What is there to "Return Home" To?

Foreign Policy has a gallery of photographs recording the remains of the Jewish presence in the Arab Middle East - what they headline as "The Arab World's Dwindling Jewish Diaspora" - but still has the chutzpah to write:

The uncertain revolutions of the past year may present the best chance for long-exiled Jewish communities across the Middle East to return home.

Return home to what?

^

On Bathroom Windows...and the Media

I have a problem.

As many press reports had it, Mohammed Merah leapt from his bathroom widow:

­He jumped out of his bathroom window

Have you ever tried jumping, or even squeezing yourself, out of your bathroom window?

So I searched and found this to quell my curiosity:

Prosecutor Francois Molins...said Merah burst out of his bathroom when police gingerly entered his apartment Thursday morning, wildly firing his gun about 30 times before jumping out an apartment window. “(He) launches an assault, charging police through the apartment and firing at them with a Colt .45, continuing to advance, armed and firing, as he jumps from the balcony,” Molins said. Merah fired “until he was hit by a retaliatory shot from the RAID (elite police unit), which felled him with a bullet to the head,” Molins said, insisting that police fired in self-defense.

That is much better, factually and logically.

How did all the press get it wrong?

^

Words of Wisdom

“A little more than 20 years ago, Francis Fukuyama wrote his famous thesis, The End of History, where he argued that we have seen the triumph of one ideology over competing ideologies,” says [Elaine] Glaser...“I believe we’ve gone beyond Fukuyama’s thesis: there’s actually no ideology. We have the rise of technocrats, pragmatic politics… even the activists who are occupying cities around the world. They don’t say what they mean any more. They don’t have manifestos either, [there is] a general reluctance to have a political project or to lay out a blueprint for change.”

...Her premise is simple: Because we no longer subscribe to clearly defined values about how best to live our lives, we have been nudged into a world of illusion, persuasion and coercion – one that conceals the truth. “A development I see as being particularly relevant to our times is the rise of the language and techniques of marketing,” she says. “The techniques of deception developed in the world of marketing are now being applied to all areas of our lives – from politics to our love lives, the things we buy, the things we consume.”

..."So while we feel that we are wise to spin and deception, in fact I see a lot of credulousness in our current era, about the ability of ordinary citizens to speak truth to power, to hold power to account,” she says...accountability is superficial...in the absence of an anchoring ideology, those who do not believe in something will believe anything...

^

Temple Mount Awareness

If you read Hebrew, find out when the Day of Public Ascent will be.

Sunday evening is the 3rd Temple Awareness Day here is the live broadcast.

^

I Hear 2 Million. Do I Hear 3?

According to this Hamas website 

The organizing committee of the Global March to Jerusalem expects the participation of more than two million people in the march which will be started from the surrounding countries of Palestine, the Palestinian territories, and some other capitals on March 30, 2012...[to] take place in Jordon and the other surrounding countries except Syria", said the GMJ's chief executive and coordinator Dr Ribhi Haloum in a press conference held on Tuesday evening .

I guess Syrians are marching to Turkey?

Gee, that's an awful lot of water, food and bathrooms for which one needs to prepare.

Unless it is an example of standard Arab...exaggeration?

^

Does 943 Mean Anything To You? Or 791?

From here

At least 943 Pakistani women and girls were murdered last year for allegedly defaming their family’s honor, the country’s leading human rights group said Thursday.

The statistics highlight the growing scale of violence suffered by many women in conservative Muslim Pakistan, where they are frequently treated as second-class citizens and there is no law against domestic violence.

Despite progress on better protecting women’s rights, activists say the government needs to do more to prosecute murderers in cases largely dismissed by police as private, family affairs.

“At least 943 women were killed in the name of honor, of which 93 were minors,” wrote the Human Rights Commission of Pakistan in its annual report.

Seven Christian and two Hindu women were among the victims, it said.

The Commission reported 791 “honor killings” in 2010.

Does anyone know how many were killed in the Palestinian Authority? *

In June 2011, Abbas said one thing, but as of this past February, nothing:

The Palestinian Women's Movement is awaiting the implementation of the reconciliation deal between Hamas and Fatah, which will pave the way for a legitimate parliament to approve the long-awaited legislation which abolishes the legal clauses that allow crimes of honour.

In an interview with Gulf News, Rawdah Baseer..."We resent those two clauses which led to the death of many innocent women in our land," she said.

