fbpx

GET HOME DELIVERY! CLICK HERE »

ADVERTISE
pick up locations
HOME DELIVERY
donate

Jewish Journal

Connect. Inform. Inspire.

December 18, 2012

An outsider’s viewpoint on the Sandy Hook shooting

Leave a Comment / Blogs /

First and foremost, I would like to say that my heart goes to the victim's family and friends. This is a terrible loss of innocent people whose only crime was to go to school. Here, in Israel, the story reached the first pages of the newspapers, and shock stroke us all. In the name of all of Israel, I would like to embrace the families who lost their dearests. Nothing we will say or do can bring them back, and I can only hope justice will be served to its fullest.

Secondly, I would like to point out that this post contains a certain amount of criticism. I am fully aware of the fact that I am an outside viewer, and therefore, do not possess all the information regarding the subject. As an Israeli, I receive a lot of criticism from people who think they know everything, but they actually don't. Experiences of such taught me to never assume I know better than the people who experience situation first hand. With that being said, I have a lot to say about the recent events in the States, with the information I currently have, by using my point of view as an outside viewer. I am not trying to make decisions for you, and I am not claiming I must be right- I am only trying to show you my point of view.

“The term “school shooting” is most commonly used to describe acts committed by a student or intruders upon the school campus. They are to be distinguished from crowd-containment shootings by law-enforcement personnel, such as the shootings at South Carolina State, Kent State and Jackson State universities in the United States…”

This quote from Wikipedia tells me much more than a definition of a phrase. It is, to me, a story of a terrible, sad reality, and a wrong perspective on life. It tells the story of Americans who already take brutal attacks of such as a solid fact that cannot be changed. It tells the story of Americans who cry every year for yet another victim. But the most awful part is that it tells the story of Americans who instead of preventing the next time, starting to think how short life is, and wishing it won't be them the next time.

Chardon High School, Chardon, Ohio- three dead; Banks County High school, Homer, Georgia- one dead; Stillwater Junior High School,  Stillwater, Oklahoma- one dead; Casper College, Casper, Wyoming- three dead;  Sandy Hook Elementary,  Connecticut- 28 dead. These are only the school shootings that occurred this year alone. Overall, in the history of the United States, there were reportedly, 136 school shootings. Most of them, if not all, were by Americans with certain mental issues (after all, no normal person would be able to commit murder) that had a gun in reach, which was held by themselves or by their family members, legally.  As I'm sure you all know, thanks to the Second Amendment, every American has the right to keep and bear arms.

In a way, it is very important that every person would have the right to defend oneself. I also understand why it is so hard to change the law now, almost 250 years after it was adopted. Every single time a disaster like this happens, and innocent people are brutally killed for no reason, the discussion regarding the Second Amendment rises, over and over again. Every single time, Republican Presidents, as well as Democrats Presidents, do nothing on that matter. They are scared of the consequences of the suggestion to limit the right to carry a weapon, because it might be interpreted as a limitation of one's freedom of protection. Instead, they shed a tear, say how much they now appreciate life, and basically wait for the next time some complicated and confused teenager will take his mother's gun and unleash his rage.

I admit it's not that simple. The Second Amendment is a symbol of freedom and democracy, which are two values that shape the United States of America. People want to feel safe, and they don't need any limitations when wanting to purchase a gun for protection. But now, I would like you to give another thought about the last couple of sentences. Can children in schools feel safe, when almost every year students lose their lives because of someone's right to protect oneself?  And for those who say that if the teachers would also carry a weapon, things like that wouldn't happen- think again! Let's say the teacher carries a gun in her purse, unless she is on guard at all times, and is an excellent sniper, she would never be able to protect her children from a surprise mad visitor at school.

The main function of weapons such as hand guns or rifles is offense, not defense. The fact that anyone can carry a weapon of such means that no one can ever feel safe. It does not mean the contrary. In the past couple of days, I've been reading many of my friends' Facebook statuses, talking about their renewed appreciation of life, because they now understand how suddenly it can end. I've read these statuses before. It was right after the shooting at the Batman premier in Colorado. It is almost as if you already know for sure there will be a next time. You are right; there will be a next time. History shows that. 

