The organization "Glance at the Palestinian Communication" has published a theatre "play" presented by the Hamas theatre in which it is said numerous times that Jews drink Muslims' blood and believe that God wants the Jews to hate the Muslims.
Medina, Islam's second holiest city, was originally a Jewish "settlement"
Although the fact is little publicized, more than one historian has affirmed at the Arab world's second holiest city, Medina, was one of the allegedly "purely Arab" cities that actually was first settled by Jewish tribes.1
And like the 16th Century English Protestants who financed their endeavors through the plunder of Catholic monasteries in England, the roots of Islamic anti-Semitism might be found in the initial plunder of Jewish settlements, and the imposition of a "poll tax" to fund Arab campaigns.
This video explains in 3-D the background to operation Cast Lead, specifically the terrorist tactics that Hamas employs. It shows how Hamas smuggles in weaponry in order to arm itself and how it employs the civilian population and infastructure in order to carry out terrorist attacks against Israel. Hamas' use of human shields during operation Cast Lead caused many civilian casualties
Sorry folks, but this is just sickening (Hat Tip: Shy Guy).
Pope Benedict XVI on Wednesday met in the Vatican on Wednesday with a group of Palestinian Catholics, who presented him with traditional Palestinian scarf as a gift.
On Tuesday, Human Rights Watch issued a report that accused Hamas of murdering 32 'Palestinians' in the Gaza Strip - 18 during Operation Cast Lead and 14 from the Operation's conclusion through March 31, 2009. In addition, 'dozens' of people were maimed by being shot in the kneecaps.
I've already gone on record saying that I believe that the timing of the charges against California Democrat Jane Harman is no coincidence, and that the charges that Harman offered to try to assist AIPAC lobbyists Steven Rosen and Keith Weissman were intended to shore up the US government's weak case against the two men. Wednesday's Washington Post all but confirms the connection.
In his Tuesday night report from Geneva, Roger Simon explains why the Durban II hatefest adopted its final statement on Tuesday even though it technically doesn't end until Friday.
Jakub Grygiel, an associate professor at Johns Hopkins may have finally figured out the 'Palestinians,' and because of him so has Robert D. Kaplan, a writer at the Atlantic. Although I disagree with much of Kaplan's article (which includes encouraging the Obama administration to pressure Israel - if he's correct in his diagnosis of the 'Palestinians' there is no moral justification for doing that), this part in the middle is dead on. The 'Palestinians' don't have a state because they don't want one:
If any of you were surprised by Sunday night's meeting between Swiss President Hans-Rudolf Merz and Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, you should not have been. Merz claimed Switzerland's 'neutrality' as justification for him to meet with the man Israeli Knesset speaker Ruby Rivlin called the 'Persian-speaking Hitler.' Switzerland has a long history of making claims like that. For instance, look at its behavior during World War II.
What America's World War II leadership knew about Auschwitz
With everything going on in Geneva, I ignored most of the Holocaust Remembrance Day stories on Tuesday. This one deserves some attention. It's the story of a 19-year old who disclosed to those who were willing to listen what was going on at the Auschwitz concentration camp during World War II. A lot of Americans still believe that their government did all that it could do to save European Jewry during World War II. Sadly, that's not the case. There were also Israelis who could have done more to save European Jewry and did not, but that's another story.
Over the past three years, I have done more posts than I care to count or remember criticizing the Israeli government for its insistence on developing the Iron Dome short-range missile defense system to protect Israel's border areas against (mostly 'Palestinian' but also Hezbullah) short-range missiles instead of buying an American system. The US actually developed two systems to intercept short-range missiles. One was called Nautilus and later Skyguard; I don't know what its status is today. The other system, called Phalanx (pictured), became operational in 2006.
The IDF today presented the findings from its investigations of the Gaza operation. I've looked for the reports themselves, but if they've been put online I can't find them - and it's not likely they'd have been put online in the first place, if you think about it. And if you don't, I'll come to it in a moment. Until then, however, bear in mind that none of the people who will be making utterances about this subject will have read the reports themselves (which are anyway in Hebrew). Like myself, they'll all be responding to other reports in the media. As an historian who is required to relate to documents not hearsay, I recognize the problem.
The investigations themselves seem to have been serious and unhurried. The allegation in the Guardian, say, that Israel wasn't even investigating, seems to have been disproved.
The findings themselves seem about as acceptable as such things can be. The investigators didn't find a single case where IDF troops consciously shot civilians with the intent to kill. So much for that allegation, published in Haaretz and quoted the world over. Which is important, because the entire case for war crimes is severely undermined if there was no intent. Of course, the myriads of hypocrites who care about the laws of war only if they can be used against Israel will be unmoved by the fact that there's no legal case to answer - the folks in Norway who are trying to indict Olmert, Livni, Barak and others, for example.
The findings didn't dispute that Palestinian civilians were killed by the hundreds - an unknowable number between 295 and 457, out of 1,157. In the single worst incident, 21 members of the al-Dahiyeh family in Zeitun were killed when their house was rocketed instead of the intended target nearby. That's what war is about, and if there was no intention to hit civilians, and measures were made not to hit them - successful in thousands of cases and unsuccessful in dozens - it's hard to see where the criminality lies.
