fbpx

GET HOME DELIVERY! CLICK HERE »

ADVERTISE
pick up locations
HOME DELIVERY
donate

Jewish Journal

Connect. Inform. Inspire.

May 13, 2012

A Matter of Faith

Leave a Comment / Uncategorized /

In the run-up to the elections in France last week, Richard Prasquier, President of CRIF – Representative Council of French Jewish Institutions, ” target=”_blank”>described him as lacking morality since he had not expressed similar concern with Marine Le-Pen’s National Front.

I can’t comment on the role CRIF has in French politics, and how explicit it should and can be in supporting a certain party or candidate. Regardless, Marianne’s focus on Prasquier’s statement rather that the state of affairs it illustrates misses the point:

The radical left in Europe and other Western countries damns Israel, an unusually productive member of the international community, because of a preconceived, unshakable belief in its blame. This belief, as any other belief, is not the result of observation and analysis of reality, but rather of faith that dictates what “reality” is.

This is very unfortunate. The believers, eyes bleared, fail to see that in this region Israel is the embodiment of Liberal ideas – even if you DO believe that the Arab-Israeli conflict is indeed what it’s widely seen as in Europe. The hatred towards Israel in Europe is an artificially placed divide between members of the same civilization; It defies any sense of ideological continuity, even more so in the context of the conflict. Have you heard of ” target=”_blank”>tells of his lecture at UC Irvine:

“I first asked for students to raise their hands if they generally support Israel. All the students to my left and several in the middle raised their hands. I then asked how many students supported the Palestinian side. All the students to my right and several in the middle raised their hands. I then posed the following question to the pro-Israel group: “How many of you would support a Palestinian state living in peace and without terrorism next to Israel?” Every single pro-Israel hand immediately went up. I then asked how many on the pro-Palestine side would accept a Jewish state within the 1967 borders, with no settlements on territory claimed by the Palestinians. There was some mumbling and brief conversation among the people to my right, but not a single hand was raised.”

Dershowitz’ story illustrates the erroneous nature of the popular equation: “Anti Israel = pro peace”. This assertion is contradictory to the very framework of the conflict and is in opposition with the history of the conflict in almost every important point – my readers will hear a lot about this unfounded equation. I remember from my ninth grade calculus that when your basic equation is wrong, you simply cannot crank the problem – let’s reflect on that for a moment: There will be no peace based on wrong assumptions.

Radicals of the world unite: Antisemitism is a hatred shared by both sides. When the Communists condemned the Jews as Capitalistic pigs, the Fascists declared Communism a Jewish plot. I can’t see another scenario, save, perhaps, for an aggressive alien invasion – where haters from left and right could come together like that. The fact that the “New Antisemitism” of the left is more alarming to the French Jewish leader than the “traditional” antisemitism of the radical right is his prerogative, and should alert any decent, honest French leftist.

Follow me on Twitter A Matter of Faith Read More »

May 13, 2012

Leave a Comment / Israel, Must Reads /

Erdogan’s Next Move

The Turkish prime minister is apparently trying to consolidate his power, writes ‎Andrew Finkel in the New York Times, but is it the right move for Turkey? ‎

This week, Erdogan said that Turks should begin debating a move from the current ‎parliamentary system, in which most of the governing power rests with the prime minister, ‎toward a presidential system with a more powerful executive, along the lines of the United States ‎or France. Everyone knows what his push for a stronger president means: Erdogan would jump ‎ship before his term as prime minister ends in 2015 and stand as president himself when the job ‎becomes vacant in 2014.  He would continue leading the country, with more power than ever.‎

The most important report on nuclear Iran ‎you are likely to read

Anshel Pfeffer in Haaretz believes that a report by Anthony Cordesman of the ‎Center for Strategic & International Studies’ leaves no room for ambiguity on Iran’s ‎nuclear ambitions. ‎

Anyone who believes that Iran is not yet actively pursuing a nuclear-weapons ‎program and merely developing the capabilities is committing an act of willful ‎delusion. The intelligence supplied to the IAEA and verified by different “member ‎countries,” is clear on that Iran has been working on a wide range of projects for ‎over a decade, all of which are specifically aimed at acquiring the capabilities ‎necessary not only to enrich uranium to weapons-grade, but to assemble a nuclear ‎advice that can be launched by long-range missile. Talk of a fatwa against nuclear ‎weapons is just that: talk.‎

New Tactics, Same Netanyahu

Be it through early elections or a massive coalition, Benjamin ‎Netanyahu’s objectives remain the same, writes Akiva Eldar in the ‎National Interest.