When I look at this reality from a distant viewer's point of view, I see a sort of helplessness. I see people who have already came to a complete understanding that this is just the way things are. It seems to me as if you look at these horrible murders as a solid fact that cannot be changed. You cry and ache every single time, but you are weak to the power of the law. It happens not only in the States, but all over the world. People start thinking of  things that must be changed as unchangeable, and it must stop. We must stop. I, personally, find it quite unbelievable that no President so far has taken the first step in truly protecting his citizens from becoming a part of the School Shooting statistics. Obama should  more than promise a change, he must make that change.He must truly try to prevent the next time from happening.

An outsider’s viewpoint on the Sandy Hook shooting Read More »

Lieberman out, advantage stable

Leave a Comment / Israel, Israel Poll Trends SUB /

This week's graph makes the gaps between the right and left blocs a little narrower, but still wide enough for us to assume that another Netanyahu coalition is inevitable. It was anecdotally intriguing to have Netanyahu`s supposed Likud-right-religious at projected 70 seats last week. However, the current 68-52 advantage should be sufficient to guarantee Netanyahu the victory, and some room for maneuver in future coalition talks. As we have already hinted, the interesting question for the day after the elections is the one about the way the coalition is constructed. Will Netanyahu just build on his home base majority of right wingers, or will he make a concerted and successful effort to broaden and “centralize” his coalition by luring in one (or more) parties to his left? 

Take a look at Prof. Camil Fuchs` updated graph, followed by some more comments:

Not a dull moment in the pre-election period: We had unexpected mergers between parties, new parties appeared while knights in shining armor (really, more like knights with shining bald pates) decided to stay on the sideline. We had a small war in Gaza and the vote in the UN on Palestinian semi-statehood, and the ensuing government decision to issue building permits on E-1 despite the world’s uproar. And in the last couple of days we've had the Lieberman affair: Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman, the strong man in the government, resigned after an indictment on relatively minor charges of fraud and breach of trust (minor – relative to the charges investigated and dropped for lack of sufficient evidence).

How will these developments affect the polls? We’ll have to wait for next week to begin to see this plays out, since the polls included in this week’s graph were taken prior to Lieberman's resignation. What we do see in the graph is that five weeks before the elections, the estimates for the Right-Religious and the Center-Left blocs are quite stable. The spread between the blocs has diminished slightly and it is now at 16 mandates. Still a lot to catch up on in five weeks.

Lieberman out, advantage stable Read More »

“Reframe”: A “Pick-up” Technique to Advocate for Israel

Leave a Comment / Blogs, California, Mobile, Mobile-Homepage, News /

When I was a singles columnist, I became a student of male-female courtship and delved for several months in the pick-up art (PUA) industry. (Read an “>online PUA dictionary for more examples.)

All too often, I hear Jewish community leaders and pro-Israel activists say, “we have to think about world opinion” as if Israel is a man and “world opinion” is an unruly woman that Israel has to court. For example, if people advocate bold solutions to Israel’s conflict with her neighbors, like unplugging electricity in Gaza during a Hamas rocket campaign or recommending the annexation of parts of Judea & Samaria (i.e. the West Bank), the solutions are immediately rebuffed with statements like, “what will the world think?”

Israeli leaders all too often frame her strategies for self-defense according to world opinion when the sum total of world opinion will probably never really “go out” with Israel anyway. By seeking to appease world opinion, Israel sends the signal that she could be treated like a rag. To garner respect, Israel must portray confidence and control of its own destiny. To do this, it must be able to “reframe” with confidence and pride the conversation about its future.

Obviously, Israel’s woes are much more severe than the woes of a dateless dude. Still, Israel often ignores basic psychological principles in relationship building as she seeks to defend her interests. Applying the concept of “reframe” to nation building, Israel and her advocates must stop reacting defensively to intellectual attacks on Israel and instead put the burden of argument on the other side. Here are some examples

Example #1: “Israel is an oppressor”

“Beta” Israel activist: “No she’s not. She really is a great country that delivers humanitarian aid all over the world.”

“Alpha” Israel activist: “You’re right. Israel is an oppressor, if you consider promoting democracy and human freedom in a region that despises democracy and human freedom as a form of ‘oppression.’”

Example #2: “There is no military solution to the conflict.”

