fbpx

February 5, 2014

Israeli teen rhythmic gymnasts visit L.A.

Standing straight, arms behind their backs, military style, the two young rhythmic gymnasts answered questions monotonously, with as few words as possible — disciplined, like the routines they were about to perform.

In Los Angeles for the annual L.A. Lights Rhythmic Gymnastics Tournament of Champions last month, 14-year-olds Sheli Sapir, Stefani Ivanzov and their coach, Svetlana Jhugarev, were representing the Israeli Rhythmic Gymnastics Federation-Maccabi Club.

Looking like innocent teenagers, yet acting like stern, well-trained athletes, the two Israeli performers, both dressed in their gymnast outfits, took a break from their warm-ups to answer some questions.

But neither had much to say, only that they have both been at this since they were about 4 years old. Instead, they did their showing off on the floor in competition during the Jan. 23-26 tournament hosted in Culver City by the Los Angeles School of Gymnastics (LASG).

In one pose that looked particularly uncomfortable — for people of normal flexibility, at least — Sapir stood on one foot and leaned forward, touching both hands to the ground while her other leg extended up in the air at a 180-degree angle to the first. Meanwhile, she somehow managed to cradle a golden ball between her airborne foot and ankle.

Unlike artistic gymnastics — which emphasizes strength, balance and agility using apparatuses such as the vault and balance beam — rhythmic gymnastics primarily involves grace, dance and flexibility, and is always choreographed with music. Competitors use clubs, hoops, balls, ribbons and ropes.

During the event with clubs, competitors would toss the clubs in the air, perform a few graceful spins and jumps, then attempt to land cleanly while catching the falling clubs. Drops were common, but Sapir and Ivanzov snatched everything that went airborne.

Held at the Veterans Memorial Auditorium, the tournament attracted top-notch talent from around the world, particularly Eastern Europe. Russian filled the air on Jan. 26, as many of the athletes and coaches were from Russia, Ukraine and Belarus. 

Headed by Alla Svirsky, LASG’s executive director, and her daughter, its general manager, L.A. Lights is just the most recent example of the mother-daughter duo’s lifelong push to spread rhythmic gymnastics.

In 1984, when the sport first became an official Olympic competition, Svirsky led the American squad in the Los Angeles games. In July 2013, Berenson was the coach for the American team at the Maccabiah Games in Israel, the first time the United States competed in rhythmic gymnastics there in more than a decade. Israel sending its own delegation to Los Angeles was, Berenson said, their way of saying thank you.

“They came in good will from the U.S. attending their event,” she said.

Performing separately, Sapir and Ivanzov each had three routines — one with a golden ball, the second with clubs and the third with a ribbon. Overall, Sapir placed eighth out of 14 in the Level 10 junior group, and Ivanzov placed ninth out of 14. The girls’ high score came when Sapir placed fourth out of 11 in the hoop competition.

Asked whether she thinks the two young Israelis have a chance at eventually competing on an even bigger stage in the years to come, Berenson said, “I know that her [Jhugarev’s] athletes are going to have a very good chance at World and Olympic Games.”

Israeli teen rhythmic gymnasts visit L.A. Read More »

Where can I sign up for a BDS marketing course?

I want to sit at the feet of the BDS movement. These people, whom I fear and hate, are my marketing mentors. They’re winning. We’re losing. Look what they’ve just accomplished with the Super Bowl, Scarlett Johansson and SodaStream. Absolutely brilliant.

They grab headlines. They gather supporters. They pull on heart strings. They capture the next generation on campuses and in the online universe. They know how to build a movement. They know how to organize. They know how to finance their efforts. They’re strategic, creative and plan extraordinary international events, such as the Freedom Flotilla. They know how to pull off a worldwide boycott. They shape world opinion. They stay with the plan and build.They know how to turn a protracted, complex and nuanced conflict into a simple, black-and-white choice for global consumption. They appear capable of doing everything that we cannot seem to do.

They’ve done their homework. They know our lingo. Did you catch Omar Barghouti’s statement in The New York Times Opinion piece, “The Israel brand today is more toxic than ever”? They know everything we are up to, including the efforts of Brand Israel.

As an adjunct professor at USC/Annenberg teaching nonprofit marketing, I want to get my PhD from these folks. As a marketer of the Jewish world, I want to understand how they accomplish what they do so well. 

BDS cannot be dismissed. As cause marketers, they need to be respected.

Marketing is always a war. There are opponents, competition and territory to be taken. As a marketer of nearly 40 years, I can recognize when I am sitting across the table from a formidable marketing foe. I can tell when there is a central planning group and a sizable budget. If that were about marketing and not about my Zionist belief system and commitments, I’d defect and join the BDS team. 