That surely is a human rights concern.



_______
*
"An average of 12 women are killed annually in the Palestinian Territories on honour grounds," has said Rawdah Baseer, an activist of the Palestinian Feminist Movement and head of the Palestinian Women's Studies Centre.
^

Jewish Students Against Free Speech

What is "the most egregious, widely-spread yet persistently ignored human rights violations of our time"?

The

illegal, state-sponsored indoctrination and recruitment of innocent Muslim children towards violence

by the Palestinian Authority.

And the Leeds Jewish Students Society doesn't want to hear about it.


^

The "No Problem With Anti-Semitism" Problem

.

I believe an honest examination will reveal a blind spot among those fighting prejudice that has allowed the ancient Jew hatred that infected Europe for centuries to survive. The blind spot is this: When the prejudice -- and even the call for murder -- is made in connection with the Palestinian cause, people look the other way and give it a pass...It is time to stop excusing anti-Semitic calls for the murder of Jews as an acceptable outgrowth of the Palestinian cause.

It's easy to blame the situation of the Arab-Israel conflict, but Jean-Yves Camus, a French expert in extremism, says today's prejudice includes the "new anti-Semitism" from radicalized Muslims and the old-fashioned hatred from the right, including neo-Nazis.

Often, when the Palestinian link is made, the prejudice comes from the left, couched as passion for human rights.

At times, human rights activists seem to have no problem with anti-Semitism -- even of the genocidal variety -- condemning it forcefully only if it is accompanied by anti-immigrant or anti-Muslim sentiment.

Frida Ghitis at CNN

(k/t=LLM)

^

UN Human Rights Council Circus Wants To Come Back

Well, the UN's Humans Rights Council Circus wants to come to this part of the world, again:

The UN Human Rights Council on Thursday passed a resolution ordering a first probe into how Israeli settlements may be infringing on the rights of the Palestinians. The resolution was adopted by the 47-member council with 36 votes in favour and 10 abstentions. Only the United States voted against it.*

From the official release:

Human Rights Council adopts 11 resolutions on Iran, Democratic People's Republic of Korea and Israeli settlements

Human Rights Council
AFTERNOON 22 March 2012

...decided to send an independent international fact-finding mission to investigate the implications of the Israeli settlements on the civil, political, economic, social and cultural rights of the Palestinian people throughout the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem...

...Under its agenda item on the human rights situation in Palestine and other Occupied Arab Territories, the Council adopted resolutions on human rights in the occupied Syrian Golan in which it called upon Israel to desist from its continuous building of settlements, from imposing Israeli citizenship and Israeli identity cards and to allow the Syrian population of the occupied Syrian Golan to visit their families. With respect to the right of the Palestinian people to self-determination, the Council reaffirmed the right of the Palestinian people to self-determination as a basic condition for achieving a just, lasting and comprehensive peace in the region of the Middle East and also reaffirmed its support for the solution of two States, Palestine and Israel, living side by side in peace and security.

Concerning the human rights situation in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem and in the Occupied Syrian Golan, the Council demanded that Israel cease all of its settlement activities, condemned the firing of rockets against Israeli civilian areas and called upon Israel to cease prolonged closures and economic and movement restrictions, including those amounting to a blockade on the Gaza Strip. On the follow-up to the report of the United Nations Independent International Fact-Finding Mission on the Gaza Conflict, the Council welcomed the efforts of Switzerland to reconvene a conference on measures to enforce the Fourth Geneva Convention in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem and recommended that the General Assembly consider launching an urgent discussion on the legality of the use of certain munitions.

This line from an AP report drew my undivided and unpartitioned attention:

Some 300,000 Israelis live in settlements in the West Bank, an area Palestinians claim as part of a state. Israel says the issue must be resolved in peace talks.

Well, that is actually correct although the state in question, of which Judea and Samaria are to be part of, is Israel.