The White Phosphorous allegations seem to have been refuted: what use was made of such ordinance was in accordance with international law, say the investigators, and on the 7th of January an order was sent to the units to desist completely from using such shells as the PR damage was felt to be greater than the value of using them.
So much for the facts. Now to the discussion about them.
Israeli Left-wing organizations who haven't read the reports any more than I have are loudly rejecting the findings. If they were serious they would at least have waited a day or to to give appearance they'd read the reports, assuming the army will grant such access, but their actions demonstrate they're not serious. Which is regrettable, because the army - like any organization in the democratic world - is more likely to be careful with what it says if knowledgeable skeptics will be reading its reports and responding to them. That's why democracy is ultimately such a fine system. If, sometime down the line, people with access to the findings begin to tell us what faults they've found in them, I'll be listening, and so will our media, which never misses an opportunity to bash the powers that be and especially the politicians (remember the aftermath of the war in Lebanon in 2006?). But that will be next week, or next month. Not 3 minutes after the findings are first cited.
Some of the critics, in Israel and of course everywhere else, reject the findings automatically because they're the findings of the IDF. Case closed. To which there are a number of responses. One, if the IDF is automatically regarded as lying, there isn't much to discuss, is there. That's an ideological position, not a rational statement. Second, if it's facts you're interested in, there isn't much choice but to listen to the IDF. The people doing the shooting, after all, were Israeli soldiers and Hamas; if it's the Israelis you're trying to convict, there isn't much choice but to ask them what they were doing, what they thought they were doing, what their orders where, what information they had, what conditions they were in when they acted, and myriads of additional very specific questions.
Which brings us to the matter of IDF investigators versus international ones. The assumption of international impartiality in matters of Israel is, of course, so vacuous as to be comic. Yet even if, against decades of experience, it were possible to appoint a commission of Martians to investigate the matter impartially, what sovereign country would allow foreigners free run of its military to carry out the investigation? In order to reach meaningful results, you'd have to know almost everything about the inner workings of the IDF - a condition no army would allow, and certainly not one still at war. The demand that Israel enable foreigners to investigate the minutiae of its army's combat behavior is a demand that it weaken itself dramatically; an Israeli politician who would allow such a thing would rightfully be drummed out of town.
Which brings me to the comparison with any other army. I don't claim to know everything, and am willing to be corrected - as you all know, I don't block comments. So far as I know, however, most armies never have investigations of the sort the IDF just had, in which each and every incident of a war is investigated; painstaking efforts are made to name every single person killed; and at the end of the process, the results are partially made public, while being fully open to parliamentary oversight which includes representatives of the opposition. I'll retract this statement if anyone shows me this is actually standard practice; until then: Israel is more meticulous in investigating its failures than any other army in the world.
The Guardian editorial said Israel has a case to answer? Here's the answer. Now let's see the Guardian admit it, or even acknowledge its existence.
Earlier today, as I was walking by the school for children with severe learning impediments that's around the corner, a child was chatting with the school guard. During the brief moment I was within earshot I picked up the stuttering child's story. "... he was the principle of an orphanage, and when they came they told him could go home now but he said No I want to die with them..."
Is there a Jew in Israel above the age of ten who wouldn't immediately recognize the story of Janusz Korczak? Is there one tenth of one percent of the college-educated adults in the rest of the world, Jews aside, who would recognize the story even if told in its entirety?
If you want to understand the communal identity of a society, talking to 12-year-old children with disabilities would probably be as good a place to start as any.
Barry Rubin has a new blog, The Rubin Report. May he be as popular as Juan Cole, without being as silly. At the moment, his top post contains four interesting letters written in the mid-1930s by a young German woman to a pen-pal in New Zealand (pen pals were a stone-age precursor to Facebook friends, for those who don't recognize the term). The letters have the advantage of lacking any hindsight, and of telling a story of how a young German woman saw the Hitler regime from the inside without realizing where they were going with it. This is the way 100% of human experience actually works. We never know with certainty what the results of our actions will be; then again, we bear full responsibility for them. Complicated.
"We, pilots of the Israeli Air Force, flying in the skies over the extermination camps, arose from the ashes of the millions of victims, carrying their silent cries, saluting their bravery, and vowing to be a shield to the Jewish Nation, and to its Land, Israel."
An oft-repeated cliche repeated by both Jewish leaders and the international community is that of "never again". Presidents and Prime Ministers visit Yad VaShem, pay tribute at Holocaust Memorials and shed crocodile tears over the Jews murdered in the Holocaust, while proceeding to condemn and attack Israel. The same leaders that stood silently in commemoration of the Holocaust denounced Israel with the most hateful vitriol during its moment of greatest need, as it was fighting to defend itself and its citizens. Never again, they pledged. Never again? Is that really so?