Beta Israel activist: “Well, Israel just wants peace but they keep shooting rockets on us. What is Israel supposed to do?”

Alpha Israel activist: “Do you have proof? History has actually proven that Israel maintained sovereignty by defending herself military against all the Arab wars waged upon her.”

There are countless examples, but you get the picture. To defend Israel, both the Israeli government and people that support Israel all over the world need to begin reframe the conversation. By confidently and proudly staking her claim and challenging Israel opponents to answer to Israel, rather than vice-versa, Israel will attract the respect and attention of nations and peoples around the world. 

Feel free to provide more examples in the comments section.

“Reframe”: A “Pick-up” Technique to Advocate for Israel Read More »

Dan Fogelman Q & A: ‘The Guilt Trip’

Leave a Comment / Blogs, Hollywood, Mobile, Mobile Sections, News /

Screenwriter Dan Fogelman took a two-week cross-country trip with his mom six years ago as research for “The Guilt Trip,” which stars Barbra Streisand and Seth Rogen as a fictional (and seemingly Jewish) mother and son taking their respective meshugas on the road. Recently, I caught up with the 36-year-old Fogelman (“Cars,” “Crazy, Stupid Love,” ABC’s “The Neighbors”) to talk about Jewish mothers and sons, Babs, and, of course, tribal guilt.

Q: So why the title “The Guilt Trip?”

A: I was really close with my mom, but even then your mother has the ability to revert you to the bratty, 13-year-old version of yourself, no matter what your age is. It’s the ultimate, underlying subtext of any Jewish mother-son relationship — which is a son always getting annoyed and wanting to explode prematurely and holding it back, but at some point he loses that battle and says something nasty to her and then feels terrible about it. And then he walks away from that dinner or that visit feeling that he should’ve been nicer to her and it’s too late.

When I watch friends with their mothers, I’m constantly horrified at how short their fuse is with these women who seem, yeah, a little bit comedically a pain in the ass but not that bad in the grand scheme of things; yet with your own mother it’s amazing how quickly you can react to anything that pushes a button.

Q: How’d you get the idea for the movie?

A: I’d always wanted to do a kind of mother-son movie; there hadn’t been a lot of them done and it was territory I wanted to explore. Then my mom died about a year after we took the road trip – she was only 60 – and we hadn’t known she was ill. It was just kind of sudden and tragic: complications from surgery to remove a tumor. My mother was not a pop culture addict, but Barbra Streisand for this Jewish girl from Brooklyn was her icon of icons. So this movie became a mission for me; come hell or high water, I was going to get this movie made.

Q: How close is Barbra’s character to your own mom?

A: Barbra had her take on the character, but it’s really heavily my mom. The character’s name is Joyce, like my mother; my mother was also obsessed with collecting frogs, and had a kaffeeklatsch of yenta friends and she was very thin, like Barbra, yet she was obsessed with food and, later in her life, with Weight Watchers. She would sit and eat a 72-ounce steak, like Barbra does in the film, and order the salad with the dressing on the side. And she was obsessed with drinking large amounts of water and refilled her water bottles from the tap, so she wouldn’t waste money on buying new bottles. She considered tap water in a bottle “bottled water.” (Laughs.)

My mother also grew up with very little money and didn’t have a lot of money as an adult, so she was notoriously thrifty; but I realized later in life that that was about control and a little bit of neuroses and less about cheapness in some ways.

Q: You kept a diary of everything that happened on the road.

A: My friends thought I was crazy to take a cross-country road trip with my mom; part of what became the movie was that every night during the trip I would send an email out to a massive group of people who were all curious about how it was going. And my mom was like, “You’re making a movie about this?” She couldn’t quite wrap her head around this in its entirety, but she knew it was a research trip. In fact, the [producers] gave us a stipend to use, so my mom was collecting receipts the entire time to make sure we didn’t go one penny over budget.

Q: How did the two of you drive each other crazy on the trip?

A: The relationship that Seth and Barbra have, especially for the first half of the movie, is kind of my mom and I at our worst points. My mom was a bit insane in the best possible way. She drove me crazy comedically.

