fbpx

November 22, 2006

Broke but hopeful, one survivor says it’s ‘better than Auschwitz’

Last Yom HaShoah, or Holocaust Memorial Day, Walter Essinger did not attend any community vigils or synagogue commemoration services. Instead, the 73-year-old survivor spent that day, April 26, being interrogated by Ventura County detectives. He was then arrested, handcuffed and eventually booked into the Ventura County Jail.

During the night, unable to sleep and “treated like a common criminal,” Essinger was transferred to four different cells before he was released on bail the following morning.

“There was absolutely no reason to arrest me,” said Essinger, a materials scientist who otherwise has a clean record and who claims the incident stemmed from an unwarranted eviction and a rushed move from the 5,000-square-foot laboratory in Simi Valley he rented for his semiconductor manufacturing business.

But despite his protestation, Essinger was indicted in August by the Ventura County Criminal Grand Jury on five counts of “knowingly and unlawfully” disposing of chemicals such as acetone and sulfuric acid. On Nov. 3, he was sentenced to three years probation, 200 hours of community service and fines totaling just over $17,000. He barely escaped a 90-day jail sentence.
“They were after me,” he said. “There’s a rat here.”

Essinger, who lives on a Social Security pension of $1,180 and who was represented by a public defender, doesn’t know how he’s going to pay the fine, with $300 due every month. Meanwhile, he is continuing to seek the services of an attorney to help him.

But for this Holocaust survivor, adversity and close calls are nothing new.
Born in 1935 in Munich, Germany, Essinger spent his first three years living on Bienerstrasse, across from Hitler’s offices. His mother, Selma Salomon, who was third-generation Jewish Dutch, witnessed the comings and goings of Nazi soldiers and feared for their future. In 1938, she packed a small valise, gathered up 3-year-old Walter, who never saw his father again, and boarded a train for Holland.

“My mother was brilliant. If not for her, I would have died in the gas chamber,” Essinger said. But while this lively, bon vivant from a wealthy textile family may have saved his life, she filled it with fear and abuse, beyond that of the Holocaust, leaving a legacy of paranoia and nightmares and a belief that money is evil.

After leaving Germany, Essinger spent four years in Holland. But in 1942, he, his mother and his new common-law stepfather, Walter de Beer, were on the run again. This time they escaped by bicycle, with Essinger riding on the handlebars of his stepfather’s “green, high-tech” bike, across the border into Belgium.

There they threw away the bikes and, taking refuge under a bridge, ripped off their yellow stars. Essinger recalls his mother rubbing his jacket with a stone to erase the star’s outline.

After that, they traveled from city to city, making extended stops in Brussels; Paris and Nancy, France; and Bern and Montreux, Switzerland. They were always one step ahead of the Nazis, always sitting separately on buses and trains in case one of them was captured. Essinger carried the money, diamonds and other jewels that were sewn into his jacket.

“I was like a little dog, doing whatever my parents told me,” he said.
Essinger remembers many close calls. Once they traveled by bus to Besancon, France, a place they heard was safe. When the bus stopped in the town center, however, three Nazi soldiers with machine guns and German shepherds greeted the vehicle. But while the other passengers exited the front door of the bus, Walter and his parents escaped out a side door, abandoning their belongings on board and running into a nearby hotel, where they found shelter.

“It was unbelievable luck, like God looked after us,” Essinger said.

But much of the time he was left to fend for himself, hanging out on the streets of unfamiliar cities and scrounging for food. Also, he remembers being berated and physically abused by his parents. He says his mother was a “very evil woman,” and his stepfather was an amateur boxer who used to beat him and who, several times, chained his hands together and forced him to stand with his arms raised.

“What saved me was my love for radios,” Essinger said.

He found them in hotel rooms, and in Switzerland his mother bought one for him.

After the war, Essinger returned to Amsterdam, where he finished the lyceum and studied radio repair and electronics. But by then, his mother had borne two more children with De Beer, and he was “in the way.” In 1952, his mother dropped him off in Israel, where he served three years in the army and then ran a radio store in Haifa. After 10 years, he immigrated to Los Angeles with a wife and two young children.

In the United States, he repaired radios for a living and then returned to school, earning two master’s degrees in electrical engineering at UCLA. He worked for several electronics companies. He then helped develop the idea for flat-screen laptop monitors, co-founding Sigmatron Nova, a technology company headquartered in Santa Barbara, in 1982 and creating several components that were patented.