As a liberal, I used to believe that only if Israel created a just peace with a two-state solution, all this would end. Even though I still support efforts to make this happen, I don’t believe it will stop the de-legitimization. We’re in this propaganda war for the long haul.

What the hell is the matter with us? We are giving these folks carte blanche to win this battle? Why?

Allow me to list 10 reasons and the challenges. (I am certain there are many more.):

1. Brand Israel has attempted to re-image Israel based upon its accomplishments. Technololgy. The Start-Up Nation. Wine. Women. Gays. Medical research. Its strategy has been to side-step the conflict. But the conflict appears on the front pages and in the news multiple times a week. It is what people care about. The conflict makes them fear for the safety of the world and their own lives. That left the door wide open for BDS to seize upon the conflict and spin it their own way.

2. BDS is organized. They’re collaborating and working together. If they weren’t, they wouldn’t be able to do what they do.

3. We don’t work together. Every Jewish leader and organization believes it knows better than the next leader and organization. We’re on a battlefield with everyone working in cross purposes and directions. On top of it, we dismiss each others’ efforts as the wrong ones. 

4. We have no central leadership that everyone has bought into. There is no general leading this battle.

5. We don’t fund this well. The Israeli government doesn’t fund it well. The worldwide Jewish community doesn’t fund it well.

6. We keep believing that the solution is to bring in a bunch of Jewish ad agency people. Ad agency people know how to sell hamburgers, cars and computers. They don’t know how to win an international propaganda battle of epic human proportions.

7. None of us has the magic solution. There isn’t one. We’re going to have to actually work together, nicely, to figure this out.

8. We don’t know how to work together nicely. Not when there are so many self-appointed kings and queens of the Jews, who believe they have the absolute answer.

9. We’re going to need to recognize there will be failures on the road to success and it doesn’t mean you pull the plug.

10. I can’t figure out Number 10. But I have no doubt all of you will, up to 120.

BDS is just revving their engines. What we are seeing is probably nothing in comparison to the plans they have on the table. I hope in a few years, I’ll be able to teach a graduate seminar on what they did — and how they ultimately failed. But unless we Jews turn ourselves into expert, risk-taking, well-funded collaborative marketers, I’ll probably be teaching about our defeat at the hands of BDS.

 


Gary Wexler is the co-founder of SeizeTheConversation.com. He is adjunct professor of both nonprofit marketing as well as advertising, in the Masters in Communication Management Program at USC/Annenberg.

Where can I sign up for a BDS marketing course? Read More »

Dear John Sexton: Condemn and block the ASA

To: John Sexton, Ph.D J. D.
President, New York University

Re. An Open Letter regarding NYU and ASA, via email, January 20, 2014.

Dear President Sexton,

I am writing to you as an alumnus of NYU-affiliated school who is deeply concerned with the recent boycott resolution by the American Studies Association (ASA) and its adverse impact on the reputation of NYU.

I received my PhD in 1965 from the Polytechnic Institute of Brooklyn, which last month became part of NYU. In November 2013, I was awarded the Distinguished Alumnus Award from NYU-Poly, an honor that made my association with NYU stronger and full of pride. I was disappointed therefore to learn that the leadership of the ASA, which pushed through a resolution that threatens the very fabric of academic life, is so intimately connected with NYU, both academically and administratively.

Four ASA National Council members (25%) are affiliated with NYU and vocally campaigned for the resolution. In particular, the ASA President Elect, Lisa Duggan, is NYU Professor of Social and Cultural Analysis. This means that in the next couple of years, NYU will become the semi-official host to most activities of this organization, and will be perceived as the academic lighthouse from which this group will be broadcasting its irresponsible, anti-coexistence and anti-academic ideology.

I represent a group of professors who are particularly affected by the ASA boycott resolution.  As part of my recent appointment to Visiting Professor at the Technion, Israel Institute of Technology, I am engaged in joint scientific projects with the Technion and its research staff. I also collaborate with Israeli universities on journalistic projects, named after my late son, Daniel Pearl, which aim at bringing Israeli and Palestinian journalists together.

I think you can appreciate how demoralizing the ASA action has been for me, as well as for other professors in my position. It is not that we view the ASA action as a danger to the continuation of our research projects — scientific collaboration has endured many hecklers in the past, much louder than the ASA drummers, and the latters are clearly more interested in defamation than in an actual boycott. What we do consider dangerous is the very attempt to contaminate our scientific explorations with a charge of criminality, and to bring that “criminality” for a so called “debate” in the public square, on our own campuses. We view this attempt as a new form of McCarthy'ism that is aimed at intimidating and silencing opposing voices, and thus threatens academic freedom and the fundamental principles of academic institutions.