The biggest fight that we had on the road was when we got lost and it’s like that age-old husband and wife fight: I don’t want to ask for directions, and she’s going “There’s a gas station right here…” and finally I say “GO! Go inside!” And the tension is so thick you could cut it with a knife. And she’s like, good, because she has to go to the bathroom like every five minutes. But I can’t take it anymore and she goes inside, comes back out and gets in the car and I pull away. And I say, “So, where do we have to drive?” And she starts crying and says, “I forgot to ask for directions!”

Q: Did you really listen to “Middlesex,” the book on tape, along the way?

A: Yes, and it was a strange experience to listen to some of the sexual stuff, with your mother. You cringe, and you actually just try not to make eye contact to get through it.

Q: Was it difficult to get Barbra Streisand to commit to the film?

A: Barbra doesn’t work a lot, so it’s a big process to convince her to do something like this. She’s in every scene of the movie except for the very beginning, so it’s a lot of work for her, and Barbra is very focused on her charities and her life and she’s not somebody who seeks out being on camera. Fortunately, I had a director who was unwilling to ever let it go; and I rewrote for Barbra a bit once she came on board to adjust the things she wanted to be adjusted — especially the scene where she and Seth have a big fight in the middle of the movie, which is kind of Barbra’s big scene. We spent a lot of time crafting the dialogue for that and I have mounds and mounds of notepads of us just going back and forth and trying to get the rhythm right.

Q: Was it intimidating to work with her?

A: Barbra’s as big as you get and this movie was very important to me, but she puts you at ease. I like to describe her in this way: Imagine your own mother, just with unlimited wealth, talent and fame.

Q: You and your mom were already very close, but did the road trip transform your relationship in any way?

A: There was a point where I had the experience that Seth has in the film, where you start seeing your parent not just as a parent, but also as a human being for the first time. What the gist of the movie is about is that moment when a kid starts seeing their parent as more than just a creature who exists to parent them, and the moment when a parent starts seeing their son or daughter as a grownup who’s not just this thing that needs to be cared for by them. That’s what the journey of the movie is in a way.

Q: Almost five years after your mom’s death, is it bittersweet to finally have finished the film?

A: I’ve been on this quest to get the film made and I’ve shut off the emotion to be more focused on it, and at some point, I’m sure it’ll catch up with me. I’m sure it’s all repressed, like any good, unhealthy male and it will come out at some point.

Q: Your next film is “Last Vegas,” starring Michael Douglas, Robert De Niro, Morgan Freeman and Kevin Kline.

A: It’s about four buddies from Brooklyn who are now in their 60s. Michael Douglas, who plays the bachelor in the group, calls his buddies to say he’s getting married and they’re going to do one final bachelor party, for him, in Vegas – the last bachelor’s party they’ll ever do.

Q: Do you see anything of your dad in these characters?

A: We did take my dad out to a nightclub in Vegas where it was just thumping music; it was funny watching him sit there in all of it. So there’s a lot of that vibe in the first half of the movie of these guys trying to figure out how to operate in the world of Vegas, then learning to own it and have fun with it.

“The Guilt Trip” opens Dec. 19.

Dan Fogelman Q & A: ‘The Guilt Trip’ Read More »

Will Obama focus on Israel-Palestinian issues?

Leave a Comment / Is Featured?, Lead Story, Mobile, Mobile-Homepage, News, United States /

Is history about to repeat itself?

President Obama’s first three years in office saw some serious tussling with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu over the peace process and settlements. Now, with Obama beginning his second term and Netanyahu looking pretty certain to win next month’s Israeli elections, will there be a replay of past tensions?

Not for now, experts suggest, saying that the Obama administration does not seem eager to wade back into the Israeli-Palestinian morass — preferring to keep it on the back burner.

David Makovsky, director of the Washington Institute for Near East Policy’s Project on the Middle East Peace Process, dismissed as overblown pre-election suggestions that Obama would ramp up pressure on Israel over the peace process in his second term.

“I don't think a lot of the political physics are suspended in a second term,” he said. “There are some in Israel who see a second presidential term as the king, but Obama's going to want to use his replenished political capital carefully.”

Makovksy said that between tough negotiations with the Republicans on fiscal issues and foreign policy challenges looming — including Iran’s nuclear program and tumult in the Middle East — Obama is not going to make Israeli-Palestinian issues a priority.