In the debate on a related issue, of the Resolution on the "Right of the Palestinian People to Self-Determination...A/HRC/19/L.33)...adopted by a vote of 46 in favour, 1 against and no abstentions, the Council reaffirms the inalienable, permanent and unqualified right of the Palestinian people to self-determination, including their right to live in freedom, justice and dignity and to establish their sovereign, independent, democratic and viable contiguous State...", you could read this:

Palestine, speaking as the concerned country, expressed its sincere condolences to France and the families of the victims of terrorism in Toulouse. In 2010, the Palestinian people celebrated 10,000 years since the creation of the first Palestinian town of Jericho which was before Judaism, Christianity, and the arrival of Islam in the region. The right to self-determination was an ethical and legal value enshrined in the United Nations Charter. The draft resolution had not sought to exclude Israel but to protect the right of Palestinians through a fact-finding mission to be sent to investigate the colonization of Palestinian land. Some 46 per cent of Palestinian territory was under complete Israeli colonization; how could a two State solution be achieved under such circumstances?

Don't we have a right not to have historically false narratives bandied about, incorrect data distributed?

Oh, and two other items there drew my attention.

The first was this:

Action on Resolution on Freedom of Religion or Belief

In a resolution (A/HRC/19/L.23) regarding freedom of religion or belief, adopted without a vote, the Council condemns all forms of violence, intolerance and discrimination based on or in the name of religion or belief, as well as any advocacy of religious hatred that constitutes incitement to discrimination, hostility or violence, whether it involves the use of print, audio-visual or electronic media or any other means; also condemns violence and acts of terrorism, which are increasing in number and targeting persons belonging to religious minorities across the world;...urges States to protect and promote freedom of thought, conscience and religion or belief, and to this end: to ensure that adequate and effective guarantees of freedom of thought, conscience and religion or belief are provided to all without distinction; to ensure that no one within their jurisdiction is deprived of the right to life, liberty or torture because of religion or belief, and to bring to justice all perpetrators of violations of these rights; to end violations of the human rights of women and to devote particular attention to abolishing practices and legislation that discriminates against women; and to promote, through the educational system and other means, mutual understanding, tolerance, non-discrimination and respect in all matters of freedom of religion or belief...The resolution also welcomed the work of the Special Rapporteur on freedom of religion or belief.

Will that to help me, as a Jew, to offset Islamic "Temple Denial"? The campaign of Palestinianism against Jewish heritage sites? **

And the second was this:

Action on Resolution on Birth Registration and the Right of Everyone to Recognition Everywhere as a Person Before the Law

In a resolution (A/HRC/19/L.24) regarding birth registration and the right to everyone to recognition everywhere as a person before the law, adopted without a vote, the Council expresses concern at the high number of persons throughout the world whose birth is not registered; calls upon States to establish or strengthen existing governmental institutions responsible for birth registration and the preservation and security of such records, and to ensure they have sufficient resources to fulfil their mandate; also calls upon States to ensure free birth registration, including free or low-fee late birth registration, by means of universal, accessible, simple, expeditious and effective registration procedures without discrimination of any kind; urges States to identify and remove physical, administrative and any other barriers that impede access to birth registration...

Can I use that against United procedure to deny my children their identity as born in Israel by refusing to append any state status to the city of Jerusalem while, on the other hand, having "West Bank" as a state for children of American citizens born in Judea and Samaria?


__________

*

The result of the vote was as follows:

In favour (36): Angola, Austria, Bangladesh, Belgium, Benin, Botswana, Burkina Faso, Chile, China, Congo, Cuba, Djibouti, Ecuador, India, Indonesia, Jordan, Kuwait, Kyrgyzstan, Libya, Malaysia, Maldives, Mauritania, Mauritius, Mexico, Nigeria, Norway, Peru, Philippines, Qatar, Russian Federation, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Switzerland, Thailand, Uganda and Uruguay.

Against (1): United States.

Abstentions (10): Cameroon, Costa Rica, Czech Republic, Guatemala, Hungary, Italy, Poland, Republic of Moldova, Romania and Spain.

Action on Resolution on the Human Rights Situation in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem

In a resolution (A/HRC/19/L.34) regarding the Human Rights Situation in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem, adopted by a vote of 44 in favour, 1 against and 2 abstentions as orally revised, the Council reiterates that all measures and actions taken by Israel in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem, in violation of the relevant provisions of the Geneva Convention and contrary to the relevant resolutions of the Security Council, are illegal and have no validity; demands that Israel cease all actions that violate the human rights of the Palestinian people; also demands that Israel comply fully with the provisions of the Fourth Geneva Convention of 1949; further demands that Israel cease all of its settlement activities, the construction of the wall and any other measures aimed at altering the character, status and demographic composition of the Occupied Palestinian Territory; condemns the firing of rockets against Israeli civilian areas resulting in loss of life and injury; demands that Israel comply with its legal obligations under international law, and General Assembly resolutions, and immediately cease the construction of the wall in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem, dismantle the structure, and make reparation for all damage caused by the construction of the wall; calls upon Israel, the occupying Power, to cease prolonged closures and economic and movement restrictions, including those amounting to a blockade on the Gaza Strip, and to fully implement the Agreement on Movement and Access and the Agreed Principles for the Rafah Crossing, both of 15 November 2005, in order to allow for the sustained and regular movement of persons and goods and for the acceleration of long overdue reconstruction in the Gaza Strip; and urges Member States to continue to provide emergency assistance to the Palestinian people to alleviate the financial crisis and the dire socio-economic and humanitarian situation, particularly in the Gaza Strip.


**

Marshall and Shea have been toiling for many years at the Hudson Institute’s Center for Religious Freedom in Washington, and the dossier they have assembled on religion and human rights shows that, in the Muslim world and beyond, the proponents of a radical and politicized Islam have set one great goal for themselves, which is not at all dreamy or utopian. The goal is to narrow the limits of what everybody else is allowed to think. The way to achieve this goal is to invoke sacred taboos against apostasy and blasphemy, together with a series of other taboos—“insulting Islam,” “corruption on earth,” “fighting against God,” “witchcraft,” and so forth.

^

The New IBA Law - Our New Media Comment Column

Media Comment: The new IBA law

The current system of self-regulation has not worked and public confidence in the press is lacking.

^

Israel's Media - It's Own Worst Enemy

From Lilac Sagan's Maariv op-ed (in Hebrew), State anti - Israel wherein she asks: It is time to ask how the Israeli media coverage of the Middle East conflict contributes to the growing anti-Semitism around the world against us - and begin to repair the distorted image

Excerpts:

...The feeling in the Western world is that Israel creates a situation where hatred, and therefore the Jews of the world, is justified. You can not underestimate the contribution of Israeli policy in these tones...[and] since Israel is the only country in which there is a free media, the international media largely fueled by the Israeli press, and let's face it: The picture here is one - sided.

For some reason, our free press chooses to emphasize only the part of Israel in the difficult situation facing the Palestinians, which affects relations with all countries around it. For us, critical journalism means to expose only Israel's crimes.

When did you last read a comprehensive investigation of corruption in the West Bank? The last time you saw an investigation on corruption in government in the West Bank? Palestinians on the education system that teaches hate and does not give legitimacy to Israel's existence? The feats of Hamas in Gaza or on the many terrorist factions whose meaning is not "responsible adult" one with whom we can talk about a comprehensive settlement?

...we emphasize only what's wrong with us, the conduct of the other party is forgettable. From the picture that emerges is difficult for those watching from the outside and does not know the facts to reach a different conclusion, because they have never been exposed...

Without realizing it, our media also lending a hand to the process [of this anti-Semitism and anti-Israel feeling], because it is not aware of the important role in this arena...[its] approach: first, that the Israeli public tires of the one - sided picture, and so despite the media's activities, there is no real impact on the government's mindset. And secondly, that it contributes to the building of a distorted image.

Why the world does not know "who we really are"? If we do not know who we really are, and if we do not care to stress ourselves the profound differences between the Israeli essence barbaric nature of Hamas, for example, will continue to intensify the atmosphere which threatens us and the Jews throughout the world. Every day that passes we increase their legitimacy and erode our own legitimacy.

Israel's own worst enemy.

^

How Right - Or Wrong - Is Wright?

Robert Wright, senior editor at The Atlantic, writes (inter alia attacking poor Jeffrey Goldberg) this in a piece entitled Who Is Responsible for the Israeli-Palestinian Impasse?.

In assigning responsibility for the impasse...you can ask:

...Why is it that it's starting to look as if a two-state solution is impossible--or, at least, close to impossible and getting closer every month? The answer to that question, it seems to me, is the settlements. There are just too many settlements, interconnected by too many roads that restrict the movement of too many Palestinians, for a two-state deal to result in anything Palestinians could proudly call a "state." It would take a massive exertion of political will on Israel's part to uproot enough settlements for a two-state deal, and Israeli politics are nowhere near permitting such a thing. And here's the kicker: As the settlements grow, the amount of political will it would take to uproot them grows, while (as Hussein Ibish recently noted) the supply of such political will drops, since the Israeli constituency for the settlements grows.

