fbpx

November 20, 2014

Palestinian Authority must face U.S. trial over terror support

U.S. victims of bombings and shootings in Jerusalem more than a decade ago have cleared a final hurdle to take the Palestinian Authority and the Palestine Liberation Organization to trial in New York for supporting the attacks.

U.S. District Judge George Daniels in Manhattan largely denied bids by the Palestinian Authority and the PLO to dismiss the long-running $1 billion lawsuit ahead of a jury trial scheduled for Jan. 12.

At a court hearing on Thursday, Daniels also reaffirmed his decision in 2008 finding that his court had jurisdiction over claims against the Palestinian Authority and PLO despite changes in law at the appellate level.

Mark Rochon, a lawyer for the Palestinian Authority, said in court his client was “considering whether to seek appellate relief on that issue.” He declined to comment after the hearing on Daniels' other rulings.

Daniel's ruling on the dismissal motion was issued late on Wednesday.

The lawsuit seeks $1 billion on behalf of 11 families who say the PLO and Palestinian Authority provided material support and resources for seven separate attacks in Israel that killed and injured American citizens.

“We are looking forward to presenting the evidence to the jury,” said Kent Yalowitz, a lawyer for the families.

Should the case go to a jury, it would mark a rare trial in a lawsuit under the U.S. Anti-Terrorism Act. A federal jury in Brooklyn in September found Arab Bank Plc liable under the law for providing material support to Hamas.

The judge's decision allowing the case to go forward comes amid continued unrest in recent weeks in Jerusalem. On Tuesday, two Palestinians killed five people at a Jerusalem synagogue during morning services, the worst attack in the city since 2008.

The lawsuit, filed in 2004, accused the PLO and the Palestinian Authority of violating the U.S. Anti-Terrorism Act through support of Hamas and the al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigades, which the U.S. government deems terrorist organizations.

In his ruling, Daniels said the plaintiffs had presented triable issues over whether the PLO and the Palestinian Authority directly supported Hamas and the al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigades with money, weapons and personnel, as well as by harboring purported terrorists.

The judge also said most of the plaintiffs could pursue claims that the Palestinian Authority was vicariously liable for its employees' alleged participation in attacks in 2001 and 2002.

The case is Sokolow v. Palestine Liberation Organization, U.S. District Court, Southern District of New York, No. 04-00397.

Palestinian Authority must face U.S. trial over terror support Read More »

The Status Quo Myth

With tensions still high in Jerusalem and throughout the rest of Israel, the latest buzzword that is being bounced around in the regional and international media is “status quo”.  More specifically, Israel is accused by the Arabs and their supporters of trying to change the status quo on the Temple Mount while senior government officials in Washington praise Israel for easing restrictions to Muslim worshipers on the Temple Mount in order to preserve the status quo. 

Similarly, within Israel itself various Jewish MKs criticize other Jewish MKs who insist on ascending the Temple Mount with charges that they're aggravating an already tense situation with the Arabs while the chief Sephardic rabbi of Israel goes even further and blames Jews who ascend the Temple Mount with provoking Arab terror and causing Jewish blood to flow (a charge which is akin to blaming the raped rather than the rapist).

In such a situation, how could anyone question the validity of the claim that Israel is trying to change the status quo, for if everyone talks about it, it must be true?

Nevertheless and with all due respect to the purveyors of disinformation, the truth is there is no clearly defined existing state or condition, otherwise known as a status quo, between the Jewish and Arab populations in Israel.  In fact, one can argue that the very opposite is true and that the state of affairs between the two groups is not static but rather has been changing for years.  Still further and contrary to the current claim, this ongoing shift in relations has been mainly to the detriment of the Jews, and not the Arabs.

Already for years the Arabs in many parts of the country have become increasingly brazen in their disrespect for any semblance of Israeli sovereignty.   Although it's certainly not every Israeli Arab, overall there's a clear trend in the direction of growing radicalization and mounting anti-Israel sentiment amongst the Arab population of Israel. 

