fbpx

October 21, 2015

Netanyahu blames mufti of Jerusalem for Final Solution, prompting outcry

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is being criticized for saying the mufti of Jerusalem gave Hitler the idea to exterminate the Jews in a meeting between the two in 1941.

Netanyahu’s remarks about the mufti, Haj Amin al-Husseini, came in a speech to the World Zionist Congress in Jerusalem on Tuesday night.

“Hitler didn’t want to exterminate the Jews at the time; he wanted to expel the Jews. And Haj Amin al-Husseini went to Hitler and said, ‘If you expel them, they’ll all come here,'” Netanyahu said. When Hitler asked Husseini what to do with the Jews, Netanyahu said the mufti told the Nazi leader: “Burn them.”

The Israeli prime minister said the mufti was sought for war crimes in the Nuremberg trials “because he had a central role in fomenting the Final Solution.”

Israeli lawmakers were among the many critics who slammed Netanyahu for the remarks, saying he was distorting history and somehow blaming the Arabs, rather than Hitler, for the Final Solution.

“A historian’s son must be accurate about history,” Isaac Herzog, the Israeli opposition leader, wrote in a statement posted on his Facebook page. “This is a dangerous distortion of history, and I demand that Netanyahu correct this immediately since he is trivializing the Holocaust.”

Hitler’s plans for the Final Solution were in place before his 1941 meeting with the mufti, Holocaust historians say.

Arab Joint List leader Ayman Odeh said Netanyahu “is rewriting history in order to incite against the Palestinian people,” Haaretz reported.

PLO Secretary General Saeb Erekat said in a statement, “Netanyahu hates Palestinians so much that he is willing to absolve Hitler of the murder of 6 million Jews.”

On Wednesday, Netanyahu sought to clarify his remarks.

“My intention was not to absolve Hitler of his responsibility, but rather to show that the forefathers of the Palestinian nation, without a country and without the so-called ‘occupation’, without land and without settlements, even then aspired to systematic incitement to exterminate the Jews,” Netanyahu said in a statement.

“Hitler was responsible for the Final Solution to exterminate six million Jews. He made ​​the decision. It is equally absurd to ignore the role played by the Mufti, Haj Amin al-Husseini, a war criminal, for encouraging and urging Hitler, Ribbentropp, Himmler and others, to exterminate European Jewry,” he said.

The German government on Wednesday also responded to Netanyahu’s remarks, saying that “responsibility for this crime against humanity is German and very much our own.”

Netanyahu traveled to Germany on Wednesday and is slated to meet German Chancellor Angela Merkel.

Netanyahu blames mufti of Jerusalem for Final Solution, prompting outcry Read More »

Willful denial fueling conflict in Israel

This article first appeared on The Media Line.

The Grand Mufti of Jerusalem, not Adolf Hitler, was the architect of the Holocaust which killed six million Jews, Benjamin Netanyahu told an audience at the World Zionist Conference this week. The statement elicited a storm of condemnation from political allies and enemies alike who were concerned at the apparent attempt to rewrite history. But the Prime Minister’s comments merely highlight an ongoing habit by both Israelis and Palestinians to ignore facts or to interpret history in a manner which pushes their own political narrative.

Haj Amin Al-Husseini did meet with Hitler but only in November 1941, after the Final Solution had already begun, Dina Porat, the head historian at Yad Vashem Holocaust museum, told The Media Line.

“The Final Solution was in Hitler’s mind – it was his obsession – since World War One. He wrote about it in Mein Kampf,” Porat said. Although the Mufti did ask Hitler to extend the genocide into the Middle East, to suggest that he gave the idea to the German leader was “not accurate,” she concluded.

The Prime Minister’s comments have been viewed by some analysts as an attempt to tie Palestinians, and their efforts to realize a sovereign state, to the genocidal policies of the Nazis for political gain.

The rewriting of history is also coming from the Palestinian side. Although Palestinians have killed ten Israelis in stabbing and shooting attacks this month, some of which have been captured on video, many ordinary Palestinians say the attacks never happened and videos were doctored. Arab media frequently underreports these events and instead focuses on the deaths of the attackers, who are often presented as blameless.

“Palestinians are assassinated for no reason. Most of the cases of people who were killed were innocent people who did not commit any crime,” Mustafa Barghouti, the general Secretary of the Palestine National Initiative (PNI), told The Media Line. “The fact that Israel claims that they were trying to stab people is nothing but a lie,” Barghouti, whose PNI attempts to be a third, democratic alternative to the main Palestinian factions, Hamas and Fatah, said.

Along with the ten Israelis killed in a wave of attacks perpetrated mostly by teenage Palestinians from east Jerusalem, 47 Palestinians have been killed by Israeli security forces or civilians. Of these, 25 have been identified as attackers, and others killed either during protests or trying to cross from the Gaza Strip into Israel.

Despite a number of videos online appearing to show Palestinians attacking Israelis with knives, axes, and cars, Barghouti refused to accept any Palestinian deaths.