‎

Whether the U.S. president after January 20, 2013, will be Obama or ‎Republican Mitt Romney, Washington will have more freedom to form ‎its Middle East policy in accordance with American strategic interests ‎that don’t necessarily match the ideology and the interests of the current ‎Israeli government. Yet any American president will have less leverage ‎over an Israeli leader who enjoys the backing of 94 out of 120 Knesset ‎members, including those from a central party that supposedly supports ‎generous concessions to the Palestinians.‎

The Hamas-Syrian Split: A Dilemma ‎For Iran’s Palestinian Strategy

Writing in Eurasia Review, Mohammad Ataie examines the impact that Hamas’ ‎somewhat ambiguous stance on Syria has had on the organization’s relationship with ‎key patron Iran. ‎

Hamas Syrian position is still quiet nebulous as the movement’s leadership in Gaza and ‎abroad remain divided over the Syrian crisis. But it is clear that the shadow of tensions ‎between the movement and President Assad has already fallen over Hamas’ relationship ‎with Tehran. For Iran, supporting Hamas is linked to its alliance with President Assad. In ‎other words, despite the Iranian commitment to the Palestinian resistance, the Islamic ‎Republic saw its relationship with the Palestinian as well as the Lebanese resistance from ‎a Syrian perspective. This is well understood in the light of the three decades of Iran’s ‎Levant policy and partnership with Syria.‎

Syria Spins Out of Control

Adam Garfinkle of the American Interest lays the blame for the spiraling chaos in ‎Syria at the feet of the Obama administration. ‎

If, in the fullness of time, a jihadi-led or strongly influenced state arises in Syria, or parts of ‎it, then it is virtually inevitable that the Shi’a-tilted status quo in Lebanon will be upset. ‎Sunni radicals in Damascus will not get along with Hizballah, and there are homegrown ‎Sunni radicals in Lebanon that “friends” in Damascus would encourage and support on their ‎behalf. The likely result? A new civil war, with a beginning epicenter most like in and around ‎Tripoli.‎

Azerbaijan – Israel’s Reluctant Friend

Writing for The Diplomat, Kevyn Lim looks at the advantages and disadvantages of ‎Azeri cooperation with Israel on an Iran strike, and the wider geopolitical ‎consequences of such a move. ‎

Moscow, the region’s preeminent power, continues to view the Caspian basin and the ‎south Caucasus as part of its Soviet-era sphere of influence and is therefore wary of any ‎development that might further diminish its toehold. A direct Israel-Iran faceoff would ‎almost certainly draw the U.S. military into the fray. But the consequences could be worse ‎for Baku if proof of complicity leaks out. And, pipeline routing disputes aside, all five ‎Caspian littoral states – Azerbaijan, Iran, Kazakhstan, Russia and Turkmenistan – share ‎an obvious interest in ensuring energy stability.‎

 

May 13, 2012 Read More »

Peter Beinart’s Only Los Angeles Appearance – Wednesday, May 16 at Temple Israel of Hollywood

Leave a Comment / Blogs, News /

In his recent book The Crisis of Zionism, journalist and writer Peter Beinart argues that a dramatic shift is taking place in Israel and America. In Israel, the deepening occupation of the West Bank is putting Israeli democracy at risk. In the United States, the refusal of major Jewish organizations to defend democracy in the Jewish state is alienating many young liberal Jews from Zionism itself. He has asserted that in the next generation, the liberal Zionist dream-the dream of a state that safeguards the Jewish people and cherishes democratic ideals-may die.

On Wednesday evening, May 16 at 7:00 PM at Temple Israel of Hollywood, Peter Beinart will make his only Los Angeles appearance. He will be in dialogue/debate with David Suissa, President of the Los Angeles Jewish Journal. I will moderate this conversation. For those who cannot be present, the debate will be streamed live on the LA Jewish Journal Website. For those attending, plan to arrive early as people will be seated first come-first serve. We expect a large crowd.

Peter Beinart is Senior Political Writer at The Daily Beast, the online home of Newsweek Magazine, editor of the Daily Beast blog “Open Zion” and the former Editor of New Republic Magazine. Most recently he is author of The Crisis of Zionism (Times Books, 2012) which has sparked international debate as well as both praise and condemnation.

President Bill Clinton had this to say about The Crisis of Zionism:

“Peter Beinart has written a deeply important book for anyone who cares about Israel, its security, its democracy, and its prospects for a just and lasting peace. Beinart explains the roots of the current political and religious debates within Israel, raises the tough questions that can’t be avoided, and offers a new way forward to achieve Zionism’s founding ideals, both in Israel and among the Diaspora Jews in the United States and elsewhere.”

The May 16 evening of conversation is sponsored by Temple Israel of Hollywood and the Los Angeles Jewish Journal, as well as co-sponsored by five sister Los Angeles synagogues, Temple Emanuel, Temple Isaiah, Ikar, Beit Chayim Chadashim, and Kol Ami.

