT WOULD HELP PALESTINIAN PEOPLE
By David Matas
Winnipeg Free Press, July 16th, 2007
How can we help the Palestinians stop killing each other? Some people have suggested intervention of a UN force; others have proposed an end to suspension of aid; still others have promoted separation of the West Bank and Gaza into two separate entities.
Yet the battle between Fatah and Hamas is not just a battle for control of the security apparatus in Gaza; it is primarily ideological, about shades of anti-Zionism. For those outside and far away, advocating to the Palestinians the end to their own murderous ideological debate is the easiest and simplest contribution we can make.
Here are 10 positions I suggest anyone concerned about the plight of the Palestinians should advocate that all Palestinians embrace.
1. Stop referring to the Israel presence in the West Bank and Gaza and Israel proper as foreign or alien occupation. Jordan and Egypt, when they controlled the West Bank and Gaza, were never described as foreign occupiers. The Israeli presence in the West Bank and Gaza has no different legal status than the old Jordanian and Egyptian presence did.
2. Abandon calls for the evacuation of the settlers from the West Bank. There is nothing wrong with Jews living in the neighbourhood anywhere else in the world. Nor should it be an issue in the West Bank. It makes no more sense to evict Jews from the West Bank than to evict Arabs from Israel.
3. Reject the claimed Palestinian right of return. There is no such right. Canadians do not have a right to move to the countries with sovereignty over the territories in which their ancestors once lived, not an absolute right nor a conditional right dependent on the circumstances of departure. Neither do the Palestinians.
4. Accept the wisdom of the Israeli security fence. The fence has led to a dramatic downturn in suicide bombings in Israel. The fence makes sense as long as the anti-Zionist terrorist threat persists.
5. Stop referring to Israel's responses to terrorist attacks as disproportionate. There is no standard of disproportionality in the Geneva Conventions on the Laws of War. The closest, in a protocol Israel has not signed, is the requirement that responses not be "excessive in relation to the concrete and direct military advantage anticipated," a very different standard. A phony standard of disproportionality leads armchair critics to second-guess every Israeli effort of self- defence.
6. Refrain from slurring Israel as an apartheid state. There is no resemblance whatsoever between Israeli practices and true apartheid -- the divesting of citizenship, allocation of nationality and forceful relocation of a racial group to state-created homelands. Israel has not since its inception taken away vested Israeli citizenship from even one Palestinian for the sole reason that the person is ethnic Palestinian, let alone created designated territories to which it has forcibly removed its own citizens who are ethnic Palestinian.
7. Acknowledge the anti-Israel boycott for what it is -- a form of anti-Semitism. This boycott is the modern equivalent of the old Nazi boycotts of stores with Jewish owners.
8. Do not pretend that there is only one refugee population created in 1948 by the UN decision to divide British Mandate Palestine into an Arab and Jewish state. Accept the reality that the Jewish refugee population from Arab states was even larger than the Palestinian refugee population from Israel. There has been a difference in willingness of all states, including Canada, to provide a durable solution outside of the territory of flight to the two different refugee populations. It is that difference that should end.
9. Acknowledge that the Jewish people have a right to self-determination and that the existence of the State of Israel is the expression of that right. Accept that destruction of the State of Israel would be a violation of the rights of the Jewish people worldwide.
10. Refrain from endorsing what is euphemistically called the "one-state solution," the incorporation of the present State of Israel into a larger Arab majority state. Embrace the two-state solution -- a predominantly Arab state and a predominantly Jewish state living side by side in peace with each other.
The first victims of promotion of hatred are the promoters themselves. Anti-Zionism has led Palestinians into a frenzy of hatred against the Jewish state, a frenzy which has turned inward. The Palestinians are suicidal, killing themselves and rejecting the possibility of their own state in a futile dispute about whether and how to destroy the Jewish state. If all Palestinians accepted all these 10 propositions, the fighting among them would cease overnight.
Many people who claim to be friends of the Palestinians reject one or many of these 10 propositions. Yet a true friend of a would-be suicider does not shout "jump." A true friend of a would-be suicider tries to lead the unfortunate away from the suicidal ideation. That is what those who truly want to help the Palestinians should now be doing.
David Matas is senior honorary counsel to B'nai Brith Canada. He is the author of Aftershock: Anti-Zionism and Anti-Semitism, published by Dundurn Press.
10 IDEAS THAT WOULD HELP PALESTINIAN PEOPLE
By David Matas
Winnipeg Free Press, July 16th, 2007
How can we help the Palestinians stop killing each other? Some people have suggested intervention of a UN force; others have proposed an end to suspension of aid; still others have promoted separation of the West Bank and Gaza into two separate entities.
Yet the battle between Fatah and Hamas is not just a battle for control of the security apparatus in Gaza; it is primarily ideological, about shades of anti-Zionism. For those outside and far away, advocating to the Palestinians the end to their own murderous ideological debate is the easiest and simplest contribution we can make.
Here are 10 positions I suggest anyone concerned about the plight of the Palestinians should advocate that all Palestinians embrace.
1. Stop referring to the Israel presence in the West Bank and Gaza and Israel proper as foreign or alien occupation. Jordan and Egypt, when they controlled the West Bank and Gaza, were never described as foreign occupiers. The Israeli presence in the West Bank and Gaza has no different legal status than the old Jordanian and Egyptian presence did.
2. Abandon calls for the evacuation of the settlers from the West Bank. There is nothing wrong with Jews living in the neighbourhood anywhere else in the world. Nor should it be an issue in the West Bank. It makes no more sense to evict Jews from the West Bank than to evict Arabs from Israel.
3. Reject the claimed Palestinian right of return. There is no such right. Canadians do not have a right to move to the countries with sovereignty over the territories in which their ancestors once lived, not an absolute right nor a conditional right dependent on the circumstances of departure. Neither do the Palestinians.
4. Accept the wisdom of the Israeli security fence. The fence has led to a dramatic downturn in suicide bombings in Israel. The fence makes sense as long as the anti-Zionist terrorist threat persists.
5. Stop referring to Israel's responses to terrorist attacks as disproportionate. There is no standard of disproportionality in the Geneva Conventions on the Laws of War. The closest, in a protocol Israel has not signed, is the requirement that responses not be "excessive in relation to the concrete and direct military advantage anticipated," a very different standard. A phony standard of disproportionality leads armchair critics to second-guess every Israeli effort of self- defence.
6. Refrain from slurring Israel as an apartheid state. There is no resemblance whatsoever between Israeli practices and true apartheid -- the divesting of citizenship, allocation of nationality and forceful relocation of a racial group to state-created homelands. Israel has not since its inception taken away vested Israeli citizenship from even one Palestinian for the sole reason that the person is ethnic Palestinian, let alone created designated territories to which it has forcibly removed its own citizens who are ethnic Palestinian.
7. Acknowledge the anti-Israel boycott for what it is -- a form of anti-Semitism. This boycott is the modern equivalent of the old Nazi boycotts of stores with Jewish owners.
8. Do not pretend that there is only one refugee population created in 1948 by the UN decision to divide British Mandate Palestine into an Arab and Jewish state. Accept the reality that the Jewish refugee population from Arab states was even larger than the Palestinian refugee population from Israel. There has been a difference in willingness of all states, including Canada, to provide a durable solution outside of the territory of flight to the two different refugee populations. It is that difference that should end.
9. Acknowledge that the Jewish people have a right to self-determination and that the existence of the State of Israel is the expression of that right. Accept that destruction of the State of Israel would be a violation of the rights of the Jewish people worldwide.
10. Refrain from endorsing what is euphemistically called the "one-state solution," the incorporation of the present State of Israel into a larger Arab majority state. Embrace the two-state solution -- a predominantly Arab state and a predominantly Jewish state living side by side in peace with each other.