...the settlements are the thing blocking the road. (At least, that's my view, and Goldberg, too, has in the past emphasized this pernicious effect of the settlements.)

At the risk of belaboring the metaphor: Suppose two people--a Palestinian and an Israeli--are in a car driving to a town called "two-state solution". Suddenly they see that a giant tree has been cut down and impedes further progress. The two people can, if they want, argue about which of them is responsible for not having gotten past this point before the tree was felled. (Who dawdled at rest stops more, etc.) That's question number one, and Goldberg says the two are about equally to blame. Question number two is: Who cut down the tree that now lies in the middle of the road?

That would be Israel. And the tree would be the settlements. (Which isn't to say that the settlements were necessarily put there in order to block a peace deal, though no doubt some settlers had that motivation--just that that is the settlements' effect.) And this would explain why Peter Beinart wants to put pressure on the settlements--because he thinks that they are what stand in the way of progress and that it's not too late to do something about that...

[Update, 3/21, 8:40 p.m.: I want to emphasize that I'm not saying that the settlements are the only current obstacle to a two-state deal. There are attitudes and positions on both the Israeli and Palestinian side that are obstacles. But the settlements are the biggest, closest-to-immovable obstacle, and they're getting closer and closer to immovable as the settler population continues to expand. If you ask the growing number of people who think it's too late for a two-state solution why they think that, a large majority will say, first and foremost, "the settlements."]

I left this comment there:

But ask yourself, using your example: who, even before that Israeli and the Arab set out on their car trip not stymied by a felled tree, was killing Jews, joining up with Hitler, pogroming, burning, chopping down trees, blocking up wells, refusing to accept partion plans and even receiving 70% of the original Mandate territory and pressuring the British Mandate authorities to halt immigration and then engaged in ethnic cleansing of Jewish communities in place in Hebron, Nablus, Gaza, etc. for centuries (what you would call "settlements") way before our current "occupation" began in 1967 (that nasty war we were forced to win) and way before any of the "settlements" that bother you were constructed.


I know you may say 'but that's so long ago' or even 'but what has that to do with contemporary and future peace deals', and I'll reply: the Arabs refuse to acknowledge any Jewish political national identity, will - and habe - done everything to halt it and even roll it back and are so concerned with this project that they give no thought to themselves, their people and their own identity, preferring to imagine who they are while refusing to recognize Jewish history.


Peace cannot be achieved given this history and this attitude.

^

Wider Settlement Demanded

No, not at Migron. Nor even Shiloh.

Here:

Labour MP [David Milliband] expressed his belief that the "Israel-Palestine question will only ever be settled in the context of a wider Arab settlement with Israel".

Why don't we Jews ever get the right to a wider settlement?

^

Merrye England and Its Jews

I've just posted how French Jews are under attack from without.

In England, the Jews are under attack also from within.

I've received this:

Dear Ed (that's Labour head, Ed Milliband),

RE: Meeting between Ken Livingstone and Labour supporting Jewish Londoners

On the 1st of March 2012 a substantial number of Labour-supporting members of the Jewish community met Ken Livingstone at a private meeting in order to explore ways in which Ken could re-connect with Jewish voters in advance of the May 3rd m ayoral election. We believe that it is vitally important that Labour win in London, not just for our city, but also for the future success of the Party.

The meeting was not part of the official Jewish calendar; however it was carried out with the full support of the London Jewish Forum, Board of Deputies of British Jews and the Jewish Leadership Council with party members from each organisation attending. Also present were key people from Labour Friends of Israel, Jewish Labour councillors from five London Boroughs and also by the religious leadership of all streams of the Jewish Community.

The meeting was not open to the wider press; Jonathan Freedland of the Guardian and Jewish Chronicle was present although in a personal capacity. The meeting was held under Chatham House rules, understood as what was said can be repeated, though the individuals saying things cannot be attributed. Ken, at the beginning of the meeting however, made it clear directly that he was happy to have anything he said attributed.