“I was living the American dream,” said Essinger, who resided with his wife and three children in a 3,000-square-foot house on a quarter-acre in the hills of Thousand Oaks. “I also owned a couple Cadillacs,” he added.

But life again took a series of unfortunate turns.

Leaving Sigmatron Nova in 1986, he worked for another company that subsequently went bankrupt. In 1990, he divorced and sold his house.

A year later, he and a partner began a new electronics company, called Elume, manufacturing semiconductors for biomedical and life-sciences applications.

But one morning, he awoke not feeling well. It turned out he needed coronary artery bypass surgery, and, because of what he believes was an allergic reaction to iodine, a subsequent valve replacement. All told, he spent 30 days at Los Robles Hospital and Medical Center in Thousand Oaks, to the tune of $248,000. He said he had no insurance — “I’m a dreamer,” he said in defense — and paid $175,000, essentially his entire net worth.

By 1997, he became the sole owner of Elume, moving to the Simi Valley facility. He had six employees and gross income over $500,000 a year. But in 2005, he discovered that a part-time business manager was embezzling money from him — about $150,000 total, Essinger estimated — and secretly selling equipment.
As a result, Essinger couldn’t pay his rent. And through a series of what he characterizes as misunderstandings, he was evicted, even after trying to pay the back rent with a cashier’s check.

Broke but hopeful, one survivor says it’s ‘better than Auschwitz’ Read More »

Carry On! Venice community gets an eruv approved

The Shul on the Beach, formally known as the Pacific Jewish Center (PJC), has crowned four years of negotiations to install an eruv along the Pacific shoreline and inland area.

The historic Orthodox congregation in Venice finally won approval from the California Coastal Commission to create an unbroken symbolic border to allow observant families to carry basic necessities and push baby strollers beyond the confines of the home on the Sabbath.

An eruv (literally “blending” in Hebrew), which generally consists of a strong fishing line strung between telephone poles, has frequently triggered bitter neighborhood disputes, pitting American Orthodox Jews against environmentalists, nearby homeowners and, occasionally, secular Jews.

The PJC case was particularly sensitive, because for the first time it involved California coastal land and the fishing lines would run near the nesting area of the protected least tern. Mark Massara, a Sierra Club official, objected at one hearing: “This is really nuts. To the extent that we’re allowing public property to be used for religious purposes, it is very troublesome.”

However, after the shul agreed to place metallic streamers on the fishing line near the nesting area to warn off birds, the commission gave the go-ahead.Rabbi Meyer May, president of the Rabbinical Council of California, said that the eruv “is nondescript and has zero impact on the neighborhood. All it does is to allow observant Jews to live in an area, and if that bothers some people, so be it.”

May said that an eruv must meet quite complex religious and technical standards approved by inspectors from his organization.

As in the case of existing eruvim in the Westside and San Fernando Valley areas, top rabbinical experts from Toronto will supervise the Venice-area installation.According to the Oxford Dictionary of the Jewish Religion, rabbinical authorities have defined three types of eruvim, all intended to promote the sanctity of the Sabbath. The fishing line enclosure is known as eruv tehunim, or the eruv of boundaries.

Some 60 years ago, the Venice Beach area was home to an elderly but thriving, Miami Beach-type Jewish community, but over time the growth of air-conditioned suburbs depleted the ranks of such residents.

During the past couple of decades, a new wave of young couples have joined the shul, led by Rabbi Benjamin Geiger, which now has a core of some 50 families, with many more expected after the eruv is up.

The 4 miles of fishing lines will joined to the existing 8-mile patchwork of chain-link fences and walls along freeways. When completed, after the shul has raised the money and let construction bids, the eruv will encompass a square-shaped area running from Marina del Rey north to the 10 Freeway, and from the Pacific coast east to the 405 Freeway.

Carry On! Venice community gets an eruv approved Read More »

C.S.I.: Dating

Some people say you can learn everything you need to know about a person on the first date.

That’s when people reveal themselves, because it’s before they
feel something is at stake. Will she like me? What will he think of me? I hope I make a good impression.

The beginning — the preliminary phone call, the casual party conversation, the unwitting meeting of total strangers on a plane, an elevator, a funeral (don’t ask) — is the best time to glean all the information you can from a person.

Most of the time you don’t understand the significance of what the other person is telling you, but it will prove to be invaluable later on, should there be a later on.

It’s kind of like being a police investigator at a crime scene. Police need to interview suspects immediately following the crime — to catch them off guard, before they have time to construct a story, an alibi, an alternate narrative where the details are changed.