The first victims of promotion of hatred are the promoters themselves. Anti-Zionism has led Palestinians into a frenzy of hatred against the Jewish state, a frenzy which has turned inward. The Palestinians are suicidal, killing themselves and rejecting the possibility of their own state in a futile dispute about whether and how to destroy the Jewish state. If all Palestinians accepted all these 10 propositions, the fighting among them would cease overnight.
Many people who claim to be friends of the Palestinians reject one or many of these 10 propositions. Yet a true friend of a would-be suicider does not shout "jump." A true friend of a would-be suicider tries to lead the unfortunate away from the suicidal ideation. That is what those who truly want to help the Palestinians should now be doing.
David Matas is senior honorary counsel to B'nai Brith Canada. He is the author of Aftershock: Anti-Zionism and Anti-Semitism, published by Dundurn Press.
Thursday, July 19, 2007
RELIGION: KNOWLEDGE UNITES, IGNORANCE DIVIDES.
[It is unfortunate that various streams of the Jewish religion tend to be intolerant of each other to the extent that secular Jews in and out of Israel tend to shun ritual observance altogether. Given the stranglehold that the Orthodox religious Parties have on the politics of Israel, religion acts as a disincentive for most secular Israelis who sometimes display total ignorance about it! This disappoints
many Diaspora Jews who expect Israelis, particularly outside Israel, to show knowledge and some respect for Jewish religious observances. MM]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Last update - 20:38 18/07/2007
Until ignorance divides us
By Yair Ettinger
Last Friday, Prime Minister Ehud Olmert received three guests in his office, all with the double-barreled title of rabbi and professor: They are well-known scholars among American Jews and fairly well-known in Israel: Rabbi David Hartman, who heads the Shalom Hartman Institute in Jerusalem and is associated with liberal Orthodoxy; Rabbi Arnie Eisen, the chancellor of the Conservative movement's Jewish Theological Seminary (JTS); and Rabbi David Ellenson, the president of Hebrew Union College (HUC), the Reform Movement's rabbinic seminary.
Far from the discriminating eyes of the ultra-Orthodox, the earth beneath the prime minister's office did not tremble when Olmert addressed each of his conversants as "rabbi" and devoted time to those who would like to find loopholes in the wall put up by the rabbinic establishment.
The three found in Olmert a favorable view of initiatives to "increase Jewish identity among Jews" in Israel and abroad. They declined to elaborate on the content of the meeting, but a talk with Rabbi Ellenson, one of the most influential leaders among American Jewry, indicated which way the wind is blowing.
During his visit to Israel, Ellenson had a hard time getting over the depressing impression made by senior Israeli figures a few days before his departure from the United States at an international gathering of university presidents. On Saturday night, he related, a rabbi recited havdalah [marking the conclusion of Shabbat] for all the participants, and Ellenson noticed the Israelis. "One of them, the president of a very large university in Israel, told me he had never seen such a service and never even heard of its existence."
He was greatly saddened, said Ellenson. "I hate the word ignorance, I prefer to be more gentle, but I know that's how it is. What does it mean that an intellectual doesn't know what havdalah is? How would you describe it? And he is not the only one among the Israelis."
Since 2001, Ellenson has been the world president of HUC, and is leading the Reform movement alongside Rabbi Eric Yoffie, the president of the Union for Reform Judaism. During those years, the movement has become more Zionist and also more halakhic [following Jewish law], processes that are associated with Ellenson, who is unique among those who have led the Reform movement in that he grew up in an Orthodox home. The smiling man with a neatly trimmed gray beard, even tells biting jokes about Reform Jews that he heard in his father's home in Virginia.
Halakha is also his area of academic expertise. In the 1970s he wrote his doctoral thesis on Rabbi Ezriel Hildesheimer, the founder of the Orthodox rabbinical seminary in Germany in the 19th century. Today he continues with searches of rabbinic rulings and the responsa of Orthodox rabbis from the 18th century to those to date and he writes on Rabbi Zvi Hirsch Kalisher, a leading Polish rabbi in the 19th century and one of the harbingers of religious Zionism; Rabbi Haim David Halevy, who was the chief rabbi of Tel Aviv-Jaffa and other rabbis. The common denominator of these rabbis is the halakhic solutions they offered for resolving the tension between tradition and modern life in a wide spectrum of areas. "It's not that I always identify with all their responsa, but I appreciate the efforts they made to cope with the challenges of the time," says Ellenson in Hebrew, which he prefers to use here. "I see them as a model and an example for me."
He noted that his choice of rulings by Orthodox rabbis is important not just for him personally; he leads a movement that defined itself by the rejection of Halakha. "There is also a symbolic importance for the Reform movement that there is someone who can represent them in these areas as well. Usually people don't expect to hear a Reform rabbi quoting from Rabbi Haim David Halevy."
Ellenson is now writing a book with Dr. Danny Gordis on rabbinic responsa on the issue of converts.
Apart from the annual seminar for rabbis held earlier this month by the Shalom Hartman Institute in Jerusalem, Ellenson had a busy schedule in Israel, including a meeting with some 100 Reform rabbinical students studying at HUC in Jerusalem and an appearance at the Jewish People Policy Planning Institute's conference in Jerusalem last week. At a session on identity and demography, experts presented data indicating a decline in the number of Jewish people due to assimilation.
When he took the floor, Ellenson chose to quote in English (the language of the discussions) from letters written by Orthodox rabbis in the 19th and 20th centuries.
"In 1864 there were people whose mothers were Christian and whose fathers were Jewish, and the question arose as to whether halakhically speaking, a lenient approach should be taken to their conversion and make circumcision and ritual immersion enough for them to be considered Jews," said Ellenson. "The rabbi of New Orleans forbade it, but at the same time, sent a query to European rabbis: what should the Jewish people's policy be on such questions.
"Rabbi Zvi Hirsch Kalisher wrote to him that not only is it permissible, but also in his opinion it is a mitzvah to convert such children. He wrote: 'Sometimes even sinners in Israel do mitzvot.' According to halakha, there is an obligation to circumcise them. Rabbi Kalisher did not consider them Jews from birth, but Jews from 'holy seed' and he wrote: 'who knows, perhaps Torah sages will spring forth from them.'
"In my opinion, it's important to address this," continued Ellenson. "Because we are facing the challenges of intermarriage abroad and also in Israel, there are many who immigrated from Russia and the establishment doesn't recognize their Jewishness. How does it help the Jewish people to reject those who wanted to be a part of the Jewish people? The halakhic definition is too narrow. People complain all the time about the shrinking Jewish people, and at the same time build walls to bar people, instead of encouraging them to join the Jewish people."
Ellenson is not disturbed by the fact that most Orthodox Jews, and not just the rabbinic establishment, would reject such converts for the purpose of marriage, for example. "In the modern world, perhaps it is possible that there will be a shared enviroment for the entire Jewish people, and at the same time the methods will differ. We don't live in the Middle Ages, when the Jewish community was really halakhic. Today things are different, there is a variety of streams in the Jewish world. If we look at the reality of the Jewish people in our time, we see that whoever is part of the Jewish destiny is part of the Jewish people as a whole," he says.
Before the conference participants, Ellenson also mentioned Rabbi [Joseph] Soloveitchik and his famous essay distinguishing between "a covenant of fate" and "a covenant of destiny": "Most Jews in the world would not agree with it today, but there is a covenant of fate. Jews who are willing to immigrate to Israel and be part of the Jewish people, who pay taxes, who defend the state in the IDF, who identify themselves as Jews, what benefit would be gained by the Jewish people if we don't accept them? Rabbi Kalisher's responsa is very relevant and can guide us in our era."
