fbpx

GET HOME DELIVERY! CLICK HERE »

ADVERTISE
pick up locations
HOME DELIVERY
donate

Jewish Journal

Connect. Inform. Inspire.

January 31, 2016

Des Moines Diary (2): Are you interested in the rest of us?

Leave a Comment / Israel, Israel, Rosner's Domain, Rosners Domain-mobile /

Friday, late morning, or maybe it is already noon, and Hillary Clinton is going on stage. The crowd cheers, but not too much. The atmosphere is business-like. These people – I interviewed some of them when the event was over – don’t easily get excited when a political celebrity comes to town. They’ve seen them all. They know them all. A tough crowd for a candidate.

Clinton focuses on the economy. First she emphasizes the differences between Republican and Democratic Presidents, some of which she happens to know, wink wink (her husband, President Clinton, inherited a recession; her former boss, President Obama, inherited a financial crisis). Then she moves on to talk, delicately, about the differences between her and her two opponents – Bernie Sanders and the third tenor whom barely anyone names. Clinton calls them ‘the Senator and the Governor.’ She does not harshly criticize them, just says that while she wants to build on “what we achieved” with healthcare, Sanders wants to “start over” (and in case anyone forgot: healthcare reform was HillaryCare before it was ObamaCare).

When she talks about equal pay for women – an important goal, if somewhat tricky to achieve – she gets the loudest cheers and clapping. When she talks about foreign policy, there is silence. I guess that’s why she doesn’t talk about foreign policy, not more than four of five sentences.

What does Clinton say about foreign policy and defense issues? She says: “I feel ready and prepared on the first day.” This isn’t about policy at all – it is about her being the experienced one. It is about her telling the voters: you do not really care about the nuances of foreign issues, and are not truly interested in them, so let’s talk about the issues about which you do care – your paycheck – and leave the rest of the world to me. I have the resume to deal with it (to which Sanders’ enthusiasts respond: Clinton does not have experience, she has a track record of bad choices) .

No one seems bothered by this world-free presentation; but as a card-carrying member of the rest-of-the-world, I wonder if I should be bothered by that. When an Israeli travels to Iowa in mid-winter it is because of the significance of tomorrow’s vote for the rest-of-the-world. When a non-American feels compelled to understand and report on the nuances of the American campaign, it is because of the implications this campaign is going to have on the rest-of-the-world.

Clinton-supporting Iowans don’t seem to care much about the rest-of-the-world. Those attending Sanders’ rallies care even less (I am still waiting for him to talk about Iran and Israel with more detail). In the last couple of days I interviewed dozens of such attendees. “The economy is my number one and two and three issue,” one of them told me; “why are you here?” another one asked me with surprising bluntness, “Iowans are not voting on the Middle East.” I must admit, though, that Rhys Blakely got a much better quote with which to open his article: “Peter Schmoll, a taciturn corn ­farmer from Iowa, adjusted his baseball cap as he pondered what he thought made a good ­president. ‘They should be good for corn farming’, he said. Anything else? ‘Not really’.”

So Saturday evening, shortly after Shabbat, I bet on a corrective experience at a Marco Rubio rally in Urbandale and was not disappointed. The issue is not that the Democrats are going for this foreign policy while the Republicans are going for that foreign policy. It is that Democratic candidates don’t want to talk about foreign policy – seeming disinterested in having a conversation about Asia and the Middle East, terrorism and radicalism – while Republican candidates want to talk about all these issues. In the case of Rubio yesterday, he wanted to talk mostly about these issues.

Rubio articulated in his speech the reason for which he focuses on foreign policy and defense policy. It is an ideological choice. In Rubio’s view, as he says, being commander in chief is the main role of the President of the US. In his view, America does not need a federal government and a president to take care of its schools – there are states for that. America needs a President to be its commander in chief.

