Dr Mark Baker and the Neturei Karta boycotters of the Left Wing

I was sent this article, written by Mark Baker, an academic at Monash University (and family friend). Mark is alleged to have posted the article below on his facebook page. I received it by email and have never visited Mark’s facebook page. My reaction, over a few days, was that we had the mirror image of the boycott tactics used by Neturei Karta against the State except unlike Neturei Karta, this wasn’t about religion (Halacha doesn’t get a guernsey in Marks article). Rather it was the exasperated groans of a left-winger indelibly married to two “states”, even if one is effectively the mamzer Amalek.

I interspersed his facebook commentary with my understanding of why some of Mark’s views are blind post-liberal, and left-wing economic terrorism. The tone sounds an awful lot like the failed rhetoric we hear from J-Street, Bernie “the shhh I’m a Yid” Sanders, American reform and the Tikun (sic.) Olamniks of this world. They stem from superimposing a left-leaning view of the world, into some plasticine-like Zionism (and Judaism) as opposed to the other way around. In the other way around, Zionism and Judaism are already defined. They react to the world. They do not metamorphose to become something else to fit into some world views.

I will variegated Mark’s emotive outbursts with a critique of his post-liberalism. The rhetoric sounds like the extreme left views we hear from J-Street and Bernie “I’m not sure if my grandchildren will even be reconstructed cultural Jews” Sanders, feel-good American Reform clergy,  and of course, the Tikun (sic) Olamniks of this world. I don’t mention the infamous Norman Finkelstein because Mark appears to be even more radical than Norman on BDS. Norman, one of many communist inventions of the Holocaust, actually opposes the very BDS that Mark claims he “quietly supports”. The left-leaning start with their vision of the Olam (world) which they conjure to appease an already morally corrupt world and then mould (sic) Judaism into having plasticine-like spinal characteristics that can be contorted any which way.

My comments are interspersed and not in italics. The original article from Mark is in italics. This should not be understood as an ad hominem attack on Mark; I’m sure he believes what he says and he is no Norman Finkelstein anymore than I am a Dershowitz or Benny Morris.

I was living in Israel in 1995 with my family. From our apartment, we could hear the crowds at Zion Square baying for Rabin’s blood, and holding up placards of the PM dressed as a Nazi and a terrorist. Bibi Netanyahu was standing on the balcony, whipping up a frenzy, which culminated in the assassination of Rabin.

Long time ago! This description is mendacious.  Both the left and the right engaged and engage in spirited demonstration, but  implicitly opening with a remark that is designed to ascribe the assassination of Rabin to Bibi is confounding and offensive, while it is woven indirectly as a deflection. Clearly  this imagery and its conclusion is out of context. It was designed to paint the entrance to the rest of the article. First, “Bibi is responsible for Rabin’s assassination”. Now we’ve got you hating him for that episode, let’s continue.

Nothing has changed about Bibi in 22 years, except that he has stood at the helm of a government that has led the country literally into a dead-end.

People who don’t change their views in the face of unchanged oppression and rejectionism should not be held to ridicule. Let’s see what else hasn’t changed in 22 years.

  1. Arafat hopelessly let his people down (apart from Mrs Arafat’s fat bank account and the years of siphoning money to his cronies and the 1 Billion spent on the 1st intifada, 1/2 of which was funded by Saudi Arabia, and the massive corruption, which makes James Packer’s gifts insignificant. Even now, it is a brave person who claims that Abbas actually distributes international money to non political causes.
  2. He had Rabin, not Bibi, and Arafat still couldn’t bring himself to sign on for a two-state solution! Wasn’t there a proposal for this in 1948 too and before that? Note: it was in Arafat’s hands; not Bibi’s. What do we learn from that? That Israel didn’t offer enough? Come now! Everyone knows that simply wasn’t true. Arafat wanted to live another day. Peace would have meant his savage opponents would lop his head off-ISIS style. In the end, I believe this is why Arafat didn’t sign. Mark, perhaps tell us why you think Arafat didn’t sign off? Was it because he was actually born in Cairo and didn’t think he had the authority. Goodness me.
  3. They still want ALL of Israel. Is anyone in any doubt? When push comes to shove, Arafat, Abbas, all of them, simply do not accept the concept that there is a distinctive JEWISH Homeland. Does Mark really believe they don’t want to push us into the sea? What does “the” occupation mean? Mahmoud “Holocaust denier” Abbas, calls the idea of a Jewish Homeland “Racist”. A Chutzpa. Let him try to live in Jordan where most of his DNA-brethren live and where his genome is found.  Perhaps he’d like Saudi Arabia or Yemen; maybe Syria?
  4. Post-holocaust, especially, endangering Israeli sovereignty is not negotiable. Not 22 years ago, while Mark sat on balconies sipping coffee, and not now. Since most Arabs still don’t accept that reality, we are delusional if we think otherwise. Instead they engage in diplobabble. Mark, falling for this, is no different to someone who takes all of Trumps rhetoric seriously.
  5. They should seek to confederate with the Hashemites in Jordan, most of whom are their blood cousins. Why do you respect Jordan so much Mark? When does Monash’s library make a big deal of that tribe. Is the Palestinian in Jordan different somehow or are you as afraid of the Hashemites as they are. Call the historic truth, not some temporal Ottoman historical relic.
  6. Israel is probably at its strongest point (although it should have listened to Bennett in respect of the Hamas tunnel tactics and not Bibi. Certainly Mr Morality Ya’alon is now finished in politics for his clumsy left-wing handling of the mortal threat of death tunnels.
  7. One cannot talk about a two state solution! One must talk about a three state solution. When someone can make Abbas, Hamas, Saudi Arabia, Iran, Hizbollah, Da’esh and Turkey’s dictators kiss and make up, they can cut the number to consideration of two states. Don’t hold your breath. Make sure you have done a course on disentangling diplomatic babble before you fall for the type of nonsense, that Rabin and Clinton did.
  8. And yet, we don’t hear anything about “the right” of return. Is this deemed acceptable by Mark? Is he expecting Abbas to move back to Tzfat and vote in the municipal elections and avail himself of Kupat Cholim for his hemorrhoids? Maybe he wants not an international Jerusalem, but an international Israel where we pay jizya or become Dhimmis. (Who were the first to call for an “international Jerusalem”? Of course, it was the Pope. Study Xtianity and the chosen people and you will understand why they had to say that).
  9. Palestinian PhD students in Melbourne who I talk to, make it VERY clear. They don’t want a Palestinian state under Abbas. I was actually shocked. They say they want ONE state (not two). They say that Abbas and Hamas and the lot of them are corrupt criminals. They say they are happy to live along Israelis and Jews and vote in elections. Sorry guys, that’s not a Jewish Homeland. We aren’t stupid. I didn’t say that in response, of course. I just listened to their view.

While he wasn’t the first to build settlements, he has deepened and permanently institutionalised the occupation, eroded Israeli democracy, continued to whip up racism against Arabs, propagated the myth that there is no peace deal to be made, turned Israel into a partisan issue in Congress and among Diaspora Jews, launched brutal wars that could have been avoided, created a diversionary campaign to fight the delegitimisation of Israel when he more than anyone has contributed to its delegitimisation, alienated Israel from world leaders by shunning international law, abused Holocaust memory by playing the victim card, exploited real threats in the region for his own political expediency, undermined the civil rights legacy of his own Likud party in exchange for a fascist impulse; created a settler state and given free rein to Jewish thuggery; and worst of all, he has paid lip-service to the two-state solution while creating a one-state reality, leading Israel (as warned by every PM before him) down the path of apartheid.

Now that’s a looong expectorating sentence, even if interspersed by stray semi colons. Lets take the allegations one by one so they can be swallowed slowly.

  1. Bibi wasn’t the first to build a “settlement”. I guess that’s a feather in Bibi’s cap. Indeed, tell us please what a settlement is. Is Efrat a settlement or are you upset only about 10-20 families in caravans on a hill-top? I trust you boycott Rabbi Riskin as well as Gush Etzyon. He’s here now. Go and demonstrate against him? Define your terms. I believe 2-3% of land is taken up by “settlements”. Are you going to tell Rabbi Riskin to pack up and go back to Lincoln Square because Arabs listened to their mufti in 1948 during a war?
  2. “The occupation”? I’m sorry, it’s disputed land. You live in an occupation. This is Aboriginal land. Have you bought it from them? I don’t know which of your teachers failed to teach you that Jews are the closest thing to indigenous natives, and Palestine is a recently promoted modern term used to confuse the neurone-deprived UN. Warren Mundine knows it. Why doesn’t Mark Baker?
  3. How is Israeli democracy eroded? Have people gotten into power unelected? Perhaps Trumps victory has you so upset that you’ve forgotten he was democratically elected. Maybe you want a new J-Street constitution?
  4. Where does Bibi whip-up racism against Arabs! He’s been hobnobbing with Sunni Arabs who are all too eager to join him and not face the brutal Shiite regime of Iran and its satellite terrorist puppets. Perhaps if God forbid one of their rockets hit your balcony in the 90’s you would have a more sober view of them. I know: Sunni, Shiite, what’s the difference, they are all fine people, full of democracy and tolerance. Did you know Iran is building underground factories for Hezbollah. You think Hezbollah care about Palestinian Arabs or Lebanon? The only thing that unites these people is hatred for YOU, yes you Mark Baker. Go back and look at the beheadings from ISIS. Do you think these savages would spare you?
  5. “Launched brutal wars?” What newspapers were you reading Mark, the Anarchist nonsense given out near Melbourne University or the Trade Union? Did you forget what the D in IDF stands for? That is the motive behind every interlocution. Oh, and don’t forget to read how the soft and fuzzy democrat Ya’alon and his mate Gantz let Israel down with their dismissal of the Hamas Tunnels. Would you ask them to resign. The report is out. Only Bennett comes out looking normal. You won’t enjoy reading how it placed Israelis in grave danger.
  6. “Abused Holocaust memory by playing the victim card.” Nobody is playing cards Mark. Did you borrow this line from Finkelstein? His parents were communists. Yours aren’t. This is for real, just like the Holocaust. How many times do you need “we will drive them into the sea repeated to you? Don’t you watch memri.org or is that also just a load of baloney? Guess what? Holocaust survivors like your parents Mark, actually like Bibi and support Jewish strength; not the pathetic ‘my grandchildren will never be Jews, Bernie Sanders nebachs’, and the libertarian, egalitarian Diaspora pontificators.
  7. You’ve chosen to only focus on the political machinations in the Likud. You think that the Labour party or the Mapai or the Mapam would stop at any political method to keep power? I have no doubt your new darling is Yair Lapid. Why? Because the left-wing is so morally bankrupt, even left wingers don’t take them seriously. Only Shimon Peres could get some attention with his one liners, but we know his part in Oslo. That wasn’t about power either, was it? He was as power drunk as the next politician. Jealous of Rabin?
  8. Alienated leaders? Oh spare me. Is Obama now your love child? Obama will go down as one of the most useless Presidents that existed. Yes, a nice fellow, smart, and great orator, but anyone who can stand and watch 450,000 Syrian casualties (those who do need Tikun Olam) and the best Obama can do in response is send the odd drone, smells morally corrupt and makes Obama a gutless wonder: take your pick. Oh, did you notice how the Africans are now lining up. Perhaps Mark you’d be more impressed if that English anti-Semite Corbyn or the genius Richard Gere was “happy” with Israel.
  9. What is a settler state? Define your terms. Stop with hyperbole. Maybe you mean the Charedim of Betar? Oh, we better not mention Betar. It’s a Jewish place, after all, and the Charedim are iconic “settlers”! I think it’s four minutes to cross Israel by plane. I imagine your microwave achieves more in less time, Mark.
  10. Free reign to Jewish Thuggery. I am a scientist. Perhaps you will quote some figures for us. Let’s go with statistics. You know you are wrong, and that’s even if the soldier who shot the dying terrorist was pardoned. Ask your acquaintance Zev Slonim why Zev’s son was held in prison without representation and democratic rights. He’s a right-winger. I thought Bibi only did that to lefties. Think again. Was that a ruse?
  11. Apartheid. Let’s see. I didn’t see it in Jerusalem. Did you see it while you were watching with your family on the porch, as you stated or while walking down Mamila? You obviously have a better understanding of how to defend ISRAELI cities and civilians from thugs, terrorists and murderers. Those who live their lives peacefully do so and nobody is bothered by them. There are plenty of Palestinian settlements (and Jewish ones) that are peaceful.

He is a liar like Trump, who will speak in Australia tonight by using his oratory skills to trade in fear, eternal victimhood, and despair – while claiming the high-moral ground that Israel is a beacon of light unto the world.

Trump is a liar. Okay, maybe, perhaps he is also a fool. Or maybe he is a clever non politician who has read the mood of the American people better than unelectable Clinton. I decided to judge Trump on what he does. What he says, is all part of the political game. Perhaps you think that Malcolm Turnbull was a sycophantic fool when he acknowledged that Israel had high democratic standards. I think your rhetoric Mark is more akin to the liar Richard Di Natale and his band of merry tree-hugging anti Semites or the repetitive letter writers in the  Jewish News (e.g. Henry Herzog). I hope no Jew ever votes Green. The assimilated ones will. I have no doubt. The tree will be more important than the rotted root. The tree lives on. The rotted root stays that way. (By the way Mark, do you consider Mark Dreyfus Jewish? You claim to be “Orthodox” albeit partnership style. Ask Melanie Landau? )

He will go down in history as having unleashed the dark demons of hyper-nationalism that will kill the Zionist dream.

I can see exactly what Trump and Bibi are doing. I’m surprised you can’t. Either Abbas will come to the party (he’s gutless so forget that) or the status quo will continue. The Palestinians will have their own Arab global warming. They will fight: Fatah and Hamas and Dahlan and say “enough is enough” we don’t hate Jews like you’ve taught us.

It is not the anti-Zionists who should be shunning him, but those who care deeply about Israel and its future.

Those who care deeply about Israel can support Bibi whole heartedly unless he is found guilty of breaching ministerial standards.  Why is the implication that only a Zionist lefty is a true Zionist. Now, that’s apartheid and bias. That’s the killing of democracy. There is nothing, absolutely nothing, about a “two state” solution. That arose in 1948 and was rejected by Hitler’s Mufti.

Nothing has changed for the better, it’s only become worse. Can I suggest concentrating on supporting the indigenous people of Australia? That’s where you and I live. Maybe we should give back their land, and their right of return (as Jews deserve in Israel).

Leave the defence of Israel and its decision-making to those who put their lives on the line–not me, nor you. We are just pontificating, opinion-bearing people. We are irrelevant.

Hey Mark, watch this video. Give me a mark out of 10 for the pathetic apologist.

But none of this is as expressive as your mentor, Mark, the venerable David Ben Gurion. Watch him here. If he heard you admit that you boycotted Israel “quietly” I suggest he’d call you a fool. As to why you continue to be funded through the community at Monash. That’s a mystery to me and I call on the community to redirect their money away from extreme left wingers.

Mark, what do you have to say about the difference between Ben Gurion and Bibi as per this video?

Perhaps, Mark, it’s time you stopped pretending and joined Noam Chomsky as a fully fledged egalitarian member of the Jewish Community where the notion of identity is erased, as per a communist manifesto and has little hope of surviving the next century.

PS. Anyone whose Hebrew isn’t good enough to understand Ben Gurion’s interview above MUST find someone to translate it to them. He didn’t sit on balconies sipping coffee.

 

 

 

 

 

רפואה שלמה ליהודה בן טובה גיטל תיכף ומיד

 

A great editorial about the Israeli Higher Court Deliberations and Delineations.

Read this editorial from the left wing Yediot  from ynet by Professor Daniel Friedman

Professor Daniel Friedmann
Professor Daniel Friedman

who makes important points.

Would the Australian High Court judge whether Pauline Hanson was permitted to be a candidate in an election? Would a High Court decide whether a vote of politicians, a referendum, or a plebiscite is the appropriate mechanism to decide the acceptability of secular gay marriage?

There is certainly a friction between the courts carrying the law, and their seeming assumed role to define  the parameters of Israeli life, culture, politics and values. The latter are safe in a sane democracy, which Israel is, albeit with the usual political compromises (one only has to watch Malcolm Turnbull in Australia have to encounter a range of single views in order to pursue the mandate he was given). When one puts the High or Supreme courts on pedestals that extend their brief, one is entitled to question this phenomenon.

It’s a very fundamental editorial and one that those from the left and right wing of our Society should think deeply about.

Guest post from R’ Meir Deutsch in response to my post on R’ Cardozo on Tisha B’Av

R Meir’s reactions to my original post (which is in italicised black) are in red. My reactions to R’ Meir are in blue

About your article concerning Tischa b’Av, here are some of my observations.
About your AL CHETs (“Who can” and “Who cannot”); you mention daily events at present, not Tisha B’Av ones. Maybe we should read it on Yom Ha’Atzmaut or on its eve, Yom Ha’Zikaron to remind us that we were a nation before and take care at present that we remain one?

These are just my thoughts.

I see all terrible things, whether remembered or not remembered encapsulated in the overarching Galus. Galus, is of course not just a geographical location. It certainly includes geographic considerations which are reflected by more than 200 Mitzvos which only apply, many Rabbinically at the moment, only in our Holy Land. I stress our Holy Land because it remains Holy to this day according to Halacha. However, even with the Second Beis Hamikdosh, while some Jews lived in the Diaspora (something I find difficult to comprehend) and others actually defiled it in horrible ways that are beyond belief (as described in the Medrash), my personal feeling has always been that whilst steps are taken, miracles happen, and renaissance occurs, all of that is secondary to the eschatological final redemption. On Tisha B’Av, bdavka, I can’t help but think that גלינו מארצינו has both aspects, and is a sad reality. It is one day of mourning, akin to Shiva, where we remember עטרת ראשינו which is not perched in its proper place. And while we have דומה דודי כצבי and are sometimes seemingly teased in directions of euphoria, we then find ourselves, yes even the second-rate ones like me sitting in Australia, depressed about the state of our existence. It extends through the trio: תורת ישראל, עם ישראל and ארץ ישראל all of which portray levels of Galut which should not make it sensible to join our fellow Jews, and recite Eicha together, in a low light, and mournful tone. The qualitative aspect cannot be seen to be ideal today, and just like one doesn’t read Bereishis literally, someone of the stature of Rabbi Cardozo, would surely be able to see between lines, and interpret poetically and midrashically, without the feelings of (not a quote) “what am I doing in Shule with everyone saying Eicha, let me say it alone at home, as it’s challenging to swallow”

I read with incredulity the continuing slide to the left

What do you mean by that? .ימין ושמאל תפרוצי. What is meant by left. by respected people, such as Rabbi Dr Nathan Lopez Cardozo

Rabbi Dr Cardozo is a thinker. This is a hallmark of those with intellect. At the same time intellect may preclude a level of Bittul. I don’t have his intellect, but I’m often accused of not being able to exhibit Bittul. Indeed, this week’s parsha includes a wonderful vort from Rav Soloveitchik which sums up this concept. I wrote it for another forum and will put it up before Shabbos. It tends to be those who are more inclined to mould judaism into new trends, that I refer to as the left. Open Orthodoxy and Partnership Minyanim, and things of that nature (as opposed to Yoatzot Halacha) are the types of things which I call “left” wing. Rabbi Benny Lau is another who I see sometimes express himself this way. I don’t see Rabonim who live in this world and are not cloistered in an attic, like Mori V’Rabbi Rav Hershel Schachter, as ‘right wing fundamentalists’. He is at YU and heads Psak at the OU, and in all my correspondence with him, I have found him to be as straight as an arrow, and moderate, maintaining the strong Menorah base transmitted to him from Rav Soloveitchik. One thing he isn’t, is a philosopher.

Who can not find a day to be sad when a Jew from Jerusalem is called up to the Torah and is asked “what is your name”, and they answer “Chaim”. And after being asked “Ben?” they say “Ben Esrim V’shmoneh”? It’s not funny.

On the other hand, a relative of mine was called up in the diaspora. He said his name: Ra’anan Lior ben Avraham, the Gabai said: not your secular name, your Hebrew name.

I find that just as sad. It’s not a contest. It’s a reflection of the poor quality of Jewish Education that the Mapai have managed to infuse into Israeli society and which the religious zionists ignored for too long while they were perhaps over focussed on outposts at the expense of spreading good Jewish education in Tel Aviv etc

I am not sure how Rabbi Cardozo qualitatively defines the Messianic era, but it seems to me, if he enunciated that, he’d have no issue, on the saddest day of the year, to join in the Shiva, that we all take part in. Don’t we eat meat and drink wine during the Shiva? On Yahrzeit we have a Kiddush (not our minhag). It is true, that our Rabbis also promised us that this will be transformed to a day of Yom Tov. We still do not have a Temple, but we have a Yerushalayim. Is it the time to transform it to a Yom Tov?

We changed the “l’Shana ha’Ba’a Bi’Yrushalayim” to “l’Shana ha’Ba’a Bi’Yrushalayim HABNUYA” the addition is for the Temple – we already are in Yerushalayim.

I feel this is syntactic and in fact supports my comments and not opposes them. Halachically, it is true, that there are ramifications being in Yerushalayim: for example Korban Pesach.

Rabbi Cardozo, surely you aren’t suggesting you see the Yom Tov, but are blind to the myriad of reasons to be sad?

I attend Yom Hashoa out of solidarity, but my real Yom Hashoa tacks onto Tisha B’Av. Each one with his own feelings and customs.

I ask myself: Why would G-d destroy HIS home? It was a place where the Jews worshiped G-d, and not a home of his people. I do not know G-d’s intentions, but shall try my understandings or reasoning. Can one imagine anyone bringing today sacrifices? How would Judaism look if they did? Can it be that G-d’s intention was to stop those sacrifices, and the best way was to destroy the building? ונשלמה פרים שפתינו.

These are questions beyond our human understanding. The Rambam who to my knowledge is the only one who codifies the Halachos of Beis Habechirah and the times of the Mashiach, is certainly not suggesting that there won’t be sacrifices. I know there are those who interpret Rav Kook as implying there may be Korbanos Mincha. At the end of the day, as the Rambam notes, we lack a certain Mesora for these times, because they were hidden from us, and could not have been passed down. He says explicitly words that “all these details we will truly properly know at the time when they happen”

About Yom Hashoa: I was interviewed by GINZACH KIDUSH HASHEM (the Charedi Yad Vashem), and asked: how can you explain the Shoah? My reply was:

We have quite a limited view of the world and its future, as against G-d who has a wider one. At the destruction of the Temple, the Jews were driven out of their city Jerusalem, many were killed others dispersed among the Nations, and many were sold to slavery. They did not enjoy those days, they suffered quite a bit. They probably said Kinot. But G-d had a wider view; my children are going to dwell all over the globe, learn different trades and cultures. Had we stayed in our country, with the Temple, I (or probably also you) would surely dwell in my tent in the Negev as a shepherd looking after my flock – just like a Bedouin. The same with the holocaust, I can still not see the whole picture, but one is that the Jews, after the terrible holocaust, are again a NATION with their own country. Would the world grant us a piece of land if there was no holocaust? Would the Jews come to Eretz Yisrael, the land of desert and camels? Maybe it isn’t yet a full Geula, but surely a beginning. Why did we need six million sacrifices? Would not one million or fewer be enough? Please do not put this question to me. I am not G-d’s accountant.

By the way, in one of the Agudat Yisrael Knesiot (5679 Zurich) there was a discussion whether Jews are a Mosaic sect or a Nation! Because of such a question my father in law, and other German Rabbis left Agudat Yisrael. I thought that Yetziat Mitzraim was our transformation from a nomadic tribe into a Nation. Was I wrong?

I’m a second generation holocaust generation, but feel it acutely, likely due to the fact that for most of my life, I was surrounded only by holocaust survivors, who would challenge my religiosity, even when I was 10 years of age and ask me questions that I could not and dared not answer. It is certainly the case that history would record that an outcome of the holocaust was the re-establishment of a Jewish homeland. These are happenings that I don’t understand either. Do I have to pay 6 million lives to acquire something that we have already been promised? Did God not have other more gentle ways to somehow not interfere and yet interfere in the ways of the world so we would have the same outcome? Why didn’t he send Eliyahu down before the final solution and say ENOUGH. ושבו בנים לגבולם. I don’t know and I don’t believe anyone knows, despite the Satmar and other rhetoric. Indeed, on Tisha B’Av, as we sit on the eve of the full redemption, we can only sit exasperated while more human korbanos occur, and anti-Zionism is the new anti-Semitism, and Tisha B’Av encompasses all that.

Sure, on Yom Ha’atzmaut and on Yom Yerushalayim, when I was a student in Israel, I celebrated. I went to Yeshivat Mercaz HaRav, and euphorically danced all the way to the Kosel, and for the entire night danced until we davened Vatikin. We know how important it is to sing and give praise. Chizkiyahu Hamelech would have been Mashiach if he had sung, as openly stated by the Gemora in Sanhedrin (from memory).

I just expressed my humble thoughts.