The Reform movement in the U.S. is expanding its borders and accepting more and more people from "holy seed" who identify as Jews, as well as homosexuals, into the rabbinate, but a no less interesting process, seemingly contradictory, is also taking place within the movement as more and more Reform Jews are seeking to redefine their Jewishness by relating to Halakha more seriously.
"We see increasing numbers of people wearing skullcaps and being careful about Shabbat and kashrut observance," said Ellenson. "Men and women are more interested in Halakha and want to observe Halakha. In my eyes, this is a positive phenomenon." In the U.S., he says, people of all religions are trying to get closer to their heritage. "You could call it tribalism," he says.
And what about ignorance? Is there ignorance only among secular Israelis?
"Apparently ignorance exists throughout the Jewish world, and that's the line that connects to all the streams of Judaism, in a negative sense. There is ignorance throughout the Jewish world, and it must be fought.
"The problem is that in the U.S. if people don't have knowledge about their Jewishness, then the connection to Israel will also be cut in a few more generations. That is our mission, to teach modern Torah. There a lot of people who neglect Judaism and don't know anything about it. They associate Judaism with ultra-Orthodoxy because they see something authentic in it, and in the meantime they can abandon Judaism. They think it can't contribute anything to their modern world. There is relevance to Judaism, we have principles and values that can guide people in the modern era."
/hasen/objects/pages/PrintArticleEn.jhtml?itemNo=883367
many Diaspora Jews who expect Israelis, particularly outside Israel, to show knowledge and some respect for Jewish religious observances. MM]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Last update - 20:38 18/07/2007
Until ignorance divides us
By Yair Ettinger
Last Friday, Prime Minister Ehud Olmert received three guests in his office, all with the double-barreled title of rabbi and professor: They are well-known scholars among American Jews and fairly well-known in Israel: Rabbi David Hartman, who heads the Shalom Hartman Institute in Jerusalem and is associated with liberal Orthodoxy; Rabbi Arnie Eisen, the chancellor of the Conservative movement's Jewish Theological Seminary (JTS); and Rabbi David Ellenson, the president of Hebrew Union College (HUC), the Reform Movement's rabbinic seminary.
Far from the discriminating eyes of the ultra-Orthodox, the earth beneath the prime minister's office did not tremble when Olmert addressed each of his conversants as "rabbi" and devoted time to those who would like to find loopholes in the wall put up by the rabbinic establishment.
The three found in Olmert a favorable view of initiatives to "increase Jewish identity among Jews" in Israel and abroad. They declined to elaborate on the content of the meeting, but a talk with Rabbi Ellenson, one of the most influential leaders among American Jewry, indicated which way the wind is blowing.
During his visit to Israel, Ellenson had a hard time getting over the depressing impression made by senior Israeli figures a few days before his departure from the United States at an international gathering of university presidents. On Saturday night, he related, a rabbi recited havdalah [marking the conclusion of Shabbat] for all the participants, and Ellenson noticed the Israelis. "One of them, the president of a very large university in Israel, told me he had never seen such a service and never even heard of its existence."
He was greatly saddened, said Ellenson. "I hate the word ignorance, I prefer to be more gentle, but I know that's how it is. What does it mean that an intellectual doesn't know what havdalah is? How would you describe it? And he is not the only one among the Israelis."
Since 2001, Ellenson has been the world president of HUC, and is leading the Reform movement alongside Rabbi Eric Yoffie, the president of the Union for Reform Judaism. During those years, the movement has become more Zionist and also more halakhic [following Jewish law], processes that are associated with Ellenson, who is unique among those who have led the Reform movement in that he grew up in an Orthodox home. The smiling man with a neatly trimmed gray beard, even tells biting jokes about Reform Jews that he heard in his father's home in Virginia.
Halakha is also his area of academic expertise. In the 1970s he wrote his doctoral thesis on Rabbi Ezriel Hildesheimer, the founder of the Orthodox rabbinical seminary in Germany in the 19th century. Today he continues with searches of rabbinic rulings and the responsa of Orthodox rabbis from the 18th century to those to date and he writes on Rabbi Zvi Hirsch Kalisher, a leading Polish rabbi in the 19th century and one of the harbingers of religious Zionism; Rabbi Haim David Halevy, who was the chief rabbi of Tel Aviv-Jaffa and other rabbis. The common denominator of these rabbis is the halakhic solutions they offered for resolving the tension between tradition and modern life in a wide spectrum of areas. "It's not that I always identify with all their responsa, but I appreciate the efforts they made to cope with the challenges of the time," says Ellenson in Hebrew, which he prefers to use here. "I see them as a model and an example for me."
He noted that his choice of rulings by Orthodox rabbis is important not just for him personally; he leads a movement that defined itself by the rejection of Halakha. "There is also a symbolic importance for the Reform movement that there is someone who can represent them in these areas as well. Usually people don't expect to hear a Reform rabbi quoting from Rabbi Haim David Halevy."
Ellenson is now writing a book with Dr. Danny Gordis on rabbinic responsa on the issue of converts.
Apart from the annual seminar for rabbis held earlier this month by the Shalom Hartman Institute in Jerusalem, Ellenson had a busy schedule in Israel, including a meeting with some 100 Reform rabbinical students studying at HUC in Jerusalem and an appearance at the Jewish People Policy Planning Institute's conference in Jerusalem last week. At a session on identity and demography, experts presented data indicating a decline in the number of Jewish people due to assimilation.
When he took the floor, Ellenson chose to quote in English (the language of the discussions) from letters written by Orthodox rabbis in the 19th and 20th centuries.
"In 1864 there were people whose mothers were Christian and whose fathers were Jewish, and the question arose as to whether halakhically speaking, a lenient approach should be taken to their conversion and make circumcision and ritual immersion enough for them to be considered Jews," said Ellenson. "The rabbi of New Orleans forbade it, but at the same time, sent a query to European rabbis: what should the Jewish people's policy be on such questions.
"Rabbi Zvi Hirsch Kalisher wrote to him that not only is it permissible, but also in his opinion it is a mitzvah to convert such children. He wrote: 'Sometimes even sinners in Israel do mitzvot.' According to halakha, there is an obligation to circumcise them. Rabbi Kalisher did not consider them Jews from birth, but Jews from 'holy seed' and he wrote: 'who knows, perhaps Torah sages will spring forth from them.'
"In my opinion, it's important to address this," continued Ellenson. "Because we are facing the challenges of intermarriage abroad and also in Israel, there are many who immigrated from Russia and the establishment doesn't recognize their Jewishness. How does it help the Jewish people to reject those who wanted to be a part of the Jewish people? The halakhic definition is too narrow. People complain all the time about the shrinking Jewish people, and at the same time build walls to bar people, instead of encouraging them to join the Jewish people."
Ellenson is not disturbed by the fact that most Orthodox Jews, and not just the rabbinic establishment, would reject such converts for the purpose of marriage, for example. "In the modern world, perhaps it is possible that there will be a shared enviroment for the entire Jewish people, and at the same time the methods will differ. We don't live in the Middle Ages, when the Jewish community was really halakhic. Today things are different, there is a variety of streams in the Jewish world. If we look at the reality of the Jewish people in our time, we see that whoever is part of the Jewish destiny is part of the Jewish people as a whole," he says.
Before the conference participants, Ellenson also mentioned Rabbi [Joseph] Soloveitchik and his famous essay distinguishing between "a covenant of fate" and "a covenant of destiny": "Most Jews in the world would not agree with it today, but there is a covenant of fate. Jews who are willing to immigrate to Israel and be part of the Jewish people, who pay taxes, who defend the state in the IDF, who identify themselves as Jews, what benefit would be gained by the Jewish people if we don't accept them? Rabbi Kalisher's responsa is very relevant and can guide us in our era."