So Rubio begins by saying: We elected a President who wants America to be more like the rest of the world – Obama – and now we need a President who understands that America is exceptional. Obama signed a deal with Iran (the crowd boos the deal). Obama betrays “our allies like Israel.” Rubio talks a little bit about immigration and about healthcare but quickly returns to talking about the world. The “lunatic” leader of North Korea, the recent moves by China, Vladimir Putin who poisons people, Iran – another boo – and ISIS. On ISIS, Rubio gives a little educational speech. What is the ideology behind it, what are its ambitions, how it operates.

Rubio does it well, putting his well-recognized communication abilities to work. He is a much better speaker than Hillary Clinton. Nicer, funnier, lighter, smoother. Maybe somewhat like the other Clinton. But it’s more than the style of presentation that these two do not share. I was intrigued by their completely different choice of subjects – a difference that reflects a different reading of what Americans need and want, a difference that reflects a different ideology and a different set of priorities, a difference that will surely be felt when the next President gets into the White House (be it her, him, or one of the many others).

Des Moines Diary (2): Are you interested in the rest of us? Read More »

The Knesset NGO Transparency Bill is not what its right-wing backers say it is!

Leave a Comment / Blogs, Judaism /

Israel’s Justice Minister, 39 year-old Ayelet Shaked of the right-wing Jewish Home Party that represents the powerful settler movement, is the primary advocate behind the Knesset bill that would require NGOs (non-governmental organizations) that receive 50% or more of their funding from foreign governments to publicly detail those sources as a means, Shaked says, to protect the state of Israel from the undermining and delegitimizing efforts of the Jewish state by foreign governments.

This bill, however, has nothing to do with what its backers claim because the bill is superfluous. Israel already has many regulations in place for NGOs that receive money from foreign governments, and their budgets are published and sources of income are known.

What is the real intent behind passage of this NGO Transparency bill?

To target Israeli human rights and left-wing organizations such as “B’tzelem,” which monitors human rights violations against Palestinians by settlers and the Israeli military administration in the West Bank, “Breaking the Silence,” a group of former IDF soldiers who are speaking out about army violations of  human rights in the West Bank, and the American based “New Israel Fund,” a pro-Israel human rights organization that funds projects not funded by the Israeli government or American Federation dollars.

It is noteworthy that many right-wing NGOs that are not transparent are left untouched by this Knesset Bill.

According to a Peace Now survey issued in September, 2015 that examined the reports for 2006-2013 of nine NGOs identified with the Israeli right-wing, it was found that there is no way of knowing where the funding of hundreds of millions of shekels to these organizations that deeply affect policy and Israeli public opinion comes from (see http://peacenow.org.il/eng/RightWingNGOs).

For example, 2% (160,000 NIS) of the extremist right-wing organization “Im Tirtsu’s” funding is secret. Last week Im Tirtsu launched a slanderous campaign targeting some of Israel’s most respected left-wing literary icons including Amos Oz, A.B Yehoshua and David Grossman calling them “moles in culture” and insinuating that they are treasonous.

The anti-left “NGO Monitor” does not reveal 23% of its funding. The settlement movement’s powerful “Yesha Council” does not reveal 99% of its funding. The right-wing organization “Ir David Foundation” (Elad) that has led the way in building and developing East Jerusalem Palestinian neighborhoods for Jewish settlement, does not reveal 100% of its funding.

The reason these groups are not required to reveal their funding sources is that their money either comes from Israeli individuals and Foundations or from wealthy American Jews and American Foundations. There is no requirement in Israeli law to name the names of individuals or non-government foundations. The Shaked NGO Transparency Bill only addresses funding from foreign governments.

Shaked’s bill is similar to policies in Egypt after the revolution that banned all NGOs and to Putin’s Russia that bans free speech. MK Shaked dismissed criticism by comparing the Israeli bill with the American Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA), but US Ambassador to Israel Dan Shapiro publicly refuted her comparison last month saying:

“As a general matter, US law imposes no limits, restrictions or transparency requirements on the  receipt of foreign funding by NGOs operating in the United States, other than those generally applicable to all Americans…the draft Israeli law would target NGOs simply because they are funded principally by foreign government entities….FARA requires individuals or organizations to register as foreign agents only if they engage in certain specified activities at the order, request or under the direction or control, of a foreign principal – not simply by receiving contributions from such an entity. As a result, it does not create the chilling effect on NGO activities that we are concerned about in reviewing the draft Israeli NGO law.”