Moreover, when one looks at the total bedlam engulfing the region ever since the beginning of the Arab Spring – the uprising, so we were told, which was to usher in a new era of peace and democracy in the region – the trend in Israel should not come as a surprise.

I personally witnessed this on a visit to a kibbutz in the normally tranquil Jezreel Valley two summers ago when our night-time barbecue was interrupted by the menacing sound of gunshots emanating from the nearby Arab village.  When I asked one of the members of the kibbutz if this was something new, the young man, who for more than two hours was on the phone pleading with the police and regional security officers to get involved, explained that this insanity had been going on for more than three years and that despite the periodic direct hit of a bullet on a kibbutz home nothing was being done since the police were afraid to enter the Arab village.

He then explained, as did members of a nearby kibbutz the following day, that in addition to the occasional Arab attack, Arab thefts in the region were out of control and that nothing was being done to stop it.

This is just one small example, far from the Temple Mount, of what has been taking place in Israel in recent years.  Once again, this is not to suggest that each and every Israeli Arab is becoming increasingly radicalized and aggressively hostile to Israeli sovereignty.  There are plenty of Arabs in Israel that are not this way.  Nevertheless, like their Arab brethren in other parts of the Middle East, they are practically irrelevant when it comes to halting the frightening changes that are taking place.

Regarding the Temple Mount, the situation is horrific.  While everyone, Jew and non-Jew, have open access to the Kotel (the Western Wall), Jews have been discriminated against for years on the Temple Mount.  Yet despite the fact that their rights are trampled upon by the Islamic authority that basically controls the Temple Mount, and this frequently with the tacit approval of the Israeli authorities, no one seems to care. 

Even now, as Israel is applauded for removing age restrictions for Muslim worshippers on the Temple Mount, restrictions that were put in place due to the ongoing Arab violence against Israeli police, the amount of Jews allowed to visit the Temple Mount has been drastically reduced.  From now on, no more than five Jews at one time are allowed to visit the holiest site in the world according to Judaism.  And if that isn't enough, like usual they're prohibited by the Islamic officials on the Temple Mount, under threat of expulsion from the site, from reciting any type of prayer or even moving their lips in what appears to be a prayer.

So the fact that more and more Jews want to express their Jewish identity by visiting the Temple Mount has nothing to do with any status quo, be it real or imagined.  Rather, as has been the case ever since the Oslo process began twenty-one years ago, the Arabs are using their effective weapon of combined violence, threats and baseless fabrications in order to coerce Israel into making yet more concessions.  This in turn creates a new and updated “status quo”, one that will inevitably change following the next round of Arab aggression.  The pattern is oh-so-familiar.

Nevertheless and despite the ample evidence that confirms these ongoing changes in Israel, be it in the north, south or Jerusalem, many Israeli Jews still prefer to keep their head in the sand rather than facing this unpleasant reality.

Yoel Meltzer is a freelance writer living in Jerusalem.  He can be contacted via http://yoelmeltzer.com

The Status Quo Myth Read More »

Death in a synagogue

They could hear the iron doors at the front of the synagogue clang shut behind them.  Crowded together with 2,000 other people inside the main sanctuary, the man and the woman looked at each other in panic. The woman gazed down at her five year-old-son and gripped the little boy’s hand. She saw fear on his face.  Outside they heard shouting and could smell the pungent reek of flowing gasoline.  From the open window a swab, glowing with fire, landed on the synagogue floor. Then another. And another.  Shortly, the vestibule next to which they stood caught alight.  The flames then spread so quickly that they barely had time to catch their breath as the synagogue was engulfed in confusion and panic.  Screaming and shouting, people tore at each other to get near the windows.  But the windows had been nailed shut. Crushed in the throng, the man motioned to his wife to a hidden stairway that he knew led to an attic.  Slowly, through the gathering fumes and smoke, they forced their way towards it.   Once there they hurriedly clambered up.   And at the top they saw it.  A window not yet boarded up.  The man thrust open the wooden shutters and looked down.  He was there!