In the case of dating, the suspect is your potential partner, but he doesn’t know it yet and so he reveals all sorts of clues about himself in order to seem open and emotionally in touch. You, the investigator, have this one rare opportunity to probe delicately this first time without seeming invasive, needy or psycho, because, hey, you’re just talking, casually, you know, as friends.

Ironically, the more you like the person the less you’ll reveal about your true self because you’ll want to impress, and it will take months for the other person to find out who you are, unless the other person is paying attention in the very, very beginning, before you try to pull the mask over his heart.

For example: In our first conversation, Mike tells me he’s divorced.

“What happened?” I ask.

Because isn’t that a natural question?

“She cheated on me,” he admits.

“Your wife cheated on you?” I say, barely holding in my incredulity. Now that’s a new one. And it’s too unusual to be untrue. Not to say that women don’t cheat, but it’s a man-bites-dog story, and it leaves me speechless, like if you ask someone how many siblings he has, and he responds that his twin died.

“I’m so sorry,” I say. “That is so terrible.”

It is.

“Oh, it was a long time ago,” he says, explaining his cavalier attitude.

I guess that’s why I can get away with asking so many pointed questions. Questions I won’t be able to broach two months from now because he’ll know that I’m onto him. The suspect will realize I’m on his tail, using all my investigations and exculpatory examinations for evidence in the case I’m building against him — i.e., The People vs. Mike Schwartzstein. (The people being me, and all the friends I bring evidence to of why he may not be good enough.)

But for now I can ask him things like “How long was she cheating on you?” “How did you find out?” “Who was the guy?” “What did you do?”

It is too sad.

“How could she do that to you?” I lament.

“No, it wasn’t all her fault,” he backtracks.

What a guy. Trying to take the blame.

“We’re still friends,” he says.

Something seems wrong with this.

“You’re still friends?” I ask. “How can you be friends with the woman who cheated on you?” Could a person be so forgiving? So cavalier?

“Well, she had her reasons,” he says. “I understand her reasons.”

Mike says he wasn’t always available to her; he was working really hard; he wasn’t home a lot; he felt insecure about his income so he was working two jobs, and so he understood why she did it. By the way, she’s still married to the guy she had the affair with.

It didn’t add up. She wasn’t a lying, unfaithful person if she was still married to her lover. And yet, Mike didn’t seem bitter, hurt or vindictive. Is he such a magnanimous man?

I decide to let it go, because it is only our first conversation. I don’t know that it would be one of our last conversations on that subject. That’s right — we started to really like each other; hence we were more circumspect. Every discussion began to have larger, personal implications. Why did he date that woman for only two months? Will he do the same thing to me? Why does he hate his mother? Does he hate all women? Why did his wife cheat on him? Will he be able to trust someone else again?

But he wouldn’t talk about it anymore. He wouldn’t talk about any of them. He thought I was hounding him. The truth is, he was onto me. The suspect pleaded the Fifth. And so, I had to go open my initial file: I found strange similarities between the two cases. Mine and hers.

He wasn’t available to his wife = he wasn’t available to me.

He didn’t suspect anything was wrong = he didn’t like to hear me complain.

He never went to counseling with her = he didn’t want to talk things over with me.

She cheated on him = ???

In the end it wasn’t a simple algebraic equation. My emotions were already involved; I was too close to the suspect to be impartial. But in reviewing the evidence, my only conclusion was that the suspect had a rap sheet with a long record for unavailability. He left the clues in the very beginning, and all I had to do was find them.

I didn’t cheat on him; I don’t do that. But I did leave him. Otherwise I’d be his next victim.

C.S.I.: Dating Read More »

On Thanksgiving, open your hand to the poor and needy

n 1863, Abraham Lincoln proclaimed, “I do therefore invite my fellow … to set apart and observe the last Thursday of November next, as a day of Thanksgiving…. And I recommend to them that … they do also … commend to [God’s] tender care all those who have become widows, orphans, mourners or sufferers in the lamentable civil strife in which we are unavoidably engaged.”

Thanksgiving is the holiday to which most American Jews fully relate. It’s based on the biblical Sukkot, and it’s the American holiday most associated with family gatherings and food.

And
yet, there is much more to the holiday than stuffing and pumpkin pie.

As Lincoln hoped, it is a celebration of gratitude and an acknowledgement of good fortune. Our Jewish tradition is reflected in Lincoln’s words commanding us to care for those who cannot care for themselves: our society’s widows, orphans, mourners and sufferers.