This meeting partly followed up on a meeting held two years previously with a similar group of Labour- supporting London Jews, which was acrimonious. At that time we did not follow the meeting up with the party leadership in any way. A number of us having attended the meeting have concluded that as loyal Party members, in this instance, considering our collective desire to see Labour win in London, it would be remiss of us not to raise these issues now, rather than in a post-mortem of a failed mayoral bid. We still believe that Ken has every possibility of reconnection with Jewish Labour voters. For the good of the Party and for London we would ultimately like to see this happen.

It is worth mentioning that it was made very clear to Ken the mood amongst Jewish Labour Party supporters. Despite his seeming obsession with Israel, which gives some quarters cause for concern, many of us had just about managed to vote for him in 2008. Today, many of us who would otherwise normally vote Labour are finding it harder and harder to consider voting for Ken, despite agreeing with his policies for London. Many of us are actively working for local GLA Labour candidates, and in particular Andrew Dismore in Barnet and Camden, where grassroots efforts are being made to ensure he wins.

A key focus of the discussion centred on Ken's discourse when discussing Zionism. It is not an uncontroversial thing to say that for the vast majority of British Jews, Israel plays an important part in their core identity, in the same way that family, language and cultural ties continue to bind BAME (Black, Asian and minority ethnic) communities with India, Pakistan etc.

This is certainly a conversation that has taken place with Ken on numerous occasions. Ken determines Jews as a religious group but does not accept Jews as an ethnicity and a people, and did not respond on this other than to say as an atheist he found this hard to comprehend.

In the same way that Black, Irish, Women and LGBT groups are afforded the right to determine their own identity, many of us feel that Ken doesn't afford Jews that right. Just as we do not have a right to tell Ken what he thinks about Israel despite our many disagreements, Ken doesn't have the right to define who we believe we are.

At various points in the discussion Ken used the words Zionist, Jewish and Israeli, interchangeably, as if they meant the same, and did so in a pejorative manner. These words are not interchangeable and to do so is highly offensive, particularly when repeated over and again as was done. For example, when discussing Sheik Yusuf al-Qaradawi's extreme views on homosexuality, Ken said "one would expect the same views on homosexuality from extreme Christians, Muslims and Israelis" and using the word "Zionist" as an adjectival negative to criticise much more widely than what can be attributed to the ideology of Zionism. He also stated "I am not against Israel, I am against Zionists", which we also find impossible.

Ken's relationship with radical Islamist politics was also raised in the context of him accepting a paid role presenting on the Iranian state-controlled Press TV and his continued defence of the City Hall reception for Sheikh Yusuf al-Qaradawi.

When challenged over whether it had been appropriate to publicly embrace an individual who holds racist, misogynistic and homophobic views, in addition to his justification for suicide bombings in Israel, Ken again reinforced his view that al-Qaradawi is a moderate voice to be engaged, and that he was encouraged to do so. Ken stated that as al-Qaradawi was not advocating suicide bombings in the UK, and as he had apparently been the victim of a smear campaign by the British press, Ken would gladly embrace him as he would anyone being attacked by the Murdoch empire. Given the scenario of hugging Nick Griffin, Ken quickly backed off this comment.

Ken, towards the end of the meeting, stated that he did not expect the Jewish community to vote Labour as votes for the left are inversely proportional to wealth levels, and suggested that as the Jewish community is rich, we simply wouldn't vote for him. When we pointed to research undertaken by the Institute of Jewish Policy Research that demonstrates the Jewish community in the UK has a propensity to vote much more radically than its wealth, and this is attributed to Jewish values and sociology and history and also alluded to Democrats in the USA, Ken begrudgingly accepted this.

The real and more pressing issue is that of the strong perception that Ken is seeking to align himself with the politics of the Muslim Brotherhood and the Iranian regime, whilst at the same time turning a blind eye to Islamist antisemitism, misogynism and homophobia, even when overt and demonisation of Zionism and the derogatory use of the word Zionist and use of antisemitic memes.

We are concerned that this is more about infantile far left politics, being seen to take a stance against whatever the anti-establishment or anti-imperialism cause of the moment is. Boiled down, it's hard to interpret this in any other way than Ken basically having no sympathy for those that he perceives as bourgeois , which is why he isn't really attempting to appeal to, and perhaps why he is losing progressive as well as Jewish votes.

Whilst we do feel somewhat despondent that we are covering the same arguments and reaching the same conclusions as we have done before, we do feel that it is now more important than ever, given the closeness of this election, given the election's significance to the Party nationally, and to the growing unease amongst Jewish Labour voters, its time to resolve the matter once and for all.