And I thank you so much for sharing them. I heard second-hand, that Rabbi Cardozo felt I had not understood his points. That maybe so. As it is the Yohr Tzeit of the famed R’ Chaim Brisker now, I’d like to express that his Neshomo should have an Aliya. He revolutionised Torah learning.

Yair Lapid has talent

Netanyahu should seriously use it. This is from his Facebook (hat tip MD)

UNRWA Spokesperson Chris Gunness harshly criticized our decision to demolish the homes of two terrorists who last December stabbed two Israelis to death at the Jaffa Gate in Jerusalem.

I have one question for Mr. Gunness:

What’s it got to do with you?

Actually I have another one:

Who asked you?

UNRWA is the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees. Its role is clear. It is meant to help Palestinians find work and if they can’t find work then to assist them with food and medication.

That’s it. It doesn’t have another role. There is nothing in UNRWA’s mandate which justifies intervention in security matters. There is nothing in Chris Gunness’ past which qualifies him to give us advice on how to protect ourselves.

And if we’re already speaking Chris, here are another few questions:

Why doesn’t the State of Israel appear on maps in UNRWA schools?

If you condemn violence, why were you silent when it became clear that an UNRWA building was used as a hiding place for a terror tunnel used to kill three Israeli soldiers?

Why are the Palestinians the only ones in the world allowed to pass down the status of refugee from one generation to the next? Why can someone be born in Qatar, live in a villa in Paris, hold a Spanish passport and still be considered a Palestinian refugee?

Why is it that among the 23,000 UNRWA employees are there so many Hamas people (I didn’t say that Chris – as you know the Secretary General of your organization said so himself(?

In actual fact, why is it that only the Palestinians have a refugee agency of their own? What do they deserve that the 21.5 million refugees from Tibet, Darfur, Syria, Iraq and elsewhere don’t?

How is it that since UNRWA was founded, in 1950, the number of refugees has increased from 750,000 to over 5 million (!) without a single Palestinian being expelled? Is UNRWA creating refugees?

And a question to the citizens of the United States:

Do you know that your taxpayer dollars fund over a hundred million dollars a year of this insanity?

 

Cassius Clay and the Tree Hugging New Israel Fund and leftist tree hugging Rabbis

Do we have any in Melbourne? Non Rabbis we certainly do. They are so so morally decrepit… Like the NEW Israel Fund which should be cremated according to Reform Judaism rights (where they removed all references to Zion from their prayer books because they were so ‘enlightened’ and PROGRESSIVE.

This article from the Algemeiner is nice

A Message to Michael Lerner:

Tolerance only works if it goes both ways.
At Muhammad Ali’s funeral, Rabbi Michael Lerner, founder of Tikkun Magazine and the Network of Spiritual Progressives, gave a stirring speech that was roundly applauded. I agree with almost everything he said. We must stop victimizing, generalizing and hating people who are different in color, creed and practice. We live in a world where power corrupts. Inequality and exploitation are everywhere and infiltrate every ideology, religion and creed. Racism, victimization, greed and violence pervade every society. Obviously, some more than others. Otherwise, no one would ever want to move to a different country for a better quality of life and greater freedom.
The message that Rabbi Lerner advocated was the message of every idealist. We must love our neighbors. Do unto others as we would be done by. Yet for some reason, despite technological, scientific and humanitarian progress, despite a reduction in poverty, an increase in food production, welfare systems, huge charitable enterprises and benevolence, we are still way, way off from achieving what we have been preaching. We still live in a world of either imperfect or evil regimes. But we still yearn for freedom, equality, friendship and benevolence. We like the good. But we are not all capable of pursuing it.
Muhammad Ali was a remarkable character, as well as a brilliant athlete. No one is perfect. Not even he. He picked up too many anti-white and anti-Zionist hate tropes from mentors Malcolm X and Louis Farrakhan. But he fought for his people and for freedom. How ironic that he had a Jewish grandson and went to his bar mitzvah. But still, it is so important, and after Orlando even more so, to use every opportunity to speak out against racism and prejudice, and that was what Rabbi Lerner rightly did.
I was pleased that he went to the funeral. It was, in its way, a kiddush hashem (sanctifying of the name of God), even if he had absolutely no right to say he was representing American Jewry. It seems any rabbi who gets exposure claims that nowadays. But I am sorry he so overtly politicized his message by spouting left-wing Bernie nostra as if they would solve the problems of the world, let alone America.
Governments that want to create a utopia often have to concede that they either do not have the financial means or the population to achieve it. We all want it in theory, on our terms. Since the days of Plato and his Republic, we have dreamed and planned, but we are still a long way off. With our societies we have the idealists and the pragmatists, the capitalists and the socialists, and no one system is perfect or has ever been. But still we must dream, we should dream, and we need to be reminded of our dreams.
In all my days in the rabbinate, whenever I was stuck for a sermon I knew I could always fall back on preaching ideals, excoriating those who betray our ideals and standing against hypocrisy. And after every such sermon someone would always come up to me and say, “Rabbi, great sermon, you really gave it to them today.” Or words to that effect. It was always, “You told them.” It was never, “You told me.”
On the same day as Ali’s funeral, an American Muslim wrote in the New York Times about how his young daughter was picked on in a restaurant for wearing a headscarf. He ended by wondering why we hate people for their religion or race. Yes, of course, I agreed, because I wonder why so many Muslims and Christians still hate Jews for being Jews, or hate people of different sexual orientation. We are so good at seeing the mote in the eyes of others, but not the beam in our own. Or as the Talmud says (Bava Batra 15b), “Don’t tell me to do something about my toothpick when you have a whole plank of wood to deal with.”
So I ask myself, why in his speech did Lerner have to focus on Israel’s treatment of the Palestinians and not Sunni-Shia internecine conflicts (which Ali felt equally strongly about), human rights in China and Russia, occupation in Tibet, Kashmir, or West Sahara, or Turkey’s treatment of Kurds, or North Korea? Why did he not excoriate the left-wing ideology that Chavez and Maduro have destroyed Venezuela with? Or indeed Cuba? Does he think there is no need for self-examination other than for Jews? Why no reciprocity? Did Israel start the wars? Do Israelis really not want peace desperately? Is there no other side to the argument?
We now live in a world of rights. Do not Jews have rights, too? Were Rabbi Lerner’s comments about Netanyahu just to pander to an audience that, at core, is now sadly so anti-Israel and antisemitic as to deny rights to Jews to defend themselves? He could have said that almost half of Israel opposes many of his policies and rhetoric. He spoke about how once Jew stood shoulder-to-shoulder with black civil rights leaders. He did not speak about why today antisemitism is so prevalent in black societies. Why Black Lives Matter has chosen to add Palestine to their agenda rather than any one of the other humanitarian causes with far greater casualties elsewhere in the world today. If Martin Luther King had been present, he would not have been so one-sided.
Of course, the Israeli Left, indeed any Left, has the right and should have the right to take whatever side it wants to. Of course, excess, corruption and inhumanity must be addressed. But one who excoriates Jews wherever they are, should have the honesty and morality to point out another point of view others political correctness and one-sidedness simply debases the debate. Why does no one mention the protests in Palestinian territory against the policies of their dogmatists and kleptocracy? When you pick on just one example, on just one argument, that is pure prejudice.
Not only, but look at how Lerner’s speech was reported — not as a critique of racism or prejudice wherever it comes from. Instead, look on the internet and see the headlines, “Rabbi Slams Israel in Muhammad Ali Funeral Speech.” Yes, just more fodder for the Jew-haters. He could have made all his major ethical points without having to pander to the tub-thumping anti-Israel, anti-Jewish amen chorus that has now taken over the Left (not to mention the Right) wherever it exists.
The same trope. Remove Israel and the Middle East will be peaceful. Sunni and Shia will love each other, as well as lesbians, gays, bisexuals and transsexuals. The Left has always had rose-colored spectacles. Remove the Kulaks, then the aristocrats, then the bourgeoisie, then the Jews and Russia will be paradise. Remove capitalists, and we will live in heaven. Remove religion, and we will get in with each other, make love, and we will all live happily ever after.
Life is not like that. I am glad Rabbi Lerner stands for what he stands for. We need contrarians and prophets. But my experience tells me that any dogma can be dangerous, and that any one sided argument is doomed.
All I seek is balance. By all means, criticize Netanyahu if you also criticize Abu Mazen. By all means, attack Israel if you also attack Hamas, Hezbollah and all the others who put war above human needs and human rights. Rabbi Lerner can and should demand rights. But I can demand mine, too.

Advertisements on the Jerusalem Post App

I have a daily habit of looking at the app (which is one of the more annoying ones as you are bombarded every which way … the Israelis know how to annoy you so 🙂

Last night and this morning, I come across advertisements for the rabidly anti Zionist Adam Bandt of the Australian Greens Party. What the Heck? Do I have to see his Partzuf (visage) on the Jerusalem Post? Does he really think even Jewish lefties are going to support this BDS supporter and his fanatical anti Israel party?

I have taken the opportunity to report the advertisement as inappropriate with a few clicks. Consider the same?

I imagine the Android app is similar (I don’t use Android. There is too much Mamzerus in the operating system, and yes, I know it’s cheaper and the S7 is a nice phone; but Steve Jobs, who wasn’t an Israel lover, did revolutionise the Computer World unless you still wear blinkers and are happy with the South East Asian Engineering version of the plagiarism.

Anyway, click the advertisement, and tell Google (more Yidden) to send these advertisements to Azazel.

In the meanwhile, I  encourage people to vote for Michael Danby in Melbourne Ports. My hip pocket may be better in the long run under Malcolm Turnbull, who is a wonderful friend of Israel and a competent person, but Michael needs to remain in Parliament as a strong voice, and for that reason alone, I feel it’s important to support him. Saul Same AM ( Avshalom Shmulewitz was his real name; an Elwood Shule Mispallel who came from a Shochet in Western Australia, but I digress) would agree, but for more partisan reasons.

Tree Huggers: You voting Green in Melbourne Ports?

Consider this:

Local Greens candidate Stephanie Hodgins-May has announced she will pull out of the only Melbourne Ports candidates’ debate, after having agreed to participate “because one of the co-hosts” was the Jewish community roof body, Zionism Victoria.

Michael Danby, Member for Melbourne Ports, said:
“This is shameful. The Greens Party mask is finally off. The Greens boycott of the Jewish community shows their deep and intractable antagonism towards the Australian Jewish community.

Zionism Victoria is a roof body organisation of cross-spectrum groups which support Israel, including pluralistic Australian Union of Jewish Students (AUJS), which operates across Australian universities, the international affiliate of the Israeli Labour Party, Ameinu Australia, and includes socialist Zionist youth movements like Hashomer Hatzair and Habonim Dror.

“The Greens Party candidate from Daylesford, an advisor to Greens Leader Di Natale, is unfit to represent Melbourne Ports. Nearly a third of the electorate is of Jewish heritage. Refusing to address this public forum on the bigoted grounds that she has is an insult to the local community.”

“Approximately 71% of Australian Jewish residents of Melbourne Ports have family in Israel”, Danby recounted. “If she doesn’t want to represent our local Jewish community, or even speak to them, she cannot be their local Member. Greens leader Richard Di Natale must sack her.”

“Her excuse that candidates shouldn’t address politically active groups makes no sense. She is a political candidate and political staffer for the Green Political Party. She wants to be a representative of a diverse Melbourne Ports community – candidates for such a position speak to all kinds of groups, whether or not they agree with them,” Danby said.

Green Party hypocrisy and bigotry is underlined by the activity in the neighbouring seat of Melbourne, where Green Member for Melbourne Adam Bandt will address a forum held by the Australian Palestinian Advocacy Network,” Danby said. “This is a purely political group that is not a community organisation, nor does it represent tens of thousands of local residents, unlike the Jewish group the Greens are boycotting in Melbourne Ports.”

Michael Danby said Party leader Richard Di Natale, who cloaks himself as more moderate than other Green Senators such as Lee Rhiannon, will replace Hodgins-May with someone who will speak freely to all groups in Melbourne Ports.

A sane, traditional university and the BDS

This is from the Algemeiner. McGill is probably too fair for the New Israel Fund, and Israel’s bleeding left wing.

McGill University and How Western Civilization May Have Just Saved Itself — From Itself

McGill University in Montreal, Canada. Photo: wiki commons.
McGill University in Montreal, Canada. Photo: wiki commons.
Something quite remarkable happened a few days ago. It happened quietly, in a remote corner of some administrative building probably, but it ought to be loudly disseminated across the Western world. Not to be overly dramatic, but Western civilization just might have saved itself — from itself.

For universities are the heart of that civilization, and last week, a university’s student government suddenly remembered what the overall purpose of student governments is — which itself ought to remind universities of what their overall purpose is.

The Judicial Board at Montreal’s McGill University ruled last Tuesday that resolutions affirming the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) campaign against Israel violate the Constitution and Equity Policy of its student government, the Students’ Society of McGill University (SSMU). That means that McGill, whose campus has in the past 18 months endured three consecutive BDS campaigns and votes, all of which ultimately failed, will finally be able to return full-time to its proper business.

The reasoning in the decision is so clear that it’s downright refreshing.

In its mandate documents, the Judicial Board notes that SSMU’s mission is to “facilitate communication and interaction between all students,” to refrain from discrimination on the basis of “race, national or ethnic origin … religion …,” and to create “an ‘anti-oppressive’ atmosphere where all of its membership feels included.”

But, then, can the SSMU “take an authoritative, direct, and unambiguous stance” against a particular nation, as the recent BDS resolution demands that it do against Israel?

Unambiguously, no.

A university may well have students from both sides of any given conflict, and “by picking a side … the government does not promote interactions … but rather champions one’s cause over another.” Student governments must represent their members, but “it would be absurd for the government to claim that it is representing Israeli members as favorably as other nationals despite it supporting boycotts … against Israel.” Indeed, by “adopting official positions against certain nations … SSMU would be placing members from those nations at a structural disadvantage within [the] community,” failing to protect the rights of those minorities from “the tyranny of the majority,” and in thus violating its “anti-oppression” mandate would be failing in “its obligations to its own members.”

Or to put it succinctly:

McGill is first and foremost a university, a place of knowledge and intellectual growth — a fact that is often forgotten….[Our student government] cannot be the venue for a proxy war.

Yes, one wants to respond, refreshed — and the same is true for any university and student government, whether or not they have a constitution explicitly spelling that out.

Obviously.

That all this is so obviously true — that anyone undertaking a neutral approach to designing student governments would concur — makes you wonder why (as the Judicial Board put it) it is so “often forgotten.”

I have several hypotheses, but will mention just one.

For any conflict, the scholar always recognizes that there are (at least) two sides. Any organization serving the scholarly mission of the university must always therefore ensure that all sides have equal opportunity to be heard.

The activist has no such constraint. The activist’s goal is to “win,” to change the status quo, to defeat the other side, to overturn it — to silence it.

I believe that activism is wonderful, and to be encouraged. I would even propose that activism as we today understand it has naturally grown out of scholarship: that as the enlightenment led to intellectual liberty it led to the recognition of the value of diversity in every sense — which in turn leads to the activism that admirably promotes that diversity.

But in our zeal for activism, we have forgotten that when a student government takes a side in a conflict, when it decides that there are not two sides after all, it thereby abandons its role in the scholarly mission of the institution for the activism. And as the Judicial Board noted, where a student government’s objective should be to protect and promote the interests of minorities, including minority opinions, against the tyranny of the majority, when the government chooses one side it becomes the tyrannical majority instead.

That is the moment when the activism begotten by scholarship overthrows the scholarship — the moment when the university launches its own destruction.

Indeed, the last time this was put so clearly was perhaps all the way back in 1967, when the University of Chicago’s Kalven Committee produced its famous “Report on the University’s Role in Political and Social Action.”

It is worth some extended quotes:

A university has a great and unique role to play in fostering the development of social and political values in a society. The role is defined by the distinctive mission of the university … the discovery, improvement, and dissemination of knowledge.

The instrument of dissent and criticism is the individual faculty member or … student. The university is the home and sponsor of critics; it is not itself the critic…. To perform its mission in the society, a university must sustain an extraordinary environment of freedom of inquiry and maintain an independence from political fashions, passions, and pressures. A university, if it is to be true to its faith in intellectual inquiry, must embrace, be hospitable to, and encourage the widest diversity of views within its own community … It is not a club, it is not a trade association, it is not a lobby.

…[It] is a community which cannot take collective action on the issues of the day without endangering the conditions for its existence and effectiveness. There is no mechanism by which it can reach a collective position without inhibiting that full freedom of dissent on which it thrives. It cannot insist that all of its members favor a given view of social policy; if it takes collective action, therefore, it does so at the price of censuring any minority who do not agree with the view adopted. In brief, it is a community which cannot resort to majority vote to reach positions on public issues.

The neutrality of the university as an institution arises … out of respect for free inquiry and the obligation to cherish a diversity of viewpoints …

Of course, one wants to say. Intellectual inquiry requires intellectual liberty, and the freedom of speech. Don’t we all agree on that? Doesn’t every single fair-minded lover of knowledge, not seized by the hysteria of his own personal political agenda, agree with that?

But the “instrument” of that speech is the individual faculty member or student, and the groups they may form to promote their viewpoints. Let them have at it, with maximal freedom of inquiry and speech ringing throughout the institution.

But that most noble goal of intellectual liberty and diversity can be achieved only when the organs of the institution itself — the university, the faculty governing body, graduate student unions, the student government — are above the fray. To maximize the freedom of inquiry and speech of their members, they must not be hijacked for the political agendas even of the majority of their members.

In our zeal for activism, for the clarity of one side (at the expense of the other), we have somehow failed to observe what could not be more obvious: that the BDS movement as it is manifest on our campuses is an attack on the fundamental goals and values of the university as a whole.

This is not about defending Israel. Criticize Israel all you want.

It is about defending the university.

McGill’s Judicial Board has done us all an immense service. Socrates, Hume, Mill — and ultimately all the many minority and disenfranchised voices themselves that have in recent years finally been getting their turn to be heard — should thank you.

The Incredible Journey of a Jewish Traveller by Israel Cohen

[Hat tip to RYDBZ]

This is an incredible log of a world-wide journey, published in 1925. Even the City of Melbourne was visited and described in Chapter 7, and I present that section below (not perfectly converted from PDF to text).

Israel Cohen

CHAPTER VII
MEMORIES OF MELBOURNE

THE journey from Adelaide to Melbourne,
accomplished overnight in a comfortable train,
was the shortest I made since I left Port Said,
as it took only eighteen hours. Melbourne impressed me as a beautiful city, clean and spacious, with
wide, regular streets, tall imposing buildings, including
something like a sky—scraper, and a handsome tree—lined
thoroughfare—St. Kilda’s Avenue-—which can challenge
comparison with some of the finest boulevards in the
capitals of Europe. It has a. Jewish community of 6000
souls, who are all intensely proud of the city in which
they live, and who never ceased asking me what I thought
of it. Their lines have fallen in pleasant places, for
most of those who arrived there as immigrants with only a few shillings in their pockets, though with untold

energy, succeeded within a comparatively short time in
attaining a high degree of prosperity. One of the largest
departmental stores was pointed out to me as belonging
to a Russian Jew who, twenty years ago, went about
hawking with a pack on his back. The devotion of
the Jews to the British Crown is sincere and ever-present,
and struck me as much more demonstrative in character
than that of their co—religionists in the mother country.

‘So fond were they of singing the National Anthem at
the gatherings in which I appeared that I was almost
inclined to think that they regarded me not so much
as an Emissary of the Zionist Executive as an Envoy of
His Majesty.

On the day of my arrival a reception in my honour
was given by the committee of the “Hatechia,” a Zionist
Society consisting mostly of Russian Jews. As I entered
the room the entire company greeted me with “ God
save the King,” to pianoforte accompaniment, and after
the introductions were over, and we had taken our seats
at a festively decked table, the chairman asked us to
fill our glasses, rose to propose “ The Health of the
King,” and within two minutes the National Anthem
was again rendered with great gusto to the tinkling of
the piano. Many speeches, brimful of enthusiasm, were
then delivered, and the concluding event was the singing
of the National Anthem for the third time. That demonstration should have sufficed to convince even the most
sceptical of the Morning Post scribes that Zionism has
nothing to do with Bolshevism. There was, indeed,
hardly any public function in my honour that did not
either open or close with a similar patriotic manifestation.
One evening I went to a ball organized by some youthful
Zionists, and as soon as I appeared on the platform overlooking the dancing-floor, the orchestra suddenly stopped
in the middle of a lively jazz measure, and after a
moment’s solemn preparation vigorously struck up the
ever-popular anthem.

The reception on the day of my arrival was rendered
memorable by another feature. It was .a gargantuan
plaited loaf that lay on the table. before me, similar to
that which I had seen in Perth on the eve of my departure. It had been specially baked, I was told, not only
in my honour, but for my personal consumption ; but
when I explained that I could not very well take the
loaf back to my hotel, and that in any case it would
become quite stale before I had eaten even half, it was
proposed that it should be raffled among the members
of the society for the benefit of the Palestine Fund.
This suggestion, however, was not proceeded with, as
one of the members bought it by private treaty for a
party that he was giving the next day in celebration of
his daughter’s marriage. The bridal couple thought that their union was rendered particularly auspicious
by the acquisition of the loaf of the Zionist Emissary.

Among various messages that reached me soon after
the local newspapers published their first interview
with me was a letter from a gentleman who stated that
he was very keenly interested in my mission, and had
indeed been looking forward for some time to my coming.
He mentioned that he was the brother of a rather distinguished personality in London, and asked if he could
call to see me. I at once responded cordially and affirmatively, congratulating myself upon the valuable assistance
which I felt sure he would offer, and still more upon the
introduction that I expected to receive to the distinguished
London personality, who had hitherto held quite aloof
from any Jewish cause. The brother of the great man
came to see me at once, but at the first glance at his
shabby coat and bristly chin I felt that I had been
building castles in the air, and we had not been engaged
in conversation many minutes before all the castles came
toppling down into fragments. For my visitor, after
inquiring after‘ the welfare of his famous relative and
perceiving that I acknowledged his importance, suddenly
remarked: “ I’m rather stumped just now. Can you
lend me a dollar ? I’ll let you have it back when we meet
again.” I had little faith in the possibility of any such
repayment, nor was I disposed to risk a second meeting,
as I feared it might be abused by further exploitation,
so I gave the brother of the distinguished personality
half a crown, and he left me with the assurance that he
would never’ forget me——a sentiment that I sincerely
though tacitly reciprocated. When I related the incident
later in the day to a friend, he told me that my experience
was not unique, that there were several “ ex-remittance
men ” belonging to good families of the old country,
who ‘were always on the look-out for visitors whom they
could impress and impose upon ; and he congratulated
me upon having got off so cheaply.

But if I had to place a trifle on the debit side of my sojourn in Melbourne, I was rather lucky‘ to be able to
build up -on the -credit side a record of munificence far
surpassing anything done by any other community in
the whole of my travels. I owed a good measure of my‘

success to the help and advice of Mr. M. Zeltner, the

President of the Victoria Zionist Organization, who was
himself characteristic of the self-made man, for, born
over half a century ago in Cracow, he had arrived in
Melbourne with nothing but his wits and his grit, and
gradually established his fortune as a.- merchant in rubber,
and his fame as a public-spirited philanthropist. He
presided at the first two public meetings that I addressed,
and lent his house on a Sunday afternoon for a private
gathering, the total yield of the three occasions being
‘nearly £14,000, which Mr. Zeltner headed with the first
£1000.

The “most important meeting was that over which
General Sir John Monash presided. The General had
hitherto not identified himself with Zionism, although,
since his return from war-stricken Europe as the brilliant
Commander-in-Chief of the Australian Forces, he had
begun to take a more keen and active interest in Jewish
affairs. The fame that he, not a professional soldier
before the war, had deservedly won on the battlefield
by his genius for strategy and gift for leadership, seemed
to be resented by the military clique, whose jealousy
prevented the according of such an official welcome on
his h0me—coming as a victor acclaimed in the Allied
capitals was entitled to expect. Sir John had now put
away his uniform and sword and resumed his practice
as a civil engineer, and only a day after my arrival he
was appointed by the Federal Government as Director
of the great Morwell electricity scheme. He was exceedingly busy at the time,” and as the meeting over which

I wished him to preside was to take place on a Monday
evening. and I could not approach him until the previous
Friday afternoon, I was prepared for a rebuff. But Sir
John was the soul of kindness. He welcomed me in his office in his bluff and hearty manner, and little persuasion
was needed either from me or from a mutual friend,
Mr. B. H. Altson, an ardent Zionist, who accompanied
me, to secure his assent to our request. He had a previous
engagement, an important meeting of the Court of
Governors of the University, but he agreed to waive it
for the sake of Zion. He inquired about the latest
developments in Palestine, and told me with pride that
a famous kinsman of his had once been interested in
the Jewish colonization of the country.

“ Who was that ? ” I asked curiously.

“ The ‘historian of our people, Graetz,” was the reply.