The Holocaust teaches many universal messages. It teaches mankind to be ever vigilant against the forces of hatred and intolerance, whenever they arise against any people or group. It warns us never to allow bigoted speech and ideas fester and grow. It shows the ease with which an entire nation can descend to the depths of depravity and immorality. Yet, for the Jewish people, the Holocaust has one sharp and poignant message: Never again to be weak.
Since the destruction of the Second Temple, for two millenia, Jews lived as strangers in foreign lands, minorities under the rule of others. In Christendom and in Islamic lands, Jews were forced to lived in ghettos, mellahs or juderias, to wear distinctive and humiliating clothing, had restrictions on their professions and employment and endured severe discrimination. Jews were at the mercies of the lords of the land and had to comply with their wishes, whether it be being forced to hear a conversionist sermon delivered by a priest in a synagogue on Shabbat, or to pay a jyziah tax in a debasing ceremony to their Muslim overlords. Jews were spat upon and cursed, beaten and abused at will. The two thousand years of Jewish life in Europe and the Middle-East, with the exception of occasional periods of prosperity and tranquility, was marked with constant fear and insecurity. Ravaged by pogroms and Crusades, Inquisitions and forced conversions, massacres and jihads, Jews lived with their lives always hanging in a narrow balance. A new king or pope, ruler or clergyman, could put the Jews in peril.
In this climate of ingrained loathing and despising of the Jews, Hitler came along. He used the traditional anti-semitic motives of the Catholic church as well as new anti-semitic racial theories to stir up the people's hate. The policies of the Nazi Regime, even before the Final Solution to the Jewish Problem was implemented, were designed to crush and dehumanize the Jews. The Jew looked in trepidation at the Nazi brownshirts, Gestapo and SS, unable to defend or stand up for himself. Like animals, Jews were crammed into cattle cars, suffocated in gas chambers and burnt in ovens. The Nazi beasts could not have accomplished their genocide without the help of their Polish, Lithuanian, Ukrainian, Hungarian, etc. collaborators and executioners. Nor could they have managed without the world's silent approval. The Pope looked away when the Jews of Rome were rounded up from under his very window. Roosevelt, Stalin and Churchill all knew about the death camps, about the killing fields and mass graves in the Ukraine, about the gas chambers and crematorium in Poland, yet closed their doors to Jewish refugees. Allied bombers flew over Auschwitz but the military didn't see the use of bombing the train lines. As Jews needed a place to flee to, the British, at the urging of the Arabs and the Nazi-collaborator Haj Amin al-Husseini, may his name be accursed, prevented Jewish aliyah to the Land of Israel, and even sent refugees back into the hands of the Nazis.
Just yesterday, on Holocaust Memorial Day, a group of partisans who fought the Nazis in the forests of Europe, visited an IDF air force base. One woman asked an officer in our air force if our pilots could reach Iran. "They can reach anywhere," he answered. This answer, powerful and moving for its simplicity, conveys the true meaning of never again. Never again will we wait in vain for Allied planes to bomb the gas chambers. Never again will we wait for world aid which did not come. Never again will we allow ourselves to be weak, to be victimized, to be powerless. Never again will we accept any conditions on where we can live, what we can wear, on our professions or possessions. Never again will we be at the mercies of the gentiles, begging for our lives. This pilot was saying that we may have been 60 years too late for the Jews of Europe, but we were not too late for the Jews of Yemen or Ethiopia. Never again will we be too late! We may not have been able to save the Jews of Warsaw, but our planes reached Iraq and Entebbe. Our planes can fly to Lebanon or Gaza, and they may yet fly to Iran, destroying the enemies of the Jewish people. We will not stand idly by our brothers blood, whether they are being rounded up and deported to annihilation, living under constant bombardment and rocket attacks or in the shadow of a nuclear attack. We know that the world abandoned the Jews to their fate, that deals were not made and safe havens closed off. Today, we can reach anywhere.
Another survivor made her own request of the air force of Israel, "What I ask of you is to make sure that there will not be another Holocaust." As long as brave Jewish men and women don the uniform of the Israeli Defense Force and protect the Jewish people from on land, sea and air, there can never be another Holocaust. We have learnt the terrible price of being weak. Being defenseless and without a homeland came at the horrendous cost of a third of our nation. The hatred of the world for the Jews has not diminished one iota since the trains came to a halt and the crematoriums stopped giving off their accursed smoke. Across Europe and North America, in public forums and university campuses, the Jewish State is being delegitimized and marked as a pariah. We must not heed the words of these haters for we know too well how dearly we pay without a state of our own. The only thing that stands between us and Auschwitz-Birkenau are the soldiers of the IDF. Those who condemned the army going in to Gaza must know that they only went in there to protect and defend the Jewish people. They are what keeps us from the narrow brink, from the mound of ashes at Majdanek, from the halls of shoes and piles of hair. To the Jews of Europe, massacred because of the world's apathy and our own weakness, scattered in the forests of Teblinka, the fields of Birkenau or the mass graves of the Ukraine, we promise never again to be weak, to allow ourselves to be bullied and beaten. For this is the true meaning of "Never Again".