Among the sufferers, Judaism includes the poor and the hungry. Scattered generously throughout our texts are guidelines for offering support to the less fortunate. We are instructed to leave the corners of our fields for the poor, to maintain the poor and to give according to our means. One cannot think about Judaism without thinking about charity and tzedakah.

Charity and tzedakah are different. While charity is almost exclusively monetary generosity, tzedakah includes the idea of the pursuit of justice — tzedek. Maimonides speaks of the eight steps of tzedakah — that some acts of giving are higher than others.

The ultimate goal, the highest form of tzedakah, is that which ensures that there will no longer be a need for charity. The old adage about giving a person a fish vs. teaching him to fish comes directly from Rambam’s theory.

In the meantime, however, we must not forget that the person still needs to eat.

Thanksgiving is a holiday about appreciating what we have. By acknowledging our blessings, we become aware of our vulnerability. We realize that our own abundance is tempered by the paucity that surrounds us. We live in one of the richest countries in the world. And yet, our communities are still filled with the impoverished and hungry.

Lincoln called upon all Americans to observe a day of Thanksgiving each year to thank God for what they had and to pray for those people who were suffering.

But, Judaism calls upon us to do more than just pray. We are commanded to alleviate suffering. Deuteronomy, Chapter 15, says, “Do not harden your heart and shut your hand against your needy kinsman. Rather, you must open your hand and lend him sufficient for what he needs.”

In addition to the commandment to care for our own, our tradition repeatedly reminds us of how we have often been strangers. In this way, the texts demand that we care for all of the strangers in our midst, and that we open our hands and our hearts to every human being.

We can change the state of hunger in America. We need not be discouraged. No matter how small the step, if we make it, we are on our way to stamping out hunger.

For more than 20 years, MAZON: A Jewish Response to Hunger has done just that, taking large and small steps to provide for hungry families on Thanksgiving and every day. From its beginning, MAZON has brought a message to the Jewish community that obligation should lead to action. This action, in turn, takes the shape of measurable steps that can make a real and lasting difference in hungry people’s lives.

In September of 2000, the United Nations adopted the Millennium Development Goals, a set of global improvement aims with a target end date of 2015. The first goal was to cut extreme poverty and hunger around the world in half.

Studies show that if every American pitched in, it would cost each of us less than 10 cents per day, or $36 per year, to halve hunger by 2015.

What is $36? Double chai — a new life for the poor and a new consciousness for us. An end to hunger is possible.

Almost 150 years ago, Thanksgiving was established, in large part, to recognize the severe poverty created in the wake of the Civil War and to give people a special time to help each other. This year, as part of our Thanksgiving celebrations, let’s help others have a reason to give thanks.

Remember the commandment to open your hand to the poor and needy. This year, let’s acknowledge our civil responsibility and Jewish obligations. Let’s open our hearts and hands.

Rabbi Arnold Rachlis, spiritual leader of University Synagogue in Irvine, is chairman of MAZON. Dr. H. Eric Schockman is MAZON’s president. For more information, go to ‘ TARGET=’_blank’>www.ksg.harvard.edu/research/working_papers/dershowitzreply.pdf.

There are however, several fundamental points that simply cannot be ignored before one buys into the Pat Buchananesque nonsense that Israel and its backers control U.S. foreign policy. I have a confession: I wish most of what they said about wielding power and influencing public policy were true. But alas, like those other stereotypes about Jews being rich and controlling the media and the banks, it’s just bubbe meises.

The hard truth is that while the pro-Israel community does wield some influence on foreign policy, recent history is replete with instances where, on issues vital to Israel’s security, the United States has shown no reluctance whatsoever to exert strong pressure on Israeli leaders to adopt positions they believed would weaken their nation’s security.

Consider the following examples that literally involve life-and-death issues:
The Bush administration, which likes to tout itself as the best friend Israel ever had in the White House, this month has pushed the Olmert government to reverse previous policy and accept 1,500 additional armed Palestinian troops to enter Gaza, despite alarm bells rung by Israeli defense and security experts who have seen Gaza become a breeding ground for terror, where tons of smuggled arms and explosives are stockpiled until they are turned loose on Israelis.

Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice also got Prime Minister Ehud Olmert to approve transferring thousands of assault rifles to Abbas’s security forces; in the past when this happened, they often were turned on Israelis, not those they were supposed to be used against. Somehow, I don’t think that this military buildup was high on the pro-Israel agenda.

Moreover, let’s not forget it was Rice who insisted and exerted pressure to ensure that Hamas — declared by our own government to be a terrorist organization and which refuses to recognize Israel — be allowed fully to participate in January’s Palestinian elections, believing that such “democratic” involvement would have a moderating impact on the organization.

