Tuesday, January 26, 2010

Koestler and Jabotinsky, Again

From this book review article, Yesterday's Man? by Anne Applebaum on the book "Koestler: The Literary and Political Odyssey of a Twentieth-Century Skeptic" by Michael Scammell

...He began his education in the twilight of the Austro-Hungarian Empire, at an experimental kindergarten in Budapest. His mother was briefly a patient of Sigmund Freud's. In interwar Vienna he wound up as the personal secretary of Vladimir Jabotinsky, one of the early leaders of the Zionist movement...

...It is difficult, in other words, to think of a single important twentieth-century intellectual who did not cross paths with Arthur Koestler, or a single important twentieth-century intellectual movement that Koestler did not either join or oppose. From progressive education and Freudian psychoanalysis through Zionism, communism, and existentialism to psychedelic drugs, parapsychology, and euthanasia, Koestler was fascinated by every philosophical fad, serious and unserious, political and apolitical, of his era.

Nor were these shallow passions. His belief in communism led him to fight in Spain and travel in the USSR. His Zionism led him to a kibbutz near Haifa. At different times, he advocated the use of violence, whether to bring about a Communist utopia or to create the state of Israel. Even when he turned against his previous causes (and against his previous friends who still believed in them) he did so with real fervor....His involvement with Revisionist Zionism is also probably less well known than The Thirteenth Tribe, a book that argues that modern European Jews are descended from the Central Asian Khazars, and not from the Jews who lived in the Palestine of antiquity—a thesis which, whatever its merits, is hugely popular among the enemies of Zionism...

Koestler was equally likely to succumb to extreme passions in his personal life—notoriously so. He was variously in thrall to Jabotinsky,


Again?

Yes. Here. And here.

Hot Chocolate




Source

Do You Tweet?

These are things you don't.

Lions and Tigers and Bears. Oh My

Incidental Wall Poster Pic

In honor of my many postiungs of wall posters in the Hareidi neighborhoods of Jerusalem:





Found here.

The Too Clever Sarid

Yossi Sarid, a former chairman of the Higher Education Council, wrote in the Haaretz newspaper on Thursday:

“Thanks to [Mr Barak], we will have the only university in the free world whose founders and owners are uniformed officers.”


That is plainly stupid.

All the army did was authorize the recognition of the Ariel University as per the direction of the Defense Minister.

Sarid is too clever for our own good.

As for the University, judge for yourself.

Confused About "Settlements"

Pay attention:

Just recently, the Knesset passed a law which would allow Jewish settlements inside Israel (not to be confused with West Bank settlements), build on public state land, to forbid Arab citizens from purchasing a home within them.


That purposeful obfuscating between Israeli rule within the Green Line and without was from here and written by one Noam Sheizaf.



He describes himself as "a freelance journalist and editor. I worked for Ha-ir local paper in Tel Aviv, for Ynet.co.il and for Maariv daily paper. My last job was as a deputy editor on Maariv’s weekend magazine. I was born in Ramat-Gan; now I live and work in Tel Aviv."

Now do you know why Israel has a problem?

Here, he makes it clearer:

Among leftist bloggers who write in English, we joke that after one raises a critical or controversial issue, you start by being praised by those fighting for peace and civil liberties, than by anti-Israelis, later on by anti-Semites, and finally by Holocaust deniers. Naturally, many of these responses are not exactly what we aim for, but still, we think that some of Israel’s actions – more and more lately – deserve to be criticized publicly. The truth – about the West Bank, or about Gaza, or about civil liberties in Israel – must be told, even if it occasionally leads to some unfortunate consequences.


And let me make Noam clearer:

Confused About "Settlements"

Camera Substitution

It seems someone now has realized that Americans, in voting for a candidate they knew really nothing about,

“substituted the camera — fame, celebrity — for both achievement and the studied judgment of colleagues,”




Richard Cohen

Abrams on Patriarch Abraham's Land

Elliott Abrams is a senior fellow for the Middle East at the Council on Foreign Relations and was a deputy national security adviser in the George W. Bush administration. He openly contradicted Hillary Clinton and President Obama.

And he has an article, All Process, No Peace which is important and some extracts:

Peace in the Middle East has been on the Obama administration’s mind from the beginning...[and] As the Obama administration begins its second year in office, its Middle East peace efforts are widely regarded as a shambles. Its initial goals have all been missed...

...From the start the White House—led by the president himself and his chief of staff Rahm Emanuel—has pushed hardest for Israeli concessions, a reversal of the standard pattern where the legendary Arabists in the State Department’s Near Eastern Affairs bureau criticize Israel while top officials defend her. This time, those at the top—including Mitchell and Clinton—publicly and repeatedly demanded a total Israeli construction freeze...The great plan has collapsed, but the mystery of who exactly will be in charge of the policy in Year Two—and whether they understand what happened—is now the center of conversations all over the region...