When preventing a terrorist attack, “you don’t shoot (the perpetrator) ten times. Or shoot them and then leave them on the ground bleeding to death,” the physician and politician said. When asked under what circumstances it was acceptable for Israel police to use lethal force, Barghouti declined to elaborate, and said only “any attack is unjustified in general, who ever does it, without exception.”

Last week Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas, who has not condemned any of the stabbing attacks, infuriated Israelis further. Abbas claimed that thirteen year-old Ahmad Manasra, who had stabbed and seriously wounded a 13-year-old Israeli boy, had been executed by security forces. In fact, Manasra was taken to an Israeli hospital for treatment and is recovering.

In other incidents, Palestinian media has a tendency to report additional information which strive to explain the attacks as actions other than terrorist activity. For example, a Palestinian woman who stabbed an Israeli man in Jerusalem’s Old City was reported to have done so because he attempted to snatch off her headscarf, which Palestinian women wear in modesty.  In a second incident, in which a female Palestinian driver apparently detonated a vehicle borne improvised explosive device, Palestinian media claimed that the car’s electric system had caused a fire.

For their part, Israelis have rejected any claims that soldiers may have used disproportionate force against Palestinian attackers.

Mustafa Barghouti singled out the recent cases of Fadi Alon and Asraa Abed. Alon was shot and killed, Asraa was shot and wounded. In both cases, video footage does not appear to show either as posing a direct imminent threat at the time of their shooting. It is also not clear that they were trying to carry out a terrorist attack.

In the videos, Abed, a young Israeli Arab mother, appeared more confused than aggressive and has previously been treated for mental issues. Alon, 19, was involved in a scuffle with right-wing Israeli activists at 4 am, and it has been suggested he was simply in the wrong place at the wrong time.

The danger of such a possibility was highlighted by the death of Habtom Zarhum, an Eritrean asylum seeker who died after being shot and then beaten by a crowd. A security guard at the Beersheba bus station misidentified Zarhum as a terrorist during an attack by an Israeli Bedouin man that left one dead and eleven others injured. Video footage of an Israeli soldier and a number of civilians kicking the Eritrean man and dropping furniture on him as he lies semi-conscious have elicited anger in Israel and prompted an investigation.

Suggestions of Israeli unlawful killings were strongly rejected by Shmuel Sandler, a professor of politics with the Begin Sadat Center. “They come to kill us, we protect ourselves and you call this extra-judicial killings. I don’t understand it,” Sandler said. He rejected the use of the word Palestinian, arguing that no state called Palestine ever existed in history.

“I want the media to be more objective – you don’t take the liar – the killer – and tell both (sides of the) stories,” Sandler said. Hatred towards Jews was the only motivation behind recent attacks, the professor concluded.

This was in line with previous comments by Prime Minister Netanyahu who rejected poverty in east Jerusalem neighborhoods, and a lack of a political progress in the conflict, as motivating factors for Israeli attacks against Israeli civilians.

“There are two narratives here and each side is promoting its (version) – it’s not just part of propaganda, people really believe in their narrative,” David Tal, a historian with the University of Sussex in the United Kingdom, told The Media Line. The different political tales told in each camp don’t merely add fuel to ongoing tensions but are the foundations for the conflict, Tal said. Willful denial of the other side’s beliefs is an ongoing part of this process.

“The first thing is that if you have a propaganda weapon you can use, then you use it,” Tal explained, adding that Palestinians and Israelis were equally guilty of this. In such circumstances, ordinary Israelis and Palestinians will believe in their rhetoric even if their leaders do not.

In the case of Mamoud Abbas’s claim that Ahmed Manasra was killed, video evidence showed the President to be wrong. But in many other cases evidence will not be so clear cut and people will choose to stick to their pre-existing beliefs about the other side, Tal concluded.

Netanyahu later clarified his comments regarding the Mufti. “I had no intention of absolving Hitler from his diabolical responsibility for the annihilation of European Jews,” the Prime Minister said, ironically on his way to a visit to Germany and a meeting with German Chancellor Angela Merkel.

Willful denial fueling conflict in Israel Read More »

Israel nervous about Trudeau win

This article first appeared on The Media Line.

Many Israelis were disappointed with the results of Canada’s election and the victory of Justin Trudeau over Stephen Harper, who has been a strong advocate of Israel and Israeli policy.

“Not having Harper around is a very big loss for Israel,” Canadian-born Mordechai Nisan, a retired professor of political science at Hebrew University told The Media Line. “He stood out as a person who said explicitly to the Israelis and to the world that he would virtually always adopt a pro-Israeli stance.”

His pro-Israel ethos was shaped by his belief in the reestablishment of a Jewish state in its ancient homeland, Nisan said, as well as an understanding of the permanent threats Israel faces.

In a visit to Israel in 2014, Harper told a news conference that Canadians have learned the lesson that “when someone is a minority, a particularly small minority in the world, one goes out of one’s way to embrace them, not to single them out for criticism.”