The parshayot of this week deal with ritual impurity and spiritual uncleanness. It is said that evil speech leads to evil consequences - psoriasis (tzoraas) and then some. Evil is really all around us at all times, ready to attach itself to us, but is only held at bay by our righteousness and our purity of speech...
For many years, the United Nations has conducted itself in ways that range from the ridiculous to the surreal. They have been utterly ineffective in all things save one: the legalization of Jew-hatred. That grim project continues to gather force and is now a potentially genocidal one. The current Durban II conference is more of the same diabolical Mad Hatters party. But make no mistake: The UN and the Organization of Islamic States take themselves very seriously. They think there is nothing illogical, biased, perverted, or even “racist” about their condemnation of the Jewish state.
The failure to stop Durban I not only led to Durban II. It played a role in the escalating and never-ending intifada against Israel and in the “hate Israel” mob demonstrations in the Islamic world and in the West, including on American and European campuses that have taken place ever since.
Let me suggest that President Amadinejad means exactly what he says. He does plan to implement another Holocaust against the Jews. We deny this at our own peril. And, Amadinejad does plan to “play,” shame and, if possible, defeat America in terms of Iran’s obtaining and using nuclear power. The arrest of Iranian-American journalist, Roxana Sabari, as an American “spy” is only the first of many steps in response to President Obama’s open hand and conciliatory tone.
Shouldn't the UN be promoting human rights instead of racism as the organization's integrity takes a pounding?
The United Nations enjoys what is known as the "halo effect", whereby, because of its supposed humanitarian focus and promotion of universal values, it is insulated from scrutiny and is regarded as above reproach by the media, which often holds international bodies such as the UN to be a reference and a guiding moral light.
HonestReporting has regularly attempted to redress the balance, focusing on some of the long list of discriminatory actions by the UN against Israel and highlighting shortcomings within the international organization that the media failed to cover.
Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad had a triumphant return home on Tuesday according to several accounts in the media:
In Teheran, some 200 people gathered at the airport to give Ahmadinejad a hero's welcome and bunches of flowers as he returned home.
Iranian state TV described him as having defended Palestinian rights against a racist regime. The official IRNA news agency, which strongly supports Ahmadinejad, quoted lawmaker Mohammad Reza Bahonar as saying that Ahmadinejad's speech in Geneva was a "great achievement for (Iran's ruling) system."
Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad dropped a reference in the original text of his speech to the Holocaust as being "ambiguous and dubious" in the hope that fewer delegations would walk out of his Monday speech in Geneva. One of the delegations that did not walk out as a result of Ahmadinejad's not denying the Holocaust was the Vatican
UN Secretary General Ban Ki-Moon criticized President Ahmadinejad's speech Monday at the United Nations hatefest in Geneva.
I deplore the use of this platform by the Iranian President to accuse, divide and even incite. This is the opposite of what this Conference seeks to achieve. . . . I reminded the President that the UN General Assembly had adopted the resolutions to revoke the equation of Zionism with racism and to reaffirm the historical facts of the Holocaust respectively.
There are some very strange goings on over at the Jerusalem Post.
On Sunday night, the Post reported that Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu has 'canceled' a trip to the AIPAC conference May 3-5 ostensibly because US President Obama 'refuses' to meet with him.
Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu on Sunday canceled his plans to attend the upcoming AIPAC summit, after it became clear that US President Barack Obama would not meet him during the conference.
The paper then went on to report that the Prime Minister has asked Shimon Peres to take his place. Note that there is no source or byline for that article - it was written by "JPost staff."
In response to Monday's welcoming reception for Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad in Geneva, the United Nations has expelled a 'large number' of members of the European Union of Jewish Students, from whose ranks the clowns and gallery hecklers who disrupted Ahmadinejad's speech were drawn. I suppose that since they cannot really expel the country delegations who walked out of the hall, Ban Ki-Moon and his friends are taking it out on the students instead. No matter - most of the 'action' in Geneva is taking place outside the conference hall anyway.
In her best-selling book, Londonistan: How Britain is Creating a Terror State Within, British journalist Melanie Phillips argues that multiculturalism, weak policing, cultural relativism, and what Phillips calls a 'victim culture' combined to create an ideal breeding ground for Islamic terrorists. She points to the centrality of London-based individuals and groups to many terror plots around the world, which she argues were enabled by a semi-formal "covenant of security" between Islamists and the British authorities. An example of what results from these forces took place in London on Monday when the city's Bloomsbury Theater bowed to pressure from Islamist and other anti-Zionist and canceled a Yom HaAtzmaut (Independence Day) celebration that was to be held by the UK's Zionist Federation at the theater next week.
In Tuesday's Wall Street Journal, Bret Stephens rips the mask off the selective moral outrage that the World in general - and the Muslim world in particular - applies to 'Palestinian' deaths and injuries. He does so by comparing the 'Palestinians' and the reaction to their situation to the Chechens and the reaction to their situation. Stephens could as easily have compared the 'Palestinians' to the Darfuris or to Muslims in Thailand (for example) and gotten similar results. But he chose the Chechens, and the comparison makes for interesting reading. And he's dead on with his explanation. Can you guess it before you start reading?