...So the Obama administration’s Middle East adventures in 2009 came to a close with Netanyahu, whom the administration has never much liked or treated well, stronger politically; and Abbas, whom the administration wished to strengthen, weaker and talking of retirement...But who will tell the president that his judgments have been wrong and his policy is failing? Does he recognize how much bad advice he was given last year? Who among the senior figures is likely to say to this president that George Mitchell is now associated with a policy disaster or that Rahm Emanuel’s read on Israeli politics proved 180 degrees off course?

...The Israelis and Palestinians are too far apart on the core issues to reach a deal now, and the Fatah and PLO leadership (having lost the last elections to Hamas and having lost Gaza to a Hamas coup) is too weak now to negotiate compromises and sell them to the Palestinian people.

...Obama White House personnel like to say the Situation Room has no windows precisely so that people can’t see in. In fact it has three windows that look out at the Executive Office Building, but the error is telling: They want to preserve the sense of mystery. The problem is, the main mystery in the Middle East is whether they’ll cling to a policy that has already failed or open their minds to one that has a chance of bringing serious progress.


And Jeffrey Goldberg interviewed him where he said:

JG: It's my belief that settlements are the vanguard of binationalism, rather than the leading edge of Zionism. But we all acknowledge that some settlements will stay where they are in the framework of a final agreement. Do you think that the maximum Israel can offer on this issue matches the minimum the Palestinians can accept?

EA: If we can separate the issues of Jerusalem and settlements, I think a settlement solution is possible. The offers Barak made at Camp David, and that Olmert made in January 2009, are the maximum Israel can offer and give the Palestinians what they need. Olmert offered an almost one for one territorial swap (actually 99.3%, with the Gaza-West Bank link counting for 0.7% of territory). I am assuming that the Palestinians realize some compromise is necessary, and realize that an exact return to the 1949 armistice lines is not possible. If the minimum the Palestinians can accept is an exact return to the 1949 lines, there will never be an agreement. But I don't believe that; I don't think territory or the settlements are the problem. I believe abandoning the "right of return" is politically far tougher for the Palestinian leaders, and solving Jerusalem is a much harder problem for both sides.

Not My Shiloh

Crime news report:


BUCYRUS -- A Shiloh man was sentenced to three years of community control on eight charges of breaking and entering Monday.

DeWayne Sparkman, 48, 39 High St., Shiloh, pleaded guilty to all eight charges in Crawford County Common Pleas Court.

After a pre-sentence investigation, Crawford County Common Pleas Judge Russ Wiseman determined Sparkman is disabled. He lives with his mother. Wiseman has previous misdemeanors, but no felonies.



But not my Shiloh. We're in Israel.

That was Ohio. United States of America.

Israel and UK vs. Security Risk Offenders

Israel has been the target of criticism, local and from abroad, over the way it treats suspects who might present a security risk, either at airports, at roadblocks or other sites. Profiling, et al.

How does the UK deal with a parallel problem?

Simple, actually:-

More than 3,000 football hooligans will be banned from travelling [sic] to South Africa for the World Cup, the Government confirmed today.

Measures to stop troublemakers who are currently barred from watching matches from going to the tournament this summer will be passed in the Commons in the coming weeks, according to the Home Office. The step will allow Home Secretary Alan Johnson to impose a "control period" on approximately 3,200 hooligans who are currently subject to banning orders.

Banning orders prevent hooligans from attending football matches in England and mean they have to surrender their passports to police before international football matches.

...The powers are part of the process whereby officials try to prevent England fans from being able to cause trouble during international events...

"Police will monitor all England fans on departure and intercept any known to pose a risk of violence or disorder, and we are working closely with South African authorities to help minimise any safety and security risks associated with hosting a major football tournament."

Figures released by the Home Office last month revealed the number of football hooligans arrested by the police fell last season.

Shtum in the London Times

James Delingpole, who doesn't seem to be Jewish, has used a Yiddishism in a London Times (of all places) story today:

The first thing husbands very necessarily keep shtoom about is their nagging discomfort at having got married in the first place.


That's the British spelling, I guess, but by me it's

shtum


meaning, to keep quiet, be speechless, 'mum's the word'.

I'm shtum that he knows the word.

Wait! Didn't Mitchell Solve the Ireland Situation?

Nope:-

Hillary Clinton, US Secretary of State, could be called in to break the impasse between Northern Ireland’s two largest political parties after a fruitless night of talks between Gordon Brown and his Irish counterpart, Brian Cowen.

Sinn Féin said that US intervention may be necessary as negotiations resumed at Hillsborough Castle in an attempt to rescue the power-sharing institutions.