This past Saturday,  The Crisis of Zionism was reviewed by David Lauter in the Los Angeles Times, Calendar Section, page 1.  For more information about Peter Beinart and The Crisis in Zionism, see these links:

Peter Beinart’s Only Los Angeles Appearance – Wednesday, May 16 at Temple Israel of Hollywood Read More »

Religious Freedom: Should the 10 Commandments Be Promoted in Public?

Leave a Comment / Is Featured?, Judaism, Mobile, News /

One of the great debates in America today is over the role of religion in the public sphere. To what extent is the United States government embracing religion? Are we “one nation under G-d?” Most concretely, should religious teachings such as the Ten Commandments be allowed on the walls of courthouses and classrooms?

The question of separation between church and state has long been an important one in America. In Virginia, the Church of England was the established church, and in Massachusetts it was the (Puritan) Congregationalist Church. In England, this split contributed to a bloody civil war. In the colonies, there was a move to eliminate the concept of an established church. In 1763, for example, Virginia patriot Patrick Henry argued in the “Parson’s Case” that parishioners should not have to pay so much to support the established church. While he technically lost the case, Henry persuaded the jurors to award each parson one penny in damages, thus weakening the established church’s hold.

Another Virginian, Thomas Jefferson, played a pivotal role in clarifying the separation of church and state. As author of the Declaration of Independence, Jefferson avoided any Christian terminology, and referred to “Divine Providence” rather than a Christian “G-d.” While he opposed the Constitution, Jefferson did contribute to the push for a Bill of Rights to be added to the Constitution, and the First Amendment begins with an explicit rejection of an established church: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof…” When he became President, Jefferson emphatically endorsed this separation in a letter to the ” title=”http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religion_in_the_United_States” target=”_blank”>rose to around 15%.

  • In 2009, ” title=”http://religions.pewforum.org/reports” target=”_blank”>2007 Pew Forum on Religion and Public Life data showed that 44% of adults have changed (or dropped) the religious affiliation of their birth.

    • We should take this into account, and acknowledge that the Ten Commandments require serious theological commitments in addition to moral obligations. In addition to maintaining a pluralism of values, we must strengthen religious pluralism. While the Commandments do appear in the Torah twice, the Rambam (responsa 263) opposes the practice of standing in synagogue for the reading of the Ten Commandments, since one might come to think that these teachings are more important than all of the other values in the Torah. Rav Ovadia Yosef (Shu”t Yechave Daat 1:29) accepts this position. Christianity may prioritize these ten, but Judaism is much broader in its commitments. Our religious values cannot adequately be expressed through statues of the Ten Commandments.

    Judaism is a religion of debate, argument, and discussion, not dogma. Putting up statements about commandments flies in the face of celebrating a lived tradition. This is why it was originally prohibited to write down the Oral Torah. It should be spoken about and lived, not put onto the library shelf and archived.

    The Ten Commandments debate should not be viewed as a debate between the religious and the secular. Rather, the truly religious should value religious expression that works, values the dignity of human difference, and celebrates learning and discourse over the posting of plaques.

    Rabbi Shmuly Yanklowitz is the Founder & President of ” title=”http://shamayimvaretz.org/” target=”_blank”>The Shamayim V’Aretz Institute, the Director of Jewish Life & the Senior Jewish Educator at the UCLA Hillel and a 6th year doctoral candidate at Columbia University in Moral Psychology & Epistemology. Rav Shmuly’s book “Jewish Ethics & Social Justice: A Guide for the 21st Century” is now available on ” title=”http://www.thedailybeast.com/galleries/2012/04/02/america-s-top-50-rabbis-for-2012.html#slide40″ target=”_blank”>most influential rabbis in America.

    Religious Freedom: Should the 10 Commandments Be Promoted in Public? Read More »

    Israel and the world Pt. 5- weekly news from Israel

    Leave a Comment / Blogs /

    • The Irish bands Dervish and Full Set were scheduled to perform in Israel next month. Unfortunately for them, but mostly for their Israeli fans, the bands’ members caved in to pressure, and decided to join the unreasonable cultural boycott on Israel.
    Dervish’s Facebook page filled with posts by fans, who threatened to boycott the band itself, unless they cancelled their visit here. Here is what the band members published (spelling mistakes included): “Dervish wish to announce they will not be taking part in the Irish music concert series in Israel this June. Our original decision to participate in the concerts was, like all our tours and appearances, completely non-political. The organiser of the shows is a musician and friend of the band for many years. He has worked to bridge divides between people through music for much of his life. These concerts were organised in this same spirit. At the time we agreed to these performances we were unaware there was a cultural boycott in place. We now feel that we do not wish to break this boycott. Our decision to withdraw from the concerts reflects our wish to neither endorse nor criticise anyone’s political views in this situation. Dervish are a grouping of like musical minds, we are not a political party .Our motivation as a band has always been and will continue to be our love of music”.

    More on the outcome of their cancellation: Israel and the world Pt. 5- weekly news from Israel Read More »