” Chaim! ”  he shouted at the top of his lungs. ” CHAIM!!!”

From down below a young man looked up and saw his father’s face.

” Jump, father, jump!!”

The woman  looked to her husband and she back at him. She shook her head.

” We CANNOT. We will never survive it. Never!”

” Basia, we will die here too.

But it was too late. Someone had seen them make their way to the stairs and a group now stormed the wooden steps ,invading the narrow space.  They were crushed against the attic wall.

” We will all die!,” the woman wept.

The man looked down at his frightened son.

” GIVE ME HIM!” he shouted above the din.

She let go of his hand and pushed him toward her husband.  He lifted the boy by his armpits and with  a heave pushed his way  toward the open window.

He then set  him on the window ledge and looked below.

” Chaim, I am throwing him to you!, he shouted to the brother below. ” You must catch him!  You must break his fall!”

He turned to the boy and said softly:

” You will be alright. Chaim will catch you.  He touched  the boy’s face and kissed him.

” Grow, my son, to be a good Jew. “

” NO, Tati, NO!!!  the boy cried.

But in less than a second he was tumbling through the cold night air.

Below his brother stood breathing hard and as the boy came down he caught him and they both collapsed into the snow.

There they lay for a second, stunned, and then the boy turned and looked back to the window.  But his father’s face had disappeared.

” TATI!!!!” the boy screamed.

They waited for a minute, as the tumult grew –  but they could already see smoke pouring from the attic window.  The older boy looked around and saw the police riding towards them.  He knew they had to leave.

” Come.  We cannot stay.”

” I can’t, no”  the boy whimpered.  “TATI!, MAMMA!”  he cried as  he searched desperately for a sign of  his parents at the window.

“COME! ” the older boy finally commanded, holding back his own tears and pulling at the child’s arm.  ” YOU MUST COME!”

They quickly made their way out of the town and hid for the night in the fields under a blanket they had found.  They watched that night as the synagogues of Kiev burned to the ground.

Six months later  the orphan would be placed on a ship to Australia in the company of his aunt, never to see Russia again.  His brother would make his way to Canada and then America to begin a new life of his own.

The man and the woman were my great-grandparents.  Their five -year-old son, my grandfather.   Their story is scorched into my family’s consciousness and the memory of that night can never be erased.

                                                                                                              *****

Stories such as this are replete among Jewish families.  This event took place in 1919 during the Russian Civil War but could have easily been a scene taken from any number of episodes in Jewish history from the killing of the Jews of Medina by Mohammed in the 7th Century, to the rampages of the Crusaders along the Rhine in the 11th Century to the Chelminicki masscresmin  Russia in the mid 1600s.

The synagogue has always been a convenient place to find and kill Jews.  There, at prayer, they are most vulnerable and least likely to offer resistance.

And so, it is little wonder that two Arab cousins  decided to enter the Jerusalem synagogue  in Har Nof, Jerusalem on Wednesday morning.  How likely would it have been that these pious Jews were carrying weapons with which to defend themselves or would have any idea that their lives might be in danger?  How prepared could they have been for what overcame them that morning?B

This particular incident has yet another painful  familial association for me. My brother, his wife and six children live only a quarter of a mile from the synagogue. He has often prayed in the building  and his children have attended the school next door.

Jews began arriving in Palestine in the late 19th Century, fleeing attacks in Russia of exactly this nature.   The theory went that in the Holy Land, Jews would finally find safety and security building lives protected from the antisemitism and violence which swirled around them in Europe.  In the light of this most recent horrific incident it would be fairly easy to argue that the experiment has failed.  If Jews at prayer can still be butchered in a land they call their own, then what is the use of a Jewish police force, a Jewish army and all the benefits of a Jewish state?