The Reform movement in the U.S. is expanding its borders and accepting more and more people from "holy seed" who identify as Jews, as well as homosexuals, into the rabbinate, but a no less interesting process, seemingly contradictory, is also taking place within the movement as more and more Reform Jews are seeking to redefine their Jewishness by relating to Halakha more seriously.
"We see increasing numbers of people wearing skullcaps and being careful about Shabbat and kashrut observance," said Ellenson. "Men and women are more interested in Halakha and want to observe Halakha. In my eyes, this is a positive phenomenon." In the U.S., he says, people of all religions are trying to get closer to their heritage. "You could call it tribalism," he says.
And what about ignorance? Is there ignorance only among secular Israelis?
"Apparently ignorance exists throughout the Jewish world, and that's the line that connects to all the streams of Judaism, in a negative sense. There is ignorance throughout the Jewish world, and it must be fought.
"The problem is that in the U.S. if people don't have knowledge about their Jewishness, then the connection to Israel will also be cut in a few more generations. That is our mission, to teach modern Torah. There a lot of people who neglect Judaism and don't know anything about it. They associate Judaism with ultra-Orthodoxy because they see something authentic in it, and in the meantime they can abandon Judaism. They think it can't contribute anything to their modern world. There is relevance to Judaism, we have principles and values that can guide people in the modern era."
/hasen/objects/pages/PrintArticleEn.jhtml?itemNo=883367
Saturday, July 14, 2007
THE KIDNAPPING GAMES.
JOHNSTON RELEASE NOT SO KOSHERMEMRI.ORG
Sources close to Jaysh Al-Islam have revealed that the organization received $5 million and a million Kalashnikov rifle bullets in a deal for the release of BBC correspondent Alan Johnston.
According to Palestinian sources, Jaysh Al-Islam commander Mumtaz Daghmoush received a guarantee from Hamas that he would not stand trial for crimes he was suspected of carrying out, and that Hamas would release Jaysh Al-Islam's spokesman, whom it was holding.
Further, Hamas and Jaysh Al-Islam agreed not to reveal which operations they had carried out jointly.
Dismissed Palestinian prime minister Isma'il Haniya denied that there had been a deal or preconditions in the matter of Johnston's release.
__._,_.___
Sources close to Jaysh Al-Islam have revealed that the organization received $5 million and a million Kalashnikov rifle bullets in a deal for the release of BBC correspondent Alan Johnston.
According to Palestinian sources, Jaysh Al-Islam commander Mumtaz Daghmoush received a guarantee from Hamas that he would not stand trial for crimes he was suspected of carrying out, and that Hamas would release Jaysh Al-Islam's spokesman, whom it was holding.
Further, Hamas and Jaysh Al-Islam agreed not to reveal which operations they had carried out jointly.
Dismissed Palestinian prime minister Isma'il Haniya denied that there had been a deal or preconditions in the matter of Johnston's release.
__._,_.___
Tuesday, July 10, 2007
ITALIANS MARCHING FOR ISRAEL
From Manfred Gerstenfeld: European-Israeli Relations: Between Confusion and Change?
Marching for Israel Against Ahmadinejad
An Interview with Giuliano Ferrara
On 26 October 2005, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, president of Iran, made a genocidal call for the elimination of Israel at the "World without Zionism" conference in Teheran. Other speakers were terrorist leaders Hassan Nasrallah of Hizballah and Khaled Mash'al of Hamas.
Ahmadinejad's murderous statements prompted many condemnations, inter alia from the UN Security Council and the European Union. One of the West's strongest reactions was in Rome where, on 3 November, a torchlight march was held near the Iranian embassy. This protest was initiated by Giuliano Ferrara, editor of the conservative daily Il Foglio. An estimated 15-20,000 people took part in the demonstration, among them cabinet minister Roberto Calderoli who said he represented both the government and his Lega Nord party.
Ferrara, when asked why he took an initiative that was unique in the world, replies: "I felt it a political, cultural, and civil duty to organize a protest
against Ahmadinejad's call for genocide. I wanted this demonstration to have a simple goal: to proclaim that we uphold Israel's right to exist and object to a head of state who denies this."
A Great Political Success
Ferrara elaborates: "The demonstration was a great political success: it went beyond a gathering of about twenty thousand people who were determined to affirm their principles. Among those who marched or supported the demonstration almost the entire Italian political spectrum was represented, from the Center-Right to the Center-Left. The Rifondazione communists were the only party with a parliamentary faction that did not participate. Like other forces of the extreme Left, their prejudice is to support the national struggle of the Palestinians and their ideology tends toward anti-Zionism.
"Yet the party's leader, Fausto Bertinotti, said that even he would have participated if the demonstration had as its motto 'two states for two peoples.' I replied that since we were not marching for a political goal, we were not interested in negotiating compromises on wording to gain unified backing. I told him that the demonstration's motto was a simple one: to defend Israel and its right to exist against whoever threatens it.
"We succeeded in holding the demonstration one week after Ahmadinejad's initial anti-Semitic and anti-Zionist declarations. Our support went far beyond the political parties. Corriere della Sera, Italy's largest daily, came out in favor of the demonstration along with many other papers. Repubblica, the second largest daily, treated the rally benevolently, which was the maximum one could expect. The communist daily Il Manifesto opposed the demonstration but some of its journalists marched nevertheless. Numerous associations also came out in support and so did various other bodies of Italian civil society, from the Catholic sector and elsewhere. Many intellectuals and public personalities also expressed their backing.
"Also important, this was the first major demonstration of Europeans before the embassy of a Muslim country. We marched as close to it as we were allowed by the authorities. I called it a 'hybrid torchlight march' because persons and groups with very diverse views were present. But they showed unity in upholding Israel's right to exist."
Ferrara sums up: "The strong underlying message of the march against Ahmadinejad was that Israel had with its own forces defended its existence. Even for the Italian Left that has a great fascination, which is undeniable after all these years."
One Precedent: USADay
"The demonstration in favor of Israel was only possible because on two previous occasions I had taken similar initiatives. Il Foglio is a small opinion daily that informs about 20-30,000 readers among Italy's elite. I founded it with little money and a great liking for adventure. We have shown that we can intensively promote cultural and civil opinions within the Italian political system. We lead battles on cultural, political, economic, and social issues at the Italian, European, and global levels."
Ferrara founded Il Foglio in 1996. "The first time we organized a public demonstration was on 10 November 2001, less than two months after the attack by Bin Laden's followers on the Twin Towers in New York and the Pentagon in Washington. It seemed shameful that all one heard about the thousands of American victims of terrorism was cheap rhetoric. At the same time, other people were burning American flags to protest the bombardments in Afghanistan at the start of the military operation to dismantle Al Qaeda's training camps. This burning of American and also Israeli flags is an ongoing vice of small left-wing groups that are tolerated in Italy.
"We decided to organize a demonstration called 'USA Day' to show solidarity with the United States after 9-11. Italy's newly elected prime minister, Silvio Berlusconi, spoke in Rome's Piazza del Popolo. Former U.S. president Bill Clinton sent a message as well, speaking on CNN. He called it a beautiful idea and said Americans needed more Europeans in the streets to express their support. This was a new type of political event, a newspaper that took the initiative as an opinion-leader to bring people out into the public square.
"Repubblica came out against USA Day saying it wasn't a bipartisan demonstration. Thereafter they were greatly embarrassed by the fact that Clinton, the so-much beloved former American president, so strongly endorsed what we did."
IsraelDay
"On 15 April 2002 we organized a second, even more important demonstration called 'Israel Day.' A year before the attack on the Twin Towers, the Palestinians had launched the Second Intifada with its murderous suicide bombings. The Israeli government reacted by suppressing terrorism in the West Bank and Gaza.