When a group of self-appointed vigilantes empowers itself with a moral authority to incriminate the academic activities of their colleagues, we are seeing the end of academia and the end of the sacred academic principles that have been painstakingly developed over centuries.

It is for this reason that I was personally disappointed with your letter which, while expressing opposition to boycotts in general and the ASA resolution in particular, failed to identify the ASA action as an imminent threat to NYU's  reputation. Your letter did not state whether the ASA will be able to continue using NYU facilities and services as its de-facto national headquarter, and what action you plan to take to restrain its leaders from re-staining the name of NYU with similar actions in the future.

In the name of many NYU alumni who wish to remain proud of their Alma Mater, I strongly urge you to remove NYU's name from the ASA “institutional member” list (as other universities have done), and to voice a strong and unequivocal condemnation of the pro-boycott activities of the ASA leadership.

Sincerely,
Judea Pearl
UCLA

Dear John Sexton: Condemn and block the ASA Read More »

Israel trip inspires art

In organizing a 12-day trip to Israel with a group of friends last May, USC Professor Ruth Weisberg made certain that her itinerary included historic sites, cultural events and meals in the homes of friends. She also blocked out at least four hours daily for her fellow travelers to draw, paint or sketch.

“We drew every day,” said Weisberg, director of the USC Initiative for Israeli Arts and Humanities. “It was not a trip for everyone. It was a trip for people who really wanted to work.”

This agenda came as no surprise to the tour-goers, as all are working professional artists who have taken similar trips with Weisberg before. Participants included Jan Langdon Handtmann, a mixed-media artist and designer whose works have been displayed around the world; Ellen Lee, an oil painter who has exhibited in China; Gayle Garner Roski, the watercolorist who endowed USC’s Roski School of Art and Design; Susie Gesundheit, an acclaimed painter and printmaker and her architect/photographer husband, Jaime. Weisberg herself is an internationally recognized artist and scholar with more than 80 solo exhibitions and 190 group exhibitions around the world. 

The product of the trip is on display at the USC Hillel Art Gallery through March 9, titled “Israel Through Our Eyes.” Jaime Gesundheit documented the trip via a series of photographs, which are also on display.

The works that came out of the trip were an assemblage of styles and themes, from the 4-by-8-foot mixed media collage “Conflict Resolution” to Susie Gesundheit’s series of monotypes reflecting on a Chassidic man in Jerusalem drinking from a cup. Roski turned her sketch book/travel journal into a series of water colors, which she bordered with designs from Armenian pottery that she encountered in the Mount Zion Hotel. 

Some of the territory and accompanying experiences were familiar to Weisberg, Roski and the Gesundheits, who all have been to Israel multiple times. The Gesundheits even visited family in the Holy Land during this trip. 

Lee and Handtmann, however, were visiting Israel for the first time. Since some of the participants are are not Jewish, Weisberg programed visits to important Christian sites that she had never seen, such as the Mount of Olives and the Church of the Holy Sepulchre. 

In addition to providing plenty of inspiration for creativity, the multifaith elements of the itinerary led to emotional experiences. Lee, who viewed the trip as much as a pilgrimage as a work trip, marveled at the diversity of people she encountered in the Church of All Nations and was particularly overcome with emotion when she touched the Western Wall. 

“In the church, you could see Ethiopian Catholics next to Korean Protestants and they would all be praying and singing hymns. There would be a group of Greek Orthodox listening very intently to their spiritual leader,” recalled Lee. “Sometimes you had the feeling that, although we’re all so different and so diverse, if you looked a little bit underneath, there are similar sentiments that we all share.” 

The group spent a day at the renowned Jerusalem Print Workshop. Excursions out of Jerusalem took them to the coastal cities of Jaffa and Caesarea, where Weisberg was particularly struck by the ruins of Herod’s palace and pleasure grounds. 

“The sense of the passage of time is so powerful,” Weisberg said. “We sat up on a cliff at a restaurant overlooking these formations that I just assumed when I first glanced at them were rock formations. If it were the California coast, you would think rocks.  No! These are ancient walls built by Herod.”

During the designated work hours, the artists most often gravitated toward restaurants offering views from terraces, which they quickly commandeered. On one occasion, representatives from the Jewish National Fund tried to help stir the creative spirit by bringing the group into the Sataf forest on the western fringes of Jerusalem to a hill with a marvelous vista. The view was indeed panoramic … but artistically unsuitable.

“Everything is in the distance. It’s not a good place to draw,” Weisberg said. “They were shocked that we weren’t thrilled at their choice of place. We had to very quickly find another solution, which turned out to be a restaurant with a terrace, and we had a great day.”