Shaked’s NGO Transparency bill does not expose anything new. Organizations in Israel that receive funds from private donors, as such as Sheldon Adelson, are far less regulated as opposed to those organizations receiving money from foreign governments, even governments such as the EU, Germany and the Netherlands that have excellent relations with Israel.

What it comes down to is that MK Shaked’s law focuses upon organizations she and the right-wing government of Israel do not like.

There seems to be a misconception by the bill’s advocates about the important check and balance role that NGOs play in democracies. In a proper democracy, the government does not get to decide what are the good NGOs and what are the bad NGOs. Rather, people decide what they wish to fund or not fund.

Shaked acknowledges that this NGO law does not shut down any NGO nor does it require changes in operating left-wing NGOs. The purpose of the bill is symbolic. Its intent is to sow suspicion about Israeli human rights NGOs, to insult their integrity, to challenge their pro-Israel credentials, and to prime the Israeli public to accept further limitations on what NGOs can do and not do down the road.

This bill ought to be defeated but it is expected to pass, which does not augur well for Israeli democracy.

The Knesset NGO Transparency Bill is not what its right-wing backers say it is! Read More »

Western Wall prayer fight ends with historic compromise

Leave a Comment / Israel /

Israel's government on Sunday approved a compromise to expand the non-Orthodox Jewish prayer section of the Western Wall, putting to rest the decades-long fight between Women of the Wall and Israel's haredi Orthodox religious establishment.

The deal achieves what had been an elusive goal: an interdenominational consensus on Judaism's holiest site with official recognition. The non-Orthodox prayer section at the wall will become much larger and more accessible. But haredi control of the Orthodox section will also be solidified, though non-Orthodox leaders have long protested that monopoly.

The deal, a copy of which JTA obtained ahead of the Cabinet vote, still contains a few unknowns. It is unclear how long construction will take. It does not say whether clear signage will direct visitors to the non-Orthodox section. Nor does it say exactly when Women of the Wall, an embattled women’s prayer group, will move its monthly services from the Orthodox Jewish main prayer section to the non-Orthodox one.

Still, the Conservative and Reform movements can declare victory. The size of the non-Orthodox section of the Western Wall will double to nearly 10,000 square feet — half the size of the Orthodox main section just to its north. A committee of non-Orthodox leaders and government officials will manage the non-Orthodox section. And a single entrance will lead to both sections.

The Western Wall’s haredi Orthodox management, called the Western Wall Heritage Foundation, also safeguarded its interests. Non-Orthodox leaders had campaigned for a share of control of the Orthodox section of the wall, but the Heritage Foundation will retain full authority over it and the larger plaza behind the prayer sections. And when the plan is implemented, Women of the Wall will move to the non-Orthodox section, one of the Heritage Foundation’s long-standing demands.

“They all came to the conclusion that they must make serious compromises because they want it to remain one Kotel for one people,” Jewish Agency for Israel Chairman Natan Sharansky told JTA, using the Hebrew term for the site. “lt's the place that must unite us more than anything else, and it turned into the most ugly war.”

Plans for the non-Orthodox section’s expansion, spearheaded by Sharansky, began in December 2012. In October of that year, police had arrested the Women of the Wall's chairwoman, Anat Hoffman, for wearing a tallit during the group’s monthly service — an act that at the time was illegal at the site.

Talks on a plan to expand the non-Orthodox section of the wall, located in an archaeological park known as Robinson’s Arch, began in April 2013. Sharansky and outgoing Israeli Cabinet secretary Avichai Mandelblit led the negotiations, which included representatives of the Reform and Conservative movements, the Heritage Foundation and Women of the Wall.