"It was very difficult to call for a pro-Israeli demonstration in Italy in the days after the battles in Jenin. People were shown on television what were called 'the tanks of Sharon.' These besieged the mukhata in Ramallah where Yasser Arafat was almost a prisoner. Israel's legitimate aim was to eliminate terrorism in the territories it had occupied for more than thirty-five years after winning a war of self-defense.
"We had anticipated well in advance how the media would react to Jenin. When the Israeli military action began, we warned that it would be strongly denounced. We explained that it would be very problematic to fight the terrorists in Jenin. We also knew how the anti-Israeli propaganda war functioned. We thus started to warn immediately that there would be newspaper headlines announcing the 'Jenin massacre.'
"Subsequently, Human Rights Watch found that fifty terrorists had been killed and the Israelis had also sustained many losses. Within the limits of what was possible, Israel had made an effort to avoid civilian casualties in the very difficult combat conditions of the Jenin camp. It was clear that Israel had behaved honorably. We were happy that the truth had come out. Rather suddenly in Italy, even an extreme left-wing journal such as Il Diario was inspired to send a journalist to Jenin who reported the truth."
A Very Successful Demonstration
"In those days it was not easy to organize a pro-Israeli demonstration, but we decided we had to do it. This event was again a great success, gaining the support of personalities from both the Right and the Left. The prime minister of the present left-wing Italian government, Romano Prodi, then president of the European Commission, expressed his sympathy. Among the backers on the Right was Deputy Prime Minister Gianfranco Fini, leader of the Alleanza Nazionale party.
"On Israel Day there was a massive show of Israeli flags. Already on USA Day there had been many such flags alongside the American ones. People gathered on the square of the Capitol and descended the steps. It was a massive, beautiful procession. We marched to the synagogues on the Tiber River, where the participants deposited small stones. There was a short speech. I must stress that all these demonstrations have been organized with little money by a small newspaper.
"The success of the first two demonstrations helped me decide that a similar one was necessary against Ahmadinejad's anti-Israeli and anti-Semitic campaign. We had to express intelligently our indignation toward the Iranian president and his political madness. Besides the Israeli flags there were also Italian and Iranian ones. A group of Iranians in exile took part in the protest and one of their slogans was, in the Persian language, 'Zendebab Israel'-wishing Israel to live.
"Initially many ministers of the Berlusconi government intended to participate. However, the afternoon before the march in Rome there were counterdemonstrations before the Italian embassy in Teheran. Italy is Iran's leading trade partner in Europe, and the Iranian government let it be known that there would be consequences for the countries' bilateral trade.
"There was also pressure from the Confindustria, the Italian manufacturers association, and from some in the government. Berlusconi hesitated and did not reply forcefully. This led to the decision of Deputy Prime Minister and Foreign Minister Fini not to participate. Also Defense Minister Antonio Martino chose not to come to the demonstration. Still, it was an event of major political importance."
Why Did We Do It?
When asked why Ferrara was the only non-Jewish person in the world to organize such a demonstration, he replied: "I have no answer. What I can say is that prominent French intellectuals such as Alain Finkielkraut and Andr? Glucksman were astonished by what we had done. They said it would never have been possible in France."
After some reflection he remarks: "Perhaps it can be explained by a mix of our national reality, the history of Il Foglio, and my personal experiences. Italy has a certain liberty of action that other European countries do not have. Furthermore, Il Foglio is not so sensitive to the market. We do not have a certain quota of people whom we have to please. For other papers this usually includes the pro-Palestinians and the pro-Israelis, as well as the left-wing and right-wing intellectuals."
Ferrara says it was very important that the pro-Israeli Berlusconi government was in power. "Fini's role was also significant. As leader of a postfascist party he needed Israeli legitimization. His attitude toward Israel was the main indicator that he had changed his political outlook. At the founding congress of Alleanza Nazionale he had the party condemn anti-Semitism and the prewar racial laws of the Mussolini government, which were an important element of fascism. As a result, Fini ultimately succeeded in being invited to Jerusalem. His trip there inspired much debate in his party. Mussolini's granddaughter Alessandra left the party and took with her a small group of members."
Israel's Strategic Role
"Berlusconi understood that Israel should play an important strategic role in Italy's foreign policy. Pro-Arab prime ministers in the previous decades, such as the Christian Democrat Giulio Andreotti and the Socialist Bettino Craxi, had created an imbalance in Italian positions toward the Middle East."
In the current coalition government led by Prodi, the socialist DS party consisting mainly of former communists is the largest. When asked what position it will take on the Middle East, Ferrara says it is too early to tell. "When Berlusconi was talking to Javier Solana, the European high representative for foreign and security affairs, or to people like the then French foreign minister Dominique de Villepin or his Spanish colleague Miguel Angel Moratinos, it was a dialogue of the deaf. Berlusconi was pro-Israeli and they were anti-American, anti-British, and anti-Israeli. Berlusconi's refusal to go along has prevented this position from advancing too much in Europe."
The Prodi Government
"Now Berlusconi is no longer prime minister, and the opposite tendency has returned. We will have to wait and see where Italy will stand. When our DS foreign minister, D'Alema, was in the opposition, he did realize that he had to march against Ahmadinejad. Will he now cave in entirely on Israel and become a loudspeaker in Italy for Europe's dominant anti-Israeli line? Or will he, which is much more in Italy's interest, be a brake on the fanatic anti-Israelis who form much of the European bureaucracy? Anything is possible, yet the key man in his party, Secretary-General Piero Fassino, has shown himself to be a very balanced person. He is convinced that defending Israel is a matter of priority. Thus it won't be easy for D'Alema to overcome that stance.
"Prime Minister Prodi has the habits of the old Christian Democrat politicians. He comes from a left-wing Catholic school. He believes in ecumenism and interfaith dialogue. He rejects the idea of a clash of civilizations. He can best be defined as a navigator. Prodi is no fighter against terrorism and Islamic fanaticism. He is unlikely to create great surprises that will detach him from the Brussels and Strasbourg orthodoxy.
"As president of the EU Commission he made some far-reaching anti-Israeli statements. This helped him in his relationship with Paris and Berlin, protecting him, in turn, from the evident contempt he faced from London and Washington. As Italian prime minister he is likely to navigate more carefully."
Ferrara repeats: "It is certainly possible that the Prodi government will take an anti-Israeli line. We do not yet see the first explicit signs of it, but as noted, it is too early to say."
In mid-July during the fighting in Lebanon, Ferrara attacked the Italian government and the parties that supported it. He charged that they were taking a summer vacation from their responsibility. In an article titled "The Tears of the European Crocodile Destroy Israel," Ferrara wrote that "they feigned not to know that Palestinian nationalism-polluted by the political and civil corruption of the revolutionary elites-was being substituted by the political Islamism of Ahmadinejad, a Holocaust-denying head of state."
Ferrara ended with a call to the Italian Left: "On one side you have people like Olmert, Livni, Peretz, and Peres. On the other side there is Sheikh Nasrallah and Mash'al, who is a fugitive in Damascus protected by the worst despots of the Middle East. For once, do-gooders, make a choice that reflects proportional use of intelligence and political dignity."1
-------------------------------------------------
Giuliano Ferrarais the founder and editor of the daily Il Foglio. He was born in Romein 1952 to a family of longstanding communists, and remained a communist until the age of thirty. He was a political columnist for Corriera della Sera and has published in several Italian weeklies. He has been the director of many television programs, first for the state-owned RAI and later for Mediaset of the Berlusconi Group. For five years he has been anchoring a daily news program on the independent network La7 owned by the Telecom group. Notes
------------------------
1 Giuliano Ferrara, "Le Lacrime del coccodrillo europeista annegano Israele," Il Foglio, 17 July 2006. [Italian]
-------------------------------------------------------------
The opinions expressed herein do not necessarily reflect those of the Board of Fellows of the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs.