As the Obama administration attempts to deliver a Judenrein (Jew-free) reichlet to the 'Palestinian Authority,' the 'moderate' 'Palestinians' attempt to ensure that none of their own sell any land on which they wish to establish that reichlet to Jews.
On Sunday, YNet reported that an investigation into land sales by 'Palestinians' to Jews in the eastern half of Jerusalem had been closed due to pressure by the Israeli authorities. The pressure was brought to bear because under the Oslo accords, the 'Palestinians' are not allowed to arrest people in Jerusalem, and because the people they were arresting were made Israeli citizens when Israel incorporated the entire city into Israel's borders shortly after the 1967 Six Day War.
Israel does not allow the 'Palestinian Authority' to arrest Israeli citizens - even if they happen to be Arabs.
Israel Radio reported on Tuesday morning that an editorial in the London-based pan-Arabic daily Asharq Al-Awsat slammed Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's speech on Monday to the UN-sponsored hatefest in Geneva.
No, not because it was a racist anti-Semitic diatribe.
Last night and this morning Jews commemorated those who fell during the Holocaust of World War II. Various events and observances took place through the day, some with a basis in Jewish tradition, such as saying Qaddish, lighting candles, closing some businesses, and memorializing the fallen through story telling, and some without any basis in Jewish tradition, such as standing for a siren and laying wreaths.
It is not my intention to enter the debate over which kinds of observances are appropriate, and which kinds are not.
There is also an ongoing debate as to whether a day of such observances in addition to Fast of the Fifth Month (9 b'Av) and the Fast of the Tenth Month (10 b'Teveth) is even necessary.
It is not my intention to enter this debate either.
It is my intention to address the issue of memorials in general.
Memorials are important. They are important for us as a community to remember and to relive the grieving; they are important for us as community who hopes and prays that Holocausts will not reoccur.
Andrew Sullivan seems to be saying that when it comes to torture, the Americans have been worse than the Nazis. This is so blatantly crap (I don't even apologize for the term) that I can't believe he's saying it. Perhaps he isn't, and I'm reading him wrong. But I don't think I am.
Notice how the Nazis ensured that doctors were present at all times so that they could monitor the captives' response to torture and make sure they didn't die or suffer visible permanent injuries that could embarrass the regime in public (see the Bradbury and Bybee memos for the Bush equivalent). Notice the careful measurement of how many times someone can be beaten (another Cheney innovation). And notice that we are not talking about waterboarding - something even the Nazis excluded from their "enhanced interrogation" methods.
More than 400 unarmed demonstrators and even bystanders killed over ten years, and no police ever convicted for any of the deaths, not even on manslaughter charges.
Something to keep in mind the next time someone tells you about how Israel's court system is uniquely evil in protecting its security types from the wrath of the law. Though of course, the British coppers don't really face an enemy, so perhaps they need not be trained in restraint.
Is America's Left starting to realize that President Obama isn't God and that the World will not necessarily follow Obama's dictates? There's an interesting comment in Monday's Washington Post by Jackson Diehl (Hat Tip: Memeorandum). It's limited to foreign policy, it does include Israel, and surprisingly, it does not only blame Israel for the 'impasse' in our region
The European delegations that remain in attendance at the Durban II hatefest in Geneva, Switzerland walked out on Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad when he attacked Israel.
Just two days after US President Barack Hussein I'm Sorry Obama shook his hand warmly in Port of Spain, the Intelligence and Terrorism Information Center reports that Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is using Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez as a willing tool to export the Islamic revolution to Latin America and to threaten United States interests in the region.
On Sunday night, I ran a video of a Libyan torture victim speaking to the Durban II preparatory conference and making its Libyan chairwoman squirm. Here is a much longer, clearer and more explicit version of that video. This is great.
Mystery writer Roger Simon (pictured) is in Geneva covering the Durban II hatefest for Pajamas Media. Simon filed a report about his coming close to Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, who is staying in the same hotel as Simon and Harvard Law Professor Alan Dershowitz. Simon and Dershowitz were standing outside the hotel on Sunday night when Ahmadinejad and his entourage arrived. Here's how Roger described the experience (Hat Tip: Instapundit).
During the night between Sunday and Monday, New Zealand and Germany joined Canada, Israel, Italy, the United States, Australia, Holland and Sweden in announcing that they would boycott the Durban II conference opening on Monday in Geneva. England and the Czech Republic announced that they would attend, but would only send low-level representatives. France is apparently still undecided.
Meanwhile, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, probably the world's most prominent Holocaust denier today, arrived in Geneva and met with Hans-Rudolf Merz, the President of Switzerland, a country that did as little as it could to save Jews during World War II so as to maintain it's 'neutrality.'
The sirens wail for two minutes, the entire country comes to a standstill. Cars stop in the middle of the road, people sad, and take time to remember the martyrs and heroes.