There was little time left to make arrangements for
the meeting, especially as it was the week-end, and
some of my friends were rather nervous about the result.
But thanks to prominent advertisements in the press,
headed “ The King’s Message to Palestine,” and above
all, to the attraction of Sir John Monash, whose popularity
with the public was not affected by military pique, the
Assembly Hall was crowded with a representative
audience of about I000, whilst late comers had to be
turned away. As soon as Sir John arrived in the waiting-
room behind the platform he remarked: “ I mustn’t
forget to give you this,” and, taking a half-crown out of
his waistcoat-pocket, he said : “ This is from my cook.
She is a profound believer in the restoration of the Jews
to Palestine, and she insisted on my giving you her
mite to the funds”

The meeting was marked by scenes of enthusiasm,
particular applause greeting the reference in my speech
to the part played by the Australians in the redemption
of the Holy Land. I had been told that at the time
when volunteers were being raised in the Commonwealth
for transportation to the battlefields of Europe there was
a popular song with the catching refrain : “ Australia
will be there ! ” which was sung and whistled throughout
the Continent. I utilized the refrain in drawing a picture
of the future glories of Palestine, for, speaking of the new settlements that would gradually arise to cover
the waste places of the ancient country and of the proposal to create among them a colony bearing the name
of the Commonwealth, I exclaimed tha “ once again
would it be said: ‘ Australia will be there!’ ” The
patriotic allusion brought the house down. My appeal
for‘ funds, conducted by the method I had inaugurated
in Perth, was successful. The first response was for
£1000, then followed a few donations of £500 each (one
being from Sir John, though he asked that the announcement should be anonymous), and scores of others for
decreasing amounts, until a total of £6000 was reached
within an hour, making a grand total of £20,000 after
only six days’ work. The Victoria collection was shortly
increased to £26,000, thanks to private canvassing and
to visits paid to Geelong and Ballarat.

Another distinguished Jew whom I met was the Hon.
Justice Isaacs, a member of the Commonwealth Supreme
Court, whose decisions in some leading cases, I was told,
had evoked encomiums from legal authorities in England.
He was another example of the Jew who had risen to
the highest position by sheer merit and force of character.
The son of a poor Russo-Jewish tailor, he had started
life as a school teacher, but in his leisure hours he studied
law and then decided to devote himself to the legal
profession.

I met him———a dour-visaged sexagenarian of medium
height with small grey moustache and fresh complexion
——at the house of Mr. Altson. The aspect of Zionism
in which the judge was most interested, or rather about
which he was most concerned, was the question of
Jewish nationality. He could not understand nationality
apart from a state or territory from which such nationality was derived, and he therefore asked how the Jews,
having no such qualification, could claim nationality.
I replied that his definition was faulty, that it was
formulated without regard to actual conditions, and
that he confused nationality with citizenship.

” Take the case of Eastern Galicia,” I said. “ There
you have a country whose fate the Peace Conference
has not yet decided, and which is inhabited by three
distinct nationalities-the Ukrainians, the Poles and
the Jews. The Ukrainians and the Poles are striving
for the mastery, but both recognize that the Jews form
quite a different nationality. Whatever be the fate of

Eastern Galicia, the Jews will be citizens of the State ‘

to which it will be assigned, but they will still belong
to the Jewish nationality.”

The judge thought for a moment, and then said
gravely: “ I think that nationality is an unfortunate
term.”

He told me that he was making a serious study of
Hebrew grammar, which he had neglected since
boyhood, and wished to know something about the
adaptability of Hebrew to the needs of modern speech,
asking for the equivalents of various modern terms.
The acquisition of languages was his hobby, and among
the various European tongues that he had mastered were
Russian and modern Greek. I” was anxious that he
should make a. profounder study of Zionism than he
had hitherto done, and was glad to learn that he in-
tended. visiting Palestine on his way to England, whither
he was shortly sailing for a year’s holiday. I gave him
a letter of introduction to Sir Herbert Samuel, but when
I reached Jerusalem several months later, I learned that
Justice Isaacs had spent only a day in Palestine, which
scarcely sufficed for the correction of pre-conceived
ideas, still less for the gathering of new impressions.

Among the novel experiences that fell to my lot was
to occupy the pulpit in two synagogues, first, at the
more fashionable shrine in St. Kilda, whose minister
was my old fellow—student, the Rev. Jacob Danglow,
and, secondly (after a few weeks spent in New Zealand),
at the East Melbourne Synagogue. The addresses
served a practical as well as a moral purpose, for they
were delivered during the Sabbath morning service before congregations which included many people who
had not attended my public meetings, and the result
was of no small benefit to the Fund. The experience
recalled memories of my Jews’ College days, when I
occupied more than one London pulpit ; and apparently
I acquitted myself of the preacher’s role ‘with some
measure of satisfaction as I was discreetly approached
on behalf of the committee of another synagogue and
offered the vacant position of minister with alluring
emoluments. Memories of my College days were also
revived when I visited Mr. Danglow’s study and saw
on the wall the framed illuminated address that had
been presented to him by the Jews’ College Union
Society on the occasion of his departure from England
some sixteen years before, and which had been drafted
and signed by me as President of the Society.

I had, indeed, no lack of variety of experiences. They
were in no case exciting, though occasionally exasperating.
For I had to supplement my public appeals by personal
canvassing, and I seldom found anybody willing to
promise a donation without some preliminary skirmish.
Doubts were sometimes expressed whether the Zionist
scheme would succeed ; questions were asked about the
measure of financial support given by prominent English
Jews ; priority was claimed for local calls and charities;
attempts were made to postpone a decision. But I
grappled bravely with every case, developing the patience
of a Job and the ingenuity of a counsel for the defence.
One man wished to be assured that there would be a
Hebrew revival in Palestine; his next-door neighbour
demanded that English should be predominant; both
were ultimately satisfied and contributed. Another
person was anxious lest England should relinquish the

‘Mandate and leave Palestine to her fate; and a fourth
had the vision of a powerful Jewish Commonwealth fifty
years hence making war upon Great Britain-—as though
we Jews have not had enough with the wars of others.

Some doubted whether Jews could make successful colonizers, but when I showed them some of the photographs I had taken in Palestine—of the beautiful avenue
of palms in Rishon-le-Zion, the picturesque suburb of
Tel Aviv, the keen intelligent faces of the Haluzim,
the splendid figure of a mounted Shomer—their doubts
were dispelled.

There was, in truth, little reason in Victoria for doubt
on the score. of Jewish fitness for husbandry, as a colony
of Jewish farmers had actually been created in that
State only a hundred miles from Melbourne. It was
the fruit-growing colony- of Shepparton, comprising a
hundred Jews, mostly of Russian origin, some of whom
had lived in Palestine several years before the war.
The establishment of the settlement was due to the
initiative and generosity of one or two public-spirited
Melbourne Jews, and had proved thoroughly successful.
I received a telegram from the little community inviting
me to visit them, but unfortunately my arrangements
rendered the journey impossible. The Jews of Shepparton, however, bore no grudge. They at once convened
a local meeting, delivered speeches on the restoration
of Palestine, and raised a goodly sum for the benefit of
the Fund.

A little scepticism was also expressed at a meeting
that I addressed under the auspices of the Melbourne
University, and over which the Principal presided. I
spoke mainly upon the subject of the Jerusalem University, though I also dealt with the general aspects of
the Restoration. But a professor of history, who proposed
the vote of thanks for my address, tried to show that
the Zionist ideal was impracticable on the ground that
his reading of history had taught him that the Jews
had always lived in discord with one another, and could
not govern themselves. I. acknowledged his thanks but
repudiated his history. I pointed out that the Jewish
communities and colonies already established in Palestine
were .a model of peace and concord ; and that the Jews
were not only able to govern themselves, as they had proved through the councils of the colonies in that
country, but were also able to govern some of the people
in Australia, as would be shown when Sir Matthew
Nathan shortly arrived to assume office as Governor of
Queensland. The burst of applause evoked by this local
illustration signalized the discomfiture of the professor
and the ‘explosion of his thesis.

Before leaving Melbourne, I had a brief interview
with the Commonwealth “Premier, the Right I-Ion.
W. M. Hughes, to whom I bore a letter of introduction
from Sir Alfred Mond. The Federal Parliament was
sitting at the time, and as the interview was to take
place in the Premier’s official room, I arrived a little
earlier so as to hear some of the speeches. The Chamber,
which is modelled in general after the House of Commons,
is, of course, much smaller and less dignified, and the
apparently constant restlessness of the members deprived
the proceedings of any inspiration. I was fortunate enough to come in time to hear “ Billy ” Hughes, as he
is invariably styled, address the House on the Estimates.
He has an unprepossessing figure, being short, round-
shouldered, and with a beak-like nose; his. lips snapped
open like a vice, emitting a rasping, raucous voice, and
then snapped together again; he gyrated first on one
foot and then on the other ; and all the time he held
in his hand a short ear-trumpet to- catch the interruptions
that flew about. But the instrument-did not compensate
entirely for his deafness, and he made some curious slips
in his retorts, which evoked peals of laughter. “ Billy.”
however, was not disconcerted, and despite all his physical
deficiencies he easily dominated the entire assembly
with his arresting eye and air of authority.

As soon as his speech was over he left the Chamber

[for his private room, into which I was presently ushered.

After reading the letter of Sir Alfred Mond, he remarked
that the latter had been very helpful to him in England,
and then asked if he could be of any assistance to me.
I said that I should have liked him to preside at a public meeting, but as he had been away most of the time that
I was in Melbourne, and I had to leave for Sydney the next day, that desire was doomed to disappointment.

He inquired about the progress in Palestine, and especially
about the attitude of the Arabs, and then sharply asked :

“You haven’t come here to recruit emigrants for Palestine ? ”

“ Oh, no, sir,” I assured him. ‘

“Because we can’t spare any,” he added grimly.

He expressed his good wishes for the continuance of my tour, and I withdrew.

It is well worth downloading and reading all 378 pages of this book. Enjoy.

The USA and Israel. Full of it

I noticed this article by David Horowitz in the Times. I don’t understand why people don’t call a spade a spade. America likes to antagonise Israel’s “right” (sic) as anti peace. It’s the same in Melbourne with the left wing of the New (sic) Israel Fund, “Ameinu”, Habonim or Hashomer HaTzair.

Israel’s right isn’t anti peace. Who doesn’t want peace? It will not, however, kowtow to one approach, Obama politics.

Iran? Of course there is nothing to talk about. Fact: they are anti-Semitic. Fact: they deny Israel’s right to exist. Fact: they don’t give a damn about “Palestinians”. Fact: they emblazoned “destruction of Israel” on their missiles. We are in fact the Indigenous people of Israel.

Barack Hussein Obama knows he can’t do anything to Iran unless they step over an “imaginary line”. If that line is crossed, and it may be crossed, then Hilary will adopt Kissinger-like zero-result diplomacy, Trump may well make decisions that cause Americans on the ground to die (as opposed to Obama’s Pareve drone attacks which do nothing except knock off a head which grows again on another body) and Bernie Sanders will always be the darling Jewish talking head of the darlings.

It never ceases to amaze me that the left-wing (who THINK they are the owners of any and all peace proposals) condemn the democratic process. Are they denying Netanyahu and Lieberman to join? This is the Israeli democratic system.

The left wing is full of it. They always have been. Look at Russia and our countryman who invented their “philosophy” of life. If the world was serious, and the world is not serious, then it would allow equal time for prayer according to their sacred democracy and equal rights on the temple mount. I won’t go there for Halachic reasons, but the secular Israeli parliament has legislated that Jews must stay mute. sacré bleu!

Avigdor Liberman and Naftoli Bennet call their spades. People seem to not like spades.

Maybe they prefer the editor of Melbourne’s Australian Jewish News who disgracefully allowed a big feature of an INTER-marriage (read non Jewish marriage) also performed by a נכרי  “celebrant” and chose not to publish letters decrying this תואבה. Don’t get me wrong. People have free choice. They can do as they like. Why doesn’t the aJn tell us what Jewish means in the J  “celebrating” an marriage of assimilation ר’ל . What a disgraceful piece of Jewish journalism. I may as well read the Age.

By the way, Communist/Socialist Lee Brown (Rhiannon) of the Greens (and God help any sane person who votes for that party) is actually halachically Jewish.

[As an aside: I admit to recently finding out that my father’s cousin ע׳ה, with whom he played in the streets of Rawa Mazowiecka before the war decided that the answer to Jewish Persecution was to become a Communist. He became a high-ranking officer and always was surrounded by body guards. His father and brothers were frum, but he “knew” the answer. After the war, he still tried to bribe my father ע’ה to stay in Poland and become a communist as that was the future! Why go to Australia he said. He gave my father an expensive gold coin which my father promptly returned to him. My father ע׳ה didn’t fall for Hitler. He wasn’t going to fall for gold. I never knew of him (except for a reference once my father made in passing) and my father ע’ה didn’t know what happened to him. As השגחה פרטית would have it, his granddaughter was courting an Australian Jew she met in the USA, and she came to a wedding of a friend in Australia. To cut a long story short, I invited her to our house so she could meet her Jewish family. I showed her pictures of her lineage. I told her she was my cousin etc. Her mother advised me via email (they left Poland) that her father (my father’s cousin) regretted his courtship with the left. After the war, teaching himself, he was admitted to a Bachelor of Economics. He finished that and completed a Masters of Economics. He then did a PhD in Economics. Then he discovered what it means to be a Jew, even if you tried to hide it. He was not permitted to submit his thesis for some five years because he was Jewish by none other than his Socialist friends. Yes, after the war. Finally his thesis was defended and he became Dr Balbin. All this time, I thought I was the “first” Dr Balbin (big deal). I was wrong. He then went on and did something beyond a doctorate. I don’t know the details of the Polish University system. Whatever it was, he achieved it. After that, he was ignored.

Disillusioned, he travelled to Vietnam during that war, and helped out on a humanitarian mission, literally giving away the clothes he had, to those who didn’t. He returned with no suitcase. I was told by his daughter, that he knew of his relatives in Melbourne, and he tried to ring them from Vietnam. Unfortunately, that didn’t succeed in those days. He returned to Poland a broken and disillusioned man, but one who now understood the farce of contemporary  Communism and Socialism. He passed away. His wife outlived him, and when she was on her death-bed with cancer, her treating doctor, a famous professor, made an anti-semitic remark. She had no strength, but suddenly found it. Yelling loudly she screamed that “this doctor will never ever go near me again. He is an anti-Semite. I would rather die today than be treated by that toad”.

A few days later she was dead.

Some of my family were “annoyed” I had rediscovered this small branch. I stay in touch. Here is a picture. My father ע’ה is pictured on the bottom left, and the Polish, now American, granddaughter is on the top right. My Aunt and Uncle are also pictured.

IMG_2467

Open your eyes people. The USA Government has a love/hate relationship with us. It does not have true love. It’s what’s known in הלכה as אהבה שתלויה בדבר …. In this case, the דבר, is the דבר אחר.

Most American Jews are so assimilated they don’t know their Krutzmich (scratch me) from the light of a Menorah. I don’t hold out that they will give a Patch (pronounced putch in Yiddish) to the Democrats, but they damn well should. The only reason Israel doesn’t go to the Jewish (on both sides, yes really) Vladimir Putin, is because he hasn’t got the money to give them billions in military aid and Berel Lazar isn’t that important to him. Remember, though, Russia were the first to recognise the State of Israel: there is Jewish blood running thick in the veins of Russia.

The only reason the USA supports us is because of the messianic lobby and real politick and the so-called disappearing Jewish “lobby”.

Do you delude yourself like Horowitz that anyone really cares? They don’t. The slither, ממש, that is ארץ אבותינו doesn’t mean anything to them in real terms.

אבינו מלכינו אין לנו מלך אלא אתה

David’s article follows. Why does he bother?

According to unnamed senior politicians referenced by Israel’s Channel 10 news on Friday night, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s bid to stabilize his coalition by bringing in Yisrael Beytenu, with Avigdor Liberman taking over the Defense Ministry, is likely to have the opposite effect. The government may well collapse, and we could be heading to “new elections in the next six months,” these anonymous top polls predicted.

This is Israeli politics, where every new hour can make a mockery of what you thought you knew the hour before, so it would be wise not to get carried away by such anonymous predictions. But, it’s easy to understand the assessment. The brutal ousting of capable, temperate and loyal Moshe Ya’alon, in favor of the inexpert, intemperate and disloyal Liberman, has caused dismay across the spectrum, and not only in opposition circles.

The Jewish Home coalition party has manufactured a crisis over it, demanding an overhaul of the process by which the key security cabinet is provided with information in times of war and conflict, vowing otherwise to block Liberman’s appointment.

Kulanu’s Environmental Protection Minister Avi Gabbay has followed Ya’alon’s lead in resigning from government in protest at one cynical political maneuver too many; like Ya’alon a week before, Gabbay on Friday slammed the door on his way out with a warning that, under this increasingly extremist coalition, Israel is heading down the path to destruction.

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Yisrael Beytenu leader Avigdor Liberman announce their coalition agreement, May 25, 2016 (Yonatan Sindel/FLASH90)
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Yisrael Beytenu leader Avigdor Liberman announce their coalition agreement, May 25, 2016 (Yonatan Sindel/Flash90)

Kulanu, a party crucial to Netanyahu’s Knesset majority, is plainly discomfited by the unfolding events, and is trying to persuade Zionist Union’s Isaac Herzog to enter the government — ludicrously, since Herzog was so badly burned by his last effort to negotiate terms for a unity deal with Netanyahu that his party leadership is under unprecedented threat.

In Netanyahu’s own Likud ranks, the wave of criticism rolls on. MK Benny Begin immediately pronounced himself horrified by the Ya’alon-for-Liberman trade. On Saturday, deputy minister Ayoub Kara declared that ex-corporal Liberman, who never served in an IDF combat role, is simply not fit to succeed ex-chief of staff Ya’alon.

Herzog has claimed that he held talks with Netanyahu, at great risk to his own political career, because Israel currently has a rare opportunity to make headway toward regional peace, but that the prime minister, in jilting him for blunt, bleak, settler Liberman, “ran away” from the compromises and domestic political battles seizing such an opportunity would have entailed.

And even the United States has weighed in, with the State Department articulating concerns over Israel’s direction. Asked about incoming defense minister Liberman hours after the new coalition deal was signed on Wednesday, spokesman Mark Toner stressed that the administration would, of course, “work with this government as we have with every Israeli government that preceded it, with the goal of strengthening our cooperation.”

But he allowed himself a little foray into what might be considered internal Israeli politics. Said Toner: “We’ve also seen reports from Israel describing it as the most right-wing coalition in Israel’s history. And we also know that many of its ministers have said they opposed a two-state solution. This raises legitimate questions about the direction it may be headed in, and what kind of policies it may adopt, but ultimately we’re going to judge this government based on its actions.”

I have written two columns in recent days criticizing the ouster of Ya’alon and his imminent replacement by Liberman, and I wouldn’t be surprised if the Netanyahu gambit does come to be regarded as a turning point when it comes to the electorate’s opinion of the prime minister.

But I’m struck, nonetheless, by the criticism from Washington — issued even though Liberman pledged at the coalition signing ceremony that he was “committed to a balanced policy that will bring stability to the region and to our country”; he even switched to English to pledge his commitment to “peace and to a final status agreement, and to understanding between us and our neighbors.”

What’s perhaps most telling about the response from Washington is that it was so very different to the administration’s response, one day earlier, to dramatic political developments in Iran — where, coincidentally, a hard-liner was being elevated in somewhat different circumstances to a yet more powerful position.

On Tuesday, a day before Netanyahu and Liberman signed their deal, Iran’s Assembly of Experts chose Ayatollah Ahmad Jannati as its new chairman. The Assembly oversees the actions of Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei, and come the day, will select Khamenei’s successor. That makes Jannati one of the most powerful figures in Iran, arguably the most powerful.

Ahmad Jannati, widely described as the most radical of Iran’s senior clerics, is not a nice man. He opposes any notion of Iranian political reform. He backs the execution of political dissidents. He insists that Iran’s women cover up beneath the hijab. Needless to say, he loathes Israel. And he loathes the United States.

Here’s Jannati in 2007: “At the end of the day, we are an anti-American regime. America is our enemy, and we are the enemies of America. The hostility between us is not a personal matter. It is a matter of principle.”

In 2008: “You cried: ‘Death to the Shah,’ and indeed, he died. You cried: ‘Death to Israel,’ and it is now on its deathbed. You cry: ‘Death to America,’ and before long, Allah [he’s not my God] willing, the prayer for the dead will be recited over it.”

And in 2014: “‘Death to America’ [is] the first option on our table… This is the slogan of our entire people without exception. This is our number one slogan.”

In this photo released by the official website of the office of the Iranian Presidency, hard-line Iranian cleric Ayatollah Ahmad Jannati speaks during an inaugural meeting of the Assembly of Experts in Tehran, May 24, 2016. Jannati was chosen on Tuesday as speaker of the Assembly of Experts, a clerical body that is mainly tasked with selecting the country’s supreme leader. The official IRNA news agency said 89-year-old Ayatollah Ahmad Jannati won 51 votes in the 88-seat Assembly and would serve as speaker for the next two years. (Iranian Presidency Office via AP)
In this photo released by the official website of the office of the Iranian Presidency, hard-line Iranian cleric Ayatollah Ahmad Jannati speaks during an inaugural meeting of the Assembly of Experts in Tehran, May 24, 2016. (Iranian Presidency Office via AP)

Given that the United States last year led the diplomatic process that culminated in an agreement to rein in (but not dismantle) Iran’s rogue nuclear program; given that President Barack Obama has been urging Iran to “move toward a more constructive relationship with the world community”; given that Iran is a state sponsor of terrorism and a regional troublemaker; given that Iran continues to develop its ballistic missile program… you might be forgiven for thinking that the selection of the radically hostile Jannati would raise “legitimate questions about the direction” in which Iran may be headed, “and what kind of policies it may adopt.”

And indeed, a day before he was asked about Liberman, the State Department’s Mark Toner was questioned at his daily press briefing about Jannati. Did he express his dismay at the selection of an official viciously hostile to the US and Israel to so prestigious a role? Did he communicate America’s concern about the grim message that the choice of Jannati represented? He did not.

Here’s the full exchange:

Question: “You’ll have seen, I’m sure, the reports that Ahmad Jannati, a 90-year-old anti-Western cleric, has been chosen as the head of Iran’s new Assembly of Experts, which is in charge of selecting the new or whomever will be the next supreme leader. Is this a good thing? Is this a bad thing? And does this suggest that Iran may be moving toward a more pro-Western, more open-toward-the-West stance?”

Question: “Or do you have faith in Iran’s internal democratic procedures?” (Laughter.)

Mark Toner: “Let me see if I have anything pithy to say about that.”

Question: “And do you regard Iran as an ally in the fight against terrorism?” (Laughter.)

Toner: “You’re talking about – yeah, no. Have at it, guys. (Laughter.) We follow domestic events in Iran closely, as you know, but we don’t have any comment at this point on the outcome of the leadership elections of the Assembly of Experts.”

Raising questions about Israel’s direction, after Liberman, promising a commitment to peacemaking, joins the coalition. But staying silent about Iran’s direction, after Jannati, a man who declaredly seeks the destruction of the United States, is elected to head the Assembly of Experts.

Have at it, guys.

 

Missing the point about Jews, Judaism and Zionism

We are used to worrying about the BDS boycott, and various academic boycotts and the like. There has been no talk of boycotts in my University. If the National Tertiary Education Union went down those stairs and/or the University, there would be mayhem.

What attracted my attention today is a statement we hear over and over, in various guises and contexts. The statement is attributed in the Jerusalem to former Chief Rabbi Sacks, a brilliant speaker and writer. He is alleged to have said

Speaking to The Jerusalem Post, Sacks said that some politicians in the British Labour Party had courted the Muslim vote and had adopted anti-Israel attitudes which have morphed into anti-Semitism.

I could not DISagree more. Where is the clear thinking. Anti-Israel attitudes expressed in the context of ‘we must solve the problem of Palestinian Arabs’ is nothing more than anti-Semitism. This is not anti-Zionism. The logic is exceedingly simple. There is no body, none, that will agree that Jews deserve a homeland, and that homeland is Israel. This narrative is elided too often. Some will quibble over the definition of borders and security provisions and so forth. They are issues that should be discussed. However, since 1948 and before that, there is still no recognition that Jews need a homeland. In this I include the entire spectrum of Jews in Israel except for the hand full of lunatics led by Moshe Ber Beck, the Iranian nuzzler. He is welcome to live there, and be happy. They are not religious Jews. They have seen that all their sycophantic activities amount to nothing but Bitul Torah while protesting and travel.

No, Rabbi Sacks. Nothing has “morphed“. This is classic fallacy filled British diplomacy . The anti-Semitic Ken Livingstone types of this world should be dethroned, but to allow the semblance of thought that Jews are not entitled to their homeland, as above, and call this entitlement Zionism, is bizarre, I find it difficult to comprehend. Nay, this is an attack on Judaism 101. We assert our right to live in peaceful boundaries. Those who seek to deny this right, whether emanating from explicit charter, whispering, obfuscation or diplobabble (the French Connection) are anti-Semites.

As Rav Kook so eloquently put it:

“It is only the anticipation of redemption that preserves Judaism in Exile, while Judaism in the Land of Israel is the redemption itself.”