When asked about continued Israeli building in areas that Israel acquired in 1967, Harper said, “When I’m in Israel, I’m asked to single out Israel, when I’m in the Palestinian Authority I’m asked to single out Israel, and half the other places around the world you ask me to single out Israel,” adding that he refused to do that.

The support of Canada became even more important to Israel as tensions rose between Netanyahu and President Obama. Having “North American support” was an important psychological boost. Nisan remembers Justin Trudeau’s father, Pierre Trudeau, who came to power in 1968. Now the son, who shares his father’s good lucks and charisma, will become the second-youngest Prime Minister in Canada’s history.

Some Israeli analysts say there is no proof that Trudeau will be openly critical of Israel, and that it is worth giving him a chance.

“Israelis and the pro-Israel community which has a tendency to view the world as revolving around Israel see this as a catastrophe,” Gil Troy, a professor of politics at McGill University in Canada, who resides in Israel, told The Media Line. “But Trudeau has Jewish advisors, and many of the people around him have been to Israel. His father understood Israel and there is no indication that he will be any different.”

Troy said that Israel was not part of the Canadian election but that Harper lost because voters wanted to see a new face in politics.

“Israel’s enemies are going to try to pretend this is some kind of referendum on Harper’s foreign policy and his support for Israel,” Troy said. “The truth of this election was that all of the candidates – even the far-left NDP party are deeply committed to supporting Israel, believe in Israel’s legitimacy, and speak eloquently against boycott and divestment.”

Israeli officials refused to comment until Netanyahu made an official statement.

Israel nervous about Trudeau win Read More »

Biden says he will not seek 2016 Democratic nomination

Vice President Joe Biden said on Wednesday he would not seek the Democratic nomination for president in 2016, ending months of suspense and removing a huge political obstacle for front-runner Hillary Clinton.

“While I will not be a candidate, I will not be silent,” Biden told reporters in the White House Rose Garden with President Barack Obama and Biden's wife Jill at his side.

In deciding not to run, Biden, 72, appeared to succumb to his own doubts about whether he and his family were ready for a grueling campaign while still mourning his son Beau, who died of brain cancer in May. His son had urged him to run.

Clinton's slipping poll numbers had cracked open a door to a late bid by the affable Biden, leading to calls from his supporters to seek the presidency.

But what was widely hailed as a command performance by Clinton in the Oct. 13 Democratic debate turned the tide back in her favor and quieted talk that she was vulnerable in her quest for her party's nomination for the November 2016 election.

Clinton's support among Democrats surged by 10 percentage points after the October debate, a recent Reuters/Ipsos poll showed. She had the backing of about 52 percent of poll participants, followed by Sanders at 27 percent. Biden's support, at 13 percent, was down 6 percentage points.

Biden had run for president twice before and was a U.S. senator from Delaware for more than three decades. Biden is popular with white, working-class voters, and he could still play a major role in the election if he chooses to endorse a Democratic candidate.

Also in the running for the Democratic nomination are former Maryland Governor Martin O'Malley and former Rhode Island Governor Lincoln Chafee.

BIDEN LEGACY

Biden ran for president in 1988 and 2008, both times dropping out early in the race.

He has been prominent for a vice president, with broad involvement in many of President Barack Obama's foreign affairs decisions, such as the withdrawal from Iraq and his Afghanistan strategy.

Biden once boasted that he had “met virtually every major leader in the world.”

He became something of a secret weapon for the White House on Capitol Hill, stepping in to negotiate tricky fiscal deals with Republican lawmakers.

Biden, who is Roman Catholic, won praise from human rights groups for saying in May 2012 that he was “absolutely comfortable” with same-sex marriage. Many observers credited his comments for pushing Obama to announce his support too.

In Biden's long Senate career, he served as chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee. He also pushed for the Violence Against Women Act, which toughened penalties for sex offenders and created protections for victims.

Biden says he will not seek 2016 Democratic nomination Read More »

End of the Houthis?

This artice first appeared on The Media Line.

Thirteen months ago the Iranian-backed Houthi stormed into Sana’a taking control over large swathes of Yemen in the process. Attempts between the group and the incumbent President Abd Rabu Mansur Hadi to cooperate eventually collapsed leading to the premier’s escape into exile in February of this year. An air campaign led by Saudi Arabia followed, reversing much of the territorial gains made by the Shi’ite militia.

As a result the Houthi have recently announced that its fighters will withdraw from the remaining territory they hold, signaling what could be the beginning of the end of the country’s civil war. The Media Line spoke to Yemenis and representatives of the group to ask them what they believed had been achieved in the year-long Houthi rule. 

The group’s first achievement was in preventing Saudi Arabia from breaking Yemen into numerous small regions, Abu Mohammed Al-Marwani, a Houthi leading figure, told The Media Line. “We are fighting a war to define the fate of Yemen: either we escape (Saudi) control or remain slaves to them. We are determined to defeat them in order to have the right to decide our destiny,” Al-Marwani said.