Other related articles:
The Cynical Use of Israel in Italian Politics - Interview with Fiamma Nirenstein (Post-Holocaust and Anti-Semitism #58, July 2007)
http://www.jcpa.org/JCPA/Templates/ShowPage.asp?DRIT=0&DBID=1&LNGID=1&TMID=111&FID=381&PID=470&IID=1589&TTL=The_Cynical_Use_of_Israel_in_Italian_Politics
Neo Anti-Semitism in Today's Italy - Sergio I. Minerbi (Jewish Political Studies Review, Fall 2003) http://www.jcpa.org/phas/phas-minerbi-f03.htm
__._,_.___
Messages in this topic (1) Reply (via web post) | Start a new topic
Messages | Files | Photos | Links | Database
============================================================================
.
============================================================================
Copyright belongs to the authors or owners of the original. Reproduce with
their permission only. Please respect the original authors' rights.
============================================================================
Marching for Israel Against Ahmadinejad
An Interview with Giuliano Ferrara
On 26 October 2005, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, president of Iran, made a genocidal call for the elimination of Israel at the "World without Zionism" conference in Teheran. Other speakers were terrorist leaders Hassan Nasrallah of Hizballah and Khaled Mash'al of Hamas.
Ahmadinejad's murderous statements prompted many condemnations, inter alia from the UN Security Council and the European Union. One of the West's strongest reactions was in Rome where, on 3 November, a torchlight march was held near the Iranian embassy. This protest was initiated by Giuliano Ferrara, editor of the conservative daily Il Foglio. An estimated 15-20,000 people took part in the demonstration, among them cabinet minister Roberto Calderoli who said he represented both the government and his Lega Nord party.
Ferrara, when asked why he took an initiative that was unique in the world, replies: "I felt it a political, cultural, and civil duty to organize a protest
against Ahmadinejad's call for genocide. I wanted this demonstration to have a simple goal: to proclaim that we uphold Israel's right to exist and object to a head of state who denies this."
A Great Political Success
Ferrara elaborates: "The demonstration was a great political success: it went beyond a gathering of about twenty thousand people who were determined to affirm their principles. Among those who marched or supported the demonstration almost the entire Italian political spectrum was represented, from the Center-Right to the Center-Left. The Rifondazione communists were the only party with a parliamentary faction that did not participate. Like other forces of the extreme Left, their prejudice is to support the national struggle of the Palestinians and their ideology tends toward anti-Zionism.
"Yet the party's leader, Fausto Bertinotti, said that even he would have participated if the demonstration had as its motto 'two states for two peoples.' I replied that since we were not marching for a political goal, we were not interested in negotiating compromises on wording to gain unified backing. I told him that the demonstration's motto was a simple one: to defend Israel and its right to exist against whoever threatens it.
"We succeeded in holding the demonstration one week after Ahmadinejad's initial anti-Semitic and anti-Zionist declarations. Our support went far beyond the political parties. Corriere della Sera, Italy's largest daily, came out in favor of the demonstration along with many other papers. Repubblica, the second largest daily, treated the rally benevolently, which was the maximum one could expect. The communist daily Il Manifesto opposed the demonstration but some of its journalists marched nevertheless. Numerous associations also came out in support and so did various other bodies of Italian civil society, from the Catholic sector and elsewhere. Many intellectuals and public personalities also expressed their backing.
"Also important, this was the first major demonstration of Europeans before the embassy of a Muslim country. We marched as close to it as we were allowed by the authorities. I called it a 'hybrid torchlight march' because persons and groups with very diverse views were present. But they showed unity in upholding Israel's right to exist."
Ferrara sums up: "The strong underlying message of the march against Ahmadinejad was that Israel had with its own forces defended its existence. Even for the Italian Left that has a great fascination, which is undeniable after all these years."
One Precedent: USADay
"The demonstration in favor of Israel was only possible because on two previous occasions I had taken similar initiatives. Il Foglio is a small opinion daily that informs about 20-30,000 readers among Italy's elite. I founded it with little money and a great liking for adventure. We have shown that we can intensively promote cultural and civil opinions within the Italian political system. We lead battles on cultural, political, economic, and social issues at the Italian, European, and global levels."
Ferrara founded Il Foglio in 1996. "The first time we organized a public demonstration was on 10 November 2001, less than two months after the attack by Bin Laden's followers on the Twin Towers in New York and the Pentagon in Washington. It seemed shameful that all one heard about the thousands of American victims of terrorism was cheap rhetoric. At the same time, other people were burning American flags to protest the bombardments in Afghanistan at the start of the military operation to dismantle Al Qaeda's training camps. This burning of American and also Israeli flags is an ongoing vice of small left-wing groups that are tolerated in Italy.
"We decided to organize a demonstration called 'USA Day' to show solidarity with the United States after 9-11. Italy's newly elected prime minister, Silvio Berlusconi, spoke in Rome's Piazza del Popolo. Former U.S. president Bill Clinton sent a message as well, speaking on CNN. He called it a beautiful idea and said Americans needed more Europeans in the streets to express their support. This was a new type of political event, a newspaper that took the initiative as an opinion-leader to bring people out into the public square.
"Repubblica came out against USA Day saying it wasn't a bipartisan demonstration. Thereafter they were greatly embarrassed by the fact that Clinton, the so-much beloved former American president, so strongly endorsed what we did."
IsraelDay
"On 15 April 2002 we organized a second, even more important demonstration called 'Israel Day.' A year before the attack on the Twin Towers, the Palestinians had launched the Second Intifada with its murderous suicide bombings. The Israeli government reacted by suppressing terrorism in the West Bank and Gaza.
"It was very difficult to call for a pro-Israeli demonstration in Italy in the days after the battles in Jenin. People were shown on television what were called 'the tanks of Sharon.' These besieged the mukhata in Ramallah where Yasser Arafat was almost a prisoner. Israel's legitimate aim was to eliminate terrorism in the territories it had occupied for more than thirty-five years after winning a war of self-defense.
"We had anticipated well in advance how the media would react to Jenin. When the Israeli military action began, we warned that it would be strongly denounced. We explained that it would be very problematic to fight the terrorists in Jenin. We also knew how the anti-Israeli propaganda war functioned. We thus started to warn immediately that there would be newspaper headlines announcing the 'Jenin massacre.'
"Subsequently, Human Rights Watch found that fifty terrorists had been killed and the Israelis had also sustained many losses. Within the limits of what was possible, Israel had made an effort to avoid civilian casualties in the very difficult combat conditions of the Jenin camp. It was clear that Israel had behaved honorably. We were happy that the truth had come out. Rather suddenly in Italy, even an extreme left-wing journal such as Il Diario was inspired to send a journalist to Jenin who reported the truth."
A Very Successful Demonstration
"In those days it was not easy to organize a pro-Israeli demonstration, but we decided we had to do it. This event was again a great success, gaining the support of personalities from both the Right and the Left. The prime minister of the present left-wing Italian government, Romano Prodi, then president of the European Commission, expressed his sympathy. Among the backers on the Right was Deputy Prime Minister Gianfranco Fini, leader of the Alleanza Nazionale party.
"On Israel Day there was a massive show of Israeli flags. Already on USA Day there had been many such flags alongside the American ones. People gathered on the square of the Capitol and descended the steps. It was a massive, beautiful procession. We marched to the synagogues on the Tiber River, where the participants deposited small stones. There was a short speech. I must stress that all these demonstrations have been organized with little money by a small newspaper.