We’ve seen the results of such foreign policy naiveté: Hamas thugs now wield unprecedented clout, and Israeli blood has been needlessly spilled. I, for one, certainly don’t remember the pro-Israel cabal pushing to try to legitimize Hamas.

Speaking of Gaza, one of the reasons that area today — long after Israeli troops and settlers left — poses such a threat is Rice’s refusal to allow Israel to secure the Sinai-Gaza border, insisting, instead, that that vital assignment be given to Egypt. The result: a porous border through which weapons, explosives and terrorists easily pass every day, later to be turned loose against Israelis.

There have been daily barrages of Kassam rockets, the most recent of which claimed at least one life — ironically, a Muslim woman married to a Jew. Yes sir, score another one for those wily Israel supporters.

After Israel withdrew from Lebanon, the U.N. Security Council passed a resolution requiring Lebanon to control its border with Israel in order to prevent Hezbollah from re-arming, rebuilding its military infrastructure and gaining more power. Predictably, the United Nations did absolutely nothing to implement its resolution.

But our government (and Lebanon) also stood idly by as missile, arms and explosives flowed into southern Lebanon and into the hands of Hezbollah thugs. Indeed, the Bush administration failed to enforce a proviso of the 2001 Foreign Relations Authorization Act, introduced by Rep. Tom Lantos (D-San Mateo), aimed at pressing the Lebanese government to take on Hezbollah.

Our government effectively turned a blind eye to the festering problem, ignoring Israel’s warning that southern Lebanon was turning into a volatile Hezbollah stronghold; we saw the results last summer as Jewish blood once again flowed at the hands of terrorists. There it is, yet another piece of evidence that U.S. foreign policy is at the mercy of those disloyal American Jews.

Moreover, how can the Walt and Mearsheimer crowd possibly explain our government’s decades-long policy of appeasement of Saudi Arabia, whose citizens, officials and institutions financed and orchestrated the Sept. 11 atrocities.

This in the face of irrefutable proof of Saudis: financing of least 50 percent of the current operating budget of Hamas; providing major financial support, for decades, to Palestinian terrorists; encouraging and inciting violence through Saudi Arabian government-funded textbooks used both in Saudi Arabia and in North American Islamic schools and mosques (including some in the suburbs of Washington , D.C.); using “charities” to fund Al Qaeda; radicalizing an estimated 80 percent of U.S. mosques through the advocacy of the Wahhabi form of Islam, and allowing Hamas to freely operate a command center on Saudi soil.

Despite all this, the administration has adamantly opposed all legislative efforts to hold Saudi Arabia’s feet to the fire. Chalk up yet another victory for the pro-Israel conspiracy.

An AIPAC ‘stranglehold’ on US foreign policy? Huh? Read More »

I’m dreaming of a Jewish Thanksgiving

“And after 11 months and 30 days, He rested, and Moshe told his people that they shall journey through airport security to gather with their individual tribes; thatthey shall partake in the holy feast of turkey and anything starchy in the orange family; and rejoice in a brew of malt, hops, barley and college football; and say thanks to the Holy One for our families, our freedoms, the iPod and all the other blessings of the land….”

“And all of America listened and said, ‘Yes, we shall be grateful and stuff ourselves until we can’t move.'”

That’s not from Genesis; it’s from the warped imagination of a Pico-Robertson Jew trying to understand the American love affair with Thanksgiving, this holiest of days in the American calendar. Ever since I moved to this country 25 years ago, I’ve been in awe of how 250 million people stop everything during the fourth Thursday of November to gather around cranberry sauce, stuffing and bread pudding.

This year, however, being in the Orthodox hood, where they celebrate a Jewish version of Thanksgiving twice a week — on Friday night and Shabbat lunch, without turkey and TV but with lots of prayers, blessings and songs, and at least as much food — I’ve been experiencing something a little different: a respectful but slightly blasé attitude toward this big American holiday. Oh sure, all the schools are off and most people make plans for a Thanksgiving meal, but it’s nowhere near the excitement and anticipation you see elsewhere throughout the country.

And I think I’ve figured out why: Orthodox Jews get excited only when God is around.

Interestingly, at the inception of Thanksgiving, God was very much around. Look at the biblical tone of the original Thanksgiving Proclamation of 1676: “The Holy God having by a long and Continual Series of his Afflictive dispensations in and by the present War with the Heathen Natives of this land, written and brought to pass bitter things against his own Covenant people in this wilderness, yet so that we evidently discern that in the midst of his judgments he hath remembered mercy…” and so on, with the Holy One mentioned throughout.