Weisberg laughed at the memory: “The best laid plans sometimes get changed because you don’t know what it’s actually going to be like until you get there. You’re having an experience in real time and that’s part of the pleasure and a little bit part of the tension, especially if you’re leading a group.”

Back in the United States, the artists had an ideal exhibition space at USC Hillel, one of the few Hillels on an American college campus with a working art gallery, according to Bailey London, the Allen and Ruth Ziegler executive director of USC Hillel. Weisberg and Susie Gesundheit, who chairs the art gallery committee, have long associations with USC Hillel. When they approached newly appointed London about the “Israeli Through Our Eyes” exhibition, she jumped at the opportunity. 

So did the public. The exhibit’s opening reception on Jan. 26 with all of the artists drew 100 guests to the gallery. London estimates that about 10 percent of the student population at USC is Jewish, and the Hillel community often turns out in great force for art-related activities and programs.

“The subject of the exhibition is incredibly relevant,” she said. “This is an opportunity to bridge the art of USC artists with the Jewish students on campus. Some of these artists are not Jewish, but they responded to issues that are very dear to the heart of our Jewish students.”  

Erica Muhl, dean of the Roski School, knows all of the artists and was intrigued to see what they would produce.

“They’re all extraordinary and very different, and so I was really anxious to see how each one of them would portray not just the actual country and the actual locales that they visited, but their impression of it,” Muhl said. “I was kind of excited to vicariously visit Israel through these artists’ eyes.”

The artists returned from Israel with more than just art and fresh inspiration. Weisberg, who was scheduled to be part of a b’nai mitzvah upon her return, had hoped to find a tallit in Israel. Jaime Gesundheit guided her to a store in Jaffa where Weisberg found what she was looking for. When she went to pay for it, the storekeeper refused to take her money. Members of the group had purchased the tallit as a gift.

“So if you want a moving story, there it is,” Weisberg said. “I have a very beautiful tallit and every time I wear it, I think of this wonderful group of friends and fellow artists who kind of understood my spiritual journey. They all came to the b’nai mitzvah and it was very special.”

Israel trip inspires art Read More »

If boycott is anti-academic what do we call its leaders?

To: John Sexton, Ph.D J. D.
President, New York University

Re. An Open Letter regarding NYU and ASA, via email, January 20, 2014.

Dear President Sexton,

I am writing to you as an alumnus of NYU-affiliated school who is deeply concerned with the recent boycott resolution by the American Studies Association (ASA) and its adverse impact on the reputation of NYU.

I received my PhD in 1965 from the Polytechnic Institute of Brooklyn, which last month became part of NYU. In November 2013, I was awarded the Distinguished Alumnus Award from NYU-Poly, an honor that made my association with NYU stronger and full of pride. I was disappointed therefore to learn that the leadership of the ASA, which pushed through a resolution that threatens the very fabric of academic life, is so intimately connected with NYU, both academically and administratively.

Four ASA National Council members (25%) are affiliated with NYU and vocally campaigned for the resolution. In particular, the ASA President Elect, Lisa Duggan, is NYU Professor of Social and Cultural Analysis. This means that in the next couple of years, NYU will become the semi-official host to most activities of this organization, and will be perceived as the academic lighthouse from which this group will be broadcasting its irresponsible, anti-coexistence and anti-academic ideology.

I represent a group of professors who are particularly affected by the ASA boycott resolution.  As part of my recent appointment to Visiting Professor at the Technion, Israel Institute of Technology, I am engaged in joint scientific projects with the Technion and its research staff. I also collaborate with Israeli universities on journalistic projects, named after my late son, Daniel Pearl, which aim at bringing Israeli and Palestinian journalists together.

I think you can appreciate how demoralizing the ASA action has been for me, as well as for other professors in my position. It is not that we view the ASA action as a danger to the continuation of our research projects — scientific collaboration has endured many hecklers in the past, much louder than the ASA drummers, and the latters are clearly more interested in defamation than in an actual boycott. What we do consider dangerous is the very attempt to contaminate our scientific explorations with a charge of criminality, and to bring that “criminality” for a so called “debate” in the public square, on our own campuses. We view this attempt as a new form of McCarthy'ism that is aimed at intimidating and silencing opposing voices, and thus threatens academic freedom and the fundamental principles of academic institutions.

When a group of self-appointed vigilantes empowers itself with a moral authority to incriminate the academic activities of their colleagues, we are seeing the end of academia and the end of the sacred academic principles that have been painstakingly developed over centuries.