"The success of the first two demonstrations helped me decide that a similar one was necessary against Ahmadinejad's anti-Israeli and anti-Semitic campaign. We had to express intelligently our indignation toward the Iranian president and his political madness. Besides the Israeli flags there were also Italian and Iranian ones. A group of Iranians in exile took part in the protest and one of their slogans was, in the Persian language, 'Zendebab Israel'-wishing Israel to live.
"Initially many ministers of the Berlusconi government intended to participate. However, the afternoon before the march in Rome there were counterdemonstrations before the Italian embassy in Teheran. Italy is Iran's leading trade partner in Europe, and the Iranian government let it be known that there would be consequences for the countries' bilateral trade.
"There was also pressure from the Confindustria, the Italian manufacturers association, and from some in the government. Berlusconi hesitated and did not reply forcefully. This led to the decision of Deputy Prime Minister and Foreign Minister Fini not to participate. Also Defense Minister Antonio Martino chose not to come to the demonstration. Still, it was an event of major political importance."
Why Did We Do It?
When asked why Ferrara was the only non-Jewish person in the world to organize such a demonstration, he replied: "I have no answer. What I can say is that prominent French intellectuals such as Alain Finkielkraut and Andr? Glucksman were astonished by what we had done. They said it would never have been possible in France."
After some reflection he remarks: "Perhaps it can be explained by a mix of our national reality, the history of Il Foglio, and my personal experiences. Italy has a certain liberty of action that other European countries do not have. Furthermore, Il Foglio is not so sensitive to the market. We do not have a certain quota of people whom we have to please. For other papers this usually includes the pro-Palestinians and the pro-Israelis, as well as the left-wing and right-wing intellectuals."
Ferrara says it was very important that the pro-Israeli Berlusconi government was in power. "Fini's role was also significant. As leader of a postfascist party he needed Israeli legitimization. His attitude toward Israel was the main indicator that he had changed his political outlook. At the founding congress of Alleanza Nazionale he had the party condemn anti-Semitism and the prewar racial laws of the Mussolini government, which were an important element of fascism. As a result, Fini ultimately succeeded in being invited to Jerusalem. His trip there inspired much debate in his party. Mussolini's granddaughter Alessandra left the party and took with her a small group of members."
Israel's Strategic Role
"Berlusconi understood that Israel should play an important strategic role in Italy's foreign policy. Pro-Arab prime ministers in the previous decades, such as the Christian Democrat Giulio Andreotti and the Socialist Bettino Craxi, had created an imbalance in Italian positions toward the Middle East."
In the current coalition government led by Prodi, the socialist DS party consisting mainly of former communists is the largest. When asked what position it will take on the Middle East, Ferrara says it is too early to tell. "When Berlusconi was talking to Javier Solana, the European high representative for foreign and security affairs, or to people like the then French foreign minister Dominique de Villepin or his Spanish colleague Miguel Angel Moratinos, it was a dialogue of the deaf. Berlusconi was pro-Israeli and they were anti-American, anti-British, and anti-Israeli. Berlusconi's refusal to go along has prevented this position from advancing too much in Europe."
The Prodi Government
"Now Berlusconi is no longer prime minister, and the opposite tendency has returned. We will have to wait and see where Italy will stand. When our DS foreign minister, D'Alema, was in the opposition, he did realize that he had to march against Ahmadinejad. Will he now cave in entirely on Israel and become a loudspeaker in Italy for Europe's dominant anti-Israeli line? Or will he, which is much more in Italy's interest, be a brake on the fanatic anti-Israelis who form much of the European bureaucracy? Anything is possible, yet the key man in his party, Secretary-General Piero Fassino, has shown himself to be a very balanced person. He is convinced that defending Israel is a matter of priority. Thus it won't be easy for D'Alema to overcome that stance.
"Prime Minister Prodi has the habits of the old Christian Democrat politicians. He comes from a left-wing Catholic school. He believes in ecumenism and interfaith dialogue. He rejects the idea of a clash of civilizations. He can best be defined as a navigator. Prodi is no fighter against terrorism and Islamic fanaticism. He is unlikely to create great surprises that will detach him from the Brussels and Strasbourg orthodoxy.
"As president of the EU Commission he made some far-reaching anti-Israeli statements. This helped him in his relationship with Paris and Berlin, protecting him, in turn, from the evident contempt he faced from London and Washington. As Italian prime minister he is likely to navigate more carefully."
Ferrara repeats: "It is certainly possible that the Prodi government will take an anti-Israeli line. We do not yet see the first explicit signs of it, but as noted, it is too early to say."
In mid-July during the fighting in Lebanon, Ferrara attacked the Italian government and the parties that supported it. He charged that they were taking a summer vacation from their responsibility. In an article titled "The Tears of the European Crocodile Destroy Israel," Ferrara wrote that "they feigned not to know that Palestinian nationalism-polluted by the political and civil corruption of the revolutionary elites-was being substituted by the political Islamism of Ahmadinejad, a Holocaust-denying head of state."
Ferrara ended with a call to the Italian Left: "On one side you have people like Olmert, Livni, Peretz, and Peres. On the other side there is Sheikh Nasrallah and Mash'al, who is a fugitive in Damascus protected by the worst despots of the Middle East. For once, do-gooders, make a choice that reflects proportional use of intelligence and political dignity."1
-------------------------------------------------
Giuliano Ferrarais the founder and editor of the daily Il Foglio. He was born in Romein 1952 to a family of longstanding communists, and remained a communist until the age of thirty. He was a political columnist for Corriera della Sera and has published in several Italian weeklies. He has been the director of many television programs, first for the state-owned RAI and later for Mediaset of the Berlusconi Group. For five years he has been anchoring a daily news program on the independent network La7 owned by the Telecom group. Notes
------------------------
1 Giuliano Ferrara, "Le Lacrime del coccodrillo europeista annegano Israele," Il Foglio, 17 July 2006. [Italian]
-------------------------------------------------------------
The opinions expressed herein do not necessarily reflect those of the Board of Fellows of the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs.
Other related articles:
The Cynical Use of Israel in Italian Politics - Interview with Fiamma Nirenstein (Post-Holocaust and Anti-Semitism #58, July 2007)
http://www.jcpa.org/JCPA/Templates/ShowPage.asp?DRIT=0&DBID=1&LNGID=1&TMID=111&FID=381&PID=470&IID=1589&TTL=The_Cynical_Use_of_Israel_in_Italian_Politics
Neo Anti-Semitism in Today's Italy - Sergio I. Minerbi (Jewish Political Studies Review, Fall 2003) http://www.jcpa.org/phas/phas-minerbi-f03.htm
__._,_.___
Messages in this topic (1) Reply (via web post) | Start a new topic
Messages | Files | Photos | Links | Database
============================================================================
.
============================================================================
Copyright belongs to the authors or owners of the original. Reproduce with
their permission only. Please respect the original authors' rights.
============================================================================
Monday, July 09, 2007
ATTITUDE TO ME CONFLICT AROUND THE WORLD
INTERESTING STATISTICS RE WORLD’S ATTITUDE TO M.E. CONFLICT.
About the 2007 Pew Global Attitudes Survey
http://pewglobal.org/reports/pdf/256.pdf
Results for the survey are based on telephone and face-to-face interviews
conducted under the direction of Princeton Survey Research Associates
International. All surveys are based on national samples except in Bolivia,
Brazil, China, India, Ivory Coast, Pakistan, South Africa, and Venezuela
wherethe samples were disproportionately or exclusively urban.
THE QUESTIONS.
1. Where do their sympathies lie: more with the Israelis or the Palestinians?
2. Should a way be found for the State of Israel to exist so that the rights or needs of the Palestinians can be taken care of? OR;
3. these rights cannot be taken care of if Israel continues to exist.
4. Can a way be found for both to coexist?
5. Who is mostly responsible for the fact that the Palestinians don’t have a State of their own: Israel or the Palestinians?