This redemption is what we aspire to.

[ Only an ignorant would interpret this to mean Rav Kook’s Judaism in Exile was not infused with Torah. ]

 

Challenges

There are a number in Melbourne. I won’t elaborate but 

חיה ביילא בת לאה בתיה 

Is one which hits home personally and she should get back to full health quickly.

I was at a Simcha tonight, and all I heard was ‘it’s terrible what’s going on in Melbourne lately’

Then somebody sent me THIS CHILLUL HASHEM

If I was there I would take the parents and teachers and air drop them into Gaza. That’s obviously their home. Disgraceful low lives.

Interesting article—Working does not contradict Torah

[Hat tip Kracower]

Yehuda Meshi Zahav

ZAKA chairman Yehuda Meshi Zahav describes sparingly and with restraint the things he and thousands of his volunteers at ZAKA do. ZAKA is a haredi (ultra-Orthodox Jewish) organization that rescues, identifies, and traces Jewish disaster victims in Israel and all over the world under sometimes virtually impossible conditions. Such a mission requires love of one’s fellow man, great empathy, faith, and a belief that good will come of it. It requires Zahav, a man with impeccable curly white payess (sidecurls).

Two months ago, following a four-year struggle, ZAKA won recognition as an official UN consultant and observer. The eventual decision was taken unanimously by a special UN committee composed of representatives of 19 countries, including Iran, Sudan, Venezuela, Cuba, Turkey, China, Russia, Pakistan, Uruguay, Burundi, Greece, the US, and Israel.

“Globes”: Did Iran and Pakistan also vote in favor?

Zahav: “There was no opposition, not even one country. We sent our representative, who met with every one of the committee members. The Iranians asked us if the report that ZAKA treats Jews first and Arabs later at terrorist events was true. We said that they hadn’t read it correctly. We treat the victim first, and then the murderer, regardless of nationality. They realized this, and voted in favor.”

About-face: From extremist haredi operations officer to national hero

Once upon a time, Zahav was the operations officer of the Eda Haredit extremist haredi group. He led demonstrations against Sabbath desecration, burnt Israeli flags, fasted and wore mourning clothes on Israel Independence Day, illegally removed dead bodies from the Abu Kabir Forensic Institute to prevent autopsies from being performed and put mice into the pathologists’ rooms, and sneaked onto archeological sites in order to prevent archeological excavations. Since then, however, Zahav has been honored by being asked to light a torch on Mt. Herzl while calling aloud in a clear voice, “For the glory of the state of Israel.” His grandfather, Rabbi Yosef Sheinberger, the mythological leader of the Eda Haredit and a fanatical opponent of the founding of Israel, refused to speak with Zahav for the last four years of his life. For Sheinberger, what Zahav did was a desecration of God’s name.

The change in Zahav began on July 6, 1989, when a terrorist blew up a bus on the 405 route from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem. It happened on a road in front of the Telz-Stone yeshiva (Jewish religious seminary) in Neva Ilan. Zahav and his friends wanted to see what was happening, “and then, when the dismembered bodies were laid out before my eyes, when the sirens were echoing among the smoky fragments of the bus, when the bloodstained clothes were scattered over the area, when entire families were broken and erased in an instant, I realized that the quarrels between us were meaningless. The type of skullcap you wear and the kind of clothes you wear pale in comparison with the real war we’re faced with. The Arab enemy doesn’t distinguish between the blood of a haredi, a secular person, and someone who’s modern Orthodox. We’re all connected. There’s no right or left. Everyone’s pain is the same. That was the moment when I crossed the lines and abandoned the ideology of haredi Judaism,” he later said, just before lighting the torch in honor of the ZAKA volunteers in 2003.

“Since then,” he says today, “I have been repenting. I put my efforts in the right place.” That also includes severe criticism of the leaders of the community he is identified with. “I didn’t see the haredi leaders with the bereaved families,” he said during one of the IDF campaigns in the Gaza Strip. “There were 20,000 people at the funeral, but I didn’t see black clothes there. There might have been haredim here or there, but when we want to, we can fill any place with black clothes.”

….

To read the full article click globes.

Published by Globes [online], Israel business news – www.globes-online.com – on April 27, 2016

© Copyright of Globes Publisher Itonut (1983) Ltd. 2016

J-Street: the fifth column

They have concerns when a “settler leader” is appointed to a diplomatic post? Why? Why not have concerns when someone who is so left-wing that they have little connection with the Jewish dynamic of Israel is appointed to a position?

J-Street talk about two State solutions. The problem with them is that their starting point is not that any such discussion should be based on Israel as the State for JEWS. Would they accept talks that spoke of a State for Palestinians which was Judenrein? The answer is yes, they would. Their hypocrisy knowns no bounds and is consistent with the rhetoric of the left wing Reform movement which shares many practices with traditional Judaism, but is a tangential religion. I’d say that Shiites and Sunnis have more in common than Reform/J-Street and traditional orthodox Judaism. We are different though: we don’t kill each other over differences.

J-Street state:

 In the last year several Israeli officials in the US have “sent the message that Israel’s government is far more serious about legitimizing and entrenching settlements than they are about the two-state solution.”

Why can’t they be? Mahmoud Abbas is more serious about legitimising and entrenching hatred, incitement and terrorism than he is about a two state solution. He might want a two state solution, but every Palestinian leader knows that he or she will end up with their head blown to smithereens by their own if they ever signed an agreement with Israel, even if it was based on the indefensible 1967 borders.

As the Jerusalem Post noted:

The organization cited the appointment of Danny Danon as Israel’s Ambassador to the United Nations, Ambassador Ron Dermer’s decision to send out gift packages filled with settlement products to officials and Tzipi Hotovely’s call for Israeli diplomats to tell the world that “this country is all ours. We didn’t come here to apologize for that” as examples.

Clearly J-Street have not read the EU declaration on its labelling policy. There is nothing illegal about the products. They simply must be labelled because they don’t fall under the EU’s definition of Israel and the free trade agreement.

J-Street are so left-wing, I do not know how they could cope with the following truisms of David Ben Gurion which are as true then as they are now, let alone Isaac Herzog’s doctrine of walled separation.

If your Ivrit isn’t good, it is well worth watching this with someone who can translate. One can guess what Ben Gurion would have thought of J-Street and their unwelcome incursions into Israeli diplomatic appointments. J-Street forget that they do not vote for the Prime Minister of Israel of his coalition. If they want to grand stand, they do harm. If they want to influence, then I’d suggest discussing issues with Israel directly is an approach that is more positive.

J-Street quote a Conservative “Rabbi” as support against Trump when he says

Donald Trump’s words weren’t the worst part of his appearance before the world’s largest annual Jewish gathering, the AIPAC Policy Conference in Washington, DC. The standing ovations from many in the Verizon Center when he attacked the President of the United States were.

The last time I looked one was permitted to express disdain for the policies of a President. Isn’t it time any group who feel badly done by are not attacked by J-Street for doing so? Goodness only knows, J-Street would be doing so if Donald Trump became president. The move to the right by the USA is entirely linked to the extreme move to the left and the inactive diplomacy of Obama. He is widely seen as ineffective. This is also borne out by the fact that all of a sudden Saudi Arabia has formed a large coalition of Arab countries file under its direction, and declared Hezbollah a terrorist organisation. This would never have happened if Obama had been seen as pro-active, as opposed to a fence-sitter and drone-user. Obama has been trumped (sic) in Syria by Putin and Iran, and his strategies are most difficult to fathom. His one achievement has been to “stay out of trouble”. It is as if he is spooked by leadership. Leadership means that there are times when you must lead and not stand back and talk ad nausea.

J-Street were emboldened by Obama. They would not be emboldened by Hillary Clinton but would love the Jew who avoid his Jewishness, Bernie Sanders. Sanders would be an unmitigated socialist disaster for the USA and Israel.

How many Jews in Melbourne hold these perverted views?

Does the Adass breakaway, “Divrei Emineh”?

Do Satmar and the Neturei Karta in Adass?

How many only disagree in as much as they shouldn’t be saying this (out loud), but actually subscribe to this discredited view of R’ Yoelish of Satmar? Emphasis is mine. Text is from my Mashgiach, Rav Rivlin שליט’’א

The Gemara in Ketubot (111a) derives from the triple mention of the pasuk, “I have bound you in oath, O daughters of Jerusalem” (Shir Hashirim), that Hashem bound Am Yisrael and the nations of the world with three oaths. The first oath is, “shelo yaalu bachoma,” that the Jews should not forcibly, “break through the wall,” and enter Eretz Yisrael. The second is that the Jews should not rebel against the nations. The third is that the nations of the world should not oppress Yisrael too much over the course of the exile. According to R. Zera, there are three additional oaths which relate to the ultimate redemption. The Gemara concludes with the threat that if Israel violates these oaths, their flesh will be made free like wild animals in the field, i.e., Hashem would bring upon them great suffering and physical destruction.

The Satmar Rebbe, Rav Yoel Teitelbaum, claims in “Vayoel Moshe” that Hashem brought about the Holocaust because the Zionist movement caused the Jews to violate the “Three Oaths.” Since the Jewish people forcefully went to resettle Eretz Yisrael, Hashem brought upon them massive destruction, as the Gemara warns in its conclusion. Rav Shlomo Aviner compiled thirteen answers to this claim, amongst them the following:

1) Rav Teitelbaum’s claim rests on the fact that there was a “choma,” that the nations of the world prohibited the Jews from settling in the land of Israel. The Avnei Nezer writes that this oath does not apply when the nations give Yisrael permission to return. Following the Balfour Declaration and the San Remo Conference, in which the nations of the world determined that the Jewish people have a right to settle the land of Israel, the oaths do not apply. The Midrash hints to this idea, that if Bnei Yisrael have permission to enter the land they do not violate the oaths.

2) Another answer is that once there is a sign from Hashem to return to the land, the oaths no longer apply. In addition to the permission given by the nations, the national reawakening and birth of modern Zionism can be viewed as a sign from Hashem that it is permissible to return to the land. The oaths were not an “issur” (absolute prohibition), but rather national tendencies that Hashem instilled within Klal Yisrael which would cause them to remain unmotivated to return to their land. Also, throughout most of the exile, it was very difficult physically for Jews to return to Eretz Yisrael. Once a wide scale movement with an objective to return to Eretz Yisrael began, and it was physically possible to begin Aliya to Eretz Yisrael, it became clear that the oath was no longer in effect.

3) The Gemara in Sanhedrin (98a) says that when Eretz Yisrael gives forth fruit abundantly, it is a sure sign that the redemption is coming. Eretz Yisrael, in the time of the Zionist movement, began blooming and giving forth fruits unlike any previous time since the destruction of the land. This sign of redemption showed that the oath was no longer in effect.

3) Rav Teichtal, in his work, “Em Habanim Smeicha,” offers another explanation. Although the Jews were sworn not to enter Eretz Yisrael forcefully, the nations of the world were also sworn not to persecute the Jews too much. Over the course of the exile, the Jews were severely persecuted by the gentiles. Because the gentiles violated their oath, the Jews were no longer bound by their oath.

4) According to some opinions, the only way to violate the oath would be if people came to Eretz Yisrael in very large groups. Since the Jews entered the land slowly, and over the course of many years, they did not violate the oath.

5) The author of the “Hafla’ah” maintains that the oaths only apply to those who are in the exile of Bavel, and not in other lands.

6) R’ Chaim Vital explains that the oath only applied for 1000 years, not longer.

7) The Gra writes that the oath applies only to building the Beit Hamikdash, not to entering Eretz Yisrael.

8) Elsewhere in the Gemara there are other, conflicting, sources. Furthermore, the Gemara regarding the “Three Oaths” is aggada, and we do not decide halacha based on aggada. [I add that this isn’t even from Torah and Neviim, but from Kesuvim, the weakest link in determining Halacha]

Based on all of these explanations, there is ample basis to say that the movement to return to Eretz Yisrael was a positive, not a negative, one. In fact, others maintain just the opposite, that the Holocaust was because Jews became entrenched in galut and did not return to Eretz Yisrael. Since we are not living in a generation of prophecy, it is very difficult for us to determine exactly why Hashem brings specific punishments to the world. However, the Gemara does teach us that when we are afflicted with punishment, we should look into our actions, and try to fix our bad deeds. By looking at the Akeida, we may gain some insight regarding the Holocaust.

One of the most famous tests of Avraham was Akeidat Yitzchak. We constantly mention the Akeida in our prayers, and we still reap the benefits of this test. The question is asked, what is so special about this test? Avraham did not even do any great action of sacrifice, because in the end he did not slaughter his son. There were many other tests which Avraham actually fulfilled which are not so commonly mentioned!

Furthermore, Rav Dessler questions the very concept of “zechut Avot” (merit of the Patriarchs). If two criminals violated the same law, one coming from a dysfunctional family and one from a normal background, logic dictates that the one from a normal background should be punished more severely. When we come to Hashem and tell Him that we are descendants of Avraham, Yitzchak and Yaakov, this should work against us! Why is there zechut? In fact, Rabbeinu Bachya says that sometimes it is best not to mention zechut avot. After the sin of the spies, Moshe pleaded to Hashem and did not mention that Hashem is “notzer chesed la’alafim,” that He rewards for good deeds for generations to come. Moshe did not want Hashem to say, “If Bnei Yisrael came from such great people, why did they sin?”

Perhaps this insight can explain why we ask Hashem to remember the Akeida, as opposed to other tests of Avraham. Many times Am Yisrael does not live up to the other tests which Avraham was tested with. Through our entire history, however, Am Yisrael lived up to the test of the Akeida, and on many occasions Jews were willing to die “al kiddush Hashem” (in sanctification of G-d’s name).

The Torah introduces the story of the Akeida with the phrase, “It happened after these things.” (Bereishit 22:1) The parsha directly before the Akeida is the story in which Avraham makes a peace-covenant with Avimelech. The Rashbam explains that Avraham was tested with the Akeida because he did not have a sufficiently strong connection with Eretz Yisrael, and was willing to make a pact with Avimelech, thereby forfeiting some of his right to the land. The Tanna D’vei Eliyahu writes that any nation which has a serious conflict with Yisrael, does so only because of the pact which Avraham signed with Avimelech. Hashem always had a two-part covenant with Yisrael: descendants and Eretz Yisrael. Because Avraham was willing to give part of Eretz Yisrael, Hashem said, “I will take the other half of the pact — your son.”

Although we are not prophets, and we cannot determine which punishments correspond to which sins, we must try to learn lessons from events which happen in this world. Today it is clear that our bond to Eretz Yisrael still needs strengthening. If we pray and strengthen our connection to Eretz Yisrael, there will be an end to all of the Akeidot.

For those who want to seriously understand why Satmar and these clowns are dead wrong, read this from the Seforim Blog.

I note they don’t mention Gog and Magog, and the Jewish Redemption where their friends will be beholden to the Beis Hamikdash and Elokus. Politically, they don’t mention that, because they are of course afraid. These are the Jews about which the Torah says “stay home, you are afraid to go to war and you are an impedance”. Help your wives with the washing, cooking and food provision.

I notice Issy Weiss of Neturei Karta wears the palestinian scarf. Why doesn’t he put a Kaffiyeh on and add tzitzis to the corners. Now there’s solidarity.

 

Methodologies to attract members: ARK — revised

Over the weekend, I was strongly encouraged  to repost my article. I had one comment which was valid in retrospect, and I am taking that fully into account in this revision. I was not aware, but a number of people have mentioned that R’ Shneur Zalman Waks is involved in conversions, including one involving the marriage of a Cohen. I was informed he has his own Beth Din and does not involve the Melbourne Beth Din. That’s not to say his conversions are invalid. I can’t give an opinion without knowing details. If anyone knows, do tell. We have RMG Rabi’s Beth Din which does conversions, R Schneur Zalman’s ARK Beth Din for conversion, Adass which has always been separatist, in addition to the standard and fully internationally accepted Melbourne Beth Din. In my opinion, a community should only have one Beth Din and it should be modelled on the Melbourne Beth Din, with its checks and balances from a lay committee, including a separation from money issues.

The original reason for this post, however, was that someone sent me emails that Shneur Zalman sends to his ARK community (of which I know little) and I’m commenting on the last one that I received.

Shneur Zalman of ARK, is someone who is different and seemingly diverse. That, in of itself, isn’t a problem provided he is sincere and maintains a fidelity to strict Halacha. I’ve decided to intersperse commentary on his most recent article because I found it vexing. The quotes below are verbatim from what was sent to me.

Growing up in a strictly Chabad home in the days before internet meant that my information sources were rather limited. We weren’t allowed to listen to radio, watch television, or read ‘secular’ books, so I became a Jewish History buff.

This is a questionable representation. There are plenty, including Rabbis, who were and stay intimately involved in many issues and who have strongly different views than Shneur Zalman. The statement that bothers me is that it is crafted to convince ARK congregants that Shneur was born into a prison-like idyllic “crown heights” or “kfar chabad” standard Chabad home of a most orthodox type. This has been a matter of discussion by members of that family itself. I do not know if ARK members have been exposed to counter claims. This is contextually important.

Shneur Waks and wife Lisa

The issue of Chabad in particular is profoundly misplaced. All ultra orthodox groups encourage minimisation of interaction with the outside world unless necessary.  Of all the ultra groups who have a higher percentage who are exposed to the outside world, Chabad is clearly the one most exposed and experienced (and pilloried as a result). That being said, it might be that Shneur Zalman’s  parents had no hidden TV or other devices, and a computer was locked for use for “business” purposes. I do not know. Perhaps he was denied access to the world.

It is ironic though that Shneur Zalman’s claimed TV and Radio-avoiding family chose to agree many years ago and feature in full length documentaries for SBS about how they get on with life!  I assume these were motivated primarily for the benefit of the non Orthodox and gentiles who do watch TV and whom the family they wished to influence to adopt their “idyllic Amish-like lifestyle?  I’m sure the parents felt this was prototypical Chabad Chasidism encouraging others to have double-digit children while demonstrating how it could be done with dynamic results. My band members (non Jewish, watched it with incredulity). Maybe this was a form of outreach, though, using the very medium Shneur Zalman claims was discouraged to engage with. I assume Shneur Zalman was part of that documentary. Based on his description, he might appeared like a rabbit in bright lights not knowing anything about the outside world, save his claim to be a self-made “Jewish History buff”, appearing bewildered by the brouhaha.  I have not seen the video, as the topic per se had never been of interest to me.

From my religious study I already knew about the suffering of the Jews as they were enslaved by the Egyptians, nearly annihilated by the Persians, and oppressed by the Greeks and Romans. But added to that I discovered the long history of Christian antisemitism; peaking during the Crusades, Spanish Inquisition, Pogroms, and of course culminating in the devastating Holocaust.

Shneur Zalman has been selective. He implies that his “History buff” knowledge informed him of Xtian antisemitism, the inquisition, pogroms and the holocaust, but these were denied by his education. I find this derisorious. All these events save the last, are covered in formal long lamentations  on Tisha B’Av, and spoken about on Pesach. Either Kinos wasn’t said, or understood, or Shneur Zalman met teachers throughout his entire Jewish education who always put a full stop at the Roman Conquest.

Everyone is aware of the Holocaust, including the ultra orthodox  and the survivors who occupied the pews. Does Shneur Zalman not know what happened because of his religious upbringing at home?. Even Satmar knows!

Shneur Zalman is disingenuous about modern-day events. He most definitely would have heard how his namesake was persecuted by the Communists and dreaded NKVD. Strangely, Shneur Zalman doesn’t seem to mention the systematic attempts at destroying Torah Judaism to eradicate the Jewish people in the Soviet Union. The Nazis attempted it physically, the Soviets were happy if one abandoned Judaism spiritually and adopted a (ironically Jewish sourced) Stalinism or Marxism, that considered a Jewish text, to be poison and to be eradicated.

Shneur Zalman tells us that

I read every book I could get my hands on which told the story of the darkest years in human history and heard the story from the mouths of many survivors. When we then sang the Vehi Sheamda on Seder night, which basically translates that in every generation there are those who want to kill us, it was felt in a most immediate fashion.

Shneur Zalman’s  own Chabad School has a very good free lending library almost next door to his house. Are we to assume that his parents forbade him to borrow books from that library (let alone his excellent School library) or perhaps they they vetted the books lest they would corrupt their son with hatred to those hell-bent on killing Jews at any time or place? I think not. Is Shneur Zalman being purposefully disingenuous here or just tardy? I’m not sure.

I surmise that Shneur Zalman is  naïve  if he considers himself a “Jewish history buff” and yet could write

At some point I came to question the point of this message. Granted, we should never be complacent about antisemitism. We have suffered too deeply to be so naïve. But I personally never experienced antisemitism. Sure there were Saturday morning drunks who could scream out “bloody Jew”, but to rate that at all would be to belittle the traumas inflicted on our people. So what relevance does the story of antisemitism have to me, my generation, and the ones younger?

How did Shneur Zalman know that only drunks screamed this message from their fast-moving car? Is he superman with X-ray vision?

It is incredulous that anyone could emerge as a self-proclaimed ” Jewish History buff” and yet feel that because in the short cloistered walk of 1 minute from his house to his School (remember, he claims he was forbidden to be exposed to the real world) he concluded that people who called out “bloody jew” in that moment, were not hard-core anti-Semites. What a strange intuition. It in fact contradicts the beginning of each and every blood bath the Jews faced. Does Shneur Zalman not realise that they all started with small voices of “bloody Jew” and then grew into a society unfettered by morals and ethics proceeding to death and destruction. Does Shneur Zalman not realise that if he took a number plate and reported it to the police that those who said those things would be prosecuted for hate crime? Was Shneur Zalman blind and deaf  to a prominent incident, next door to his home, where one of his chassidic colleagues was beaten by off-duty police. It was all over the papers and the talk of the centre. Did Shneur Zalman miss the articles or was he forbidden to read them.

I contrast that with my experience which is philosophically diametrically opposed

Walking with my father to Elwood Shule, we stood in the middle of Brighton Road on the tram tracks. A car load of “young and restless” passed us, rolled down their window, and called out “Bloody Jews”. To me, standing next to my elderly father, a holocaust survivor, this was simply not on. I took off on a fast run down the tram tracks of Brighton Road in my suit, hoping that their car would be stopped by a red light. Luckily, it was. I reached their car, thumped hard on their window and bonnet. Startled, they turned their heads and heard me yell at the top of my voice.

If you filthy scumbag anti Semites ever say that again, I will smash your bones and report you to the police. Don’t ever take a Jew lightly. I will break every bone in your body if you dare say that again

I went to the same school as Shneur Zalman. I don’t attribute my then reaction to the school in totality, let alone should Shneur Zalman be insinuating that his lack of understanding of the beginnings of anti-Semitism had anything to do with his home or his school. This was Shneur Zalman’s  reaction, and his alone. His sad misunderstanding of anti-Semitism, is there for all to I see in that paragraph.

By the way, my father later asked me why I reacted with such crazed venom. I explained that precisely because of the message of Pesach and his place as a survivor, I for one was not ever going to be a  Jew who minimised such vituperation in the way that Shneur Zalman seemingly professed to his ARK community in tame words and wonderful sculptures.

A wedding at ARK. (I’m not sure who the second witness is, based on this picture)

Jumping back to where Shneur Zalman was heading, he informs us

The most prominent response I came across when I was younger was that we should never trust the Goy. We were even taught in the first chapter of the Tanya, the seminal work of Chabad philosophy written by my namesake, that non-Jews are inherently incapable of good deeds, that whatever seemingly kind acts they perform are for their own selfish gain.

I see this as sloganeering. The lack of definition and intentional misrepresentation is breathtaking. Firstly, he claims this was the most “prominent” response. Response to what? Response to anti-Semitism? What is the context of trust here? Was it trust in business? Trust in Tae Kwan do? Even a young Shneur Zalman would know that this is not manifestly practiced by any ultra orthodox people (who may have more tangles in business with many Jews than they do with non Jews.)

What was he getting at, I thought? Was he saying that he was taught that a non-Jew was more likely to thrust a knife in his back than a Jew? If so, statistics would say that this is entirely correct whether one is ultra orthodox or not. Does Shneur Zalman not know of a gentile reporter who recently donned a Yarmulka and found that this immediately made him a magnet of hate, violence, and derision. Heck, the reporter was featured everywhere.

Does Shneur Zalman still not read the popular press? Perhaps he subscribes to the doctrine that it’s all because of the “settlements”. I guess the prime settlement of Tel Aviv, which is still claimed by Hamas and their ilk as the problem as well as the mere existence of Jews? Or perhaps Shneur Zalman sides with Neturei Karta or Mahmoud Abbas, that a Jewish homeland, should never exist? Alternatively, he might be one of the mixed up clerics who think that sharing bread and holding hands with clerics of other religions espousing “social justice” will solve the latent hate blatantly expressed in the texts of their religions, while clasping hands for photo ops. Will Shneur Zalman change that? It has never solved anything. I don’t see a “Jewish history buff”.