How time changes things: 330 years later, the God that launched Thanksgiving in America has given way to the friendly idols of comfort food and “Twilight Zone” marathons, around the universal ideal of the family gathering. In a country that deeply respects religion, including the freedom to practice no religion, this gradual secularizing of Thanksgiving has enabled the holiday to reach into the homes of just about every American, regardless of race, culture or religion.

Still, for an observant Jew who recites prayers of gratitude first thing in the morning and throughout the day — including a special blessing for America on Shabbat — and who partakes in maybe 120 Thanksgiving-type holiday meals a year (Shabbats plus other holidays), it’s hard, no offense, to get too worked up about another holiday meal — even if this one has little to do with Judaism and everything to do with America.

But I think there’s something more going on, and it has to do with rituals.Observant Jews have a hard time doing anything without a ritual, especially the act of eating. Just look at the Friday night Shabbat meal. First you light the Shabbat candles before sundown and make a blessing. After the evening prayers, you gather at the meal table where you sing a mystical song to welcome the angels. You then bless the women of valor, you bless the children, you bless the wine, you wash your hands with another blessing before you bless the bread, and some of us might even add a few songs and Torah stories.

And all of this before one molecule of eggplant salad has been ingested!

If you want more direct comparisons to Thanksgiving, look at the “Harvest Festival” of Sukkot and the “Freedom Festival” of Passover. Are there any holidays that have more rituals? The point is this: In Judaism, we can’t just sit down and eat. A family holiday meal like the Passover seder is a holy experience, and we add meaning to all three — the family, the holiday and the meal — through the rituals that are meant for that occasion.

This love affair with rituals is not gratuitous. In fact, it’s hard to imagine how our holidays could have survived for so long without their reassuring presence. It still amazes me how Ashkenazi and Sephardi Jews didn’t see much of each other since the destruction of the Temple some 2,000 years ago, and yet we still come to our Shabbat and seder tables and recite the exact same blessings!

For a people that love to argue and question everything, you must admit, that is a remarkable absence of editing.

Of course, you want to be careful before you edit anything that revolves around God, and our holy rituals and blessings certainly do revolve around God. It’s not a coincidence that they have had such staying power. When God is integral to your holiday meal, it’s hard for college football and Budweiser to hijack the holiday.

So here’s an idea for Orthodox Jews, and for any Jew who loves America: make Thanksgiving more Jewish. Add some rituals that commemorate our deep gratitude to our adopted country. Get creative. Come up with special blessings that will add meaning to Thanksgiving meal. Do a mini Haggadah. Write a song to “Thank USA.” Publish a “Book of Thanks” from famous American Jews. Get our best chefs to distribute Jewish Thanksgiving recipes (my mother can donate her famous Sephardic stuffing recipe). And don’t be afraid to say “thank God” somewhere.

That would make it really Jewish.

Listen, we’ve given so much to this country already, they almost expect us to do something crazy like spiritually elevate their biggest day of the year.

If this thing takes off, by the time Thanksgiving rolls around next year, a lot more Americans might be asking: When do we eat?

David Suissa, an advertising executive, is the founder of OLAM magazine and Meals4Israel.com. He can be reached at dsuissa@olam.org.

I’m dreaming of a Jewish Thanksgiving Read More »

Borat, Seriously

Following the massive success of the movie “Borat,” there is bound to be an equally massive deluge of punditry on what it all means.

I defy you to watch the movieand not cramp up from laughter. And by all means, continue laughing when the pundits say “Borat” reveals something dark, ugly or frightening about America. Taking “Borat” seriously is seriously ridiculous.

As the erstwhile Kazakh journalist Borat, British comedian Sacha Baron Cohen travels across the United States, goading the common man and woman into shocking, sometimes hilarious, sometimes just shocking situations.

I saw it on a Monday night in Santa Monica, during the second sold-out show. There were unexpected comic moments that hit the audience like an amusement park plunge — we all screamed as one. There were also unexpectedly touching moments of comic brilliance — director Larry Charles did “Seinfeld” as well — as close to a Charlie Chaplain movie as any film with sound.

There’s also the racism and anti-Semitism. Part of the humor and shock in the movie is how easily it seems Borat can coax a heap of Jew-hating out of Middle America (well, mostly Southern Middle America).