Holocaust Martyrs and Heroes Remembrance Day (Monday evening until Tuesday) was set to mark the anniversary of the Warsaw Ghetto uprising and has been traditionally commemorated around the world.
"We pilots of the Israeli Air Force, flying in the skies above the camp of horrors, arose from the ashes of the millions of victims and shoulder their silent cries, salute their courage and promise to be the shield of the Jewish people and its nation Israel."
Jewish holidays begin at sunset and end at sunset. This evening will see the beginning of Holocaust Commemoration Day in Israel (and in some Jewish communities beyond), called Yom HaShoah in Hebrew. The New York Times has a chilling article about the Nazi killing fields in the Soviet Union. A brief reminder of the dimensions of that horror.
Once every 19 years or so Yom HaShoah falls on April 20th, Hitler's birthday. During the Nazi era this was a very important day, with parades and ceremonies. Someone I know who went to an AUstrian highschool in the 1970s once told me that every year on April 20th many of the students appeared at school in brown shirts. In the 1970s.
Of course, we've got the Durban II United Nations anti-racism conference starting today, too. So far it's being boycotted by Australia, Canada, Germany, Israel, Italy, the Netherlands, Sweden, the United States and New Zealand, because it's got nothing to do with anti racism, and everything to do with antisemitism and shielding Islam from free speech. Iran's president is scheduled to give a speech there today, and the representatives of the UK, France, Austria, and other upright democracies will be there to celebrate with him, as will the Arab folks who recently feted Sudan's Omar Bashir, the indicted mass murderer and genocidaire.
Still, after years of preparations there appears little evidence to validate these fears. The statement of 2001 that is so contentious now was cheered in Israel at the time, as it recognized the Jewish state's right to security.
Antisemitism has always flourished on lies, nothing new there. Anyway, the conflation of all these events on one day do rather serve to underline the state of the world. There have been worse moments of time, certainly, but the room for improvement keeps on getting bigger. Finally, the Palestinian contribution: a recent sermon by Ziad Abu Alhaj, broadcast on Hamas television on April 3rd, 2009. Here's some background. Notice that while the man doesn't like Israel, his hatred is directed at Jews, all of them always, his source is (his reading of) the Koran, and he's very clearly calling for world-wide genocide.
Before you get agitated about the wrong things, however: the content of his hate speech isn't new. People have been saying things like this with regularity for millennia, and some of their listeners have acted upon it will regularity of their own, even if the attempt to kill all Jews was a Nazi novelty. If there's anything new about that sermon, it's that now there's a large international constituency, a broad deep and important one, that fervently tells us the sermon doesn't mean what it says, it's not serious, or if it is it could easily be defused if only the Jews took note and changed, and what have you. That, perhaps, may be new. And perhaps not.
Wherever radical evil openly flourishes, that’s where miracles also abound. A hero is someone who risks her own life in order to save another person’s life. A hero may know that what she is doing is dangerous, that she herself might be caught and punished, she might be very afraid–but her fear does not stop her. Such actions go beyond speaking out, beyond documenting the atrocities. It is important to teach our children that high-risk courage, self-sacrifice, morality, and goodness do exist. The world may not always do so.
Indeed, for nearly fifty years, the world forgot about the heroic Irena Sendler. She was “discovered” by four Uniontown, Kansas high school students in 1999. Their research, which they turned into a play, finally brought her story to world attention. When the students visited Sendler in 2001, she was already in her nineties, in poor health, and living in poverty.
Following Iran's President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's address at the United Nations anti-racism conference in Geneva, during which he called for the eradication of Israel, UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon released on Monday a statement slamming Ahmadinejad's cynical manipulation of the conference. "I deplore the use of this platform by the Iranian president to accuse, divide and even incite. This is the opposite of what this Conference seeks to achieve. This makes it significantly more difficult to build constructive solutions to the very real problem of racism," the statement read.
"And to them will I give in my house and within my walls a memorial and a name (a "yad vashem")... that shall not be cut off."
(Isaiah, chapter 56, verse 5)
As the Jewish people’s living memorial to the Holocaust, Yad Vashem safeguards the memory of the past and imparts its meaning for future generations. Established in 1953, as the world center for documentation, research, education and commemoration of the Holocaust, Yad Vashem is today a dynamic and vital place of intergenerational and international encounter. For over half a century, Yad Vashem has been committed to four pillars of remembrance:
Monday night, the 27th of Nissan, is Yom HaShoah v'Hagevurah, Holocaust and Heroism Memorial Day. On this day, we bear witness to the worst crime in human history, to the unfathomable murder of 6 million Jews of Europe, 1.5 million of them children.
The Holocaust did not begin with gas chambers or crematorium. The road to Auschwitz-Birkenau was a gradual process, one that began with the delegitimization and isolation of Jews from general society. The Final Solution, which almost completely wiped out European Jewry, began with words of hatred and intolerance. It began with the demonization of Jews as disloyal to their countries, foreign parasites destroying the culture, race and homeland from the inside. Children were taught in schools that Jews were the enemies of the Aryan race, and in the papers, on the radios and in speeches, Jews were denounced. Before official government policies could separate and ostracize Jews, Nazi propaganda made them persona non grata, completely loathsome and rejected by German society.