Now, I do not profess to have more than a simple passing knowledge of Chabad metaphysics as described in Tanya, but I do know that it is not a Shulchan Aruch as Shneur Zalman had his ARK members misunderstand. One of its tenets, which isn’t universally held (I hope Shneur Zalman is able to transmit authentic  other Orthodox approaches and that he isn’t still in the “imprisoned cloistered” youth that he painted, Tanya is a collection of older texts rewritten coherently and beautifully. Jews do have an element of Neshama that non-Jews do not. The oldies used to call it the “pintlele yid”. This has ramifications to understanding conversion, and whilst it most certainly is a valid understanding of Judaism, I’d hope Shneur Zalman isn’t on some populist anti-Chabad rant  presenting it as the only  Orthodox approach to understanding the metaphysics of the soul. It seems that Shneur Zalman either forgot, or chose not to mention many Talmudic statements which, if understood in a simple way are far more contentious. More importantly, projecting other Orthodox approaches would be a great idea if he didn’t “like” the Tanya’s sources.

What I can say without any doubt is that his namesake was an absolute giant of an intellect on par with the Gaon of Vilna, and was possessed with a love of Jews and the future of Judaism that was legendary. That he chose sides in the Russian/French non-Jewish conflict is remarkable. Perhaps Shneur Zalman should tell his ARKers about how his name sake  made the right choice and that almost single-handedly saved Soviet Jewry from obliteration. To this day, moderate Rabbis such as Rabbi Riskin make kiddush on Vodka on Shabbos because of the incredible legacy that Shneur Zalman’s  name sake left in Russia. Shneur Zalman will readily admit he isn’t a boot lace compared to his name sake: either in matters of standard Jewish Law, or in matters of Jewish Metaphysics or as a Jewish History buff. Is there anybody today?

Next Shneur Zalman makes what seems to be a leap of logic from his earlier statement, that confounds understanding.

But that is a very depressing message. Moreover, it contradicts our experience. And most importantly, that message is precisely the message propounded by the most evil of people. I mean isn’t that precisely what Hitler was saying in the inverse? Surely that can’t be the moral of the story.

Shneur Zalman, it would be profoundly incorrect to assume that every non-Jew is an anti Semite. It would also be wrong to assume that many non Jews are indeed anti semitic but it’s definitely on the rise. I have personally experienced it in today’s age of the culturally sophisticated.

Hitler? Has Shneur missed out ? Has he taught ARK about Amalek? We read it today in Shule. I know of no Jewish gangs who take baseball bats to Lakemba or Coburg with the aim of obliterating Lebanese Muslim anti-Semites who openly say Jews should all die (as does Hamas). Again, perhaps Shneur Zalman has not caught up with current events? He seems to live in a utopian but unrealistic world.

Over the last two weeks, ARK Centre has been hosting an incredible exhibition put on by Courage to Care that provides an answer to this question most profoundly and resolutely. We must remember the suffering of our people not in order to perpetuate trauma but to learn the evils of bigotry and what happens when good people stand by and allow it to happen. We must learn to be up-standers, not by-standers!

The exhibition contained a number of evocative pieces. The one that affected me most deeply was a piece by an incredibly inspiring, youthful, and optimistic, 89 Year old Sarah Saaroni. It is a sculpture of Dr Janusz Korczak, a paediatrician and head of an orphanage, who had an opportunity to save himself but decided to stay with the children as they were gassed to death. In the sculpture he is holding, embracing, and comforting a dozen children or so as they are standing in the gas chamber. The image really is heart wrenching and now, as a father of two beautiful children I love so dearly, it really is difficult to process.

But the sculpture is more than a statement about the unbelievable depravity of the Nazis who could do this to pure children. It is a tribute to the spiritual depth of the doctor who, in the midst of absolute darkness, was able to radiate a beam of holiness, of love. His facial expression left me, and I dare say anyone who sees it, with a sense of warmth and serenity.

I’m not sure how Shneur Zalman’s  religious education seems to have forgotten the concept of the other Chassidim. Yes, the חסידי אומות העולם.  The righteous gentiles. Note: they are called Chassidim, Shneur Zalman.

I do hope Shneur Zalman exposes ARK to that concept. It was there well before the cultured sculptures, and has a history as long as the history of anti-Semitism. Furthermore, his namesake writes about them and their reward in the world to come. Is Shneur Zalman trying to turn  his congregation into populist left-wing tree huggers? Let Shneur Zalman break bread and condemn Senator Lee Rhiannon of the loony greens to ARK. Would he? Perhaps he should remind ARK about German Jewry who were more German than the Germans, and that it did not help them in the “advanced” socialist democracy of Germany.

Don’t misread me. I interacted with 400+ non Jewish alumni on my Facebook. I didn’t have family or friends on facebook. I recently lent a significant amount of money to a non-Jewish colleague who had to fly back from overseas because her father and uncle dropped dead. The message I give Shneur Zalman is, rather than the seemingly post-modern one he is giving ARK, one can be centrist orthodox with an absolute fidelity to Halacha and live in this world peacefully, especially with tolerant non Jews. I can tell Shneur Zalman, that if I ever meet an intolerant or anti semitic type who threatens me overtly or covertly, I turn into a different persona. I don’t sit down to “break bread” with them. I know exactly with what I am dealing, and any “Jewish history buff” will affirm this.

Shneur Zalman writes:

This is a message that is so relevant and extremely positive. This is, in fact, what the Jewish tradition is all about. We are not the Chosen People of a superior race as I was taught. Rather we are a people who have, unfortunately, experienced immense suffering as a result of bigotry and the absence of enough up-standers in our midst. This experience of being a stranger in a strange land endlessly persecuted compels us to be the preachers of light; to declare that all human beings are created in the image of God and, therefore, all equally deserve to be treated with compassion, dignity, and humanity.

To the whole team at Courage to Care, thank you for your vision and dedication to fulfil it.

With hope and prayer that we internalise this message and turn our horrible history into a reservoir of inspiration to become more sensitive and caring human beings especially to those who are very different to us.

I couldn’t disagree more with this contorted configuration of childhood and this message. My own family was saved by righteous gentiles who were honoured in Yad Vashem. I have visited them. For close to 70 years, the extended Balbin family still sends all our surplus clothes to their extended family. A number of their family are anti Semites. They hid the fact that they saved Jews. When the husband of the girl found out, he beat his wife constantly. She held it a secret for some 30 years because she knew he was a depraved anti-Semite. We send them money and medicine too. (One of the family couldn’t even stand being in the room with me and my father, and left). This, despite the heroic efforts of his mother and her father). Some morality!

In short Shneur Zalman, I find this newsletter message rather populist, misleading, and simple. I’d rather if it was more learned and candid and more informed and realistic. The simple reading of history today, actually matches the claimed simple education Shneur Zalman claims to have received!

He didn’t receive a simple education.

He sounds populist.

Is he a member of the Rabbinic Council of Victoria?

If not, why not?

Why doesn’t he  break bread with them and convince them of his views and how they conform with Halacha. This is the Rabbinic way.

I take that back if he does not consider himself or ARK Orthodox.

Don’t support Satmar ever

These chassidim occupy a religion which has many connections to orthodox judaism, but they are also the biggest group that causes problems. Purim wouldn’t have occurred if Mordechai was a Satmar Chosid or Esther was one of them. He would have been told to cower to the enemy and suck it it all up and Esther would have been hidden in a bunker. These people who base their religion on R’ Yoelish’s discredited V’Yoel Moshe continue to be a thorn in the side of Jewish continuity and unity. They are everywhere and their polemic is offensive and untimely. While rockets rain from Gaza this is what they say.

In Melbourne, they are in Adass Yisrael. Don’t forget it. On Yom Ha’atzmaut, their Rabbi commanded that they say Tachanun at a Bris!

When they come to collect “Peerim Gelt” ask who they are. If they are Satmar. Give them ten cents. Give your money to poor people in the community who don’t follow this perverted philosophy. Which philosophy? The one which gives strength to the enemy. They haven’t learned that sucking up to those who actually don’t like you, will never help in the long run. Read this from ynet, and tell me if it doesn’t annoy you as much as it does me (emphasis is mine).

I don’t know which permission Rabbi Teitelbaum used to visit Israel and then leave. It seems to me that this is patently against Jewish law. I know of no permission to do so because of a grandson’s bar mitzvah. Love to read his halachic defence. It’s all politics; not halacha.

Disclaimer: I don’t have a clue how many in Melbourne’s Adass community follow him versus his (beloved) brother Zalman, but they both share the same hate for the Jewish State and do enormous damage with their sharp unbridled tongues.

Rabbi Aharon Teitelbaum visits Israel and rails against settlers and ultra-Orthodox recruits who join the ID.
Kobi Nachshoni
Published: 03.11.16, 17:33 / Israel Jewish Scene
As terror attacks continue to strike Israel, Rabbi Aaron Teitelbaum said on Tuesday that “the real culprits are the settlers in Israel who agitate the nations of the world in the country and throughout the world, which causes serious hatred of Israel and the severe wave of attacks.”

Rabbi Teitelbaum, also known as the Satmar Rebbe, and his brother lead the world’s largest Hasidic movement, landed in Israel on Tuesday and spoke sharply to his followers, at his grandson’s bar mitzvah in Jerusalem. The city had which suffered a serious attack shortly before that, alongside two other attacks that night. “In recent months, the blood of Israel is spilling like water,” he said. “We cry every day for those dead and wounded. ”

The rabbi also addressed the growing numbers of ultra-Orthodox recruits in the IDF. “It is true that there is no coercion,” he said, “but via soft words there is an increase in recruits to the IDF, which is a source of evil , and especially when the young men are not as strong spirituality. What is new is that no one here screams out loud that there is a prohibition to enlist in the IDF, which is is a place of destruction.”

The anti-Zionist rabbi attacked in his speech all the ultra-Orthodox political parties that participate in state institutions, are partners in the government, and enjoy its budgets. “You are always hearing about what’s happening here in Israel, and especially the conscription law, there there are agreements with the government,” he said. “We will stand firm so that the yeshivas will not be destroyed. ”

“The agreements – there are some who say they are good, some say they are bad, and they need a lawyer to teach them, but the reality is that since that law there has been a rise in ultra-Orthodox recruits. One should know that the main sin in enlistment is
those who go there will not return (i.e. will become alienated from religion – KN).”

The moral decay that is anti semitism 

Dennis Prager made his name when I was a youngster with Joseph Telushkin (who more recently wrote a marvellous book about the Lubavitcher Rebbe זי׳ע

Denis has been involved in some Oxford Debates of late.

[hat tip Md]

Here he is in a stinging and compelling snippet.

 

 

“Who is like your people, Israel”

Amazing technology. I would produce it in Yehuda and Shomron and thereby deny it to all those anti Semites, Gentiles and Jews, who support BDS. Suck eggs EU.

This is from the Jerusalem Post.

US government to stock Israeli bio-tech cure for lethal radiation in 2017

By YAAKOV LAPPIN

22 Feb 2016, 02:51 AM

Pluristem Therapeutics developed ground-breaking cell therapy that can heal 100% of patients exposed to radiological attack; Company hopes to hold contacts with Israeli authorities soon.

An Israeli bio-tech company has developed an anti-radiation therapy that the US government will likely begin stocking next year, and which is able to cure 100% of patients exposed to unconventional radiological incidents like a terrorist dirty bomb, or an attack on a nuclear power plant.

Pluristem Theraputecs has developed a placenta-based cell therapy, which involves injecting patients who have been exposed to lethal doses of radiation.

Clinical trials have so far yielded a near 100% recovery rate for animals exposed to radiation, Yaky Yanai, President and Chief Operation Officer of Pluristem told The Jerusalem Post on Sunday.

Last week, the US’s National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID), a part of the US National Institutes of Health (NIH), initiated studies in large animals to evaluate dosing. The trials are part of the US’s Department of Homeland Security Program to protect the population in case of catastrophes involving radiation.

“The whole free world is dealing with unusual challenges,” Yanai said.

Defining lethal radiation as an amount that kills 70% of population exposed and over, Yanai said that within 48 hours of someone receiving the company’s placenta cell injections, bone marrow blood cell production levels returned to normal, and animals fully recovered from the high radiation exposure.

Initial experiments were conducted at Hadassah Medical Center in Israel, and produced results that Yanai described as “phenomenal.” The US then asked the company to join its NIAID program, designed to protect masses of the population in case of catastrophic incidents, including a nuclear terrorist attack, an attack on a nuclear reactor, or an accident occurring in a nuclear power plant.

“We saw that injecting the placenta cells enabled nearly 100% of the population to recover, compared to 30% of the [animal] group that did not receive the injections,” he said.

The FDA developed an “animal route” for clinical trials, Yanai added.

During the trial period, Pluristem Therapeutics agreed to make available an immediate supply of the radiation antidote to the US if needed.

The US government is now paying for, and carrying out trials as it seeks FDA approval, which it will likely receive in 2017.

“You don’t need DNA matches for patients. It can be injected into the muscle very easily, in all humans or animals,” Yanai said.

“As a proud Israeli citizen, I can say that Israel is at the top of our priorities, and we are talking to Israeli authorities. We very much want to provide the level of defense that the Israeli people deserve,” he added

How to keep Bernie Sanders honest in the US elections

Unless a miracle occurs or Hillary stumbles, I can’t see anyone other than Bernie Sanders winning the Presidency. Many have noted that he avoids talking about his Jewishness. It is clear that he has strong socialist views. In my opinion, many of his socialist views are actually Torah views, vis-a-vis Society, Justice, the Poor etc. Notwithstanding that, he potentially will be worse than Henry Kissinger for Israel. Accordingly, I would set him up for an interview which focussed on four or five of his socialist opinions. I would show him that they in fact emanated from the Torah and were Jewish values. I would ask him if agreed with these Jewish values, and whether he had been subconsciously informed by them. Finally, I’d ask him which Jewish values he did not identify himself with. Specifically, I would ask him if he supported assimilation of Jews, such that they would be dissolved among the nations. Does he perform a Pesach Seder, and if so, what is he commemorating? I would ask him if he felt any value in self-reflection on Yom Kippur, and whether such a notion was good for the American people. Finally, I’d ask him if he agreed that all people should abide by the Noachide Laws. He needs to be put on the spot, and not allowed to create his own golden path avoiding difficult questions. Let him tell us about his Zayda and Booba and what they meant to him etc. Does he financially support the notion of Jewish schools, or does he believe all schools should admit all comers.

Alas, the press are giving him a free run and letting avoid issues with neutral one liners. I think he is a good and genuine guy, but he needs to have his Jewish Neshoma rekindled.

I would have loved to hear him in audience with the Lubavitcher Rebbe זי’’ע

The only chance that Israel/American relations will suffer less under his presidency, is if Herzog defeats Netanyahu. The latter has run out of ideas and is biding time until Obama leaves.

Let’s be “thankful” to the Iranians

News agencies tell us

100 Iranians have held a candlelight vigil in front of the French Embassy in Tehran

If that alone doesn’t tell the deluded something, they should be sent to Krakatoa.

Now, someone, please tell me what Hezbollah has said about this. They have overtaken the “Paris of the Middle East” formerly known as Lebanon.

The lefties in Tel Aviv rightly supported the French, but I hope they are consistent with their tree-hugging, and have demonstrations saying that France is forbidden to carry out any operation which might endanger Civilians. Wait, I’ve got a good idea. The French can drop leaflets on Rakkah, warning all civilians to leave, and then carpet bomb the place. But what if civilians stay and become human shields, or D’aesh decide to wear civilian clothes. What do they propose we do, sit down bare footed in Tel Aviv and sing John Lennon songs? That will save the day. I think they call it “Social Justice” or “Tikun Olam”.

Maybe the Toldos Aharon lunatics can meet with D’aesh and convince them to hold fire on innocent goyim.

As for Rabbi Dov Lior and his knowledge of “why” this happened (because of French complicity in the Holocaust), he isn’t even on the level of Bilaam, let alone Bilaam’s Donkey. Bilaam was a prophet! Rabbi Lior is not. The donkey saw what Bilaam couldn’t. Which Seif in Shulchan Aruch is Rabbi Lior quoting. What a stupid thing to say.

CANCEL your subscription to Mishpacha Magazine

Anyone who wants to know what divisiveness is, anyone who wants to know what love of a fellow Jew is NOT, anyone who wants to know why Haredim are derided, anyone who wants to remember Kamtza and Bar Kamtza, anyone who wants to know why Al Aqsa isn’t the Beis Hamikdash should read this outrageous, monstrous and contumelious post

The haredi Mishpacha newspaper created a social media firestorm on Thursday after it published an opinion article in which the first paragraph, printed in Arabic and in Hebrew, asked that since members of the haredi public do not go up to the Temple Mount “could you please stop murdering us.”

The article, written by Mishpacha Magazine deputy editor Aryeh Ehrlich, explained how the haredi community refrains from going up to the Temple Mount since the haredi rabbinic leadership prohibits visiting the site.

Almost all leading haredi rabbis and arbiters of Jewish law rule that Jews may not visit the Temple Mount since they may enter areas that are forbidden to enter without undergoing purification rituals which cannot be conducted today.

“Us, the haredi community, we have no interest in going up to the Temple Mount in our time,” Ehrlich writes. “We oppose this vehemently. Moreover, Jewish law see this as a severe prohibition – punished by spiritual excommunication.”

So even if you have solid information on Israeli desires to change the status quo at the Dome of the Rock – something which is incorrect to the best of our knowledge – the haredi community has no connection to it. So please, stop murdering us.”

In the rest of the article, the Mishpacha deputy editor observed that several victims of the recent spate of terror attacks have been from the haredi community, and wrote that he was trying to understand why this was the case.

He went on to detail a conversation he had with an Arab worker at a Rami Levi store and he tried to convince him that members of the haredi public do not go up to the Temple Mount.

Ehrlich was subjected to fierce condemnation on social media once awareness of the article spread.

“How wretched and ghetto like can you be? Is this your version of ‘loving your neighbor as yourself’? Of loving your fellow Jew,?” asked one person on Twitter. “Are you are calling on Arabs not to murder haredim because they don’t go up to the Temple Mount but insinuating ‘go and murder those who do? Disgusting. What about just calling on them not to murder. It would be more humane and more Jewish.”

One talkbacker on haredi website B’hadrei Haredim exclaimed “What about other Jews who aren’t haredi, them you should kill?????”

“The Mishpacha newspaper is turning to murderers to ask them not to murder haredim…everyone else is okay apparently. (He forgot that the pogrom in 1929 was because Jews went to visit the Western Wall),” tweeted far-right former MK Michael Ben-Ari.

Following the outrage prompted by his article, Ehrlich took to Twitter and said that he was trying to explain in his article that the Islamic Movement in Israel was trying to create a religious war and has urged Palestinians to attack people with a religious appearance.

“My article in the Mishpacha Magazine says: This religious war is wild incitement based in imaginary rumors. Most people who observe the religious commandments don’t go to the Temple Mount, if only because of the religious prohibition. The article was trying, naively it must be admitted, to tear the away the mask from the murderous Palestinian aggression which has been going on for decades, and to neutralize the false Islamic incitement.”

It is beyond belief that these morons from Mishpacha think they can affect anything. As if the Arabs don’t know this. They know it’s a beat up. They dress up as Haredim wanting a lift so that someone will stop and give them a lift, and then pull a knife on the Jew loving driver who thought he was picking up a harmless Haredi.

These people need to find

מחילה ברקיע השמים אצל מלך מלכי המלכים, הקדוש ברוך הוא

A Message to J-Street, the NIF (New Israel Fund), Ameinu and other lefties

The following is from the New York Times and is by Daniel Gordis. It says it all. It isn’t about 2 States, it isn’t about boundaries, it isn’t about apartheid, it isn’t about poverty. It isn’t about any of these issues. The following from Gordis says it all.

(c) New York Times

We have a young language instructor at Shalem College in Jerusalem, where I work. She’s a religious Muslim who wears a hijab, lives in one of the Arab neighborhoods of Jerusalem and is a graduate student at Hebrew University. She’s fun and warm, and a great teacher — the students like her a lot.
Late last spring, when things here were quiet, some of the students mentioned to the department chair that as much as they’d spoken with her over the past couple of years, they’d never discussed politics. They were curious what someone like her thought about the conflict in this region, especially now that she was teaching at an unabashedly Zionist college, had come to know so many Jewish students and had developed such warm relationships with them. How does someone like her see things here? How did she think we would one day be able to settle this conflict?
“So ask her,” the department chair said. “As long as you speak to her in Arabic (she’s on staff to help our students master the language), you can talk about anything you want.”
They did. They told her that since they’d never discussed the “situation” (as we metaphorically call it here in Israel), they were curious how she thought we might someday resolve it.
“It’s our land,” she responded rather matter-of-factly. Stunned, they weren’t sure that they’d heard her correctly. So they waited. But that was all she had to say. “It’s our land. You’re just here for now.”
What upset those students more than anything was not that a Palestinian might believe that the Jews are simply the latest wave of Crusaders in this region, and that we, like the Crusaders of old, will one day be forced out. We all know that there are many Palestinians who believe that.
What upset them was that she — an educated woman, getting a graduate degree (which would never happen in a Muslim country) at a world class university (only Israel has those — none of Israel’s neighbors has a single highly rated university) and working at a college filled with Jews who admire her, like her and treat her as they would any other colleague — still believes that when it’s all over, the situation will get resolved by our being tossed out of here once again.
Even she , who lives a life filled with opportunities that she would never have in an Arab country, still thinks at the end of the day the Jews are nothing but colonialists. And colonialists, she believes, don’t last here. The British got rid of the Ottomans, the Jews got rid of the British — and one day, she believes, the Arabs will get rid of the Jews.
That is one of the many reasons that this recent wave of violence, consisting mostly of deadly stabbings carried out by Israeli Arabs (not Palestinians living over the Green Line) and Arab residents of east Jerusalem, has Israelis so unsettled.
Yes, the reality on the ground is frightening. People are being stabbed on the street, on buses, in malls. Those being attacked are elderly men and women and young boys on their bicycles. No one is immune, and unlike the last Intifada, when suicide bombers sought high casualty counts so you felt safe away from crowds, now nowhere feels definitely safe.
But even that is not the most debilitating dimension of this new round of attacks on Jews. What’s most sobering is the fact that this new round of violence has made it clear, once again, that this conflict is simply never going to end.
What Israelis are coming to understand by virtue of the fact that the attackers are not Palestinians living in refugee camps but Israeli Arabs — who have access to Israeli health care, Israeli education, Israel’s free press and right of assembly, protection for gays and lesbians and much more — is that this latest round of violence is simply the newest battle in the War of Independence that Israel has been fighting for 68 years now.
The war began even before Israel was a state — Arabs attacked Israel not when David Ben-Gurion declared independence on May 14, 1948, but when the United Nations General Assembly voted — on November 29, 1947 — to create a Jewish state. When formal independence followed some six months later, the attacking Arab militias were replaced by standing armies of five Arab nations — Egypt, Jordan, Syria, Lebanon and even Iraq (which joined the fray even though it did not share a border with Israel).
Over the years, the enemies have shifted (Israel signed peace treaties with Egypt and Jordan, but now there are the Palestinians and Iran is both pursuing a weapon of mass destruction and declaring that Israel must be destroyed) and the methods have changed (standing Arab armies have been replaced by terrorism at home and an international campaign to delegitimize Israel in the UN and beyond). But the basic goal of Israel’s enemies remains the destruction of the Jewish state.
Increasingly, Israelis (who, polls show, overwhelmingly would like to get out of the West Bank and live peacefully alongside a Palestinian State that would recognize Israel) fear that while for us this is a conflict that can be settled by adjusting borders and guaranteeing security for both sides, for our enemies this is an all-or-nothing battle in which the only end would be for Israel to disappear.
Israel’s iconic diplomat, Abba Eban, said in the early 1970s that “the Arabs never miss an opportunity to miss an opportunity.” It was, sadly, an apt observation. And it is still true. By joining the violence and responding to Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas’ incitement (Abbas insists that he’s not inciting, but that is patently false — if nothing else, his ludicrous claim that Israel is planning to change the status quo on the Temple Mount proved sufficient to inflame an entire region), Israeli Arabs have foolishly put themselves on the wrong side of history.
Rather than take a page from Martin Luther King, Jr., perhaps protesting peacefully on behalf of other Palestinians, a violent minority has chosen to show its support for the larger Palestinian cause by attacking innocent Jews. And by and large, Israeli Arab leadership has been silent.
Israeli Jews have taken note — and the consequences are likely to be longstanding. While Israelis are feeling vulnerable, they are also feeling abandoned. When Secretary of State John Kerry said that he would not “point fingers from afar” at who was responsible for the violence, and called the latest attacks part of a “revolving cycle that damages the future for everybody,” he convinced Israelis once again that the present American administration has abandoned any ability to distinguish right from wrong, just from unjust, wise from destructive. America is hopelessly irrelevant in the Middle East, which means that Israel is sadly very alone.
When Americans fret in the months and years to come that the peace process is stuck, Israelis hope that they will remember that when the violence broke out again, the world’s newspapers ignored it. When Abbas said Israel had murdered a 13-year-old Palestinian attacked and the Israeli press then published a photo showing the boy sitting in an Israeli hospital bed, Abbas did not retract and the world ignored his mendacity.
When the American secretary of state was asked to comment on why the new round of violence erupted, he refused to mention Abbas and said he would not point fingers. When Palestinians incited, Israeli Arabs (20% of Israel’s population) who picked up knives convinced many Israelis that they were enemies, not fellow citizens.
Israelis hope that people will remember all that, but we also know better.
Where all this will lead, no one can say. For the time being, though, the future in this region is going to be bleak. Despair and a sense of having been abandoned never bring out the best in anyone, never make them more likely to compromise. When Palestinians express their objections to occupation, to checkpoints, to mistreatment at the hands of Israelis, those protestations will fall on increasingly deaf ears.
Why? Is it because Israelis do not want peace? Is it because we do not understand that our future would be better if Palestinians could have a democratic, functioning state? Is it because we’re oblivious to their legitimate complaints?
No. It’s simply that we know, with no doubt, that for our enemies, this is a conflict not about borders but about our very right to be here. We know that, overwhelmingly, the Arab world is still committed to driving us out of this land. So we’ll stay, and tough it out — whatever the world thinks of the steps we have to take — for as long as it takes. For as Golda Meir put it decades ago with her characteristic wit, “Israelis have a secret weapon — we have nowhere else to go.”