Nearly three years later, the deal enacted Sunday calls for the creation of an “official and respected,” 9,700-square foot prayer space in the non-Orthodox section of the Western Wall, running along a 31-foot segment of the wall, that Sharansky said will fit approximately 1,200 people. It will have a government-funded staff, Torah scrolls and other ritual objects, and be open to all forms of Jewish prayer. Sharansky estimated its construction could take up to two years.

Even after it is completed, the non-Orthodox section will remain smaller than its Orthodox counterpart. The Orthodox section measures some 21,500 square feet, adjacent to a nearly 200-foot segment of the wall, and has some 27,000 visitors on an average day.

The area is divided into two sections: a larger one for men and a smaller one for women. The rules prohibit women from reading from Torah scrolls in the Orthodox section.

A committee composed of two Reform leaders, two Conservative leaders, two non-Orthodox women representatives, the Jewish Agency chairman and six government officials will run the non-Orthodox section.

The Orthodox and non-Orthodox sections of the Western Wall will share an entrance near the Old City of Jerusalem’s Dung Gate, one story above the Western Wall plaza’s current entrance. Currently, the path to the non-Orthodox section is long, narrow and accessible only through a gateway tucked in a back corner of the plaza. The deal will create a wide and visible walkway to the section.

The deal does not specify, however, whether there will be signs at the entrance informing visitors of the non-Orthodox section or anything else notifying visitors of its existence.

“The vision of the new section of the Kotel is a physical and conceptual space open to all forms of Jewish prayer,” a statement from Women of the Wall read. “Instead of splitting up the existing pie into ever more divided, smaller pieces, we are making the pie much larger and sharing the new space.”

The Western Wall’s haredi management, headed by Rabbi Shmuel Rabinowitz, has long pushed for Women of the Wall to leave the site. Under the deal, the women's group has agreed to move to the non-Orthodox section only once the deal is implemented. And a faction of Women of the Wall has vowed not to budge from the Orthodox section — regardless of what the deal says.

The Western Wall’s religious status has been under contention for decades. Women of the Wall was founded in 1988 to advance women’s prayer at the site, which is prohibited under haredi Orthodox Jewish law. Until 2013, much of the group’s activity contravened the Heritage Foundation’s regulations and thus was illegal. Police regularly detained members of the group.

Non-Orthodox groups also suffered persecution at the site. In 1997, an egalitarian Conservative Shavuot celebration behind the prayer section was attacked by protesters throwing bottles, diapers and refuse at the worshippers. The incident led to the establishment of the non-Orthodox prayer section at Robinson’s Arch in 2000.

Following an international backlash to Hoffman’s 2012 arrest, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu tasked Sharansky with forging a compromise solution to the dispute. An outline Sharansky proposed in April 2013 called for the non-Orthodox section to be equal in size and elevation to the Orthodox section, but it proved unworkable due to objections from the Israel Antiquities Authority and the Waqf, the Islamic body that governs the Temple Mount.

In August 2013, Diaspora Affairs Minister Naftali Bennett tried for an interim solution by building a 4,800 square-foot platform that created more space in the non-Orthodox section. Women of the Wall rejected the platform, calling it a “sundeck.” Now the architects of Sunday’s compromise hope that all sides of the debate will be able to put their differences behind them for the sake of the Western Wall’s symbolism.

“This contains the hope that the Western Wall will no longer be an arena for disputes, and will regain the uniting character that befits its special place for the entire Jewish people,” the agreement reads. “May this also bring peace among us.”

Western Wall prayer fight ends with historic compromise Read More »

I don’t know how we got here… but I’d sure like to move on!

Leave a Comment / Blogs /

I don’t know how we got here… but I’d sure like to move on!