At a gun store near Dallas, he asks the proprietor for the best gun for killing Jews, and gets an unblinking recommendation. Later he hitches a ride with some college frat boys, one of whom confides that the Jews are taking over the country.

There’s also the infamous scene from Cohen’s HBO series in which the journalist gets the patrons of a Tucson roadhouse to sing along with him the word to a “famous Kazakh folksong.” The customers laugh and sing in giddy unison: “Throw the Jews down the well/So my country can be free.”

The idea of setting people up to reveal their true selves on tape isn’t new. First there was Allen Funt’s “Candid Camera,” a much kinder, gentler “Borat.” Then Howard Stern, who has used the same technique on unsuspecting celebrities for years, and now Cohen.

Is it any coincidence the masters of this craft — Funt, Stern and Cohen — have been Jews?

The quintessential outsiders can’t help but wonder what they are saying about us behind our backs. How tempting it is to get them to say it to our disguised faces. That’s a technique as old as Jacob dressing up as Esau to fool Isaac, as clever as Shakespeare’s Shylock, out to prove “a goodly apple rotten at the heart.”

To many people, including Cohen himself, these vignettes point to something deeply wrong about America.

Cohen came out of his character closet this week to address his critics not as Borat, but as Cohen. He told Rolling Stone, “I think part of the movie shows the absurdity of holding any form of racial prejudice, whether it’s hatred of African Americans or of Jews.”

In a 2004 National Public Radio interview, he told Robert Siegel, “That’s the really interesting thing with Borat. People really let down their guard with him…. They feel much more relaxed about having their outrageous, politically incorrect, prejudiced opinions come out.”

Commentators are already warning that such satire can unleash latent, ancient hatred. Robert Wistrich, head of the Center for the Study of Anti-Semitism at Israel’s Hebrew University, told the New York Times that, “using the stereotypes can actually perpetuate them. It doesn’t matter that Jews are indulging in it.In fact, it can seem more deadly when it comes from a Jew.”

Deadly? Please. Looking to learn something about American anti-Semitism from “Borat” is like trying to study medicine by watching “Patch Adams.”

The movie is perhaps not as raw and revealing as Cohen, or anxious sociologists, want us to believe. As The Forward newspaper pointed out last year regarding the Tucson incident, the aired footage was a fraction of what was shot, and the bar’s accountant — herself a Jew — claimed that everybody in the place was onto the comedian long before the sing-along.

What also doesn’t appear in the final movie only reaffirms the point. On the Internet I found a Borat outtake in which he asks a Southern animal control officer if he can adopt a dog that will “attack Jews.” “Jews are Jesus’ children,” the woman shoots back. The dog, she says “probably loves Jews.”

The lesson of Borat isn’t that Americans deep down hate Jews, it’s that Americans should learn 1) never sign a blanket release form, and 2) never get in front of a video camera unless someone you trust is behind it, especially when you’re plastered.

But the other lesson grows out of one astonishing, little-remarked upon fact: Borat speaks Hebrew. I sat there in the theater understanding every Kazakh word without the subtitles because Cohen, an observant Jew who lived for a year on a kibbutz, just spoke Hebrew most of the time. If Americans are too geographically challenged to know anything about the real Kazakhstan, they surely won’t be able to tell Hebrew from Kazakh.

In one brilliant scene, Borat awakes in the home of two kindly old Jews to find a pair of cockroaches. Panicked that the Jews have shape-shifted, he throws dollar bills at them to shoo them away and screams at them in Kazakh; that is, in Hebrew.

So here’s the truth about Jews in America in 2006: The No. 1 comedy of the year features a Jew playing a buffoonish anti-Semite who curses Jews in a language which real anti-Semites long ago left for dead.

That is seriously funny.

Borat, Seriously Read More »

Three peace plans seek to fill Mideast vacuum

After rejecting a new European peace initiative, Israeli leaders are gearing up for more international efforts to restart the Israeli-Palestinian negotiating process on terms unfavorable to Israel.

Israel fears the initiatives might lead to the lifting of political and economic sanctions against the Hamas-led Palestinian Authority without its having to meet the international community’s three benchmarks for dialogue: recognition of Israel’s right to exist, acceptance of previous Israeli-Palestinian agreements and renunciation of terror.

The European initiative, led by Spain, France and Italy, is not the only one on the table. The Arabs have resuscitated the Saudi plan of 2002 and, perhaps most importantly, the United States is said to be working on a new plan of its own that includes an international conference based on the Saudi plan.