Hail JK Rowling and Hershel Potter

She came out publicly in the Guardian against the BDS.

Perhaps most interesting is the list of people who HAVE put themselves on the record in the British Guardian Newspaper as supporting the BDS. What I found fascinating is that they all seem to be tree hugging writers, artists, film makers,poets, directors. There seem to be few if any scientists or people with that bent of mind. What does that tell you? Here they are. JK Rowling signed onto this group.

Mark Aaron designer, artist, composer
May Abdalla documentary filmmaker
Hanan Abdalla documentary filmmaker
Khalid Abdalla actor, filmmaker
Hassan Abdulrazzak playwright/screenwriter
Leo Abrahams producer
Tom Adams musician
Martin Adams printmaker sculptor
Beverley Adams Stack artistic director Faceless Arts
Susanne Adebayo playwright, actor, director, producer, teacher
Olugbenga Adelekan dj/producer
Joseph Adesunloye director
Zahra Ahmadi actor
Raisah Ahmed writer/director
Rizwan Ahmed actor
Mediah Ahmed playwright
Peter Ahrends architect
Hamja Ahsan artist / curator
Akkas Al-Ali director
Hanan Al-Shaykh, writer
Catherine Alexander director, teacher
Kirsty Alexander dance artist and curator
Jane Alexander singer
Clem Alford musician
Seif Alhasani designer
Tariq Ali writer, film / television / broadcaster
Zulfqar Ali art consultant
Khyam Allami musician/composer
Candace Allen writer
Deniz Allport librarian story-teller
Will Alsop OBE architect
Tayo Aluko writer, actor, singer
David Ambrose storyteller, festival organiser
Chiara Ambrosio filmmaker, visual artist
Amir Amirani filmmaker
Tahmima Anam novelist
Anthony Anaxagorou poet
Adjoa Andoh actor
Ben Annesley artist
Charlotte Anstey ceramic artist
Alexander Anthony journalist
Frankie Armstrong singer, voice teacher Anti-Capitalist Roadshow
Barby Asante artist and curator
Richard Ashcroft musician
Simon Ashdown film composer, music producer
Oreet Ashery artist, visiting professor
Adeeb Ashfaq artist
Peter Ashlock artist, writer
Kevin Atherton artist
Jean Atkin poet
Tim Atkins poet
Ed Atkins artist
Anne-Marie Atkinson artist
Diane Atkinson writer
Liane Aukin scripts, drama
Franko B artist
Lekan Babalola artist
Ben Bailes lighting designer
Giles Bailey artist/lecturer
Roy Bailey folk singer
Una Baines songwriter/musician
Richard Olatunde Baker percussion
Syd Baker singer/songwriter
Patrick Baladi actor
Jayne Baldwin author
Nigel Ball design lecturer
Sue Ball producer
Steven Ball artist, academic
Nadia Ballan sculptor
Alison Ballance artist
Paul Ballard poet WAVE
Ben Ballin theatre / performance in education worker
Debbie Ballin producer/director
Nathalie Banaigs artist
Tom Bancroft musician
Ros Barber writer
Shahidha Bari teacher
Chris Barlas writer/presenter
Phyllida Barlow artist
James Barrett producer
Richard Barrett composer
Neil Bartlett author and director
Jeanie Barton musician
Linda Bassett actor
Max Batty designer
Samirah Baurtally arts marketing
Stephen Bean photographer
Oliver Beck writer, artist
Sarah Beddington artist
Cezary Bednarski architect/designer
Saleha Begum poet
Henry Bell writer
Jono Bell singer songwriter Jono & The Uke Dealers
Emilia Benjamin musician
Ishia Bennison actor
Paul Bennun executive, games and interactive
Dzifa Benson artist
Lina Bentley tutor
John Berger writer, artist and critic
Josephine Berry Slater writer and lecturer
Alessandra Bettolo architect, designer
Kavita Bhanot writer, teacher, editor
Aleksandra Bilic producer
Alice Birch writer
Norman Bissell writer
Brighid Black artist and writer
Joan Blackburn singer, songwriter, musician, event organiser
Bernard Blake musician
Kelvin Bland chartered architect
Nicholas Blincoe writer
Penni Blythe musician
Russell Bolam director
Sean Bonney poet
Leah Borromeo journalist/filmmaker
Bette Bourne actor
Michael Bovo classical guitarist
Charlie Boyer musician
Susan Bradburn agent and promoter
Paul Bradshaw curator / journalist / publisher
Andrea Brady poet, publisher and academic
Michael Bravo singer/songwriter Magic Sufi
Louis Brehony musician Fight Racism! Fight Imperialism!
Lindsay Bremner director of architectural research
Brid Brennan actor
Haim Bresheeth filmmaker
Victoria Brittain writer
Nicholas Broadhurst opera director
Sheena Brobbey digital designer
Scott Bronstein writer
Lez Brotherston designer
Mark Brown theatre / performance critic (scotland)
Ray Brown writer director
John William Brown artist, poet, performer, dramatist
Patricia Bryden former teacher, literature/
Pavel Buchler artist, research professor in art
Niall Buggy actor
Carrie Bulley musician
Jess Burke musician
Mark Burnhope poet
Michael Burns singer song writer, musician, composer
Ellen Burroughs artist, project coordinator, art educator
Jonathan Burrows choreographer
Margaret Busby writer, publisher
Justin Butcher playwright, director & musician
Brad Butler artist
Daniel Bye writer, performer
Patricia Byrne artistic director Sole Purpose Productions
Amelia Bywater artist
Antonia Caccia director
David Calder actor
Colin Callan sound engineer/producer
Carmen Callil publisher & writer
Stuart Calton composer
Ramiro Camelo independent curator
Hazel Cameron writer
Allan Cameron author
Leigh Campbell screenwriter
Ray Campbell comedian, lecturer
Dave Campbell artist
Sophie Carapetian artist
Razanne Carmey writer and director
Hayley Carmichael actor
Ele Carpenter curator
John Carruthers tour manager / events manager
Martin Carter visual artist Lawrence Street Workshops
Anna Carteret actress
Maude Casey writer
Lucy Cash artist/filmmaker
Rob Castro musician
Dean Cavanagh screenwriter
Julia Cazorla practitioner/writer
Jonathan Chadwick director, writer
Lula Chapman artist/illustrator
Tchaik Chassay architect, designer
cris cheek poet
Tarik Cherkaoui music producer/dj
Anna Chetwynd architect
Danny Chivers performance poet
Taghrid Choucair-Vizoso performer
Julie Christie actor
Ian Christie curator & cultural historian
Dominic Christie muralist
Caryl Churchill playwright
Ansell Cizic artist
Ami Clarke artist, facilitator, teacher
David Clinch musician
Jarvis Cocker musician
Norma Cohen actor
Will Coles sculptor
David Collins artist, teacher
Nick Collins filmmaker
Steve Conlan photographer
Kris Connolly artist
Paule Constable lighting designer
Feimatta Conteh theatre / performance sustainability manager
Fraser Cook artist
Dominic Cooke CBE director & playwright
Dee Coombes singer
Eliane Correa composer & pianist
George Costigan actor
Tony Coult teacher and writer
Joseph Coward artist
Paula Cox artist/printmaker
Ailsa Cox writer, lecturer
Donna Coyle artist
Sacha Craddock critic, writer and curator
Jacob Crichlow singer / songwriter
Felix Cross composer, writer, director
Ruth Cross artist Cross Collaborations
Tim Crouch theatre / performancemaker
Greg Cullen playwright/artistic director
Darren Cullen artist Spelling Mistakes Cost Lives
Keira Cullinane photographer
Liam Cunningham actor
Tracey Curtis songwriter
Ryan D’Souza technologist
Selma Dabbagh author
Andreas Daegelow painter, activist
Tariq Dajani photographer
Zeyad Dajani artist
Urszula Dajerling studio manager / visual director
William Dalrymple writer and historian
Dan Dan Blackett musician Landshapes
Jon Daniel designer
Jill Daniels filmmaker
Isa Darby singer, songwriter and author Cynical Renegade (band)
Lauren Dark producer
Colin Darke artist
Michael Darlow writer and retired tv director producer
Paula Darwish vocalist, musician, composer
Jareh Das curatorial
Rana Dasgupta author
Phil Davey author
Emma Davie director
Molly Davies playwright
Sam Davies musician
Ross Kristian Davis musician
April De Angelis playwright
Daniela De Armas artist/musician
Josephine de Kerpel artist
Pia de Keyser actor
Andy De La Tour actor and writer
Teresa De Miguel artist
Hans de Winter artist
Stephanie De-Sykes artist/musician
Barry Dean artist
Tam Dean Burn actor, vocalist, theatre / performancemaker
Janie Dee actor
Daniela Delerci dancer
Pucci Dellanno musician and promoter
Ivor Dembina writer and performer
Shane Dempsey director Fragments
Anne Dennis director, writer
Natalja Derendiajeva theatre / performance administrator, arcola energy
Neil Devlin choir member
Sam Dexter textile artist
Morag Deyes artistic director
Leena Dhingra actor, writer
Elaine di Campo vocalist Ultra Vinyl
Josephine Dickinson poet
Hope Dickson Leach writer / director
Veronica Diesen arts organiser, lecturer and writer in art theory and philosophy.
Stephen Dillane actor
– Dizraeli rapper & musician
Christine Dobbin artist, illustrator
Roy Dodds musician
Elyse Dodgson MBE international theatre / performance director
Audrey Doherty performance artist & fashion designer Casbah Cafe Community Arts & Cultural Events Ltd.
Eoin Donnelly artist
Phil Dooley musician
Noel Douglas artist, designer
Noel Douglas artist, designer, senior lecturer
Corin Douieb dj and producer
Ed Dowie performer/composer
Alison Down writer
Aidan Doyle painter
Laurence Dreyfus chamber musician Phantasm Viol Consort
Carol Drinkwater writer/actress/filmmaker
Han Duijvendak director/producer
Nicholas Duke musician Trojan Horse
Lawrence Duke musician Trojan Horse
Hugh Dunkerley writer
Dempsey Dunkley-Clark artist
Shahnequa Duprey actress
Samantha Dye dancer, teacher, actor
Geoff Dyer writer
Theresa Easton artist
Steven Eastwood artist-filmmaker
Houda Echouafni actor
David Edgar playwright
Essam Edriss artist
Michael Edwards writer & musician LTCC
Corrine Edwards artist
Steve Ehrlicher arts management
Sally El Hosaini filmmaker
Aser El Saqqa curator, producer, arts manager
Suhayla El-Bushra writer
Nancy Elan violinist
Yasmin Elderby film curator and jewellery designer
Kathryn Elkin artist
Inua Ellams artist
Lucy Ellinson actor and theatre / performancemaker
Esther Ruth Elliott actor
Samuel Ellis designer
Hannah Ellul artist
Brian Eno composer
Kodwo Eshun artist The Otolith Group
Samir Eskanda musician
Julian Evans writer
Gareth Evans producer, curator
Amina Evans writer
Bernardine Evaristo writer
Gavin Everall editor, publisher, writer
Allan Ewart artist, screenwriter, music producer
Tom Faire architect Thomas Faire Architects
Isabelle Farah actor
Gareth Farmer teacher
Saeed Taji Farouky director
Angus Farquhar public art, creative director
Marcia Farquhar artist
John Fay writer
Vicky Featherstone artistic director
Yasmin Fedda filmmaker, programmer Highlight Arts
Stella Feehily playwright
Mark Fell artist
Sylvia Ferreira dance artist
Matt ffytche teacher
Sharlaine Fincham arts co-ordinator, teacher
Deborah Findlay actor
Deborah Fink soprano & singing teacher
Sylvia Finzi artist
Annie Firbank actor
Allen Fisher poet and artist
Jean Fisher artist, writer
Rob Flanagan drummer
Christina Fletcher artist
Poppy Flint designer
James Floyd actor
Aminatta Forna writer
William Fowler curator
Naomi Foyle writer
Sarah Frankcom artistic director
John Frankland artist
Sylvie Franquet designer, writer, artist
Olivia Fraser artist
Jane Frere artist
Anna Furse artistic director, athletes of the heart
fermot fynn musician
Penny Gaff artist
Niki Gandy lecturer
Sandra Garbutt choral singer
Francesca Gardiner writer
Nina-Marie Gardner writer
Lynn Gaspard publisher
Dick Gaughan musician
Yolanta Gawlik artist
Carlo Gébler writer
Maggie Gee novelist
Abla George actor
Saadeh George artist
Phil Gerrard actor
Tina Gharavi film director / screenwriter Bridge + Tunnel
Alan Gibbons author
Bob Giles architect, forrmer vice president of riba
Nick Gill playwright and musician
Joy Gilleard artist
Julian Gillespie artist
John Gillet actor, director, teacher, writer
Tracy Gillman artist
Harry Gilonis poet
Murat Gokmen documentary filmmaker
Pauline Goldsmith actor, writer, director, comedian
Sally Goldsmith poet, song and script writer
Jonas Golland composer, drummer
Jake Goode performer/actor/workshop leader Other Half Productions
Mel Gooding writer, curator and critic
Francis Gooding writer
Mary Gordon-Smith artist
Daniel Gorman musician
Richard Gott writer, historian
Orlando Gough composer
Stephen Gouldin sculpture
Tony Graham director
John Graham Davies actor and writer
Paula Stanley Grainger painter
Ellen Graubart painter
Tony Green writer
Bonnie Greer playwright, author
Dan Gregory actor
Mark Gregory collector, working songs and poems
Isabel Griffin project manager/artist
Cameron Griffiths musician, performer
Trevor Griffiths playwright
Patrizia Grilli visual artist
Roz Grimshaw teacher
Rebecca Gross composer/singer/community musician
Duncan Gunn architect
Karin Gunnarsson artist
Rahila Gupta writer
Julius Guzy painter
Saleem Haddad author
Mark Haddon author
Tala Hadid writer/director
Hans Haenlein architect
Salim Haidrani author and teacher
Matthew Hamilton literary agent
Omar Robert Hamilton filmmaker
Nathan Hamilton poet and publisher
Nicky Hamlyn artist, lecturer, writer
Kit Hammonds independent curator, senior tutor contemporary art
Robert Hampson professor and poet
William Hanna author
Sandy Harb dj
Rob Harding sculptor
Jeremy Hardy comedian
Laura Harling actress
Sue Harris member of community choir
Barbara Harrison director
Lee Harrison musician
Judith Harry executive director Site Gallery
David Harsent poet
Douglas Hart director
Joshua Hart artist, gallery director
Graham Hastings vocal / production Young Fathers
Mona Hatoum artist
Andrew Hawkins actor/director
David Hawkins visual artist
Mark Haworth-Booth writer
Abe Hayeem architect Architects and Planners for Justice in Palestine
David Hayman actor, director
Danny Hayward writer
Jordan Hayward sound engineer
John Haywood promoter
Malcolm Hecks architect
John Heffernan actor
George Hencken filmmaker
Louis Henderson filmmaker
Janet Henfrey actor
Matthew Herbert musician Accidental Records
Nick Hern publisher
Seán Hewitt poet
Joan Hewitt poet, theatre / performance event organiser, ne people’s assembly
Melvyn Higson guitarist/ukulelist
Laurel Hill producer
Mischa Hiller writer
Nigel Hilton designer/maker
Bhavesh Hindocha film maker Loud Minority
Sam Hoare actor/writer
Wieland Hoban composer —
Peter Hobday actor
John Hodge architecture, artist and filmmaker
Mike Hodges film director
James Holcombe artist technician no.w.here
Rick Holland poet
Rachel Holmes writer
Doug Holton theatre / performancemaker
Lizzie Homersham writer
Gordon Hon artist, writer.
Adrian Hornsby writer
Jacqueline Horswill visual artist
Ian Hough musician
Liam Hourican comedian
Lucille Howe actor & author
Bill Hoyland actor
Daniel Hubbard casting director
Leon Samson Hudson artist
Richard Hughes graffiti artist, web and graphic design
Patrick Hughes artist
Paula Hughes edit assistant
Natalie Hughes writer
Kieran Hurley playwright and theatre / performance maker
Nesreen Hussein lecturer, performance maker
Waris Hussein film, television & theatre / performance director
Richard Hutchinson sound engineer
Amanda Huxtable director
Sarah Hymas poet
Riccardo Iacono artist
Ashley Inglis screenwriter
Alessio Ippolito musician
Sarah Irving writer, translator
Rose Issa curator, producer and writer
Gemma Jackson production designer
Vanessa Jackson artist and lecturer
Nick Jackson musician
David Jacques artist David Jacques
Peter Jaeger poet
Abu Jafar visual artist Abujafar Ltd
Clemmie James project co-ordinator
Paul Jamrozy artist Jamedia
Velika Janceva artist
Stephen Jeffreys playwright
Sarah Jewell choir leader, composer Songlines Choir
Rosko John vocalist/producer/dj
Darren Johns singer, guitarist, songwriter Crazy Arm
Deniz Johns filmmaker
Val Johnson singer
Robb Johnson songwriter
Joan Johnston writer, teacher
Chris Johnston director Fluxx
Leslie Johnstone artist
Vivien Jones writer & early musician
Chris Jones dj / music producer
Cliff Jones writer
Tim Jones artist
Isabel Jones artistic director
Anita Jones art facilitator
Trevor Jones composer
Catrin Jones artist
Ann Jungman witer
Remi Kabaka consultant
Sohan Kailey dancer
Rita Kalnejais writer
Dafni Kalokairinou photographer
Asif Kapadia writer/director
Rachel Karafistan actor, director COSmino
Amalia Karlsson author
Simon Katan artist, academic
Richard Katz actor
Miriam Kavana musician
Jackie Kay writer
Gary Kaye musician
John Keane artist
Brigid Keenan author
Patrick Keiller artist
Reem Kelani musician and film / television / broadcaster
Dee Kelly musician
Mark Kelly writer & performer
Tricia Kelly actor
Dennis Kelly playwright
Mary Kelly teacher
Alex Kelly artist
Mercedes Kemp writer/theatre / performance maker
Peter Kennard artist
Mary Kennedy song leader
Caroline Kennedy author
Anthea Kennedy artist/filmmaker
Francis Kennedy actor
Frank Kennedy performer A Date With Dickens
Mel Kenyon literary agent
Margareta Kern artist
Sandra Kerr artist
Steve Kettley saxophonist / composer
Hannah Khalil writer
Mimi Khalvati writer
Shahid Khan producer (naughty boy)
Yasmin Khan curator
Shama Khanna curator
Bharti Kher visual artist
Richard Kilgour artist
Michael Kindellan researcher, teacher
Ucef Knight artist
Judith Knight producer
Mark Knoop pianist and conductor
Steve Komarnyckyj translator and poet
Peter Kosminsky writer/director Stonehenge Films
Ash Kotak writer / curator Palestinian Arts Festival
Kristen Kreider poet & architect Kreider + O’Leary
Frances Kruk artist
Hari Kunzru writer
Mary Kuper illustrator
Chris Lafferty musician
Martina Laird actor
Desmond Lambert musician Some Velvet Morning
Bob Lamoon visual story-teller
Clare Lane teacher and artist
David Lang musician
David Lang musician
Diane Langford novelist
Kal Lavelle musician
Paul Laverty scriptwriter
Pamela Lawton ceramic artist
Alisa Lebow filmmaker
Suzy Lee film student
Linda Lee community choir leader
Nadjib Lefleurier sculptor
Malcolm Legrice film and video artist
Mike Leigh writer, director
Vincent Leleux artist
Emma Lennox writer
Tom Leonard poet
Lucy Lepchani poet, writer
Les Levidow violinist in ensembles
Deborah Levy writer
Louise Lewarne filmmaker
Sylvia Libedinsky architect and designer
Robin Licker musician The Restarts
Daniel Light lighting technician
Sonja Linden playwright
Dominic Lindesay-Bethune producer
Francesca Lisette poet
Pippa Little poet
Phyllida Lloyd director
Ken Loach director
Liz Lochhead playwright, and national poet of scotland
Alistair Logan clarinettist
Kiko loiacono tour manager dr kiko tours ltd
Viviana Lombardi actress, director, author
Amber Lone writer
Kim Longinotto filmmaker
Lynn Loo artist
Gerry Loose poet
D. Wayne Love musician Alabama 3
Adam Lowe writer, publisher, performer
Lesley Luckin singer
Ed Luker poet
Ben Lunn composer, conductor and musicologist
Victoria Lupton producer and curator
Omar Lyefook musician
Alexis Lykiard author (poet, novelist, translator)
John Lynch musician
Chloe Lynch musician, sound engineer
David Mabb artist
Grant Macdonald designer
James MacDonald director
Hettie Macdonald director
Sheree Mack writer
James Mackay producer & curator
Chris Mackin musician
Rohan Madison artist
Lee Maelzer artist
William Mahfoud music producer
Sabrina Mahfouz writer
Abid Mahi filmmaker/actor
Jamal Mahjoub author
Linda Maitland manager
Maitreyabandhu poet
John Maizels editor
Sulaiman Majali artist
Vincent Makowski graffiti writer, artist, graphic designer
Bob Malston artist
Bidisha SK Mamata journalist, film / television / broadcaster and author
Nina Mangalanayagam artist
Guy Mannes-Abbott writer
Jane Manning artist/academic
Miriam Margolyes actress
Jehane Markham poet
Kika Markham actor, writer
Ami Marsden sculptor
Katharine Marshall musician
John Marshall artist
Helen Marten artist
Tim Martin designer/lecturer
Sian Martin actor, writer
Angela Martin editor, filmmaker, ex-teacher
Andrea Mason actor
Ahmed Masoud artist, director, writer Al Zaytouna Dance Theatre / Performance
Nariman Massoumi filmmaker and academic
Cherie Matrix bellydancer
Mira Mattar writer
D W Mault filmmaker
Sophie Mayer writer
Julian Maynard Smith director Station House Opera
Judy Mazonowicz community artist, tutor
Andrew McAvoy architect
Simon McBurney actor, director, writer, theatre / performancemaker
Julie McCalden artist
Mike McCarthy producer Lakin McCarthy Entertainment Ltd
Annie McCartney playwright
Fred McCormick singer, songwriter, author
Sarah McDade artist, ceramics
David McDonald poet, writer, music producer, events manager
Beth McDonough poet
Elizabeth McDowall writer
David McDowall writer
Amanda McDowell artist
Jimmy McGovern writer
Teresa McGowan writer
Jon McGregor writer
Kathleen McKay writer, teacher
Paul McKee visual artist
Tom McKennan singer/songwriter
Beverley McKeown musician
Hilaire McLeish writer
Ewan McLennan folk singer
Caitlin McLeod theatre / performance director
Hilton McRae artist
Pauline Melville writer
Qalandar Memon editor Naked Punch Review
Noe Mendelle producer Scottish Documentary Institute
Peter Mennim artist
David Mercatali director
James Merry assistant
Iain Michael theatre / performance technician
Roger Michell theatre / performance, tv and film director
China Miéville writer
Chris Miley sound engineer Strange Reality Music Productions
Sam Millar author
Jonathan Miller director
Robert Miller technician
Russell Mills artist
Anthony Mills theatre / performance technician
Karen Mirza artist No-w-here
Mitch Mitchell bass player, vocalist The Wild Angels
Toby Mitchell writer/director
Giuliano Modarelli musician, composer Kefaya
Carel Moiseiwitsch visual artist
Lawrence Molloy artist, arts technician, event organiser The Superposition
Nina Moniri actor
Grazyna Monvid actor, writer, director
Robert Moon visual artist
Stephen Mooney poet and teacher
Mary Moore set and costume designer
Hubert Moore
Celt Islam Moore musician, artist, cultural director association of british muslims Celt Islam
Christopher Morahan, CBE director and executive producer
Aron Morel publisher Morel Books
Ray Morgan painter.
Jenny Morgan director
Carol Morley director
Sara Moroza-James writer
Fiona Morris executive producer
Darrell Morris photographer
Richard Morris actor/author/playwright
Alan Morrison poet, writer
Michael Mould performer/director
Laura Mulvey writer, filmmaker
Peter Mumford lighting designer
Jonathan Munby director
Gareth Murphy actor, director, writer
Lora Murphy artist , theatre / performance design
Sai Murray poet, designer, facilitator
John Murray architect
Caroline Murtagh painter
Haldun Musazlioglu comedian
Linda Mutawi producer
Larion Myakicheff artist
Tom Mycock musician the Splitters
Simon Mylius director Feeding the Fish
Daniel Naddafy actor
Rayna Nadeem filmmaker
Nadia Nadif actor, producer
Sara Naim artist
Paddy Nash musician
Orson Nava director
Pablo Navarette journalist, filmmaker
Leyla Nazli executive producer
Anthony Neilson writer/director
Helena Nelson publisher and poet HappenStance Press
Daniel Neofetou writer & editor
Esther Neslen artist
Judy Neunuebel artist
Patrick Neville actor Dialogue Productions
Courttia Newland writer
Kriss Nichol author and drummer Booktown Writers
Marilyn Nicholson painter
Janie Nicoll artist
Matthew Noel-Tod artist, filmmaker
David Owen Norris musician
Christopher Norris philosopher, poet, lecturer, singer (cor cochion caerdydd)
Barney Norris writer
Lizzie Nunnery playwright, song writer, singer
Dr Joseph O’ Neill artist
Rebecca O’Brien producer
Treasa O’Brien film director
Shivaun O’Casey director of the sean o’casey estate
Francis O’Connor theatre / performance designer
Joseph O’Neill artist
Andrew O’Hagan writer
Kirsty Ogg director
Earl Okin musician
Janice Okoh playwright
Abby Oliveiraz writer/performer
Caleb Oluwafemi poet
Gill Ord artist
Uriel Orlow artist, academic
Sean Orr artist
Sharon Dodua Otoo writer & editor
April Owens artist Pebble Design
Ian Pace pianist
Maysoon Pachachi filmmaker
Jeremy Page writer, teacher
Georgina Paget producer
Tom Paine filmmaker
Maria Palacios Cruz curator & lecturer
Eddie Palladio set artist, writer & guitarist
Claire Palmer artist/editor International Times Magazine
Kate Parkin publisher
Robin Parmar composer
Pratibha Parmar film writer & director
Alun Parry singer and songwriter
Rebecca Patenon writer
Harry Paterson author and journalist
Andy Patterson musician, songwriter, engineer
Maxine Peake actor
Eve Pearce artist
Jason Pearce artist
Eve Pearce actor
Edgar Peltenburg art historian
Alexander Penley solicitor for artists Penley Global Law
Miranda Pennell artist/filmmaker
Follett Pennell musician
Laurie Penny author
Ian Pepper artist
Jeff Perks artist and filmmaker
Holly Pester artist
Jeremy Peyton Jones composer, artistic director regular music ii
Annie Pfingst artist
Annie Pfingst artist
Steve Philbey visual artist – subvertiser
Christine Physick artist
Andy Picci painter, video maker, musician, actor, writer
Francisca Picon actor
Winsome Pinnock writer
Scoobius Pip musician
Nancy Platt docmentary director, teacher
Alison Playford actor and writer
Vanda Playford artist and doctor
Olivia Plender artist
John Pole songwriter
Alison Poltock arts director
Ben Ponton musician, composer :zoviet*france:
Erika Poole artist
Tabitha Pope architect
Olumide Popoola author
Daniel Potter musician
Tim Pottier orchestrator
Steve Pottinger poet
Jimmy Powdrell Campbell writer and composer
Audrey Powell music festival organiser
Jeremy Poynting editor and publisher Peepal Tree Press
Lucy Prebble writer
Richard Price writer
Judy Price artist
Iris Priest artist, artist’s assistant, essayist
Sunil Puri drama teacher
Clare Quinn theatre / performancemaker
Aun Qurashi architect
William Raban artist-filmmaker
Virginia Radcliffe artistic director, playwright
Michael Radford film director and screenwriter
Maha Rahwanji presenter
Gabi Rajchel dancer & tutor
Ravinder Randhawa author
Mark Ravenhill playwright
Tom Raworth poet, graphic artist
Carmen Rayavargas painter
Eddi Reader MBE singer/songwriter/musician
Siobhan Redmond actor
Sian Rees performer
John Rees writer, film / television / broadcaster
Natasha Rees artist, writer
Chris Reeves camera/sound/editing/directing Platform Films
Petra Regent printmaker and photograher
Lynne Reid Banks children’s novelist
Hugh Reilly author
Christian Reilly musical comedian
Lotte Reimer chorister
Dave Rendle poet
Ali Rhind artist
Patricia Richards chorister
Sam Richards musician and teacher
Guy Richardson composer
Ian Rickson director
Keith Ridgway writer
Keith Ridgway writer
Robin Rimbaud composer
Bill Risebero teacher. writer, actor
Alison Ritchie production manager
Ben Rivers theatre / performance director
Ben Rivers artist/filmmaker
Philip Roberts drama teacher
Douglas Robertson photographer
Eliza Robertson writer
Crispin Robinson musician, teacher
Pablo Robledo documentary-maker, cultural writer
Jenny Rodwell artist
Nick Rogers writer
Barnaby Rogerson writer & publisher
Jacqueline Rose writer
Alison Rose teacher
Steve Rose project manager, record label Secretly Canadian
Michael Rosen writer, professor
Leon Rosselson songwriter/children’s author
Jane Rossiter-Smith writer
Lee Rourke novelist
Paul Rowan musician
Hazel Roy theatre / performance director Artists for peace
Tara Rudder musician The Free Spirits
David Rushmer writer
Fiona Russell writer
Janet Russell singer, performer, teacher
Mark Rylance actor
Anjalika Sagar artist The Otolith Group
Yara Salahiddeen singer
Minna Salami writer, blogger, african popular culture
John Salway singer, actor, writer
Kareem Samara artist, musician
Andrew Sames artist, ceramisist, teacher/technician
Joel Samuels actor, playwright
Kevin Sanders sound artist
Leila Sansour filmmaker
Donald Sassoon professor of history (emeritus), writer
Stephanie Saulter writer
Dominic Saunders pianist
Camilla Saunders musician, composer
Ian Saville performer
Alexei Sayle comedian, author, actor
Prunella Scales actor/director
Alke Schmidt artist
Stanley Schtinter filmmaker, curator
Grace Schwindt artist
Mary Scott choir member
Julia Scott artist Glasgow Open Dance School (G.O.D.S)
Matt Scott composer
Jennie Scott artist
Matthew Scott editor The London Magazine
Jim Scott poet, author
Pauline Scutt visual artist
Helen Sear artist
Peggy Seeger musician, teacher
Colin Sell artist, composer, teacher
Seni Seneviratne poet
Kadija Sesay (George) publisher and writer
Sara Shaarawi playwright
Nabil Shaban actor, editor, author, film maker, artist
Julie Shackson artist
Mim Shaikh film / television / broadcast presenter
Khaldoun Shami filmmaker & lecturer
Kamila Shamsie writer
Roger Shanahan interior designer
Yasmin Shariff architect DSA
Farhana Sheikh writer
Anna Sherbany artist
Rachael Sherbourne digital artist 80 Stepney road
Anouche Sherman poet, multimedia artist
Guy Sherwin film artist/performer and teacher
Adrian Sherwood producer Onu Sound records limited
Eryl Shields writer
Kevin Shimwell actor
John Shrapnel actor
Christopher Shutt sound designer
Sigmatron dj/sound creator
Corinne Silva artist
Cate Simmons artist
Vannessa Simon singer/songwriter
Andy Simons musician, archivist
Nicky Singer writer
Tanya Singh writer, artist
Eyal Sivan filmmaker
Pam Skelton artist
Poppie Skold filmmaker
Gillian Slovo writer
Alicia Smedberg writer
Les Smith playwright
Calum Smith musician Calum Smith
Mick Smith musician, playwright, producer.
Michael Smith artist
John Smith artist filmmaker
Bob and Roberta Smith artist
Amy Smith artist
Cherry Smyth writer
Deniz Soezen artist
Samuel Solomon poet/critic
Chris Somes-Charlton artist manager
Gabriel Sotiry musician, sound engineer
Ahdaf Soueif writer
Abbie Spallen playwright
Ian Spink choreographer, director
Patrick Staff artist/choreographer
Max Stafford-Clark theatre / performance director
Siobhan Stamp teacher
Michael Start artist and craftsman The House of Automata
Danny Stead musician
Maggie Steed actor
Val Stein singer/songwriter
Amanda Stekly production designer
Polly Stenham playwright
Simon Stephens playwright
Gary Stevens artist
Liz Stirling artist
Jennie Stoller actor
Susannah Stone historical researcher/archivist
Degna Stone poet
Del Strain comedian-writer-film / television / broadcaster Del Strain Comedy
Em Strang poet & teacher
Jack Strange artist
Sarah Streatfeild violin
Paul Stroud composer
Dacia Stroud sculpture
Jenni Stuart-Anderson designer/maker
Alia Syed artist/filmmaker
Soraya Syed Sanders lettering artist
Mitra Tabrizian artist
Rebecca Tamas poet UEA
Stefan Tarnowski writer and curator
Julia Taudevin actor and playwright
Olly Taylor designer
Emilia Teglia artistic director Odd Eyes Theatre / Performance
Kate Tempest musician/poet
Julien Temple film director
Subash Thebe artist Central Saint Martins UAL
Cyril Thomas production manager
Mark Thomas comic, writer, political activist
Chris Thomas director
Patrick Thomas musician
Norma Thompson community arts development
Carolyn Thompson painter/drawer
Cathie Thomson agent
David Thorpe actor
Steve Tiller artistic director OperaMachine
Maija Timonen artist, writer
Cara Tolmie artist / musician
Nikki Tomlinson artist and artists’ advisor & producer
Di Trevis director
Cressida Trew filmmaker
Shelby Tucker author
Sarah Turner director of research, curriculum lead, fine art School of Music and Fine Art, University of Kent
Richard Twyman theatre / performance director
Jo Tyabji theatre / performance maker
Simon Tyszko artist/film / television / broadcaster theculture
Kate Unwin designer
Marion Urch author
Sheila Urquhart choir member
Esteban Uyarra director-editor
Pauline van Mourik Broekman editor, artist
Ryan Van Winkle poet
Gabriel Varghese director & academic
Francesca Viceconti artist
Maria Vigar writer
Roxana Vilk artist
Cat Villiers filmmaker
Marina Vishmidt writer and lecturer
Laura Wade playwright
James Wafer designer
Mirza Waheed writer
Gail Waldman architect (retired)
Naomi Wallace playwright
Harriet Walter actor
Christian Wangler retired sound recordist, documentary filmmaker
David Ward composer
Cathy Ward artist
Marina Warner writer
Ali Warner singer & voiceworker
Mark Warren sound designer
Roger Waters musician
Paul Watson documentary director, writer, artist, teacher
Jem Watts performer
Paul Wearing ceramicist
Mandy Webb artist
Jeremy Welsh artist
Samuel West actor and director
Timothy West actor and director
Hilary Westlake director
Boff Whalley guitarist, singer, author
Ruth Wharton printmaker
Ben White writer and journalist
Rhiannon White director Common Wealth
Tony White writer
Andy Whitehouse promoter and musician
Katy Whittle cellist
Ian Wiblin photographer, artist film-maker
Lillian Wilkie artist, teacher
Stephen Willey poet
Roy Williams artist
Melanie Williams artist & teacher
David Williams artist
Dmarcus Williams editor
Eilidh Wilson artist
Esther Wilson writer
Annalie Wilson artist
Mark Winn teacher
Devra Wiseman artist
Nathan Witt artist
Paul Wolinski musician 65daysofstatic
River Wolton writer
Matthew Wood musician Telegram
Vincent Woodcock tutor, cartoonist, animator.
Penny Woolcock writer/director
Susan Wooldridge actor and writer
Ben Woolford producer
Earnest Worthing writer
Andy Worthington author, journalist
Simon Worthington editor
Terry Wragg director
Nicholas Wright playwright
Alexa Wright artist
Fife Writes arts promoter Fife Writes
Robert Wyatt artist
Michael Wynne playwright
Carolyn Yates literature development and writer
Jeff Young writer
Reynaldo Young composer, teacher
Emily Young artist
Somaye Zadeh singer/musician
Valentina Zagaria director, writer Theatre / Performance Senza
Matthew Zajac actor, writer
Rehana Zaman artist
Sameena Zehra comedian, storyteller
Mona Zeidan community musician
Benjamin Zephaniah poet, novelist, musician
Rafeef Ziadah performance poet
Andrea Zimmerman artist
Silvia Ziranek artist