It is for this reason that I was personally disappointed with your letter which, while expressing opposition to boycotts in general and the ASA resolution in particular, failed to identify the ASA action as an imminent threat to NYU's  reputation. Your letter did not state whether the ASA will be able to continue using NYU facilities and services as its de-facto national headquarter, and what action you plan to take to restrain its leaders from re-staining the name of NYU with similar actions in the future.

In the name of many NYU alumni who wish to remain proud of their Alma Mater, I strongly urge you to remove NYU's name from the ASA “institutional member” list (as other universities have done), and to voice a strong and unequivocal condemnation of the pro-boycott activities of the ASA leadership.

Sincerely,
Judea Pearl
UCLA

Additional Remarks by J. Pearl.

———————-
This letter to President Sexton was written as
a reaction to a glaring contradiction between what
University administrators say about boycotts and
the way they tolerate, if not embrace boycott activists.
If boycott stands contrary to basic academic principles then,
surely, boycott advocates are undermining those principles
and should be exposed and treated as such.

Of course, no one expects university administrators to discipline
professors who violate academic principles; academic freedom demands
that its principles remain vulnerable to abuse, it is the
secret of their survival.
What one nevertheless expects campus leaders to do is to
DEFINE the norms of a desirable campus envionment, and
identify violators of those norms as a source of
embarrassment, whose actions are not conducive to the
kind of campus climate we wish to create.

If boycott is anti-academic what do we call its leaders? Read More »

‘The Monuments Men’: Saving the art behind enemy lines

George Clooney and Grant Heslov sat side by side recently at the Four Seasons hotel in Beverly Hills for a panel discussion on their new World War II movie, “The Monuments Men.”  Both are credited with writing and producing the film, which opens on Feb. 7, but they couldn’t appear more different. Clooney, 52, looked suave and square-jawed, every bit the movie star famous for films such as “The Descendants” and “Up in the Air.” Heslov, 50, meanwhile, was soft-spoken, thoughtful and slender with soulful brown eyes and tousled curls. 

Yet their friendship dates back to when they were both struggling actors, and Clooney was so broke that Heslov had to loan him $100 to get his headshots done.

Throughout the years, the friendship flourished and the pair are now two of Hollywood’s most sought-after filmmakers — Heslov co-wrote and produced Clooney vehicles including “Good Night and Good Luck” and “The Ides of March,” while Clooney produced and starred in Heslov’s 2009 directorial debut, “The Men Who Stare at Goats.”  Last year, both men took home best-picture Oscars for producing the Tehran hostage crisis saga, “Argo.”

Along the way, Heslov said, he has gotten used to being elbowed out of the way by Clooney’s eager fans:  “I have literally been stepped on; I’ve been practically raped,” he quipped.  “But I could never be like George, ever.  I just don’t have the constitution for it.  I covet my privacy.”

Heslov has kept his relatively low profile intact with the release of “Monuments Men,” which is based on a true story and stars Clooney, Matt Damon, Cate Blanchett and Bill Murray as a team of museum directors, artists, architects and curators who went behind enemy lines during World War II to rescue master artworks stolen by the Nazis in order to return them to their rightful owners.

Heslov only learned about these efforts while browsing through a bookstore at LAX several years ago, when he chanced upon Robert M. Edsel and Bret Witter’s 2009 “The Monuments Men:  Allied Heroes, Nazi Thieves and the Greatest Treasure Hunt in History,” at the time one of only a couple of scholarly books written.

Heslov devoured the tome, discovering that this team from the Monuments, Fine Arts and Archives division of the Allied forces were hardly seasoned soldiers, but rather mostly middle-aged art professionals. They were assigned to protect historical buildings from the Allied bombs and to ferret out the Vermeers, da Vincis and such that had been stashed down deep salt mines or in Mad King Ludwig’s neo-gothic castle at Neuschwanstein.  Their mission became all the more urgent in the last days of the war, when Hitler decreed that all the plundered art would be destroyed.

Heslov said that in writing the screenplay, he and Clooney didn’t think of the story as a World War II movie per se, but rather as a heist film. Even so, the plot could not help but touch on the Holocaust.  

For Heslov, one of the film’s most poignant scenes takes place as Damon wanders through an impossibly vast warehouse crowded with artwork stolen from the Rothschild family and other French Jewish collectors.

“What is this?” he asks Blanchett’s character.  “Peoples’ lives … Jews,” she says.  

At the press conference, Clooney noted that the set for that scene was “based on a real photograph; in Paris they collected all of the belongings of Jewish families and in fact set up rooms that looked like showrooms for blocks and blocks.”

From left: George Clooney and Grant Heslov, co-writers and co-producers of “The Monuments Men,” on the set of the film.