Multiple Choice – Please Choose ONE! Achinoam Nini, better known as Noa:

____ Represents the Palestinian people, and is not a true Israeli.

____ Is a supporter of right wing Israeli settlement politics.

____ Represented Israel in the Eurovision Contest along with Israeli Arab Mira Awad and is a passionate peace activist.

____ Is a traitor to the State of Israel and a self-hating Jewess.

All of these statements have been used to describe Noa, but only one is accurate. Noa is one of Israel’s leading international singer/songwriters.  She could also be the poster child for everything that is wrong with the current political and social landscape.

Silencing the voice of those who disagree with you is antithetical to Jewish values and undermines the very foundation of Israeli and American democracy.

Her concerts have been cancelled due to protests by the BDS Movement and she’s been called a traitor by the Israeli group Im Tirtzu for her outspoken views on Palestinian rights. Since announcing her concert at the Pico Union Project, we have received phone calls and emails attacking Noa as an “Israel hater” and “fascist pig” while demanding that we cancel her concert. It’s one thing to disagree with someone’s politics, it's another to suggest they are not entitled to share them.  Silencing the voice of those who dare to speak out is antithetical to Jewish values and undermines the very foundation of Israeli and American democracy.

Our work at the Pico Union Project empowers us to give voice to a cross-section of the community, it has also made us the target of ugly hate speech. We have seen an unraveling of common decency and common sense, and while I don’t know how we got here, I’d sure like to move on! I’m sick of the fear mongering and intimidation.

There is a cost for freedom, as rights come with obligation and responsibilities.  In this age of materialism and me-ism it’s easy to expect our rights and sluff off our responsibilities.  We cannot go back, but in order to move forward we must do so with respect.
• To never take our freedom of speech or civil rights for granted.
• To listen before we speak.
• To be tolerant of other viewpoints while vigorously defending our own.
• To refrain from judging others, especially before owning up to our own faults.
• To never expect or demand uniformity.  It’s not healthy or smart.
• To never, ever take ourselves and certainly not our opinions too seriously.

It’s a long road – Lo Aleicha Hamlacha Ligmor – it’s not up to us to finish the work – but we are not free to give up.

PS. Noa really is an extraordinary artist, we'd love to see you at the concert.   www.picounionproject.org/noa

I don’t know how we got here… but I’d sure like to move on! Read More »

Sharansky applauds ‘One Kotel for One People’

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

In the wake of the Israeli government’s historic announcement on Sunday, Jan. 31, that a new, expanded egalitarian prayer space would be opened up at the Western Wall in Jerusalem, Natan Sharansky, chairman of the Jewish Agency for Israel, spoke to the press from Pasadena.  The new section could take two years to create, but will reportedly accommodate as many as 1,200 people and will be accessible through the Wall’s main plaza for use by all genders and denominations together. Previously, the Kotel – the Hebrew name for the Western Wall – was run under Orthodox rule and had allowed only for separate prayer spaces for men and women. It also did not allow women to read from Torah or wear tallits. The existing Orthodox sections will remain in place.

“In terms of human rights and the Jewish people,” Sharansky said Sunday, “it is the right thing to do.”

Sharansky said the Wall controversy has underscored one of the biggest “internal” problems facing Israel today – the tension between Israel’s and the Diaspora’s definition of who is a Jew, with the fight over the wall serving as “the most visual example of” this.

Israel cares about the viewpoint of Diaspora Jewry, he said, because American Jews, for one, have played a critical role in combating the “de-legitimization of the State of Israel.” At the same time, he said, many Diaspora Jews see Israel as a source of their “Jewish identity.”

Sharansky was appointed three years ago by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to come up with a solution to the pressure to open up Judaism’s holiest site. At the press conference Sunday, Sharansky praised the Israeli Cabinet’s 15-5 vote to approve the new non-Orthodox prayer space, saying the vote helps achieve “one Kotel for one people,” using the Hebrew name for the ancient site believed to be a wall of the Holy Temple. He added that he had been awake at 3:30 a.m. speaking to Israeli officials through Skype about the vote.