Conor Murphy, a Sinn Féin minister, said this morning: ”Certainly the Americans are keeping a very close watching brief on this. I know she [Mrs Clinton] has spoken to people involved.” Sources from Ms Clinton’s office confirmed that she had been in touch with those involved in the negotiations.

Mr Murphy added: “This needs to be sorted out within hours, not days.”


What? Will we be in trouble?

Maybe:

Almost 12 years after the Good Friday agreement marked the high-water mark of the peace process, the complex and costly edifice of government in Northern Ireland apparently teeters and threatens to fall yet again.

Nobody could have predicted the bizarre revelations — the First Minister’s wife’s toyboy and the Sinn Féin leader’s paedophile father — that have helped to sweep the Province towards the rocks, but it will come as no surprise that the roots of the latest crisis are deep.

...The technical reasons for the rupture merely disguise the mutual antipathy that exists between parties whose political goals — Irish unity on the one hand, strengthening the union with Great Britain on the other — are irreconcilable.


irreconcilable.


Remember that.

My New "Green-Lined" JPost Blog Post

Here.

This I'd Call Tweaking

I can only surmise that this is the work of a former Kahanist activist pulling some journalist's leg:

Settlers aim to beat building ban with 'freeze-busting' tent

Israeli settlers on Tuesday unveiled the latest weapon in their battle against government restrictions on building in the West Bank - an 'instant outpost' that can be put up in minutes, Army Radio reported.

The tent, a creation of a team of activists including an engineer and West Bank resident recently released from military service, has been specially designed to aid settlers in their cat and mouse game with authorities on West Bank hilltops.

Each unit can be joined to neighboring structures, all with windows, flooring and heating. Having completed a working prototype, the team now hopes to begin full-scale production of tents in two sizes.

The structures will retail at NIS 1,000 to NIS 2,000 apiece. Development was funded entirely by donations.

Most importantly, perhaps, the tents can not only be erected in next to no time but can also be removed at the first sign of trouble from the security forces - and whisked away to form a new 'instant outpost' elsewhere.

This Is Not A Promotional Ad for a Mohel






Mohel = person who perform the Jewish ritual of circumcision

A Graphic Portrayal of a Yiddishism

Ever heard the phrase

kish mir in tuches?

If not, maybe you can figure it out from this (the rest of you can start laughing now)


Exactly Eban

Abba Eban has been quoted about the 1967 border being Aushwitz lines.

As I did research for Shmuel Katz on the matter, locating the original German-language issue of the magazine, here is how it appears:

A famous "moderate" - Abba Eban, former foreign minister - has described those Armistice lines to which Israel is now told to return as a death-trap. He once explained - to the German journal Der Spiegel (No. 5, 1969):

"We have often said that the map will never again be as it was on June 4, 1967. For us this is a matter of security and principle. The June map is for us identical with insecurity and danger. I do not exaggerate when I say that it has for us something of a memory of Auschwitz."


in this article:

THE WORLD IS FULL OF EMPTY PROMISES
April 30, 1993
Jerusalem Post

Perils of Editing

What I found researching articles by Shmuel Katz at the Jerusaelm Post:

A FAILURE OF AMERICAN JEWISH LEADERSHIP?
December 13, 1991

EARLY in November, the results of a "poll" of American Jewish leaders were published. It was gleefully reported by Joel Brinkley in The New York Times as demonstrating that the tremendous ovation accorded Prime Minister Yitzhak Shamir by the 3,000 participants in the annual Conference of Leaders of Jewish Community Federations was not a true reflection of those leaders' views on the conflict in Palestine. The poll had taken in 339 participants, of whom evidently only 205 replied to the questions.

The replies revealed that 88 percent of the 205 respondents favored a "territorial compromise;" 79 percent agreed to a "Palestinian State;" 85 percent rejected Shamir's statement that he would not give up an inch of territory; and 78 percent favored a freeze of the "settlements." One month earlier, the American Jewish Committee published the results of its annual poll of American Jews, embracing 1,125 respondents nationwide, on the same questions. It revealed a considerable hardening of attitudes toward the Arab-Israeli conflict. Eighty-six percent of those who responded agreed that Israel "must hold on to the West Bank," while 14 percent disagreed.
Twenty-four percent favored outright "annexation," while 52 percent favored Israel's "military control with local self-rule for the Arabs." Similarly, the poll reflected a firm attitude toward American pressures on Israel. Seventy-one percent believed that the US "should stop criticizing Israel for expanding the West Bank settlements." Whatever else these two sets of figures portend, they emphasize a long-revealed phenomenon: that the "leadership" is out of touch with the community. They also serve to remind Israelis that the reports in the media of the defeatist ideas of American Jewry, and sometimes threatening minatory (Judy: it means threatening, for your information! --so YOU decide whether you want to change it and risk encountering his wrath, that prima donna!) doom-laden warnings, are simply absurd.