In another sequence, the soldiers are searching a mine when they are aghast to discover two barrels filled with gold teeth removed from Jewish bodies.  “In reality, they found barrels and barrels of that kind of stuff, but George and I talked about the idea that making it smaller would be more impactful and more personal,” Heslov said.  “It was our way of addressing the Holocaust without getting too far off track of the story we wanted to tell.”

Heslov said he personally identifies in particular with the Jewish character of Sam Epstein, played by Dimitri Leonidas and based on the real-life survivor Harry Ettlinger, who fled Nazi Germany the day after his bar mitzvah and was inducted into the Monuments Men, initially as a translator, while serving in the United States Army.

As a youth in Karlsruhe, Ettlinger couldn’t go see the famed Rembrandt self-portrait that hung just three blocks away from his home because the local museum that housed it was banned to Jews.  Then, in the deep caverns of the salt mines in Heilbronn-Kochendorf, he chanced to lift the masterpiece from a crate and joyfully viewed the painting for the first time.  “It’s a beautiful story,” Heslov said of why the writers included a similar sequence in the film.

Clooney felt guilty about casting German performers to play the baddies of the film:  “I felt bad,” he said, “because for about 65 years German actors have had to play Nazis, and you’re bringing them in to read and you’re just going, ‘I know, I’m sorry, but I do need you to sort of be really mean.’ ”  

Heslov grew up attending Temple Ner Tamid in Palos Verdes, where his father, a dentist, was a founding member.  As a boy he aspired to become an actor, and later attended USC’s drama school as well as Milton Katselas’ renowned acting class when he was 19.  It was there that he met Clooney, then 21, and their friendship took off when Clooney asked the younger actor to perform with him in a scene from Neil Simon’s “Brighton Beach Memoirs.”

While Heslov went on to snag roles in a number of TV shows and films, including “True Lies” and “The Scorpion King,” he recalled having “an epiphany” while waiting for an audition for a tiny part in a sitcom 12 years ago.  “I recognized all these middle-aged actors from ‘The Bob Newhart Show’ and ‘All in the Family,’ ” he said.  “And I knew I just couldn’t be 50 and auditioning for a three-line role.  So that led me to want to be a writer and a director.”

Heslov enjoyed some good notices for his ensuing short film, “Waiting for Woody,” based on his own disappointing audition for the reclusive director.  Around that time, he had a heart-to-heart conversation about his career with Clooney, who invited him to work at Section Eight Productions, the company Clooney founded with director Steven Soderbergh in 2000.  When Soderbergh left the company six years later, Heslov and Clooney together created Smokehouse Pictures, which not only produced “Argo” but also the current Oscar contender “August:  Osage County.”

At the “Monuments Men” press conference, Heslov and Clooney cited the recent discovery in Munich of a billion dollars worth of masterpieces that had been hidden by the former German art dealer Hildebrand Gurlitt, noting the ongoing international struggle to return Nazi-looted art to its rightful owners.

“If the movie can help to raise awareness about this, we’ll be thrilled,” Heslov said.

“The Monuments Men” opens in theaters on Feb. 7.

‘The Monuments Men’: Saving the art behind enemy lines Read More »

Boycotting settlements is not anti-Israel

On her way out the door to defend the SodaStream company, the suddenly political Scarlett Johannson threw a grenade at her erstwhile cause, the international aid organization Oxfam.

According to her spokesperson, “she and Oxfam have a fundamental difference of opinion in regards to the boycott, divestment and sanctions movement.”

Full stop. The global boycott, divestment and sanctions movement, which harbors more than a few people who want to put the entire project of a Jewish homeland out of business, is not the issue between Ms. Johannson and Oxfam. SodaStream has its main factory in the occupied territories. The company is contributing to the health and prosperity of the occupation while providing income for the settlement enterprise — an enterprise that is corroding Israeli democracy, deemed “illegitimate” by the American government and considered illegal under international law.

Boycotting goods and services coming from the settlements, although sometimes difficult to implement in practice, means putting one’s money where one’s mouth is, if one has been saying that the settlements are an impediment to the two-state solution and to peace.

What’s so hard to understand about that?

My organization, the New Israel Fund, which supports more than 100 progressive civil society organizations in Israel at any given time, made a clear distinction some years ago in our funding guidelines. We don’t fund organizations with global BDS programs. We will not disqualify organizations for funding if they support the boycott of settlement goods because we see it as entirely consistent with our opposition to the occupation, our defense of Israeli democracy and our support for a two-state solution.