This private note is to Ken and Ken's senior team, the party leader's office, the shadow London Minister's office, Ed Balls' office and to a very limited part of the Jewish communal leadership, who will meet Ed Miliband later this month.

We firmly believe that Ken can turn this situation around, and can count on Jewish voters to help him be elected Mayor of London. But he does however desperately need to face up to the issues we raise.

Andrew Gilbert
Adam Langleben
Judith Bara
Rabbi Danny Rich
Neil Nerva
Jem Stein

That noise you hear is that of the rustling of the League of Trembling Israelites.

^

La France and Its Jews

The observation of Michel Gurfinkiel, founder and president of the Jean Jacques Rousseau Institute in Paris:-

One month ahead of the presidential election, the French political class wanted to both draw on the emotional impact of the killings and avoid gaffes or politically incorrect statements. All presidential candidates expressed their shock and anger about the deliberate killing of Jewish children. Most attended Jewish services in Paris and Toulouse. President Sarkozy...warned against “amalgamating” the “peaceful and law abiding Muslim community” with jihadists and other radicals, or “calling for retribution.” Many other candidates, or national leaders, said the same.

Such attitudes displease French Jews. For one thing, they know that if all Muslims are not jihadists, jihadism and other extremist movements still spread among French Muslims, especially the younger, French-born, generation. Conversely, they believe that their own global image and condition have steadily deteriorated for years and that this explains at least in part the torturing and killing of Ilan Halimi in 2006 and the Toulouse massacre today.

According to Sammy Ghozlan, a former police superintendent and the head of a French antisemitism monitoring group, street violence against Jews is increasing, and is largely perpetrated by Muslim thugs. (Just one week ago, a Jewish high school student was beaten at Porte de Bagnolet in Paris, until he was rescued by horrified witnesses.) The so called BDS campaign (anti-Israel boycott), while illegal, gains ground and grows more violent. It is not uncommon for BDS activists to “occupy” stores that sell Israeli products or bookshops that sell pro-Israel literature and to dump or damage the items, a practice reminiscent of the SA, anti-Jewish boycott in the 1930s. One hears “Death to Jews” mottos frequently in Muslim-populated areas. Such cries sounded last month in Champigny, near Paris, upon the release of a comedy about Sefardi Jews, La Vérité si je mens 3.

French radio and TV indulge routinely in Israel-bashing and even, more recently, Jew-bashing programs; a laxity encouraged, French Jews surmise, by the rampant anti-Zionism of many government agencies and initiatives (like granting sovereign state status to the Palestinian Authority at UNESCO). Last but not least, Prime Minister François Fillon crossed a red line three weeks ago when he bluntly decried both hallal and kosher slaughtering as irrational “ancestral customs” and President Sarkozy failed to reassure when he advocated “voluntary tagging” for ritually slaughtered food.

^

The Converse Double Indemnity Victimization Ploy Peter Plays

Here is some content from Petar ("Boycott Settlements") Beinart's new blog site introduction at Zion Square:

(a) ...every day, official Jewish discourse about Israel grows more disconnected from reality, and that disconnect endangers Palestinian dignity, American security and the Jewish future.

"Palestinian dignity" equals "Jewish future"? Is that an example of his priorities?

(b) ...the Purim story doesn’t end with Haman’s plot being foiled; that’s the Disney version. It actually ends with Persia’s Jews retaliating with a massacre of their own.

Actually it ends thus

For Mordecai the Jew was next unto king Ahasuerus, and great among the Jews, and accepted of the multitude of his brethren; seeking the good of his people and speaking peace to all his seed. (Esther 10:3).

In other words, peace, security and even Jewish dignity were achieved.

(c) ...in official Jewish discourse, the Jewish story begins with victimhood and end with survival. On the one hand, Jews delight in our newfound power...But because the Jewish establishment still depicts Jews as victims, this celebration of power comes without the burden of responsibility. Again and again, Jewish power is described merely as a vehicle for Jewish survival. As if Jewish history means that Jews—unlike other human beings—can use power only to survive and not to destroy.

If I understand Beinart correctly - and I am presuming that he understands himself - what we have here is the The Converse Double Indemnity Victimization Ploy. That's a sort of 'damned if you do, damned if you don't' situation.