Moreover, Makovsky suggested, there is no clear opening right now for a breakthrough.

“It's probably safe to assume that right now there's no grand deal to be done between Israelis and Palestinians,” Makovsky said.

Steve Rosen, a former foreign policy director of the American Israel Public Affairs Committee who has previously criticized Obama for pressuring Israel, said that the president seems to have accepted that there are limits to what Americans can do without willing partners.

“I think Obama no longer buys the catechism that we are this close to an agreement and all we need is presidential involvement,” Rosen said. “I don't think it’s just a political calculation or he's distracted or he's afraid of the pro-Israel lobby. He never had a secret plan to go for broke after the elections — the plan was ascribed to him by a combination of people on the right who feared it and people on the left who dreamed of it.”

American journalist Peter Beinart recently wrote in The Daily Beast that the Obama administration, frustrated with Netanyahu, had decided to pursue a policy of “benign neglect” toward the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

Beinart, a prominent critic of Israel’s policies toward the Palestinians, cited unnamed administration officials who said that while the U.S. would still provide military and diplomatic assistance to Israel, it would no longer push to re-launch direct negotiations between Israel and the Palestinians.

“Senior administration officials believe the Israeli leader has no interest in the wrenching compromises necessary to birth a viable Palestinian state,” Beinart wrote. “Instead, they believe, he wants the façade of a peace process because it insulates him from international pressure. By refusing to make that charade possible, Obama officials believe, they are forcing Netanyahu to own his rejectionism, and letting an angry world take it from there.”

But in an interview with reporters earlier this month, Israel’s ambassador to the United States, Michael Oren, said that the two countries were in agreement that the fault for the lack of negotiations belongs to the Palestinians, who have refused to rejoin talks in the absence of a settlement freeze.

“Our position remains unchanged — we are willing to negotiate with the Palestinians, today, not tomorrow, in Washington, Jerusalem, Ramallah, wherever, directly without preconditions on all the core issues to reach peace,” Oren said. “That’s not only our position, that’s the position of President Obama and the administration.”

Aaron David Miller, a former Middle East negotiator under both Republican and Democratic administrations, agreed that Obama is likely to pull back from engaging with the Israeli-Palestinian issue, having been burned by it in the past. He also said that Obama needs to maintain amicable relations with Netanyahu as he works to find a non-military solution to the Iranian nuclear issue.

But Miller predicted that the president would eventually reengage, if only because he did not want to be remembered as the president who let the two-state solution die.

“It doesn't mean he has to rush, but I'm betting you that by the time he's done, he'll have engaged in some way on the Israeli-Palestinian issue,” said Miller, a vice president for new initiatives at the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars in Washington.

Since the U.S. presidential election, there have been a number of significant developments in the Israeli-Palestinian arena. But they have not sparked any major blow-ups in U.S.-Israel relations.

A top Israeli official privately told one American Jewish interlocutor who spoke with JTA that Obama’s backing of Israel during its conflict last month with Hamas in the Gaza Strip was “A-plus.”

The United States then stood with Israel and just seven other countries in opposing the Palestinians’ successful bid to enhance their status to non-member state at the United Nations.

The Obama administration did, however, criticize Israel’s announcement after the U.N. vote of plans for new construction in eastern Jerusalem and the West Bank.

In his Daily Beast article, Beinart argued that the Obama administration did not exert itself to line up votes for Israel at the U.N., but also was restrained in its criticism of Israel's construction plans — both of which reflect its new hands-off approach.

New developments also have the potential to shake up U.S.-Israel relations. Among the potential game-changers are an empowered Hamas, a lurch to the right in Israel’s government and the prospect of top foreign policy and defense spots in a second-term Obama Cabinet going to figures who have been critical of Israeli policies toward the Palestinians.

Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton and Defense Secretary Leon Panetta — both of whom enjoy relatively warm relations with Israeli leaders — have said they will retire next  year.

The two reported frontrunners to replace them are both figures who have had their differences with Israel. Sen. John Kerry (D-Mass.), the chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and the most likely Clinton replacement, has been among the sharpest congressional critics of Israel’s blockade of the Gaza Strip.