The answer to this challenge is that there are no guarantees anywhere on Earth that Jews will not be targeted for attack.  Not in England, where Orthodox Jews fear wearing their yarmulkes in public; not in the United States where virulent anti Zionism, (of a form indistinguishable from antisemitism) has emerged as a fashionable attitude among academic elites;   and not in supposedly quiet Australia where Jews have recently suffered some deeply disturbing antisemitic attacks, unknown to me at any time in my childhood.

But unlike my great-grandparents, who had nowhere to go and nowhere to turn, Jews in Israel have much to be grateful for. It is not the existence of an Israeli police force, nor an Israeli army.   Nor is it even a Jewish majority government.  It is a sense that despite the antisemitism that again rages around the world and the growing diplomatic isolation of the Jewish state as it struggles against pathological murderers and debased liars, the wind of history is no longer blowing against  them;  it is now blowing at their back.

The Jewish birth rate in Israel is higher than it has ever been and despite all dire predictions, far exceeds that of the Palestinians or Arabs in any other Arab State; Israel’s pre-eminence  as a high-tech hub has elevated it to a position of tremendous importance for the world’s most successful corporations making the state’s eradication  economically unimaginable.  Jewish nationalism, long derided by the post-Zionist academics and secular intelligentsia is making a significant comeback, buoyed by the idea that the nation , for  all its fractured differences, must be united and strong in the face of such adversity.

But even more important than any of  this is the growing national sense  that Judaism, once relegated as an ancient anachronism by so many secular Israelis, may actually be the life blood of the nation. Four rabbis were butchered in a synagogue while praying.  A severed arm, found in the bloodied synagogue, still wrapped in tefillin, offered a stirring symbol of faith and commitment in the face of the terror with which our enemies wish to undermine our perseverance .

It would seem to reinforce the words of millions of Jewish fathers to their sons throughout the generations which perhaps offers the true key to Jewish survival:

“Grow, my son, to be a good Jew.”

Avi Davis is the President of the American Freedom Alliance in Los Angeles. He blogs at The Intermediate Zone and  at the Jewish Journal in On the Other Hand

Death in a synagogue Read More »

Why Judaism needs journalism

There’s a tendency in the Jewish world to look for big solutions to big problems. One of those problems is the disheartening fact that most Jews today are simply not that interested in Judaism.

This problem isn’t made up — it’s real. We live in a world where the options are so abundant that Judaism is seen as a choice, not an obligation. This is radically different from the world I grew up in, where every Jew in the Jewish neighborhoods of Casablanca would go to synagogue on Shabbat and follow the major rituals. Judaism wasn’t a choice — it was a way of life.

Here in America, in the land where we overdose on choices, Judaism has to compete for people’s time, and, more often than not, it loses. Why would someone go to a prayer house on Saturday mornings when they can take a beautiful hike in the canyon or have coffee with an old friend or go to a gym or yoga class? If the great American question is, “What will make me happiest?” is it that surprising that Judaism so often loses?

In response to this crisis of competition, the organized Jewish community invested enormous resources in recent years to try to get more Jews to “choose” Judaism. What most of the initiatives have in common is that they want you to “go to” Judaism — go to a class, a program, a concert, a synagogue, a camp, a school or on a trip.

The most ambitious and talked-about “solution” in this go-to arsenal has been Jewish education. If you’re ever in a meeting with Jewish professionals and you want to see everyone nod feverishly in unison, just say, “The most important thing is Jewish education!”

Of course, there’s one little problem with this solution: It’s not realistic. If so many Jews have trouble committing a few hours of their precious time to a synagogue or Jewish event, how much more so with a decision as big as enrolling in a day school?

Which brings me to what I believe is the most nimble, diverse and powerful connector in the Jewish world today: Jewish journalism. When I say journalism, I’m thinking especially of the unique, weekly experience of going through a rich and vibrant community newspaper. Why do I believe this is so powerful? 