The Houthi commander also claimed that his organization had contributed to the fight against al-Qa’ida by pushing the group into the province of Hadramout.

“The US and other parties were able to kill the leader of al-Qa’ida in Yemen, Nasser Al-Wuhaishi. If we had not cornered them in Hadramout, America would not have been able to kill him,” Al-Marwani argued. The local franchise of the jihadist organization, known as al-Qa’ida in the Arabian Peninsula (AQAP) was for some time considered the most dangerous branch of the Sunni extremist network, having attempted a number of sophisticated bomb attacks against US interests. 

Al-Marwani added that his organization had done much to reduce banditry in Yemen which previously plagued rural roads and had tackled corruption within government ministries.

“The Houthi made a huge mistake when they entered Sana’a at gunpoint and turned against the government,” Hussam Murshed Badi, an expert who follows armed organizations, told The Media Line. Badi accused the Houthi of orchestrating an energy crisis and of allowing a black market to flourish in order to provide back channel funds to its fighters. As part of this process all gas stations were closed down so that demand on the illegal market, and thus prices would soar, Badi alleged.

“We used to accuse the former regime of corruption,’ he said. “But those (the Houthis), the least we can call them is thieves. They have made millions of people homeless and hundreds of thousands unemployed.’ 

While Badi conceded that the Houthi did help suppress AQAP in some parts of the country, he suggested that elsewhere the group had expanded. Its enemies distracted and fighting each other, al-Qa’ida rearmed and expanded in the Hadramout area, Badi said. 

“It’s true that the Houthis have caused destruction, but if they were given a chance, they would have achieved things,” Mohammed Al-Anesi, a citizen in Sana’a, told The Media Line.

Mohammed Al-Qadri, another resident of Sana’a, agreed with Al-Anesi describing an incident where his taxi, his primary source of income, was stolen at gun point by ten armed men. Local police refused to help Al-Qadri retrieve his automobile. But when the Houthi arrived in the city they quickly enacted justice, Al-Qadri said, explaining, “I got my car back and the bandits were detained.”

Other Yemenis support the Houthi not for their appreciation of the group or its ideology but because of a desire to hit back at Saudi Arabia, who they see as an aggressor towards their country.

“The Houthis are the cause of all the blights of Yemen… but I am fighting for them right now, (because) we have a common enemy – Saudi Arabia,” Mujahid Al-Anesi, a resident of Dhamar, told The Media Line. Women, children and elderly people being killed by Saudi bombs had motivated Al-Anesi to fight against the Saudis, but later it would be the turn of the Houthi, the fighter said. 

“There is an old Yemeni proverb that says my cousin and I are enemies until the stranger comes, and then we fight him together,” Al-Anesi explained.

Several citizens said they were not originally sympathetic to Houthi rule but had come around to supporting the group due to their anger at Saudi Arabia’s intervention in Yemen. Some individuals have even joined the fighters of the Houthi as a result.

The Houthi declared that they will withdraw from Sana’a and relinquish territory previously taken in order to end the suffering of the people of Yemen, Mohammed Al-Bukhaiti, a member of the organization’s political office, told The Media Line. The Houthi will comply with the United Nations’ Security Council (UNSC) directive 2216 providing it is overseen by the UN itself, Al-Bukhaiti said. 

“We made concessions to end the suffering of Yemenis caused by the Saudi bombardment that spared nothing and no one,” the Houthi political officer declared.

However an exclusive source within Prime Minister Khaled Mahafoudh Bahah’s cabinet divulged to The Media Line that the government had no faith in the Houthi’s word. 

“The legitimate government does not believe the Houthi, therefore (President) Hadi’s government and the coalition will condition that their forces replace the Houthi’s to ensure that the latter’s forces will actually withdraw,” the source said.

End of the Houthis? Read More »

Kerry says no joint Abbas-Netanyahu meeting for now

U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry said a joint meeting with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas is unlikely.

“I’ve talked to President Abbas and I’ve talked to Prime Minister Netanyahu in the last few days, and we could meet if we chose to,” Kerry said Tuesday, answering reporters’ questions at a climate change conference. “But I think it’s not – that meeting together in the same country is not – this is not the moment, obviously.”

A sharp increase in Palestinian attacks on Israelis in recent weeks has killed eight Israelis, an Eritrean refugee and nearly 50 Palestinians, as tensions swirl around claims to the Temple Mount, the Jerusalem site holy to Muslims and Jews and known to Muslims as Haram al-Sharif.

There had been reported discussions of setting up a possible meeting between Abbas, Netanyahu and Jordan’s King Abdullah, who is responsible for the Muslim supervision of the site, as a means of tamping down tensions.

Kerry said he would meet separately with the leaders during his forthcoming tour of Europe and the Middle East.

“I’ll be meeting with Prime Minister Netanyahu either in Germany or in the region, and I will be meeting with President Abbas and meeting with King Abdullah and others,” he said Tuesday. “And we will go back to some very basics here with respect to what the expectations are for the administration and the Haram al-Sharif and the Temple Mount, and hopefully begin to open up enough political space to begin to move on some other areas.”