Many in pro-Israel circles are expressing alarm over the prospect of former Nebraska Sen. Chuck Hagel replacing Panetta. Hagel, a Republican who says he is a supporter of Israel, has often found himself at odds with pro-Israel groups. As a senator, he refused to sign on to congressional letters backed by the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, calling such statements “stupid.”

Will Obama focus on Israel-Palestinian issues? Read More »

Suspect in custody in bomb threat investigation, says Wilshire Blvd. Temple statement

Leave a Comment / California, Mobile, News /

Statement to Wilshire Blvd. Temple congregants from Executive Director Howard Kaplan:

We have an update on the bomb threat at the Temple’s Mid-Wilshire campus today.  The LAPD blew up the suspicious package left in a car adjacent to the Temple and determined it did NOT contain any explosives.  The LAPD also has a suspect in custody.  The arrest was based largely on video footage supplied by our security team from the Temple’s surveillance cameras.  Moments ago, the LAPD gave the “all clear” after thoroughly investigating the entire Temple campus, including searches by four bomb-sniffing dogs.

We are pleased to have a successful resolution and will re-open a safe and secure campus tomorrow morning for all of our programs.  We are grateful to the Temple’s terrific internal security team, and to the LAPD and other law enforcement agencies who responded so quickly and thoroughly.

Howard Kaplan
Executive Director
Wilshire Boulevard Temple

Suspect in custody in bomb threat investigation, says Wilshire Blvd. Temple statement Read More »

Wilshire Boulevard Temple target of bomb threats

Leave a Comment / California, Is Featured?, Lead Story, Mobile, Mobile-Homepage, News /

UPDATE (DEC. 20): Man arrested in connection with L.A. synagogue bomb threats

DEC. 18: Police responded to multiple bomb threats targeting the Koreatown home of Wilshire Boulevard Temple (WBT) and a police squad car parked adjacent to the campus on Dec. 18, disrupting life for much of the workday at one of Los Angeles’ largest synagogues and its surrounding neighborhood.

No evidence was found of any explosives following an investigation that included a visit from the bomb squad, robotic devices and the BatCat, a large forklift-like device formally called the Bomb Assault Tactical Control Assessment Tool. At press time on Tuesday, a suspect was in police custody, according to a statement sent by WBT to congregants. However police said the man in custody was not the primary suspect in the squad car threats.

The car “was rendered safe. No device was found in or around the vehicle,” said police spokesman Sgt. Rudy Lopez. “The investigation is ongoing.”

The first threatening call, which according to police was from a male voice and made from a public phone, was received by police at about 2 a.m. It indicated that there was an explosive device on the synagogue’s grounds, but an initial search failed to turn up anything suspicious, Lopez said.

[TIMELINE: LAPD investigating bomb threat near Wilshire Blvd. Temple]

About six hours later, two more calls self-reported that a device had been planted in a police vehicle nearby, which authorities identified on Harvard Boulevard north of Wilshire Boulevard. The car had been sitting there for several days as part of an effort in which vehicles are planted in areas to deter crime, Lopez said.

WBT, which is undergoing renovations, and its adjacent school and parking lot take up an entire block between Wilshire Boulevard and Sixth Street and Harvard and Hobart boulevards.

WBT

Wilshire Boulevard Temple was being investigated following several bomb threats on Dec. 18. Photo by Lynn Pelkey

No one was in the building during the police investigation, according to a statement WBT released in the late morning, while police efforts were still under way.

Cory Wenter, the congregation’s director of safety and security, explained that following the 2 a.m. call, the temple used its mass notification system to cancel all activities. WBT has a nursery school, elementary school and a charter school, Camino Nuevo Charter Academy, operating at the campus, totaling about 600 students in all, he said.

As for the temple’s West L.A. campus at Olympic Boulevard and Barrington Avenue, Wenter said life continued as normal.

[MORE: Statement from Wilshire Blvd. Temple on bomb threat]

“We have escalated threat levels, so we have more people on-site, but we’re still running,” he said.

In the Koreatown neighborhood surrounding WBT, however, things were far from normal for much of the day. Police cordoned off the streets around the building with yellow tape, and helicopters circled overhead. Some residents were evacuated from nearby apartments, and others were asked to stay put, Lopez said.