Well, for one thing, it’s incredibly convenient. A newspaper doesn’t ask you to go out of your way. You might notice it at a local café or deli or shul or supermarket, or on a friend’s coffee table, or at your doorstep if you get it at home, and all you’re asked to do is pick it up. That’s a lot easier than shlepping to some Jewish event and looking for parking.

But, more importantly, once the paper is in your hands, you are empowered and in control. No one tells you what to do or read or believe. It’s Judaism on your terms. You get to choose whatever you’re in the mood for — whether it’s news, opinion, religion, culture, arts, spirituality, humor, history, tikkun olam, community stories, poetry, Israel, Torah or whatever else helps define your Jewish identity. At its best, journalism also puts up a mirror to our community that keeps us honest and encourages progress.

In short, no other Jewish institution can offer this breadth of Jewish experience in such a convenient and mobile package. This makes Jewish journalism — whether offered digitally or on paper —  the ultimate modern-day vehicle to ignite Jewish sparks and keep us continually connected to our community, our tradition and one another.  

And yet, tragically, journalism may be the least-respected institution in the Jewish world. Why? Maybe because journalism doesn’t promote a specific agenda, which, ironically, is precisely its strength — by promoting all the flavors of Judaism, journalism gives people true freedom of choice.

Isn’t that, after all, what the new generation craves — choice? At a time when so many Jews are not choosing Judaism, the wide-open nature of journalism is ideally suited for Jews who hate having anything rammed down their throats, and whose definition of doing something Jewish is watching Jon Stewart.

Jewish foundations and donors who worry about the future of Judaism are making a huge mistake by not investing in journalism. These donors should put journalism at the top of their giving list. In fact, I can even see creating a national $100 million “Jewish Journalism Outreach Fund” to train a new generation of journalists and maximize the reach and quality of Jewish journalism nationwide.

The dream of giving every Jewish kid a Jewish education is just that— a pipe dream. A smarter dream would be to get a quality Jewish paper in the hands of every Jew in America. At the very least, that would keep Judaism in the game for the multitudes that now ignore it.

One Jewish spark may be no big deal. But ignite millions of Jewish sparks every week throughout the Jewish world, and you have one helluva big solution.


David Suissa is president of TRIBE Media Corp./Jewish Journal and can be reached at davids@jewishjournal.com.

Why Judaism needs journalism Read More »

This week in power: Har Nof attack and Jewish State bill

A roundup of the most talked about political and global stories in the Jewish world this week:

Tragic attack
During morning services on Tuesday, two Palestinian gunmen charged into a Har Nof synagogue in Israel and killed four Torah scholars. The attack left a somber note around the world as people considered what this latest incident means for the possibility of peace in the Middle East. “But it is also a tragedy for all Israelis and Palestinians. The two communities appeared increasingly locked in a cycle of hatred and hopelessness, where chances for stability, much less permanent peace, seem nearly impossible,” ” target=”_blank”>added The Wall Street Journal, in an editorial.

What's so troubling about this latest episode, ” target=”_blank”>reported Reuters. Justice Minister Tzipi Livni is chief among the opponents. “In my legal opinion, new legislation is unnecessary, not for the reasons stated by those Knesset members who are opposed to the law, but because it would be redundant,” ” target=”_blank”>said The Jerusalem Post, in an editorial. 

This week in power: Har Nof attack and Jewish State bill Read More »

Top Chef recap, episode 6: The First Thanksgiving

Katsuji’s made it a custom to pour out some of his Pabst into the sink to commemorate the show’s fallen contestants. This week, he splashes some Pabst for controversial Aaron, who got canned last episode. Smell ya later!

For a pre-quickfire challenge, the cheftestants go harvesting for cranberries. It’s Ocean Spray meets The Hunger Games as contestants dressed in proper gear go sludging waist-high through a cranberry-infested bog until they fill up their baskets with ripened fruit. Katsuji’s harvesting skills leave much to be desired.