Beinart knows Jews were and can be victims. But by not becoming victims and/or preventing that status, Jews need wield power. In wielding power, we, Beinart claims, do but victimize "Palestinians", or as I prefer, Arabs of the former territories of the Mandate for Palestine. Arabs can claim victimhood but, pardon the phrase, God help the Jews if they do they same.

(d) ... I believe that such a [Jewish] state can only be achieved through a new commitment to full citizenship for those Palestinians who live within the green line, and through the creation of a Palestinian state beyond it.

Will these "full citizens" who are, by the way, Arabs, not Palestinians, pay full taxes? Will they do full national service?

...And how can Jewish leaders declare it impermissible to question Israel’s future as a Jewish state when the very settlement policies they support are erasing the green line and turning Israel, the West Bank and the Gaza Strip into one country in which Palestinians will soon outnumber Jews?

That demographic demonology has been shown to be far less threatening than suggested. The numbers are there to be dissected and analyzed and they do not support Beinart's thesis.

Beinart predicates his theorizing on an imaginatory framing of the debate which is far from reality, all the while claiming to be representing better than the American Jewish establishment the reality that is.

What a ploy.

^

Rabbi Does Ritual Hugging

.

...as each of us left, that person would walk around the room hugging all that remained. It was sweet -- became our ritual and spoke wonders about how quickly love and concern can grow if we just let it.

Rabbi Steve Gutow on his jail experience with George Clooney, Martin Luther King II, etc.

^

Words of Wisdom

“It took years of indifference and stupidity to make us as ignorant as we are today...Widespread ignorance bordering on idiocy is our new national goal...”

Charles Simic

^

Fab Fayyad Fibs

Salam Fayyad has been quoted:

Palestinian Prime Minister Salam Fayyad strongly rejected using his people as a justification for the French killings, calling them a "cowardly terrorist attack."

"It is time for those criminals to stop exploiting the name of Palestine through their terrorist actions," Fayyad said in a statement.

But wait, who has been killing hundreds * of Jewish children, women, elderly and even foreigners here in Israel but...Arabs of the former territories of the Palestine Mandate?

You know, the ones they write academic articles about?

Like here and also here. And here where you can learn that

Washington Post journalist Daniel Williams, in an article on the woman suicide bomber Abu Aisheh, estimates that there were fifty-nine acts of suicide bombings in the first eighteen months of the second intifada. Williams also notes that “the pool of potential bombers seems far from exhausted among despairing, hostile youths of Abu Aisheh’s generation.” A Ha’aretz article reports on research conducted by a psychology lecturer at Al-Aqsa University, Fadal Abu-Hin: “In Apri1 2001, Abu-Hin conducted a research study among 1,000 young Gaza Strip Palestinians, aged 9 to 16. According to the results he published, over 40 percent of the respondents said that they were actively involved in the intifada. Over 70 percent said that they wanted to be martyrs. ‘If I were to carry out the same study today,’ says Abu-Hin, ‘I am sure the figures would be even higher,’...

There's this book and this one.

________

*

The first suicide attack ascribed to the Palestinian cause occurred on 16 April 1993, [the first modern one was the US Marine barrakcs in Lebanon] when a car bomb exploded near Mechola in the Jordan Valley. Between then and March 2004, 139 suicidal-attack incidents attributed to Palestinian operators transpired against Israeli targets (Figure 1). Between 1993 and September 2000, 27 suicide missions claimed 120 of the 290 Israeli deaths attributed to Palestinian attacks; since then, 112 suicide bombings have accounted for 474 of 918 Israeli Second Intifada fatalities while wounding more than 3,000, despite composing less than 1 percent of all violent incidents. These tallies do not include failed suicide operations (i.e. attacks intercepted by security forces or crippled by device failure); the number of attempted attacks is thus higher...recently an increasing number of these attacks have been claimed by the collaborative efforts of two or more Palestinian militant groups. From 1993 through April 2004, 46 percent of all suicide bombings were carried out by Hamas, 29 percent by PIJ (Palestine Islamic Jihad), and 22 percent by Fatah (Figure 2); the remainder were by the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP) or were claimed by two or more groups.

and this:

Since the onset of the Palestinian Intifada in September 2000 through August 2005, 151 Palestinian suicide bombing attacks have been launched against Israeli targets, killing 515 people and injuring almost 3,500 more...

^

France24 Replies to My Comment

Commenting at France24 site:

^