ANSWERS:
1. From the seven Latin American countries, most were evenly divided but less than 50% in each had any opinion at all.
All the Moslem countries in the ME, Asia and Africa were naturally for the Palestinians. But the more surprising perhaps, are the Europeans. Apart from Germany, Slovakia and the Czech Republic, the rest were more for the Palestinians, although there were a few who were almost equally divided. Overall, 14 were more for Israel, 21 for the Palestinians and 10 were equally divided.
2. Here, 26 vs. 8 believed in this first part of the question.
3. The 8 were all Moslem States.
4. Here 11 were definitely for co-existence, 6 Moslem States said NO, but for Lebanon (even,- overall), but they divided into Shia (no), Sunni (yes, 57%-43% no), Christians (yes).
5. For this, 2/3rds had fewer than 50% with an opinion at all. Out of 37 countries, only 9 were putting the blame on the Palestinians; 7were evenly divided and 18 were blaming Israel. Among the latter were 10 Moslem countries. The 11 pro-Israel ones were: USA, Bolivia, Brazil, Venezuela, Czech Republic, India, Japan, S. Korea, Bulgaria and Israel of course.
MY CONCLUSION:(MM)
On the whole, co-existence does seem to be the preferred option , even among some of the Sunni Moslems from Lebanon. Therefore, outside the Islamic world, the world does want Israel to continue to exist. But how it should exist seems to be outside their ability to understand. If it is to remain a Jewish State, then it is difficult for Christian Europeans to accept it as such. They probably prefer a “secular, democratic “ model.
Up to a point, this is what Israel is,- but to that needs to be added the fact that it must remain a “Jewish democratic State with both secular and traditional values.”
I would prefer that there be no religious “laws”, only traditional principles applied to the secular laws, after adapting tradition to the rights and freedoms of the individual as it applies to and in a modern democracy.
About the 2007 Pew Global Attitudes Survey
http://pewglobal.org/reports/pdf/256.pdf
Results for the survey are based on telephone and face-to-face interviews
conducted under the direction of Princeton Survey Research Associates
International. All surveys are based on national samples except in Bolivia,
Brazil, China, India, Ivory Coast, Pakistan, South Africa, and Venezuela
wherethe samples were disproportionately or exclusively urban.
THE QUESTIONS.
1. Where do their sympathies lie: more with the Israelis or the Palestinians?
2. Should a way be found for the State of Israel to exist so that the rights or needs of the Palestinians can be taken care of? OR;
3. these rights cannot be taken care of if Israel continues to exist.
4. Can a way be found for both to coexist?
5. Who is mostly responsible for the fact that the Palestinians don’t have a State of their own: Israel or the Palestinians?
ANSWERS:
1. From the seven Latin American countries, most were evenly divided but less than 50% in each had any opinion at all.
All the Moslem countries in the ME, Asia and Africa were naturally for the Palestinians. But the more surprising perhaps, are the Europeans. Apart from Germany, Slovakia and the Czech Republic, the rest were more for the Palestinians, although there were a few who were almost equally divided. Overall, 14 were more for Israel, 21 for the Palestinians and 10 were equally divided.
2. Here, 26 vs. 8 believed in this first part of the question.
3. The 8 were all Moslem States.
4. Here 11 were definitely for co-existence, 6 Moslem States said NO, but for Lebanon (even,- overall), but they divided into Shia (no), Sunni (yes, 57%-43% no), Christians (yes).
5. For this, 2/3rds had fewer than 50% with an opinion at all. Out of 37 countries, only 9 were putting the blame on the Palestinians; 7were evenly divided and 18 were blaming Israel. Among the latter were 10 Moslem countries. The 11 pro-Israel ones were: USA, Bolivia, Brazil, Venezuela, Czech Republic, India, Japan, S. Korea, Bulgaria and Israel of course.
MY CONCLUSION:(MM)
On the whole, co-existence does seem to be the preferred option , even among some of the Sunni Moslems from Lebanon. Therefore, outside the Islamic world, the world does want Israel to continue to exist. But how it should exist seems to be outside their ability to understand. If it is to remain a Jewish State, then it is difficult for Christian Europeans to accept it as such. They probably prefer a “secular, democratic “ model.
Up to a point, this is what Israel is,- but to that needs to be added the fact that it must remain a “Jewish democratic State with both secular and traditional values.”
I would prefer that there be no religious “laws”, only traditional principles applied to the secular laws, after adapting tradition to the rights and freedoms of the individual as it applies to and in a modern democracy.
Thursday, July 05, 2007
DOCTORS WHO WANT TO KILL.
“Those who cure you will kill you.”
The dire warning of an Al Queda operative to an Anglican priest while in Jordan came true.
All reasons for this type of terrorism as proposed by most writers are utter rubbish, IMHO. What can anyone claim to have as a reason to plant a bomb outside a nightclub, on a special night when young women congregate? It does not need special insights into the thinking of these crazies when the intention is to kill as many young Western women as possible, who are simply bent on enjoying themselves. "Sexual licentiousness" of the West goes against the fanatical Muslims' indoctrination. Inducted by Al Quaeda's "paranoid and apocalyptic world view", they are just acting out their own frustrations in their Islamist jihaddi fanaticism! Stupid women help them in this as well!
It’s all about Islam, as claimed by Irshad Manji among others, who know it from inside. In an article in The Australian, “Religion is the root cause of terrorist threat”, she states that religion, or God is always the first cry the terrorists make. But this religion is one that leads to personal frustrations, re sexual desires, sexual orientation, inhibitions and prohibitions of all that is free in our Western lifestyle, - all which stifle the individual. The “goodie- goodie” image they try to invoke, is actually one that leads them to perversions and self-hatreds and then take it out on Western society and Western women,- in the guise of wanting to maintain their own ”puritanical” values under Sharia laws.
Doctors and other professionals are apparently simply acting out their parents’ desires for their children to succeed. Their own primary focus is the desire to act out fanatical Islamists’ jihaddi intentions. What better cover to enter Western countries than through professional employment? Having passed medical exams, bomb-making should be a cinch for them. Instead they turned out to be nothing but bumbling fools and amateurs! The British should thank their lucky star for that.
MM
The dire warning of an Al Queda operative to an Anglican priest while in Jordan came true.
All reasons for this type of terrorism as proposed by most writers are utter rubbish, IMHO. What can anyone claim to have as a reason to plant a bomb outside a nightclub, on a special night when young women congregate? It does not need special insights into the thinking of these crazies when the intention is to kill as many young Western women as possible, who are simply bent on enjoying themselves. "Sexual licentiousness" of the West goes against the fanatical Muslims' indoctrination. Inducted by Al Quaeda's "paranoid and apocalyptic world view", they are just acting out their own frustrations in their Islamist jihaddi fanaticism! Stupid women help them in this as well!
It’s all about Islam, as claimed by Irshad Manji among others, who know it from inside. In an article in The Australian, “Religion is the root cause of terrorist threat”, she states that religion, or God is always the first cry the terrorists make. But this religion is one that leads to personal frustrations, re sexual desires, sexual orientation, inhibitions and prohibitions of all that is free in our Western lifestyle, - all which stifle the individual. The “goodie- goodie” image they try to invoke, is actually one that leads them to perversions and self-hatreds and then take it out on Western society and Western women,- in the guise of wanting to maintain their own ”puritanical” values under Sharia laws.
Doctors and other professionals are apparently simply acting out their parents’ desires for their children to succeed. Their own primary focus is the desire to act out fanatical Islamists’ jihaddi intentions. What better cover to enter Western countries than through professional employment? Having passed medical exams, bomb-making should be a cinch for them. Instead they turned out to be nothing but bumbling fools and amateurs! The British should thank their lucky star for that.
MM
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)