QUICKFIRE CHALLENGE: Cranberry Dishes

Guest Judge: Tiffani Faison, Top Chef Season 1 alumna

Katsuji’s Dish: Steak tartare with chile de arbol mayonnaise, fresh cranberries and cranberry hot sauce

Since Katsuji’s stint in the bog wasn’t that successful, he doesn’t get access to the premium pantry foods during the quickfire. 

Instead, he uses a skirt steak as his protein for a cranberry-based tartare. Skirt steak is a cheap piece of meat, tough with tendon, and not ideal for a raw tartare. His dish gets slammed in the bottom three. Luckily, he has the next challenge for redemption.

ELIMINATION CHALLENGE: The First Thanksgiving

Guest Judge: Restaurateur Ken Oringer

Katsuji’s Dish: Roasted butternut squash with poached lobster, chestnuts and ancho chile butter 

Contestants must create a Thanksgiving dish only using ingredients and methods available in Massachusetts during the 1600s…think wooden spoons, cauldrons and bonfires.

Site supervisor of the Wampanoag Indigenous program said she loved the lobster, which she never likes. Typically, Wampanoag use lobster as bait to catch more desirable fish. 

“Who’da thought that a Mexican guy from kosher food would turn a Wampanoag Indian into loving lobster?” asked Oringer.

Katsuji’s dish goes above and beyond, and he wins the elimination challenge! Heck yes. For the recipe, visit Bravo.

Top Chef recap, episode 6: The First Thanksgiving Read More »

Exchanging charges of incitement, Israelis and Palestinians stand firm

This story originally appeared on themedialine.org.

In the wake of the most recent spate of violence that is reverberating through Israel and the Palestinian territories, newspapers, television and street corner debates are all focusing on the issue of incitement – albeit perhaps more in an effort to assign blame for the increasing loss of life and soaring anxiety than to address ways of reducing tension. Each side reacting to the other’s ire with a sense of disingenuousness and anger, Israelis and Palestinians risk the rapid erosion of the most successful elements of post-Oslo Accord: joint security cooperation.

As is typical in the course of debates over the efficacy of the use of force to subdue armed resistance, many opine that a political solution is the only realistic course of action for ending the violence, a position expressed by Dr. Ghassan Khatib, a former spokesman for the Palestinian Authority and labor minister. According to Khatib, both sides are correct when they accuse the other of incitement the level of which, he says, increases or decreases according to the state of relations between the two leaderships.

“When things are tense, incitement will increase. When there is an active peace process, it will decrease,” Khatib told The Media Line.

But following Tuesday’s synagogue shooting that left four Jewish worshippers and a policeman dead, fear is spreading among Israelis who believe much more bloodshed is in the offing, and who see the shootings, stabbings and motor vehicle attacks on pedestrians as premeditated terror while many Palestinian see the same incidents as predictable and for many, justified, responses to Israeli actions against Palestinians.

PLO Executive Committee member Dr. Hanan Ashrawi told The Media Line that Israel itself is responsible for the surge of violence. “We have been cautioning against Israeli actions for the longest time. We said they will generate violence and create instability for Israel.”

Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu called on Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas to stop the incitement, accusing him of proffering “blood libel.” This despite Abbas’s condemnation of the synagogue killing.     

On the Palestinian street, the death of Yousef Al-Rimouni, a 32-year old bus driver for Israel’s Egged cooperative, is a clear case of murder by Israelis and casus belli for the synagogue slaughter despite findings of suicide resulting from an autopsy conducted by Israel’s chief medical examiner and witnessed by a Palestinian doctor appointed  by the Al-Rimouni family. The incident came after a mosque was torched, apparently by right-wing Jews intent on claiming revenge for acts committed by Palestinians.