Kerry says no joint Abbas-Netanyahu meeting for now Read More »

Abraham’s Children: How Muslim and Jewish Burial Practices Can Help Bring Peace

In the Biblical story of the death of Abraham, Ishmael and Isaac come together to bury their father. Then Isaac goes to live in peace with Ishmael. Many millennia later …

  • thousands of Jews across the United States and Canada volunteer their time and energy to perform the ancient Jewish ritual of Taharah, the washing, purification and dressing of their dead, considered the ultimate act of Tzeddakah, (charity). But they are experiencing health and other concerns that Isaac could never have imagined.
  • thousands of Muslims across the United States and Canada volunteer their time and energy to perform the ancient Muslim ritual of Taharah, the washing, purification and wrapping of their dead, considered the ultimate act of Sedakah, (charity). But they are experiencing health and other concerns Ishmael could never have imagined.

Face to Face
I first met Muhammad Yusuf Chaudry at his home in Laurel, Maryland. The Islamic Community Center of Laurel, along with all the other Islamic Centers in Maryland, had asked a Maryland senator to sponsor legislation to make it possible for Muslims to wash their dead at Islamic Centers. I had heard about the proposed legislation and called Yusuf to learn about his work. I asked him about the problems with the current situation.
“There are a number of issues”, he responded. “We want to maintain modesty. Only men should handle men, only women should handle women. We don't want the funeral director handling the deceased. It is a community and religious responsibility, and we especially don't want funeral directors of the opposite sex dressing, undressing, washing, removing tubes, etc.”  I nodded in agreement.
“We also want to wash and bury without delay. We need to have the body picked up quickly from where the person dies and we need immediate access to be able to wash and dress them.” I felt like I was listening to myself talk about Jewish traditions.
Over tea Yusuf explained the Muslim tradition of Taharah, washing and purification of the body. Judaism has a similar ritual also called Taharah, which translates from Hebrew to English as purification. The Jewish ritual of Taharah is also performed by men for men, and by women for women. It consists of prayers and washing, ritual pouring of water, and dressing in simple white garments.
My conversation with Yusuf was powerful and for me it had significant implications about religious traditions, death practices, and the funeral home and cemetery industry. Where I previously had seen only a gulf between Jews and Muslims, now I was seeing amazing commonalities.
Over the next few months, Yusuf and I talked frequently and worked together closely. We strategized on wording changes for the proposed legislation. We discussed the points to make in testimony before the legislature. We jointly presented the importance of this legislation to a very reserved Maryland Board of Morticians. We toured Jewish taharah rooms. We talked about every aspect of religious practice around death, as well as other Muslim and Jewish views, beliefs and practices. And we became friends.

How Can Jews and Muslim Talk?
Mideast peace remains elusive, the impact of 9-11 terrorism continues to hit home, and the United States is engaged in military actions in Afghanistan, Iraq and probably many other countries. Muslims and Jews in the United States and Canada have never had close relations. World events make the development of any relationship between the groups much less likely. The situation is made worse by the United States government’s targeting of immigrants from Arab countries for deportation, arresting Muslim Arabs without charges and conducting secret court trials.
In North America, minority groups often feel powerless to impact world events or even local politics. With Jewish and Muslim religious mandates to make the world a better place, we are forced to ask ourselves questions: How can we change the policies of governments? How can we overcome hatred and violence? What should we do today to bring peace to the world? What steps should we take to build a pluralistic society and bring peace to our homes?

Understanding the Lessons of History
From the Spanish inquisition through Russian pogroms to Nazi extermination, Jews have learned that anti-Semitic behavior was often a precursor to genocide. It is this understanding that propels many Jews to fight discrimination, to speak out for human rights, freedom and democracy. It is this history that brought Jews to be active in the civil rights movement in the South and in the anti-apartheid movement in South Africa. It is this history that would normally ally Jews with an underdog Muslim community.

Much in Common
There are over 1 billion Muslims in the World, comprising 20% of the world’s total population. In North America the Muslim and Jewish populations are roughly equal, about 2% of the population. As minorities in the Christian dominated U.S. and Canada, traditional Jews and Muslims each have their own way of dress, eating rules and worship patterns that place them out of the norm. Both religions stress the importance of family, education and hard work. Jews and Muslims have extensive faith-based social service networks.
Muslims as a group are more recent immigrants to the U.S. and Canada than are Jews. Muslims are seen by much of the rest of American society as “the other”, the way earlier generations of less assimilated Jews were perceived. Muslim communities need to better understand how to leverage their own resources and use their influence to defend against discrimination and to support the unfettered practice of their traditions.
Jews as a group are losing members and straying from their tradition. National Jewish organizations have been unable to provide clear direction to reverse this trend. Jews also feel helpless about what they can do to support peace in the Middle East and to fight terrorism. 
Historically in North Africa and in Europe, Muslims and Jews created golden ages of cooperation and peace. Because of these historical roots and similar practices, and despite the obstacles that are before us, Jews and Muslims are logical allies. We need each other now, more than ever.