So let’s take a look at those who are profiting from blurring the lines — the Green Line, to be precise. The current Israeli government and its well-funded organizational allies have popularized the word “delegitimization” to describe opposition to Israel. But in making no distinction between calls to boycott Israel itself and calls to boycott the settlement enterprise, they are deliberately conflating two very different things while erasing the distinction between Israel inside the Green Line  — the pre-1967 border with the West Bank — and military control of settlements in the territories. Defunding the settlements equals delegitimization equals anti-Semitism equals destruction of Israel as a Jewish state, or so goes their formula. Those for whom any progress toward ending the occupation is their worst nightmare have been somewhat successful at making this false equivalence stick.

The truth is, Israel has real adversaries who equate Zionism with racism. But it is also true that criticizing Israeli government policy, especially support for the settlement enterprise, is not delegitimizing Israel. According to last year’s Pew study, only 17 percent of American Jews believe the settlements help Israeli security. Do the other 83 percent not think that Israel is legitimate?

By some accounts, the Palestinians who work at SodaStream are well treated by the standards of occupation enterprises. But suggesting that those Palestinians don’t have much choice about their employment because the West Bank is entirely aid dependent, and because it’s hard to have a vibrant economy under foreign military control — that’s not delegitimizing Israel either. That’s the truth as pro-Israel progressives worldwide see it.

[Related: Pro Israel means anti-BDS]

But let’s leave the Palestinians aside for a moment. What blurring the lines between Israel and its military occupation accomplishes is not just the perpetuation of the occupation. Israel’s existence as a democratic state is grounded in the values and institutions it shares with other democracies, including freedom of speech and conscience, an independent judiciary and an untrammeled civil society. It is no accident that in the past five years, those values and institutions have come under attack from those whose defend the settlement enterprise at virtually any cost. The harassment and punitive legislation aimed at human rights groups, which inconveniently document the abuses inherent in occupation, is a deliberate strategy as well.

Anyone who has spent 10 minutes watching Palestinians queue up at a checkpoint to get to work or a hospital in Israel knows that Israeli democracy comes to a halt at that checkpoint. Anyone who drives on a road forbidden to Palestinians and guarded by barbed wire and watchtowers, or reads the graffiti left at the scene by settler vigilantes during their “price-tag” attacks, cannot help but understand why the occupation is compared to other historical examples of oppression and injustice.

Abraham Lincoln said of our own country that “this government cannot endure, permanently, half slave and half free.” Although the occupation is not slavery, he would have recognized that a pernicious institution poisons the entire body politic, and that there can be no such thing as freedom for one group and subjugation for another in a functioning democracy.

The blurring of lines between Israel and the territory it occupies and administers militarily serves the short-term purposes of the settlers and their apologists. In the long term, however, if and when those lines really disappear, when Israel becomes identical to the occupation and its democracy is sacrificed to those with a messianic vision of the Jewish state, then the Zionist enterprise will have failed. And those of us who love Israel, and believe in the promise that a state founded by Jews would reflect the love of freedom and equality that is part of the Jewish heritage — we will have failed, as well.

 


Naomi Paiss is vice president of public affairs for the New Israel Fund.

Boycotting settlements is not anti-Israel Read More »

Woody Allen’s son refutes Dylan Farrow’s claims of molestation

The latest on the Woody Allen saga: His son Moses Farrow has spoken out in his defense in the latest issue of People. Moses says he doesn’t believe Allen molested his sister Dylan Farrow, or that their mom Mia Farrow turned her brood of children against their father.

“Of course Woody did not molest my sister,” says Moses, who is estranged from Farrow and many of his siblings and is close to Allen and Soon-Yi. “She loved him and looked forward to seeing him when he would visit. She never hid from him until our mother succeeded in creating the atmosphere of fear and hate towards him. The day in question, there were six or seven of us in the house. We were all in public rooms and no one, not my father or sister, was off in any private spaces. My mother was conveniently out shopping. I don’t know if my sister really believes she was molested or is trying to please her mother. Pleasing my mother was very powerful motivation because to be on her wrong side was horrible.”

Moses, a family therapist, goes on to accuse Farrow of going into “unbridled rages” when angered, and of frequently hitting him.

Dylan responded by sticking to her story, and denying that her mother ever  poisoned her against her father or resorted to corporal punishment.

 “I will not see my family dragged down like this,” she adds. “I can’t stay silent when my family needs me and I will not abandon them like Soon-Yi and Moses. My brother is dead to me. My mother is so brave and so courageous and taught me what it means to be strong and brave and tell the truth even in the face of these monstrous lies.”

Woody Allen’s son refutes Dylan Farrow’s claims of molestation Read More »

The Dichter Scale

One way to determine whether Israeli politicians are serious about wanting to become prime minister is to check how many times they’ve visited Los Angeles.