Hamas, which praised the attack with a call for more “operations” to be carried out against Israeli targets, endorsed a cartoon that depicted a Palestinian wearing a koffiyeh (traditional Arab headdress) and dressed as a religious Jew, holding a knife dripping with blood, with bodies of Israelis on the ground above a caption that read: “show them to me.”

In the Palestinian daily Al-Ayyam, commentator Hassan Al-Batal criticized violence on any side, writing, “…nothing justifies the torching of a mosque of a terror attack on a synagogue even if there are multiple reasons and some will call these heroic deeds. A terrorist attack on a synagogue is a terrible and dangerous act.”

As for Fatah, while Abbas came out in condemnation of the synagogue shootings, a Fatah Facebook posting praised the attack. But Gaza based Palestinian journalist Saud Abu Ramadan believes the posting is not indicative of the larger organization. “The factions have their own agenda, have their own ideology and are certainly not going to be friendly with what the Israeli occupation is doing to them,” he told The Media Line. 

Khatib agrees that it deserves little attention. “Fatah is a huge movement that has never been unified. It could have been an individual that did that. The posting doesn’t say much.” Taking a shot at Netanyahu, Khatib added that he wishes the Israeli prime minister “can be as successful in restraining various Israeli officials from inciting violence.”

Nevertheless, in commemorating the 10th anniversary of Yassir Arafat’s death, the Fatah-aligned Al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigade warned Israelis that, “Our bullets will continue to be aimed at your chests and heads.”

Fatah spokesperson in Gaza Dr. Fayez Abu Atia says the most important element is that “Abbas does not support it.” He did acknowledge that Palestinians were inciting violence against Israelis because they were “emotionally affected by the acts and provocations of Jewish settlers in the West Bank.” He also said that Israel was responsible for this new wave of violence and “that a major part of the incitement problem is from Mr. Netanyahu,” adding that “It’s the Israeli media that encourages settlers to attack our people.”

Yoram Cohen, head of Israel’s Shin Bet domestic security agency disagrees with those who accuse Abbas of inciting to violence. He said the PA president was not inciting what he called “acts of terror, overtly or covertly” but that these attacks were driven by “subtler forces.”

Abu Ramadan sees incitement in the words of rightwing Israeli politicians Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman and Economy Minister Naftali Bennett. Lieberman recently called plans by Abbas to go to the United Nations to pursue world recognition of the Palestinian state a “terror attack”; and Bennett has called for a military operation in east Jerusalem in response to the recent attacks perpetrated by residents of that part of the city.

Referring to restrictions barring Palestinians from the holy site Muslims call Al-Haram Al-Sharif [and Jews call The Temple Mount] during times of violent demonstrations, Abu Ramadan admonishes that, “every action has a reaction” and incitement is a result because it has “pushed them to carry out equivalent campaign.”

On other websites, Israelis expressed outrage at the site of Palestinians celebrating over the synagogue attack. But officials claim it’s not the voice of the majority. According to Ashrawi, “We do not condone acts of violence against any civilians.”

On the other hand, some 300 Israeli right-wing activists protested at the entrance of Jerusalem and Jaffa Road following the synagogue attack calling for “Death to Arabs.”

Meanwhile, for both Palestinians and Israelis, Khatib says “it’s not easy to correct the non-official media or individuals from doing it (incitement), be it Palestinian or Israeli.”

Exchanging charges of incitement, Israelis and Palestinians stand firm Read More »

My year of street tzedakah

When I lived in Berkeley in the late ’60s and early ’70s, walking along Telegraph Avenue could be expensive if you gave to every panhandler who asked for spare change. Not that much has changed in all these years. The number of people asking for handouts is at least as great as it was, and perhaps more so. Given unemployment (mercifully down to 5.8 percent) and the underemployed, the historically low minimum wage, the federal cuts to food stamps for the working poor, and the incoming Republican Congress that is unlikely to act on behalf of the chronically poor and food-insecure people, it is no surprise that people asking for help on the street are ever-present.