The Challenge
It is easy to lose traditions just a few generations after immigrants are exposed to Western influences. Many of us have forgotten, or never learned, traditional death practices. Only through education about our heritage and attention to current issues that arise in carrying out these rituals will both communities be able to learn about themselves and each other and to preserve their cherished traditions. Understanding the other’s practices helps us better understand and appreciate our own practices.
Jews and Muslims strive to care for their own dead, and go out of their way to provide for those who cannot afford funerals and burials. Jewish and Muslim death practices are very similar to each other, and very different from the rest of society. These practices include Taharah (the ritual washing), simple dressing, ground burial and defined mourning periods and prohibit body preservation and ostentation. Both religions stress communal obligations to the deceased and the mourners. The same words, the same practices, the same meaning.
It is important to focus on action, particularly at the local level, because problem solving is concrete. Working together widens available resources, and creates a long lasting level of satisfaction – not just the ephemeral good feelings that follow intercultural dialogues. Jewish and Muslim groups can share information about specifications for Taharah facilities, including construction, ventilation and health codes.
Volunteers performing Taharah face the possibility of contracting Hepatitis B, a deadly liver disease. Yet simple precautions and a readily available vaccination will provide the protection needed. Sadly there is little health education provided for individuals who do this work of caring for the dead. OSHA says the volunteers are not paid employees and are not covered by OHSA rules. State mortuary boards usually leave the training of volunteers to the funeral directors. Funeral directors’ degree and continuing education programs spend a relatively small portion of their time on health precautions. Funeral directors themselves spend even less time teaching precautions to their employees and contractors. And it is indeed the rare Funeral Director who shows a lot of interest in training volunteers.
Joint health education program for Jews and Muslims could give lay people providing Taharot [plural of Taharah] critical information on infectious disease, precautions and vaccinations. Similar joint forums could be created to address the emotional, psychological and spiritual reactions that volunteers may experience.


Working Together
It is encouraging to see developments of think tanks and discussion groups between Jews and Muslims. Yet active cooperation, working together, is needed to develop trust and ongoing relationships between Jews and Muslims. Death and mourning practices may be our common bond, the beginning link to establishing trust.

Proposal
Kavod v’Nichum (Honor and Comfort) provides education about traditional Jewish death practices. We propose a new initiative to build grass roots relationships through education and action around funeral and burial practices of Muslims and Jews. Together with a Muslim partner, we will bring together local mosque and synagogue members interested, or involved in, traditional Muslim and Jewish practices around death, including body preparation, burial, and mourning.

We will enable Muslims and Jews to provide education about their death-related practices. We will help each group identify bureaucratic, financial and organizational obstacles to development and facilitate them helping each other. We will develop a national capacity for assistance to these groups. And most important, we will utilize these local and national contacts to help foster concrete, working relationships that go well beyond meetings and discussions. We intend to sow the seeds of peace, Salaam, Shalom.

Why
1. Common practice – Our proposal focuses on practices around death because Muslim and Jewish traditions and practices are very similar to each other, and very different from the rest of society. These practices include ritual washing, simple dressing, ground burial and defined mourning periods and exclude body preservation and ostentation. Both religions stress communal obligations and provide for the poor. The same words, the same meaning, the same practices.

2. Traditions at risk – We know how easy it is to lose traditions just a few generations after immigration. We focus on education because we have forgotten, or never learned, traditional practices, and because understanding the other’s practices helps us better understand and appreciate our own practices.

3. Action is better than talk – We focus on action at the local level, because problem solving is concrete. Working together widens available resources, and creates a long lasting level of satisfaction. For example, Jewish and Muslim groups can share information about specifications for Taharah facilities. This can include construction, water, drainage, ventilation as well as health codes, licensing, and zoning. Joint education sessions could be held on communicable disease issues and protection.

4. Local first – We focus at the grass roots level to avoid complicated organizational entanglements. We are not “the other”, a nameless unknown statistic. We live in the same communities, breathe the same air, fill up in the same gas station and drive on the same roads. We build peace one relationship at a time.

The Future
Active cooperation, working together on projects of mutual importance, is needed to develop ongoing relationships and eventual trust between the Jewish and Muslim community. We build peace one relationship and one project at a time. Death and mourning practices may be the common bond that allows real communication to start. Just as our Muslim and Jewish ancestors buried Abraham together, so we too must learn about our burial traditions and practices, and use that knowledge to foster mutual understanding. When we work together to solve practical problems, we create the trust that can be a solid foundation for peace.

Kavod v’Nichum
8112 Sea Water Path
Columbia, MD 21045
410-799-8070


David Zinner is the Executive Director of Kavod V’Nichum (honor and comfort), and of the Gamliel Institute, and serves as instructor for the non-denominational Gamliel Institute, a nonprofit center for Chevrah Kadisha organizing, education, and training. In his role as executive director Zinner co-teaches courses on Chevrah Kadisha history, organizing, taharah and shmirah (sitting with the deceased until burial),  and building capacities in Jewish communities that enable all participants to meaningfully navigate these final life cycle events.