By that measure, Avi Dichter is very serious.

For Israelis running for office, Los Angeles is an ATM. You come, you speak, you hit up an extensive, deep-pocketed network of expats and Israel lovers.  

Many years ago, one of those donors invited me to breakfast with a former minister at the Peninsula Hotel. I said I’d love to meet the man, but wasn’t his political career over? I now keep a picture of me at that breakfast with Ariel Sharon in my office to remind myself how wrong I can be.  

Dichter, the former head of the Shin Bet and former minister of Home Front Defense under Prime Minister Netanyahu, has been here at least twice in the past six months.

Late last month, he spoke at a breakfast in the Beverly Hills home of Izak Parviz Nazarian, sponsored by the American Friends of the Citizens’ Empowerment Center in Israel (AFCECI) and IDB Bank. CECI is the only organization working to fix Israel’s dysfunctional and self-defeating electoral system.

There was no overt fundraising at the event. But Dichter spent little time discussing voting reform and much more time laying out the vision he thinks will capture the imagination of Israeli voters. 

In person, Dichter is compact and barrel-chested. He has both the dead serious demeanor of a former commando and a penchant for telling some good Jewish jokes. Could it be a coincidence that he looks like a cross between Bibi Netanyahu and a younger Mel Brooks? 

Dichter oversaw Shin Bet during the Al Aqsa Intifada and is widely credited with developing the aggressive counterterrorism techniques that put a stop to it.

As tough as that was, the situation Israel finds itself in today is even more complex. 

“It’s an earthquake,” he said. “I don’t know what it would be on the Richter scale, but it’s a 9 on the Dichter scale.” Like I said, Mel Brooks.

Syria is shattered; Egypt is in tatters; and Iran is still actively meddling. 

Into this steps Secretary of State John Kerry, who is engaged in what Dichter said are quite serious discussions to achieve a framework for peace between Israel and the Palestinians. I asked Dichter why Israel, at this point, should take any risks, given the region’s uncertainty.

“There is no way to solve our problems with another round of fighting,” he said. “There is going to be somehow, someday, a peace treaty.” 

That said, Dichter is not optimistic that these talks will conclude positively. What would he do differently?

“In order to go forward,” he said, “you need to build trust.”

The subtext here is that Dichter, who speaks Arabic and has spent countless hours working with his Palestinian counterparts, is the guy to do it.

“Netanyahu and [Palestinian President] Mahmoud Abbas should open a secret channel of negotiations, like Peres did with Arafat under Rabin,” he told me. “That would be a path to building trust.” 

Both Dichter and Bibi are in the Likud party, the Israeli “right,” though the left/right debate seems to have shifted from whether there should be a Palestinian state to how best to bring one about.

“You need peace for the sake of Israel,” Dichter told me. “Israel is 66. A country needs a border. When you don’t have a border, it’s not just a physical border you lack, but you don’t have [an] ideological border either.”

I pressed Dichter on what he meant.

“As long as it is not decided by the Israeli people and the Israeli government what the borders are, everyone can try to promote his own ideology. We need to decide on the State of Israel once and for all.”

But, I said, Palestinians think time is on their side. The BDS (Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions) movement is squeezing Israel internationally, and Palestinians are achieving population parity between the Mediterranean and the Jordan Valley.

“It’s bull—-,” Dichter shot back. International pressure will never convince an Israeli government to act against its own security interests, he said.

A report for The Times of Israel asserted that Dichter was the only cabinet minister to vote against the Sep. 6, 2007, Operation Orchard attack that took out a nuclear power plant in Syria.

If true, that would seem to give Israelis pause about Dichter’s own trustworthiness.

“It’s absolutely wrong,” Dichter told me. “It’s much more complicated. I knew exactly why the reactor in Syria should be destroyed. I was not against it. Israel should have a military option.”

I asked the man who helped crush the Second Intifada whether there could be, as many predict, a third one. He doubted it.

“Each intifada caused them a huge disaster,” Dichter said. “They might lose more assets.”

“Once we agreed to a two-state solution, it’s a dramatic change. They know they will have a two-state solution. They will have it by talking, or another way.”

When a former security chief says things like, “or another way,” you know the first way is better.

So, I asked, finally, is Avi Dichter going to try to be Israel’s next prime minister?

“If you shoot low and miss, you hit even lower,” Dichter said. “If you target high and hit low, you might just hit what you want. I target high.”

 


Rob Eshman is publisher and editor-in-chief of TRIBE Media Corp./Jewish Journal. E-mail him at robe@jewishjournal.com. You can follow him on Twitter @foodaism.

The Dichter Scale Read More »