Enforcement agents spent hours assessing the squad car situation as traffic snarled through surrounding streets. While canine units searched the area for secondary threats, a robotic unit offered a better view of the car itself.

After the robot found nothing — a loud crack of breaking glass could be heard when it gained access to the interior of the vehicle for better visual access — the squad car was lifted into the air by the BatCat, providing a look at its undercarriage.

Next, bomb technicians inspected areas that couldn’t be seen by the robot, including the engine and trunk. No explosives were found, and streets were reopened about 2 p.m.

As for the motive behind the threats, Lopez said it seems unlikely to be related to the recent shootings in Newtown, Conn.

“At this point, we have no reason to believe it’s connected to the events in Connecticut,” he said. The arrest “was based largely on video footage supplied by our security team from the temple’s surveillance cameras,” the WBT e-mail said.

Jewish Journal staff writer Ryan Torok contributed to this article.

Wilshire Boulevard Temple target of bomb threats Read More »

Support for Hamas soars

Leave a Comment / Live from the Arab Spring, Mobile, Mobile-Homepage, News, Worldwide /

A new poll shows growing support for the Islamist Hamas movement in both the West Bank and Gaza. If the elections were held today, Hamas leader Ismail Haniyeh would beat Palestinian leader Mahmoud Abbas.

The poll, by veteran pollster Khalil Shikaki of the Palestinian Center for Policy and Survey Research, found that 48 percent of the electorate in both the West Bank and Gaza would vote for Haniyeh, and 45 percent for Abbas. Just three months ago, a similar poll predicted a victory for Abbas, with 51 percent support over Haniyeh’s 40 percent. The poll showed Haniyeh as the most popular he has been since 2008.

“It’s a moment of happiness and popularity for Hamas, and a moment of challenge for Abbas,” Bassem Ezbidi, a professor of political science at Birzeit University told The Media Line. “Hamas is using its 'victory' in its recent war with Israel to enhance its status.”

Last month, Israel and Hamas fought for eight days during which Hamas launched hundreds of rockets at Israel and Israel responded with punishing airstrikes. The fighting ended with a cease-fire that has so far been observed by both sides. Hamas has said it proved itself as equal to Israel despite the Jewish state’s vastly larger military.

Abbas has focused his efforts on the diplomatic track. Last month, the United Nations General Assembly recognized “Palestine” as a non-member observer state, which allows membership in various UN committees. Ezbidi says this achievement pales in the face of what many see as Hamas’s military achievements.

Israel is also punishing the Palestinians for the decision to go to the UN. Israel is withholding $100 million in taxes and customs revenues it collects on behalf of the Palestinians, and is using it to pay Palestinian debts to Israeli companies such as the Israel Electric Company. That money is usually used to help pay the salaries of more than 150,000 Palestinian civil servants.

“More than two-thirds of these civil servants have bank loans for their houses and cars so the banks are also getting nervous,” Ezbidi says. “We are really in a mess here in Ramallah. Hamas is being perceived as strong, and Abbas as very weak.”

For the first time in many years, Hamas held demonstrations in the West Bank to mark the anniversary of its founding. Thousands of Palestinians waving green flags came out, in yet another show of strength for Hamas.

Israeli officials are watching the internal developments among the Palestinians with growing nervousness.

“The support for Hamas is over-rated, and Hamas has not gained anything for the Palestinians,” Israeli foreign ministry spokesman Yigal Palmor told The Media Line. “But the confrontational approach is gaining ground, and nobody is interested in negotiations with Israel.”

The results of the poll also raise the question of Palestinian “reconciliation”, bringing an end to the bitter division between Abbas’s Fatah and Hamas. In 2007, after a mini-civil war, Hamas violently took over Gaza. Since then, there has been almost no contact between Hamas and Fatah and the Palestinian parliament has been unable to meet.

Polls consistently show that Palestinians want the rivalry to end, and for national elections to be held. But most analysts say they doubt that either side is ready now for reconciliation.

“Each side is playing up its victory – Hamas on the military side and Abbas on the diplomatic side – and neither wants to compromise,” Ezbidi said. “I think support for Hamas will continue to grow.”

Support for Hamas soars Read More »