________________________________________

UPCOMING GAMLIEL INSTITUTE COURSES


Winter 2016:  
During the coming Winter semester, the Gamliel Insitute will be offering the course. Chevrah Kadisha: Taharah & Shmirah (T&S). This course will run at two times: from January 5th to March 22nd, 8-9:30 pm EST/5-6:30 pm PST, and from January 11th to March 28th, Noon to 1:30 pm EST/9-10:30 PST (12 sessions at each time). There will be an online orientation session Monday January 4th (8-9:30 pm EST) and one on January 4th (12-1:30 pm EST). For more information, visit the Gamliel Institute section of the Kavod v’Nichum website.
This course is an in-depth study of the work of the Chevrah Kadisha in the activities and mitzvot of guarding the body of the deceased (shmirah) and of ritually preparing the body for burial (taharah). This is very much a “how-to” course as well as an examination of the liturgy and of the unusual situations that can arise. The course looks as well at the impact of the work on the community and on the members of the Chevrah Kadisha, and provides an ongoing review of best practices. Includes spiritual transformative power; personal testimony; meaning and purpose; face of God; Tahor and Tamei; Tachrichim; History; manuals, tefillah, training, impediments; safety; and complications.

 

TUITION:
NOTE: Tuition for Gamliel Institute classes is $500 per person per course. Groups of 3 or more from the same organization receive a 20% discount. There are clergy and student discounts available, and we work to find Scholarships and help students seek sources of funding. Contact us to inquire about any of these matters.

 

REGISTRATION:
You can register for Gamliel Institute courses online at jewish-funerals.org/gamreg.


INFORMATION:
Please contact us for information or assistance. info@jewish-funerals.org or j.blair@jewish-funerals.org, or call 410-733-3700.


DONATIONS:
Donations are always needed and most welcome – online at  http://jewish-funerals.org/gamliel-institute-financial-support or by snail mail to Gamliel Institute, c/o David Zinner, Executive Director, Kavod v’Nichum, 8112 Sea Water Path, Columbia, MD  21045. The Gamliel Institute is a 501(c)(3) organization and donations may be tax-deductible. Call 410-733-3700 if you have any questions or want to know more about supporting the Gamliel Institute.

________________________________________
RECEIVE NOTICES WHEN THIS BLOG IS UPDATED!
Sign up on our Facebook Group page: just search for and LIKE Chevra Kadisha sponsored by Kavod vNichum, or follow our Twitter feed @chevra_kadisha.
________________________________________

To find a list of other blogs and resources we think you, our reader, may find to be of interest, click on “About” on the right side of the page.There is a link at the end of that section to read more about us.
________________________________________

Abraham’s Children: How Muslim and Jewish Burial Practices Can Help Bring Peace Read More »

Eritrean migrant mistaken for Beersheba terrorist killed by gunfire, not beating

The Eritrean migrant mistaken for an assailant during a terrorist attack at the Beersheba bus station died from gunshot wounds, not from the beatings he sustained by Israelis.

The results of the autopsy on Haftom Zarhum, 29, who died at Beersheba’s Soroka hospital several hours after the Sunday night attack, were released on Wednesday. The autopsy found that Zarhum had eight gunshot wounds, two of which were fatal, Haaretz reported, citing the report issued by Israel’s Abu Kabir Institute of Forensic Medicine.

Hundreds of Eritrean asylum seekers and friends of Zarhum gathered at a park in Tel Aviv on Wednesday night to mourn his death.

Police are working to identify the people who beat Zarhum following the bus station attack and could bring them in for questioning. They could be charged with assault in the incident, but not with murder, based on the autopsy results.

The killing was roundly condemned by Israeli leaders.

A statement posted on the Israel Police website said the attack on the downed man was a “very grave” incident and that it would “not allow citizens to take the law into their own hands.” The police statement also called on citizens to “act with restraint and extra caution and to allow the police to perform their job.”

The Defense Ministry told Israeli media that Zarhum would not be recognized as a terrorist victim in Israel since he entered the country illegally.

Eritrean migrant mistaken for Beersheba terrorist killed by gunfire, not beating Read More »

After Netanyahu comments, Germany says responsibility for Holocaust is ours

The German government said on Wednesday that responsibility for the Holocaust lay with the Germans, after Israel's prime minister sparked controversy before a visit to Berlin by saying a Muslim elder had convinced Adolf Hitler to exterminate Jews.

“All Germans know the history of the murderous race mania of the Nazis that led to the break with civilization that was the Holocaust,” Chancellor Angela Merkel's spokesman Steffen Seibert said when asked about Benjamin Netanyahu's remarks.

“This is taught in German schools for good reason, it must never be forgotten. And I see no reason to change our view of history in any way. We know that responsibility for this crime against humanity is German and very much our own.”