Israeli Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni, worried about where the new international initiatives might lead, wants Israel to come up with a plan to pre-empt them.
The situation is reminiscent of summer 2003. Then, too, after a long deadlock in Israeli-Palestinian relations, international initiatives began to surface. It was partly to pre-empt outside plans he thought were detrimental to Israel that then-Prime Minister Ariel Sharon produced his plan to unilaterally pull Israeli troops and settlers out of the Gaza Strip.

Sharon’s gambit worked: The international community backed him and put its own ideas on hold. Indeed, in April 2004, President Bush promised that he would not back any other initiative while Sharon’s disengagement plan was on the table.
The recent Lebanon war changed that. After the fighting, Prime Minister Ehud Olmert, elected on a platform calling for a unilateral withdrawal from the West Bank, announced that he was shelving the plan. That created the political vacuum the new plans are starting to fill.

The European plan has five components: An immediate Israeli-Palestinian cease-fire is implemented; the Palestinians form a national unity government acceptable to the international community; Israel and the Palestinians exchange prisoners; Olmert and P.A. President Mahmoud Abbas start a peace dialogue; an international force moves into Gaza to keep the peace.

Israel rejected the plan on the grounds that it contains nothing new, except the call for an international force in Gaza, which Israel opposes. The Israelis argue that such a force would only make it more difficult for Israel to monitor the huge influx of weapons into Gaza across the Egyptian border.

The European plan has yet to be adopted by the European Union, several of whose members regard it as a dilettantish piece of work. But the European Union wants to play a role in resolving the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, and may well come up with a more substantial proposal.

Here Britain could prove important. On the eve of a meeting this week with Livni, British Prime Minister Tony Blair reiterated his view that Israeli-Palestinian peace could greatly help the West in its battle against radical Islam. Blair, who is stepping down soon, also has said he intends to devote much of the rest of his time as prime minister to promoting Middle East peace.

The Arab plan, being pushed by Saudi Arabia, Egypt and Jordan, has two stages: Acceptance of the Saudi initiative of 2002 as a basis for peace talks, followed by an international peace conference. The Saudi initiative calls for full Israeli withdrawal from all dusputed territory and resolution of Palestinian refugee demands in return for peace with all 22 Arab countries and the Palestinians.

Israel has expressed reservations about the Saudi initiative, concerned that it could generate pressure for the return of millions of Palestinian refugees to Israel and impose a territorial solution without room for negotiation.

But the United States is showing growing interest in the Saudi plan. As part of the Bush administration’s exit strategy from Iraq, senior Israeli officials believe, the United States may buy into the idea of an international conference based on the Saudi initiative.

“For months the Americans have been trying to cultivate an axis of moderate Arab states, Egypt, Jordan and Saudi Arabia, as a counterweight to the Iranian-led ‘axis of evil.’ Backing the Saudi initiative would give them added leverage,” a senior Israeli official said.

For weeks there have been rumors that the United States is trying to set up an international conference in which Israel and moderate Arab states would be the main players. The idea would be to explore the Saudi initiative and strengthen Abbas by providing financial and military support for his Fatah movement in its internal struggle with Hamas, which is even more radical.

Israel, however, fears that all three plans, the European, Arab and American, may end up strengthening Hamas. The Israelis are concerned that the very fact that there is a process could lead to the lifting of the political and economic boycott of the Hamas-controlled P.A. Cabinet without it recognizing Israel. The European initiative, for example, says nothing about such recognition.

The Israelis add that a premature international conference could fail in spectacular fashion, and — like the failed Camp David summit of July 2000 — leave the parties even worse off.

Livni told the Cabinet on Sunday that Israel therefore should come up with a detailed plan of its own. She suggested a cease-fire followed by the Palestinian government’s acceptance of the three international benchmarks and, after prisoner exchanges, quick movement to a Palestinian mini-state and a framework for negotiations on a final peace deal.

The call is Olmert’s. He does not believe Bush or the new Democratic U.S. Congress will try to pressure Israel on the Palestinian or Syrian tracks. This despite the fact that former U.S. Secretary of State James Baker’s Iraq exit-strategy report, due to be submitted to Bush soon, is widely expected to include recommendations for negotiations on both tracks.

Olmert wants to see movement, at least with the Palestinians. And some pundits believe that behind the scenes he may be working secretly on the contours of a deal with Abbas.

On Sunday, Olmert gave a clue, berating Defense Minister Amir Peretz for discussing a cease-fire with Abbas.

“Don’t interfere,” he said. “You could be spoiling things.”

Three peace plans seek to fill Mideast vacuum Read More »