I don’t know whether the JCCV or ZFA or Mizrachi consider him as bad as Moshe Feiglin, but I’d hope that anyone and everyone boycott this person. He was listed in a letter to the Guardian supporting the boycotting of Israeli goods from Yehuda and Shomron (otherwise known as the BDS campaign).

I had never heard of him but this is what wikipedia tells us although wikipedia notes it contains information from someone close to Sivan. Maybe he self-promoted himself?

The Obama Administration’s linguistic gymnastics

To hear this video and to continue to support Obama as a US Jew, is simply unfathomable.

In Melbourne, we have the NIF patrons

from simonstudio

: Martin Indyk and Ronni Kahn. I know Ronni, from doing gigs in Sydney where she worked to collect left over food. Martin Indyk, unlike Dennis Ross has shown himself on many occasions to be out of touch with reality.

In Melbourne, we have Ameinu: Ostensibly led by my friend Johnny Baker (although their web site could do with some fixing)

Of course the old Habonim, Hineni Reform, Conservative, Deconstructionist, and other left wing groups that have been around for eons, and now the all singing Shira Chadasha strain of conservadox judaism.

Watch this video and tell me if you detect any sign that the Obama administration is fair. Or, do you share my opinion that they are left-wing apologists for Muslim terrorism unless it affects their uber strategic assets.

This is a good article if you can get your hands on it.

Naomi Chazan’s repeated nonsense

While Moshe Feiglin was shunned, and was a previous Deputy Speaker of Knesset, so is Naomi Chazan, a previous speaker of Knesset, except she is most welcome in Melbourne. Feiglin and Chazan both see the problem except Chazan’s eyes are now in the back of her head, after 20 years. She has added nothing of value or new ideas to the debate. She’s be better off making Shiva calls.

Here is her blog post from the Times of Israel.

The only comment I can make to Chazan is very simple: there was a thing called the (failed) Oslo Accords. Yasser Arafat, whose wife lives in lavish a plenty, decided he didn’t want to sign. My guess is he, like Mazen, would be dead 24 hours after they signed! They would be killed by the Hamas and its ancillary organisations. Guess what Naomi: that was 20 years ago. If Arafat had signed, do you think you would have a blog to write? My answer is perhaps surprisingly yes. The difference would be that you would be moaning and groaning about the existence of “settlements” (a euphemism for towns) only on one side of the green line, and quite comfortable with Arab Palestinian settlements on the other side, within Israel. There is no united Jerusalem. There cannot be until Chazan and her ilk stand up for democracy and INSIST that Jews have a right to pray at the Temple Mount. I’m not sure Chazan asks a Rabbi for permission or if she prays, but I’m sure she’d defend the right of a Jew to do so?

I don’t think she ever will and for that, to me, she will always be a flawed left winger like the rest of them, albeit an academic one.

Win-win is the most viable solution

by Naomi Chazan

The current spiral of violence between Israelis and Palestinians is profoundly detrimental to all involved. The passions and actions it unleashes now radiate well beyond their point of origin in Jerusalem. By its very nature, this cycle defies deep-rooted assumptions and cannot be mitigated by the institution of methods employed in the past. It requires a thorough reassessment of by-now disproven guiding assumptions and the formulation of a new, and substantially different, approach. The alternative is a regression into uncontrollable clashes which will only wreak further havoc and engender nothing but anarchy.

The biggest — and least sustainable — illusion of the Netanyahu era has been that the status quo is durable and can be maintained indefinitely. This assertion has never been acceptable to Palestinians, who continue to reject Israeli overrule and insist on the right to determine their own future. Since 1967 they have pursued this goal by almost every means conceivable: from passive resistance, popular uprisings, terror and random violence to negotiations, diplomacy and repeated appeals to the international community.

Israelis, too, have lived with the ambiguity of their own creation without really believing that it can last forever. A good portion of the population (polls still point to a majority) seek an end to the conflict through the establishment of a Palestinian state alongside Israel; others — heavily represented in the present government — have never really given up on the dream of a greater Israel. For all, the present is merely a necessary holding operation on the road to a more permanent state down the road.

It follows, therefore, that the notion of conflict management which has guided Israeli policy in recent years is thoroughly detached both from the aspirations of the two peoples and from realities on the ground. For many Israelis it is at best a convenient default option; for Palestinians it is a daily reminder of the challenges they face. It persists because it serves the short-term interests of the Netanyahu coalition: it allows it to continue to exercise control, to contain tensions as much as possible and, above all, to defer any serious attempt to find a solution to the conflict.

The major prop in the implementation of this situation has been the threat and, when necessary, the use of force. In lulls between cycles of violence in the West Bank and Gaza, various forms of security cooperation with the Palestinian Authority or brokered understandings with the Hamas have bought periods of relative quiescence. When these have been punctured by violence, they have been met with strong-armed measures — set in motion to deter further escalation. Over the years the result has been a series of (ever-shortening and constantly rising) spurts of violent engagements.

The present round — emanating from Jerusalem but now spreading rapidly not only into the West Bank and the Gaza Strip, but also into the heart of Israel — is on the verge of taking on more massive proportions. Propelled by extreme religious sentiments and by deep-seated frustrations stemming from the absence of any prospects on the negotiation front, it is nevertheless characterized by a shift from a spattering of random individual acts to a steadier, more organized, increasingly frequent and broader stream of outbursts which have felled a growing number of innocent victims on both sides of the Palestinian-Israeli divide.

Raw nerves and heightened emotions frame the current storm. Many Palestinians have given up hope: some (especially the youth) are unwilling to resign themselves to this condition, lashing out not only against Israeli repression but against the passivity of their elders. Hatred, despair, idealism and honor intermingle to spur on violent action. Israelis, in turn, combine fear with uncertainty, a quest for security with a desire for retribution, paranoia with pride, and no small measure of arrogance with vengeance to fuel the flames. As more people are drawn into the maelstrom by their leaders and the engaged media, rational analysis and associated policy calibration have fallen by the wayside.

Nobody has emerged untainted from the events of recent weeks. Leaders on both sides have fine-tuned mutual provocations. Incitement is rampant: in official quarters, on the streets, in the press and, most viciously, on the web’s social networks. Abu-Mazen, the self-proclaimed champion of nonviolence, has fallen unusually silent. Netanyahu has declared an all-out assault on Palestinians — once again in the name of the need to restore a semblance of calm. The Old City of Jerusalem has been cordoned off to non-resident Palestinians and an effective closure of the West Bank has been imposed — backed by a stream of additional forces on the streets and the hilltops, massive administrative detentions, an easing of restrictions on the use of live fire, stepped-up house demolitions and expanded punitive measures. This is the stuff on which more violence thrives.

If the past is any indicator, today’s spiral will eventually subside when fatigue with the present human devastation sets in. The parties will pause, take stock, reorganize and then try again — a clear signal that the force of familiar habits — however destructive — will prevail unless a different logic is designed and implemented. It is harder to disentangle entire societies from the spell of their operative truisms than perhaps anything else. But this is undoubtedly, more than anything else, what is needed at this juncture.

The starting point for such an undertaking is a cold, clear-headed, revision of working assumptions. The first — and by far the most vital — is the jettisoning of the adversarial premise of the Israeli-Palestinian relationship in favor of the rather counterintuitive yet systematically manifest understanding that the two peoples are locked in a binding symbiotic relationship. What happens on one side of the equation affects the other; a mutual dependence (too often of a destructive nature) underlies their very existence. Recent history has been replete with multiple instances of lose-lose situations.

This does not mean, however, that a win-win formula cannot be found. Acknowledgement of the mutual dependence between Israelis and Palestinians is a precondition for the resurrection of hope — that elusive ingredient so necessary for halting the inexorable pattern of ongoing confrontation. Along with hope must also come its essential corollary: a commitment to the resolution of the historical conflict between the peoples who — almost in equal numbers — reside on the land. No amount of management in the short or long-term can begin to relieve the profound animosity that exists. With the opening of a realistic, time-bound, equitable possibility of a restructuring of the relationship, it might just be possible to set out on a new course.

This is the foundation for the creation of that restraint which is so absent under present circumstances. The vehicle for its realization is a non-violence pact (to which both Abu-Mazen and Netanyahu are ostensibly committed) which could facilitate the launching of a workable diplomatic process under a reconstituted international umbrella consisting not only of the Quartet, but of regional actors as well.

This is not a pipe dream. It is an imperative that depends on the courage and conviction of true leaders and the backing of all those Israelis and Palestinians who — above all else — aspire to live normal lives and give themselves and their offspring that predictability which will enable them to survive and to thrive. It also rests on the capacity to abandon the winner-takes-all mentality that has polluted the air and replace it with an understanding that if both sides don’t benefit everybody will suffer. A studied, determined, principled reorientation is the best way to avoid further violence and avert a descent into frightful chaos. It can be put in place now. The alternative is unspeakable.

Pass this on especially to your non-Jewish friends

Actually, pass it onto J-Street, Ameinu and all the left wingers who think you can TALK to these “things”.

When the word radicalisation comes up, send this video (from memri). Ask them what Australia has to do with this savage stream of religion.

Click Here

Make no mistake my friends, this is the work of Mahmoud Abbas and his predecessors and is a direct result of the profoundly failed Oslo Accords.

Sydney Adass is miles away from Melbourne’s Adass … check on THEIR attitude to Moshe Feiglin

[Hat tip BA]

Davening at Tzemach Tzedek this forthcoming Shabbos, Parshas Noach – Adass and Tzemach Tzedek will be welcoming Moshe Feiglin.
Moshe Feiglin is the past deputy speaker of the Knesset and founder of the Zehut party.
After davening, our members, with Tzemach Tzedek and Bet Yosef members are invited to a combined Kiddush to listen to and welcome him.
Moshe Feiglin has a unique insight into the problems facing Israel and their solutions.
For further details regarding his Sydney visit contact Sreuvi Lazarus Ph: 0415850245
Biography
Moshe Feiglin is the head of the Zehut political movement, dedicated to providing Israel with authentic Jewish leadership based on Jewish identity and liberty and imbuing every facet of Israeli life with the meaning of Jewish destiny.

In 1993, Moshe Feiglin co-founded the Zo Artzeinu (“This [is] our Land/Country”) movement with Shmuel Sackett to protest the Oslo Accords. In 1996, he established the Manhigut Yehudit movement to foster Jewish leadership for Israel. In 2000, the movement joined Israel’s Likud party as a faction dedicated to the same goal. Mr. Feiglin declared that he would be a candidate for chairmanship of the party as a springboard for premiership of the State of Israel. Mr. Feiglin was Deputy Speaker of the Knesset and Likud MK from 2013 – 2015.

Moshe Feiglin advocates human rights and liberty, family values, free market economy tempered with the Jewish values of kindness, Israeli sovereignty over all the land in its hands, Jewish rights on the Temple Mount and much more. He is determined to provide Israel with the authentic Jewish leadership that it so desperately needs. His goal is to be prime minister of Israel and to lead the nation to its Jewish destiny with authentic Jewish values.

So how controversial was Moshe Feiglin of Zehut?

In a previous article, I questioned why a religious zionist (modern orthodox) congregation such as Mizrachi would apparently not permit Moshe Feiglin to speak at Shalosh Seudos, prior to his main talk the next day at the Werdiger Hall. In response to some who have suggested “why don’t you ask your brother-in-law”, which is a valid question, my answer is simple: Whilst he is President of Mizrachi, and has been for many years, and from what I have witnessed has done a sterling job (I might be biased),

  • I suspect it would/should have been a committee decision
  • He may have a personal opinion which he may not wish to share
  • Simply because he is married to my sister ought not mean that my questions shouldn’t be asked in my blog
  • I don’t particularly want to put him on the spot, as he is משפחה at the end of the day

Now, Moshe Feiglin is certainly not the most controversial figure to speak in Melbourne at a Jewish Organisation. The left seem to be able to bring any and every type of anti-Jewish, questionably Zionist, type here with impunity. Ironically, the Holocaust generation, would have nothing of such people, but their tree hugging, reformulated Judaism as תיקון עולם not necessarily with the מלכות שד׳י that follows it, children are exactly those who are comfortable sitting with those who want to make Israel like “all the nations”.

Israel will never be like “all the nations”. As long as it follows the constant הלכה of והלכת בדרכיו where we are meant to emulate God, through his values, his published traits, his wishes, and his admonishments, we will share lots with many good countries, but we will depart on various issues. Indeed, this is why Jews and Judaism have survived. A Talmud that allows an Amora to say אין משיח לישראל doesn’t strike me as a Talmud that is afraid. Yes, I’m aware of the different explanations for this statement, my point being that, and not leaving it out, דרוש וקבל שכר …. listen and learn and understand and you will at least be rewarded for that.