Hours before leaving for Berlin, Netanyahu referred in a speech to a series of attacks by Muslims against Jews in Palestine during the 1920s that he said were instigated by the then Mufti of Jerusalem, Haj Amin al-Husseini.

“Hitler didn't want to exterminate the Jews at the time, he wanted to expel the Jews,” Netanyahu said in the speech. “And Haj Amin al-Husseini went to Hitler and said, 'If you expel them, they'll all come here.'

After Netanyahu comments, Germany says responsibility for Holocaust is ours Read More »

Letters to the editor: BDS and David Myers, Israel’s future, Ben Carson and guns

BDS: Anti-Semitic or Strategic?

David Myers’ article acknowledges a number of important points about the Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions movement, but misses the big picture (“Another Way to Think about BDS,” Oct. 16).

Myers correctly states that while some BDS activists are openly anti-Semitic, others are well-meaning people who think they are simply protesting Israeli policy. But BDS should be judged primarily by its political goals, not the intentions of its supporters. BDS is racist at its core because it denies the Jewish people their right to self-determination in their ancestral homeland — Israel. This is true whether its activists realize it or not.

Myers blames the rise of BDS on — what else? — the occupation. But boycotts existed before 1967, and BDS’s current focus on Israel’s presence in the West Bank is purely strategic. BDS co-founder Omar Barghouti himself said, “Would ending the occupation mean the end of BDS? No, it wouldn’t.”

BDS leaders plan to continue until the Jewish people are returned to statelessness because this is their definition of “justice in Palestine.” The anti-Semitic incidents we see on campuses and elsewhere are an inevitable byproduct of this racist agenda.

Lastly, the strategy Myers prescribes is misguided. One-sided condemnations of Israel without equal or greater pressure on Palestinian leaders will only bolster BDS and undermine efforts to achieve a just peace. There’s no need for the Jewish community to heap blame on Israel while shielding Palestinian leaders from accountability. BDS is already doing that quite effectively.

Roz Rothstein

CEO, StandWithUs 

David Myers responds: I oppose the global BDS movement. Moreover, I think we should hold Palestinian leaders accountable for their corrupt and misguided management of their people’s legitimate aspirations for national self-determination. Where I disagree with Roz Rothstein is in the belief that Israel is right in occupying the West Bank of the Jordan river. We do ourselves no benefit with the head-in-the-sand approach that she favors. The occupation is a political disaster, morally corrosive and a huge weight around Israel’s neck that must be lifted.

Two-State Solutions, Three Opinions

Rob Eshman’s editorial left me ambivalent. While I agree that playing the blame game is trivial and that it is time we stop contemplating the past and start focusing on the future, I do not agree with his opinion on a two-state solution. If a two-state solution meant ending this ubiquitous belligerence between Israel and the countries surrounding it, I believe Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu would jump at the opportunity and wouldn’t “put off big decisions.” However, the Camp David Summit in 2000, where Ehud Barak offered concessions and Yasser Arafat walked out, is a prime example as to why a two-state solution could never work. No matter how much Israel gives in concessions, it will never be enough. While Eshman might be correct that Israel “can’t survive the death of the two-state solution,” Israel won’t be able to survive the life of a two-state solution until the Palestinians recognize Israel as a Jewish state. 

Amira Felsenthal , Los Angeles

I thought “Sticks, Stones and Centrifuges” (Oct. 16) was brilliant. So well written and meaningful. Thank you. 

Might I offer something that may be of interest? It’s about the statements: “So, can Israel make a bold move here? Given the turmoil surrounding it, given the increasing radicalization and despair of the Palestinians, dare Israel dare?” and “I believe Israel has more to lose by clinging to the status quo than by shaking it up.”

Doesn’t almost every Jew want the same thing? It is the question of what comes next that divides us. Hasn’t Israel always taken bold chances, time and again since its creation, to advance peace with the Arabs? 

Has Israel made huge mistakes? Absolutely. We all know it. Yet Israel must continue to take steps for peace. We are in total agreement on this.

Rob Cherniak, Vancouver 

The Second Amendment and the Second World War

Well, Jewish Journal published yet another rant against conservatives, this time Ben Carson was on the leftist chopping block for stating a belief that, had the Jewish people not been unarmed, Hitler could not have achieved the near-total annihilation of European Judaism (“The Nutty Neurosurgeon,” Oct. 16).

I cannot believe a Jewish publication could not be aware of the anti-Nazi uprising in the Warsaw Ghetto, when a handful of Jewish heroes and heroines held off a huge array of Nazi military forces for several weeks with nothing more than a few handguns.

It is highly unlikely that hordes of Nazi soldiers would have entered Jewish homes to haul away our defenseless people had they known each home could have a rifle, perhaps a handgun or two and substantial amounts of ammunition — ready to kill those Nazis on the spot?

Leonard Melman, Nanoose Bay, Canada

Letters to the editor: BDS and David Myers, Israel’s future, Ben Carson and guns Read More »