There were about 18 million Jews worldwide in 1939, an all-time high. In 1945 there were 12 million. Sergio Della Pergolla, the top demographer for such matters, estimates however that because of the demographic structure of Eastern European Jewry, which was almost completely destroyed, the projected number of Jews had there been no Shoah would now be about 32 million. Instead, it's 13 million (if you're very optimistic: he's counting a lot of people, especially in the West, who are only notionally Jewish). So a loss of a third 65 years ago is now a loss of close to two thirds.
In Israel, the most important day of the week for newspapers is Friday. So yesterday (Friday) Haaretz had this headline, top of the front page, large letters:
(The Hebrew was more dramatic). As a general rule, Haaretz isn't too good at separating news from comment, but then who is these days? So this news item, put together by a group of their reporters, starts with a breathless report by Akiva Eldar, an old-timer who really knows his beat, but can't separate what he knows from what he preaches.
The Obama administration is preparing a Middle East peace process that will include simultaneous bilateral talks between Israel and the Palestinians, and between Israel and Syria. The plan is based on the Arab peace initiative that offers establishing normal relations between Israel and Arab League states in exchange for withdrawing from the occupied territories and establishing a Palestinian state.
The United States will put together a "security package," including demilitarization of the territories from which Israel will withdraw and the option of stationing a multinational force in them for years.
The Obama administration believes that a breakthrough in the peace process between Israel and the Arab states would restrain Tehran's influence and contribute to the diplomatic effort to block Iran's nuclearization.
The questions are 1. Is this news? 2. Is it the full story? 3. Is it important?
First, is it news. Not really. American policy since the summer of 2000, or December that year at the very latest, has officially been something like this; unofficially it has been so for far longer. Israel needs to retreat from just about all the territories taken in 1967, those territories will be demilitarized, there will be an independent Palestinian state, and peace will reign forever after. There's a slight twist in Eldar's report in that someone thinks once this happens the Iranians will also join the swords-into-plowshares brigade, but he doesn't give a source for this so let's let it pass. Actually, this is more or less the position of most Israelis, too - assuming, of course, that moving out of those territories can bring all that bounty. It can't.
Which brings us to the second question, is it the full story? At this stage of the game I'm still giving the Obama administration the benefit of the doubt, and that includes the assumption their experts are serious people, not bloggers or journalists. In which case they recognize some of the pieces Eldar left out of the picture. Right of Return, for example, meaning what happens to lots of ethnic Palestinians who are never going to move back to what is now Israel, no matter that their grandparents left here, and the fact this presents a wee stumbling block (in the Saudi plan, too). Or the fact that the elected majority of Palestinian lawmakers come from a party that wants a world without Jews, and so far that group is unable to reach an agreement with the other large Palestinian party. There's the small question of Jerusalem, the one about Israel's defining itself a Jewish state (with legal equality for minorities), the issue of how Syria defines peace, and various other nit-picking matters. I'm not saying peace is a theoretical impossibility - that would be depressing - but I haven't yet seen an indication the Obama administration knows how to create it any more than anyone else.
Is any of this important? No, not really. Even if it really and truly were soon to be the official Obama policy, and included suggestions also about all those other matters, reality has this nasty propensity of not reading newspapers (or blogs, or official memorandums, or diplomatic non-papers and all that stuff). Reality is extremely complex and ultimately unpredictable, it certainly isn't anything that can be neatly planned by some new folks at Foggy Bottom or even at the White House. As (Bill) Clinton once learned, the most powerful man in the world can glower at an unshaven old revolutionary with shifty eyes, and the unshaven fellow can pretend to be looking out the window and hum, and there's nothing the President of the United States of American can do about it. And even if he could, and the unshaven fellow had decided to humor him, it wouldn't make much difference if enough young men back at home were to feel they'd been sold down the river - which is why the unshaven one didn't cave in in the first place.
My point being that some day, I hope, the Israelis and the Arabs will be willing to live in peace, but it won't happen because someone declares it to be a fine idea or a rational thing to do.
David Brooks, just back from a trip to Israel, describes Israelis in a reasonably accurate column: Israel is a country held together by argument. Public culture is one long cacophony of criticism. The politicians go at each other with a fury we can’t even fathom in the U.S. At news conferences, Israeli journalists ridicule and abuse their national leaders. Subordinates in companies feel free to correct their superiors. People who move here from Britain or the States talk about going through a period of adjustment as they learn to toughen up and talk back.