Years of debate led up to the vote, as well as multiple confrontations, sometimes violent, between Charedi Orthodox Jews and non-Orthodox, especially a reformist group of women known as the Women of the Wall (WOW). Previously prayer at the wall was divided into a large area for men only, and a smaller one for women. In 2012, WOW leader Anat Hoffman was arrested for wearing a prayer shawl and participating in a women’s service at the Kotel. In April 2013, talks began for an egalitarian area located in an archaeological park known as Robinson’s Arch, outside the central plaza, raising objections from those wishing the egalitarian area to be a part of the larger public plaza.

Jewish Agency for Israel Chairman Natan Sharansky, in Pasadena, speaks to the press about the announcement of a new egalitarian space at the Western Wall in Jerusalem on Jan. 31. Photo by Ryan Torok

Sharansky told the media Sunday that as women were coming in “increasing numbers” and being “arrested, dragged and pushed…the Prime Minister called me and said he can’t accept how the Kotel has become a center of division.” Sharansky added, “And then was the first time he said the phrase which everybody uses as their own: ‘I want to see one Kotel for one people,’” Sharansky said.

“And he asked me, because I am the chairman of the Jewish Agency, which is a body where all the elements sit together, and because I was involved all my life in the dialogue between Jews of the Diaspora and Jews of Israel, he asked me to check with all the sides about what are the conditions with which they can start serious negotiations.” That conversation eventually led to Sunday’s historic vote.

The Consulate General of Israel, Los Angeles, convened Sunday’s press conference with the cooperation of Limmud FSU, which was holding a three-day gathering for Jewish learning of mostly Russians in Pasadena, hosting Sharansky as one of its leading speakers. Sharansky is traveling in the United States to make appearances talking about Israel at college campuses alongside actor Michael Douglas—the two are set to appear Feb. 3 at UC Santa Barbara.

North American Jewish leaders are praising the vote to create the new arena. “We applaud Israel’s historic decision to create a permanent egalitarian prayer space at the Western Wall. The Cabinet’s approval Sunday of the new space is a dramatic, unprecedented and critical acknowledgement by the State of Israel that Judaism’s holiest site — the Kotel — should incorporate the traditions of the Masorti (Conservative) and Reform streams, in which men and women pray together,” said a statement issued Sunday by The Jewish Federations of North America said.

The Orthodox section of the wall will remain under Charedi control, but the new permanent, additional space will be overseen by the Reform and Conservative movements, allowing women the full right, as men have, to read from the Torah, wear tallits, and pray alongside men who wish to be in that space with women. Bar and bat mitzvahs will also be able to take place in the new egalitarian space.

Sharansky said he worked on the issue with the Women of the Wall (WOW), including with Hoffman, who has been a leader in the fight for religious pluralism in Israel.

Sharansky said Hoffman has shown “great leadership.” Netanyahu was interested in finding a solution satisfying to both sides, Sharansky said.

Maya Kadosh, consul for public diplomacy and culture at the Consulate General of Israel, Los Angeles, said she welcomed the vote by the Israeli Cabinet.

“All the partners here [the Israeli cabinet members, the Jewish Agency for Israel and others] came together, so people will see the Jewish people is trying to be united on an issue,” she said in an interview. “I’m really glad it’s happening.”

Sharansky applauds ‘One Kotel for One People’ Read More »

Prayer is Like Jazz

Leave a Comment / Travel /

Judaism as Jazz: magical musical sermon by ” target=”_blank”>Stephen Wise Temple  I’m lucky – I’ve got a lot of great Rabbis in my life – teachers, guides, friends.

(I should say – we are all lucky. We've all got great rabbis in our lives – great Cantors, too! And a great community…)

Here’s a teaching from one of my rabbis, Levi Weiman-Kelman, at Congregation Kol Haneshama in Jerusalem:

“Praying is like playing jazz. The more you pray, the richer your prayer becomes. You can pray alone, but the exciting things happen with fellow pray-ers. It helps to know and trust the others, too (although you learn a lot when you pray with new people)… Sometimes we all pray in harmony, other times we each pray at our own rhythm, at our own volume.”