What to do? Democrats in Congress who believe that the federal government should extend a helping hand, especially in difficult times, are slogging it out with a recalcitrant, hard-hearted, extremist Republican Party that cares little for “the least among these” (Matthew 25:40) despite their own Christian faith claims.

What about us? Do we give to the people on the street? Something to everyone, nothing to anyone, or sporadically when we feel like it?

I confess that, over the years, I have been alternately generous and tightfisted. Sometimes I open my wallet, but more often I walk by without responding, feeling guilty.

Last year, my friend Letty Cottin Pogrebin sent me a link to an op-ed she had just written for Moment Magazine called “The Politics and Ethics of Street Tzedakah.” After reading it, I felt especially ashamed of myself.

I decided, both for the sake of the person asking for help and for myself, that henceforth I would give to everyone asking me for assistance. Since then, I have given to virtually everyone I encountered who asked me for assistance. I keep dollar bills in my wallet for these people and give everyone $1, not very much in the grand scheme of things (I estimate that I have given out about $250-$300 this past year). The payoff, however, is great in human terms. The opportunity to connect heart to heart and soul to soul with a stranger in need is a benefit for both of us.

In each of the several hundred cases, the recipient usually responded gratefully: “Thank you, brother!” “God bless you!” “Have a great day!” They felt seen and respected. I felt I did the right thing. It was, in a limited way, a win-win, though my dollar gift did little to solve the great socioeconomic problems in our country.

None of those who panhandle wish to be doing so. I remember one young man walking through traffic held a sign that read, “This is humiliating to me, but I am hungry. Please help!”

To those who say skeptically that these people are scamming us, that they can do better standing at a busy intersection than by actually getting a job, I ask only that you put yourselves in their place and reflect on what it would have taken for someone to do what they are doing.

Regarding giving when we legitimately suspect fraud, Rabbi Chayim of Sanz (1793-1876) said:

“The merit of tzedakah is so great that I am happy to give to 100 beggars even if only one might actually be needy. Some people, however, act as if they are exempt from giving charity to 100 beggars in the event that one might be a fraud.” (Darkai Chaim, 1962, p. 137)

Maimonides reminds us, “One must never turn a poor person away empty-handed, even if you give him a dry fig.” (Mishneh Torah, “Gifts to the Poor” 7:7)

The obligation to give tzedakah includes everyone, without exception, even the poor who receive community funds and individual handouts (Shulchan Arukh, Yoreh Deah 248:1). When the poor give, they realize that there are others worse off than themselves. 

According to surveys, the American-Jewish community is among the most generous communities in the country per capita. I am proud that our people give to all kinds of worthy causes, to alleviate suffering here and around the world, to the people and State of Israel, to local, national and international Jewish causes, to synagogues and food pantries, homeless programs, refugee organizations, universities, hospitals, art museums and symphony orchestras. We write checks because we know that Judaism requires it, because we know the heart of the stranger, the poor and oppressed, and in the interest of tikkun olam.

But how often do we give when we meet strangers on the street?

I decided a year ago that I am no longer walking by without giving. I pledged to myself to carry $1 bills at all times, and to give them whenever asked, not just for the sake of the other, but for my own sake as well.

Rabbi John Rosove is the senior rabbi at Temple Israel of Hollywood since 1988. He blogs at jewishjournal.com/rabbijohnrosovesblog

My year of street tzedakah Read More »

WATCH: How did Berkley students react to ISIS and Israel flags waved on campus?

We've all been reading about anti- Semitism and anti-Israelism on U.S campuses. Time and time again, we witness the hatred casued by ignorence, and get a bit more frightened about our future generation. As it turns out, it's not only “>said: “I have always thought that there was no connection between intellect and wisdom. To put this theory to the test, I headed out to the University of California, Berkeley…The shocking video unfortunately proves once and for all that there is in fact no connection between intellect and wisdom.”