The annual learnathon conducted in Melbourne has included people with views far more radical (of course to the left, never to the right) than Moshe Feiglin. Moshe Feiglin is above all a libertarian. I would now describe him as a radical libertarian. He has his own unique views on the crises facing Israel, and that Zionists, religious or otherwise basically abandoned him at the Werdiger Hall on Sunday night, is a blight on their Zionism.

The people happiest about such a phenomenon are the Benedict Arnold movements, Ameinu and J-Street, both of whom pander to left wing Western “sensibilities and politics” in the arcane belief that this will solve or should I say dissolve the problems.

I heard first hand what Moshe proposed, and although I was unwell and unable to attend, none of it shocked me or made me think he was a radical. We as a community need to ask ourselves some questions:

  • Is the view that the Oslo Accords are dead, and that a two state solution is not the answer, that of a Zionist heretic? Is it necessarily the view of someone who is violent? Can one be a pacifist and subscribe to the notion that there already is a Palestinian State and its name is Jordan
  • Is it anathema for someone whose Rabbi permits them to go to parts of the Temple Mount (note the Jewish Temples which preceded Al Aqsa) to be forbidden to pray! What sort of (Western) democracy is this? How do the magic words “status quo” which we see right at this minute with the lying induced violence conjure up an “Abracadabra” spell on thinking people? Why? Is it because we will lose American support? That’s the only reason I can think of. Surely thinking people would recognise that it makes no sense that a Jew cannot pray but someone from another religion can throw rocks, create fires, and destroy archeology?

Moshe Feiglin has his views. He was asked by an Arab MK when he was Deputy Speaker, and still a member of Likud, “What are the borders of Israel” and Feiglin replied quoting the Chumash, implying a wider, larger Israel. Is he not entitled to have or express such a view? The two state solution is the biggest lie we have seen. There is no partner, there is nobody serious on the other side. They are just a group of bickering tribesmen who are politically at each others throats and far away from even having a semblance of freedom.

I saw an article in the paper that was “shocked” because kids as young as 5 were shown programs about carrying guns in ISIS and their “friends”. Well, hello. Anyone who follows memri.org and I highly recommend it, will know that Palestinian Arabs have done this for decades. It is in an Australian paper because Australians have unfortunately also suffered at the hands of “radicalised ones”. Someone define what non radicalised means? Is that 1/2 Sharia or is it Australian Law?

Feiglin’s philosophy is very similar to that of many Australians. In fact, I read Prime Minister Turnbull make the same statement. There is Australian Law. There may be other legal systems. If you are uncomfortable with living in a country under an Australian legal system, then by all means go to a country that conforms with your definition of law.

Let it not be concluded that I necessarily agree with Moshe Feiglin’s views willy nilly. I’d need to read more and then form my own views. However, not allowing him to speak, is to me a great בזיון for this community which people like Isi Leibler laud as huge Zionists. Unfortunately, Leibler is long gone and doesn’t realise how that the old boat is sliding to the left more and more, while the sanguine views of the previous generation, are buried in Springvale and Lyndhurst.

If anyone felt that Feiglin said something that should preclude him from speaking, or from being granted a Visa, pray tell me why.

What made Mizrachi back flip on Moshe Zalman Feiglin’s planned talk at Shalosh Seudos?

I hear there are powerful forces that insisted that Moshe Feiglin’s talk at Mizrachi’s rather tame Shalosh Seudos, be cancelled. He was due to speak there by error or naturally. Mizrachi in Melbourne have certainly allowed right-wing revolutionaries from Ateret Cohanim to speak there, but Moshe Feiglin was cancelled. Was it because of the marxist left wing conservadox organisations like Shira Chadasha or is that Hadasha who had the Chutzpa to join the Reform and others and advertise their opposition to free speech. To them, I say go hug a tree. You will feel fulfilled. Go find a rabbi who fits your pre-defined view of Zionism and Judaism and give it a logo. Off you go. What was so damned offensive about Moshe Feiglin, someone tell me. I heard him on Friday night and knew little about him. He sounded fine to me. Are these the same dark forces that considered Rabbi Sprung too right-wing and who complain bitterly when Rabbis (for whom they have no respect) decide that certain whisky should be avoided. These are people who think they own Judaism. Guess what? They don’t. Ex nihilo is nonsense. The world was always filled with God. It was a matter for him to form a world such that והלכת בדרכיו not the ways of the humans who decide what is and is not moral, what is left and what is right.

So, I looked him up. I found this. Nothing objectionable:

Although Manhigut Yehudit is an educational organization that does not endorse political candidates, we believe that you will find Moshe Feiglin’s words at the Zehut Founding Conference to be enlightening and inspiring:

Dear Friends,

I must admit that I am very moved. I have participated in quite a few events in my life and have made quite a few speeches. But when you begin to understand the depth of the crisis and upheavals facing Israel and the world; when you understand that what we are doing here this evening is laying the foundation for the only leadership that is capable of understanding reality and thus, for dealing with it; when you understand that – you understand that tonight’s event is formative; it is an historic event.

A New Leadership Movement: From Zionism of Existence to Zionism of Destiny

Make no mistake. This is not a group of a few hundred Israelis who have decided to form another political party. What is happening here tonight is nothing less than a revolution.

Tonight, we are founding a new leadership movement for the Nation of Israel. Tonight, we are founding the only leadership that has the tools to truly deal with the approaching tsunami – from within and without!

Tonight, we are creating national leadership that will bring the State of Israel from one era: Zionism of Existence, to a completely new era: Zionism of Destiny.

The Vision: Identity, Meaning, Liberty

Everything so sorely lacking in Israeli politics can be found in this movement. First and foremost, what we have completely forgotten:

We have vision!

Our vision includes:

Loyalty to our identity

A message of meaning

A battle for liberty.

True answers can only be found within this vision:

Answers based on liberty to deal with all our current challenges: Housing, education, cost of living, health and of course security and foreign relations.

Only those who have vision and know the answer to ‘why?’ can provide the true answers to ‘how’.

Without Destiny, Existence is Endangered

Seventy years ago, the crematoria of Europe were extinguished and our Nation began to rise from the ashes. The State of Israel’s first seventy years are also about to be completed.

There is no doubt that the State of Israel is a success story. It has realized the vision of the prophets and has been the conduit for the unequaled historical miracle in which all parts of the Nation of Israel have participated.

But it is specifically the physical success that has made us vulnerable to a gnawing, paralyzing weakness that threatens all the achievements of the Return to Zion.

From a physical standpoint, we have never been greater and stronger; both economically and militarily. But internally – we have never been so weak.

Sometimes I feel that I should apologize to my children: I had so much fun growing up in this country. Israel was a country that radiated security and faith in the justice of its cause. What confusion and lowliness we are bequeathing the next generation – exactly at the most critical time!

Our parents, the generation of the War of Independence and the Six Day War, the generation of the Yom Kippur War and Entebbe, gave us a state that stood proud. They gave us a state in which a drizzle in Sderot meant that autumn was coming – not rockets coming out of the sky.

Missiles on Tel Aviv? Who would ever have thought?

Our parents gave us a state in which there was no need for security guards at the entrance to every shopping mall and train station.

They gave us a state whose existence was not questioned by any cultured person in the world.

They gave us a state in which every soldier in uniform understood what he represented and nobody dared attack him.

They gave us a state that would immediately obliterate any entity developing nuclear weapons to destroy us – with no warning, no speeches and no lobbying the Congress.

Our parents gave us a state in which every young couple could afford housing; a state that no matter what school you attended, you emerged an Israeli patriot.

They gave us a state in which little girls could play hopscotch on the corner unguarded.

A state without ‘protection’.

A state in which every Jew could walk freely – everywhere.

And what are we giving our children?

A threatened, helpless community that begs the world and the US air force for help?

A state that has lost its faith in the justice of its cause, a state that – more and more – the world considers a mistake?

A state in which young couples can only dream of owning their own home.

A state in which the schooling falls far short of our potential.

A state in which parents are forced to guard their children while they play outdoors.

A state in which personal liberties are being eroded.

The world is not exactly waiting patiently while we return to ourselves. The entire old order is crumbling before our eyes.

ISIS is replacing the Arab states.

Nuclear ayatollahs set the world agenda.

Europe is quickly becoming Moslem.

America stands by those who attempt to destroy us.

Where is the leadership of old? Leadership that would know how to present a vision and strategy in the face of the existential challenges falling upon us?

This is the new leadership that we are building today, here in Tel Aviv.

No more state that flees its message

No more state that flees its meaning and history.

Today, we are heralding the connection of all of these to the liberty of man.

Dear friends,

The era of religious and non-religious is over!

The era of Right and Left is finished!

All the ridiculous molds that divided us time and again are a thing of the past.

The Israeli young people yearn for the meaning taken from them.

They crave to dig deeply into their identity and liberty.

Israel’s young people desire leadership that will give them all these things. Leadership that will truly solve:

The housing shortage, the collapsing educational system, the high cost of living – leadership that will restore security to our streets.

We have all those gifts – and more – to give:

Housing: We know that liberty means that the land belongs to the citizens – not to the state. Land must be allotted by lottery to all army veterans in Israel.

The bureaucratic red tape must be cut and people must be allowed to build as they please on their land. And most important of all, we know that this is our Land and we should build throughout our country.

Education: We know how to truly solve the problem with education in Israel. Because we know that liberty means that we are responsible for the education of our children- not the State. The State will give vouchers to the parents of every child and the parents will decide where to redeem them.

Just imagine countless ‘boutique’ schools competing for your vouchers – just like the maternity wards compete for the social security funds that they receive for every new mother who gives birth in their hospital.

Every teacher will be a private tutor. And every student will be a king!

Cost of living: We know how to truly deal with the high cost of living and how to propel the economy forward. Simply, we must:

Open the Israeli market to competitive imports
Close the Standards Institute
Cut down the government mechanism to at least half
Nullify the tax on companies
Return the state payment for army veterans to social security
Stop funding our enemies.
War can never be over when the Israel Defense Force vocabulary does not include the word ‘victory’.

It is impossible to win when it is not clear who the enemy is (The rocket? The tunnel? Terror?)

If you cannot figure out who you are, (A Jew? An Israeli? A citizen of an amorphous state?) you will clearly not discover who your enemy is. Maybe we were sent here by the UN?

Now we can understand that a person or country that has no identity will never enjoy peace.

Yes, ladies and gentlemen: Only Zehut will bring peace!

We have the answer to the ‘why’? And thus, we can provide all the answers to the ‘how’?!

Dear friends, now it is in our hands!

The energies, the people, the clear plan and the will and preparedness to lead are all in this hall. They are in no other place and so, the responsibility is on our shoulders. We have all the tools with which to bring about a true revolution.

We have a year – not more – to reach every corner of this country.

Now friends, it is in our hands. And we have good reason to be excited at the eve of the New Year. To be excited and to thank the Creator, Who has brought us to this momentous and historic time, in which we have merited to establish leadership with vision for our Nation.

Shanah Tovah

I heard in Shule that he’s “homophobic”. Sorry, what does that mean. Does that mean that he beats up gay people or does it mean that he happens to accept Torah that the act of homosexuality is a SIN. Are the politically correct anonymous powers behind Mizrachi afraid to say the word תועבה … if so, they should join Shira Chadasha, the “Shule of Song”. Too far? Uncomfortable seats? Only for the young? Do me a favour people get a life.

Okay, so I looked for more, and found this.

While other Knesset members will ride off into the political sunset after their successors are sworn in to the parliament Tuesday, outgoing Likud MK Moshe Feiglin will go to the Party Registrar’s Office to officially create his new political home.

Feiglin left the Likud after he failed to get selected for a realistic slot on the party’s list for the new Knesset. He announced that he would form a party at an event held at the same time that Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu celebrated with his party’s new candidates.

Feiglin’s faction will be called Zehut, which means identity in Hebrew. It will push for Israel to decide what it means to be a Jewish state.

Speaking at the Knesset after he received his “former MK card,” Feiglin boasted how people waited in line to pay NIS 500 to join the list of party founders that would be submitted to the registrar. He said 60 percent of the initial 500 founders were not religious and that Zehut would not be sectarian.

“Establishing Israel’s identity is the key to its future,” Feiglin said. “The loss of its identity is the problem, and returning it is the solution.”

Feiglin said he turned down offers of realistic slots on multiple party lists, preferring to sit out the current Knesset and build a new party from the bottom up.

“The Likud is not the answer to anything,” he said. “I prefer to advance my ideas on my own. My ideas attract curiosity and appreciation. I didn’t need a stage. What I want is to provide an alternative of leadership.”

Feiglin said that if MK Yair Lapid could start a new party and win 19 seats and Kulanu leader Moshe Kahlon would win 10, he could win 20 in the next election, which he believes will take place soon after what he called a “Pyrrhic victory” for Netanyahu.

His political predictions proved right in the past. He wrote on Facebook ahead of the 2013 election, when Bayit Yehudi was polling 16 seats, that it would fall to eight when the Likud would warn its voters that the Left could come to power.

Zehut will be registered as soon as the Interior Ministry verifies the Israeli residence of everyone on its list of founders in accordance with the law.

Feiglin hopes the current Knesset will pass a bill allowing Jews abroad who are not citizens to join Israeli political parties.

Many secular people attended a pre-Passover toast Feiglin hosted Sunday night in Jerusalem.

Uri Noy of Petah Tikva, who was one of them, said he was surprised to see so many people not wearing kippot.

“The upheaval is really happening,” he said. “I came to Feiglin because I saw that in the [2006] Second Lebanon War, Israel did not fight back. I got turned on by him, and I’ve supported him since then.”

Noy said he was in Likud with Feiglin and he was glad they left because the Likud has not been true to its political platform that calls for keeping and settling the land of Israel.

He said there was nothing wrong with a secular Jew supporting the building of a Third Temple, noting that Zionist founder Theodore Herzl wrote in favor of it in his book Altneuland.

“Leaving the Likud is not giving up,” said Binyamin Nakonechny, a former Likud central committee member who was the first person who joined Zehut. “Feiglin has faced political setbacks throughout his career but he hasn’t given up. He has just started over.”

Okay, I can’t see anything that would cause the Marxist tree huggers to try and muzzle free speech. Then I saw he was sentenced to prison for opposing the Oslo Accords (sounds like Russia to me). Well, even the left-wing moustached types cannot say anything good about the useless 20 year old Oslo Accords. They were and are bullshit. Sorry, that is fact. Try a few stabbings to remind you. Then I thought to myself, maybe he was into religious coercion etc and I found this on wikipedia

Feiglin, responding to a report that Israel’s first permanent Arab Supreme Court judge Salim Joubran had refused to sing Israel’s national anthem, asserted Joubran: “must return his Israeli ID card and make do with the status of ‘permanent resident.’

Guess what, I agree with him. It’s a joke. The Marxist libertarian left wingers in our Jewish people are so self righteous that they don’t understand basic logic.

If someone supports a Kahane policy that doesn’t make them Kahane!

Try and get that through elementary logic.

Feiglin said:

Feiglin referred to U.S. Vice President Joseph Biden as a “diseased leper” in a 2010 op-ed column published by Israel’s third largest news outlet, Maariv.

Was he wrong? Is Obama any different? What good has Obama done for Israel except kiss the orifices of Iran since he came to power.

Then I heard he was a homophobe because:

“”Throughout history,” Feiglin explained, “from Rome to Europe in our day, the approval and spread of homosexuality presaged the decline of nations and cultures. If one reads the Torah portion ‘Noah’ – this comes as no surprise. . . .The organizers of a pride parade do not wish to gain rights. They strive to force homosexuality as a culture upon the public sphere. . . . A minority has no right to take over public assets. Let the marchers kindly go back to their individual closets. And let them do it without whining, because no one interferes with their affairs in there. Let them give up their attempts at takeovers, and leave the public sphere to normal people. . . .Feiglin added in an additional post: “I have no problem with homosexuals, most of whom are, most likely, good and talented people and no one wants to interfere in their private lives. I have a problem with homosexuality as a culture. This culture subverts the status of the family. And without the family there is no nation, and without a nation there is no civilization.”

Okay, he has no problem with what people do in their private lives, but opposes Pride parades and the creation of Pride cultures. Guess what. So do I. Does Shira Chadasha or Mizrachi embrace Parades in Tel Aviv and Jerusalem. I don’t tell people what to do in their bed rooms.

But then I found the answer. It’s got to be the pathetic political correctness of our good tree hugging leftists.

Feiglin is banned from entering the United Kingdom due to a decision by Home Secretary Jacqui Smith, made public in March 2008, excluding Feiglin on the grounds that his presence in the country “would not be conducive to the public good.” A letter to Feiglin from the Home Office said that Smith based her decision on an assessment that his activities “foment or justify terrorist violence in furtherance of particular beliefs; seek to provoke others to terrorist acts; foment other serious criminal activity or seek to provoke others to serious criminal acts and foster hatred which might lead to inter-community violence in the UK.”Feiglin responded, “Seeing that renowned terrorists like Hizbullah member Ibrahim Mousawi are welcomed in your country in open arms, I understand that your policy is aimed at encouraging and supporting terror.”

So what terrorism has Feiglin fomented. Since when do we follow anti-Semitic Britain? To all you libertarian democrats and supporters of free speech I say hang your heads in shame. There are far worse right wingers in the Likud, and Mizrachi would haven did let them in to speak, that was when old Mr Lamm ע’’ה was alive. Alas, his son, Danny obviously no longer has influence. As to my own views, I am outside Israel, but as long as he isn’t advocating terrorism (like the Muslims who advocate terrorism AND live in Australia) what is wrong with free speech? I was also gob-smacked when Australia wouldn’t allow that anti-abortion campaigner in. Unless there is something about him that I don’t know, we are heading towards totalitarian Russia, where if you have charisma, they certainly won’t let you in to talk.

This is political correctness gone mad

The Australian Labor Party and Israel

We are in Australia. We don’t live the life of an Israeli. It was reported yesterday that the majority of Israelis were and are against the previous evacuation of Gush Katif (Aza or Gaza).

Are we, as Jews not living there going to tell them they are wrong, while we lounge in the relative comfort of Melbourne?

And so, I will confine my views to those emanating from the Australian political landscape,

I am friendly with Michael Danby, a stalwart within the Labor Party and a shining star. Mark Dreyfus or his office never respond to my communication.

At the end of the day, to talk about a two state solution as observers in Australia is complete and utter baloney, and grossly misses the point.

There is currently NO PARTNER FOR PEACE. I do not think it is necessary to justify such a fact. It is self-evident and is the view of the Israeli Government.

IF AND ONLY IF there is partner, one can begin to talk about two states.

That reality is lost in the labor party’s discussions where the left clearly hold sway.

The transparent remarks as typified by the weekly letters to the Australian Jewish News, that we should be applauding Michael (and Mark) and two others is correct, however, the suggestion that THIS is the front page news is an attempt to deflect from the primary issue. The primary issue is not about two states. It is about whether there is a partner for peace, and what the Labor party did not say.

In my opinion statements which elide this primary issue as enunciated by the elected Government of Israel are defective and deflective of reality.

I do not know what the Liberals will say, but the Greens already have shown their lying yellow colour, when their leader changed his mind a few days after being elected. The Greens are the up and comers and the most dangerous party in respect of support for the only true democracy in the region. They are the Marmara of Australia, often wearing the clothing of the mujahideen under their vegetable-derived suits.

Parshas Shelach

from Rav Motti Greenberg, Rosh Yeshivah, Kerem B’Yavneh

“We cannot rise up against the nation because it is stronger than us… And the whole nation that we saw there are very big.” [Bamidbar 13:32]. Rashi explains this to mean that the people were tall and large. However, the SHELAH brings a surprising interpretation: that the people had good traits. (This is also brought by the Kli Yakar.) However, why should the scouts want to praise the moral traits of the Canaanites, to tell us that they behave in a righteous and proper way? Evidently this is meant to imply that “the sin of the Emorites is not complete” [Bereishit 15:16], and it will be difficult for Bnei Yisrael to conquer them and take the land. And that is why the scouts added, “We were in our eyes like grasshoppers” [Bamidbar 13:33]. Not as Rashi explains, that the scouts felt as small as grasshoppers, rather that they felt the opposite of those “people with good traits,” for they were honest and good while we were like locusts and grasshoppers which come and steal away the produce of honest owners of the fields. As is written in the Talmud, “If one steals a field which is then ravaged by locusts” [Bava Kama 11 6b] he can give it back to the original owner (see the Talmud and Rashi’s commentary). Thus, the claim of the scouts was that the current residents were behaving in a proper way, and that Bnei Yisrael had come to steal their land (does this sound familiar to our ears?).

 

This claim can be countered by the words of Rabbi Yitzchak quoted by Rashi in the beginning of Bereishit. “Why did the Torah begin with Bereishit? The answer is because of the verse, ‘He told the nation about the power of His deeds, to give them the heritage of the other nations’ [Tehillim 111:6]. If the nations claim that you are robbers in that you conquered the lands of the Seven Nations, you can reply: The entire land belongs to the Holy One, Blessed be He, He created it and gives it to whomever He sees fit. When He wanted to He gave it to them, and when He wants to He takes it from them and gives it to us.”

 

At first glance, this reply is hard to understand and even sounds unjust. Every robber can use this claim, to say that the Master of the World took possession of an object and gave it to him. If this is so, how can any sense of order be maintained?

 

The answer to the above question is that the claim of Divine intervention is only valid when it is absolutely clear that the Holy One, Blessed be He, is the one who took the land from them and gave it to us. When it can be seen that we who are small and weak, a nation which was just freed from slavery, who conquered “a great and mighty people, children of giants” [Devarim 9:2], it is clear that we are not robbers, and that the Master of the World took the land from them and gave it to us. As Rachav said to the scouts sent by Yehoshua, “We have heard that G-d dried out the waters of the Red Sea before you… And what you did to the two kings of the Emorites… And we heard this and our hearts melted… For your G-d is the G-d of heaven above and of the earth below.” [Yehoshua 1:10-12].

 

In our generation too, it is impossible to deny that the hand of G-d has wrought all that has taken place. On one hand Jews were led to slaughter, but a magnificent nation was established right after the tragic events. Rabbi Amital wrote that if the world would have been destroyed and later on studied by historians in the distant future they would certainly have come to the conclusion that many hundreds of years passed between the two events, the Holocaust and the establishment of the State of Israel.

 

A hundred years ago, when Theodor Herzl asked for help from the Pope to return to Eretz Yisrael, he replied that he could not agree to our return to the land because this was against the Xristian religion. If only we could uncover the eyes of that Pope and show him that when his successor visited our land a few months ago he placed a bouquet of flowers on Herzl’s grave – almost as if to say: You were right and we were wrong.

This parliamentarian is right on the money

I like her straight views. Having witnessed many protests around RMIT for BDS, I can tell you it is the same motley bunch of unwashed socialists who actually know close to NOTHING about the middle east. When I’ve engaged them in discussion, apart from their yelling, they actually can’t answer a single sensible question. It’s plain old anti-Semitism driving them. Of course, they are accompanied by some locals of another faith and many of them are just extremists under watch.

This snippet is from Yediot

Shaked: BDS is anti-Semitism under new guide

The Knesset held a special session Wednesday about the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) campaign against Israel after the UK’s National Union of Students voted in favor of joining the movement.

“This is anti-Semitism under new guise with the same symptoms,” said Justice Minister Ayelet Shaked. Shaked’s speech was accompanied by a lot of vocal comments from the other MKs. “There is a de-legitimization campaign against Israel happening right now. These are ephemeral organizations and we need to stop cooperating with them and cut ties, have them pay for their boycotts,” Shaked said.

She then turned to members of the opposition saying, “Open your eyes and ears. In 2012, the UN General Assembly approved 22 resolutions against Israel compared to four against the rest of the world countries. This is a campaign of lies and threats and you (Meretz MKs) were standing at the podium reading quotes from Breaking the Silence, an organization which is slandering Israel and damaging it.”

Shaked speaking at the Knesset.Shaked speaking at the Knesset.

“Today, it’s ‘super in’ to be anti-Israel,” she continued. “If someone thinks withdrawals will help, they are wrong. The biggest diplomatic attacks against the State of Israel were all done because of Israel’s operations in Gaza, from which we withdrew until the last centimeter. Are we also occupiers in the Negev? Israel’s boycotts seek to erase the State of Israel, not divide it.” Minister Ofir Akunis took the podium next, aiming his attack at Meretz Chairwoman Zehava Galon. “The most contemptible acts in human history started with boycotts against the Jews,” he said. Galon responded with, “You think you can stand there and preach us and we will remain quiet? Come to 2015 already.”

“We cannot bear this victimization policy of yours, Ministers Shaked and Akunis,” Galon said. “Calm down, because those who work in the service of this boycott are members of the Netanyahu government. They are those who impose separation on buses and release videos of Arabs ‘going in droves’ (to the polls) and claims Arabs are playing games. You will have to decide: Either settlements or international legitimacy.