CLARIFICATION APPENDED Harvard Islamic chaplain Taha Abdul-Basser ’96 has recently come under fire for controversial statements in which he allegedly endorsed death as a punishment for Islamic apostates. In a private e-mail to a student last week, Abdul-Basser wrote that there was “great wisdom (hikma) associated with the established and preserved position (capital punishment [for apostates]) and so, even if it makes some uncomfortable in the face of the hegemonic modern human rights discourse, one should not dismiss it out of hand.” The e-mail was forwarded over Muslim student e-mail lists and later picked up by the blogosphere, sparking debate and, in many cases, criticism of Abdul-Basser from those who have interpreted his statement as supporting the execution of those who leave the Islamic religion. “I believe he doesn’t belong as the official chaplain,” said one Islamic student, who asked that he not be named to avoid conflicts with Muslim religious authorities. “If the Christian ministers said that people who converted from Christianity should be killed, don’t you think the University should do something?”According to the student, many of Abdul-Basser’s other views are “not in line with liberal values, such as notions of human rights. He privileges the medieval discourse of the Islamic jurists, and is not willing to exercise independent thought and judgment beyond a certain limit,” the student said. Samad Khurram ’09-’10 said Abdul-Basser’s remarks conflicted with the Harvard United Ministry’s support of freedom of religion. “I support free speech, freedom of belief and association, so this came as a big shock to me,” Khurram said. “[His remarks] are the first step towards inciting intolerance and inciting people towards violence,” said a Muslim Harvard student, who requested that he not be named for fear of harming his relationship with the Islamic community. Aqil Sajjad, a Harvard graduate student, also said that Abdul-Basser’s statements were “totally wrong, definitely out of line for somebody in that position. I wouldn’t go and seek religious advice from one who is saying this.” A Muslim student at MIT, who also asked to remain anonymous to preserve his relationship with the Islamic community, said the chaplain’s remarks wrongly suggested that only Westerners and Westernized Muslims who did not fully understand Islam would find the killing of apostates objectionable. “If what he said was what I thought, then it is very shocking and not something that I would expect or want coming out of a chaplain at any major American university,” he said. Abdul-Basser wrote in a later e-mailed statement that he “never expressed the position that individuals who leave Islam or convert from Islam to another religion must be killed. I do not hold this opinion personally.” He explained that he was not advocating for the positions mentioned in his e-mail, but rather “addressing them in the context of the evolution of an Islamic legal doctrine.” “[Abdul-Basser] was speaking as a chaplain to a student in a private e-mail exchange. One of these e-mails was misinterpreted, misconstrued, and posted on the blogosphere,” said Harvard Islamic Society spokesperson Nafees A. Syed ’10, who praised Abdul-Basser for promoting diversity within HIS and the campus at large. “His immeasurable contributions should not be overlooked in this matter,” she said. —
“I am free, no matter what rules surround me. If I find them tolerable, I tolerate them; if I find them too obnoxious, I break them. I am free because I know that I alone am morally responsible for everything I do.”
(Robert A. Heinlein quotes)
Two Acts of Terror in One Picture
-
It's 7:00 in the morning in Israel. Time when people get up, dressed and
out the door for work. Time when children are dressed and fed, their books
and ...
From LFJ to Northern Breeze
-
I am writing to you from the celestial city of Tz’fat (Safed), set amidst
the green hills of Israel’s beautiful Galilee, where I moved from Jerusalem
with ...
Building the New Walls of Yerushalayim
-
Ha-Rav Avishai Tzruya
Rosh Yeshiva of Ateret Yerushalayim
located in the Muslim Quarter of the Old City of Yerushalayim
Asara Be-Tevet – the 10th ...
Nitai Stern's Playground
-
When I was a schoolboy, fallen soldiers were a special kind of grownup.
Usual grownups went to work and had meetings, whatever those were, or they
drove...
Descubram as diferenças
-
Como é que uma notícia com autoria "Diário Digital com Lusa" é *tradução
exacta* de uma com autoria "AFP com Times of Israel"?
Descubram as diferenças:
...
Até um dia Sefarad...
-
Chegou ao fim um ciclo iniciado há 5 anos.
Agradeço a todos os leitores a sua passagem por "Terras de Sefarad", em
especial aos que contribuíram com ...
HA'AZINU; TOWER OF SALVATION
-
by Rabbi Baruch Binyamin Hakohen Melman In our parsha, Ha'azinu, as for
every parsha, we need to ask: what is the question and what is the answer?
In this...
Parashá Tzav
-
“Shabat Hagadol”
No contexto da parashá desta semana, Parashá Tzav, na qual a Torá nos
relata as obrigações dos sacrifícios, com tantos detalhes que chegam...
Marketing Israel
-
At this point, it would be a cliche to say that Israel has a PR problem. It
is clear that in many sectors, Israel has lost the battle for hearts and
minds....
Women Of Valor (אשת חיל מי ימצא)
-
22 of the Tenth Month 5771
אֵשֶׁת-חַיִל, מִי יִמְצָא; וְרָחֹק מִפְּנִינִים מִכְרָהּ. מִשְׁלֵי לא,י
A woman of valor who can find? for her price is far abov...
SHALOM, SHALOM
-
Afirmava Elie Wiesel que o oposto da vida não é a morte, senão a
indiferença. Como membros da sociedade democrática occidental temos
contraído a obriga de...