Page 1,109«..1020..1,1081,1091,1101,111..1,1201,130..»

References to Diaspora Jews as in exile reveals need for greater empathy – The Jerusalem Post

Posted By on May 7, 2020

The International Bible Contest for Youth is one of the quintessential components of a traditional Israeli Independence Day. Watching Israeli and Jewish youth from around the world grapple with devilishly detailed questions about King Davids deeds, Jeremiahs jeremiads, or Ezekiels exhortations, perhaps while hunting around for the barbecue fire-lighters from last year, is one of the time-honored customs of Israels national holiday. But this year, the light-hearted and good-spirited contest was marred somewhat by comments by the long-standing host of the quiz, Dr. Avshalom Kor, whose presence in the living rooms of Israelis on Independence Day for over 30 years is now just as traditional as the quiz itself. During the course of the contest, Kor made several disparaging remarks about the experience of Jews of living in the Diaspora, including saying of one of the international contestants who appeared rather solemn, What does he have to smile about? He lives in exile. He also referred to the Diaspora as the exile, which is not widely used and which critics said implied a derogatory view of Jews outside of Israel. In response to the criticism, Kor insisted that he views Jews in the Diaspora as his brothers, and said that all contestants in the Bible quiz from around the Jewish world would testify as to his fond attitude toward them, while at the same time persisting in his use of the words exile and exiled communities, in his non-apology. Regardless of the specific offense Kor gave, the issues that he brought to the fore regarding attitudes in Israel toward the Diaspora, and regarding the language used to relate to Jews around the world, are very relevant today, when the ability of Jews in Israel and outside of it to understand and empathize with one another is often questionable. In the opinion of Rabbi Yuval Cherlow, dean of the Orot Shaul yeshiva and head of the Tzohar rabbinical associations ethics department, Kors comments reflect the ideological underpinnings of Zionism of bringing Jews to the Land of Israel as part of a national revival.Cherlow emphasized that he is very much in favor of aliyah by Jews to the Jewish homeland, but says that the condescending attitude of Kor to the non-Israeli contestants is unhelpful and even dangerous.Millions of Jews live outside of Israel, and we want to strengthen their Jewish identity and to empower them, he said. This type of language has the opposite effect. It says there is no significance to anything you do there, to the Torah you study there, to your Jewish identity there; the only thing worthwhile you can do is immigrate to Israel.Cherlow said that this is a very dangerous attitude for the Jewish people, since it creates a division in the nation between the good ones who came to Israel and the bad guys who didnt.We have millions of Jews outside of Israel for whom making aliyah is not relevant at the moment, and therefore we have a great mission to preserve the connection between all parts of the Jewish people, including those who do not come to the State of Israel, and engage with all the of Jewish people and their Jewish identity, said the rabbi. ALTHOUGH KORS sentiment is unhelpful and potentially damaging, it is by no means rare.Shmuel Rosner, an editor at the Jewish Journal of Los Angeles and a senior fellow at the Jewish People Policy Institute, said that research he has conducted shows that fully 56% of Israelis believe that being a good Jew means to live in Israel.Most Jewish Israelis would tell you that living in Israel is an important component of being wholeheartedly, more meaningfully Jewish, said Rosner. Kor has revealed an important secret, even if it was impolite. A significant number of Israelis think like this.Rosner said that this perspective cuts across a large swath of Israeli society, including the religious-Zionist communities, as well as those who define themselves as religiously traditional and even secular-traditional. The two main sectors of society that do not widely hold such views would be the totally secular, as well as the ultra-Orthodox, who see no national or religious significance in the State of Israel. What lies behind this perspective?Rosner argued that the goals of Zionism even at its early stages always included the belief that to restore the Jewish people to completeness and make it whole, Jews must have a place they call their own, be able to govern themselves and establish their own culture. Zionism includes the assumption that to be fully Jewish, you must be able to manifest the traditional and religious components of Judaism, as well as its national aspects, and the only place you can manifest all of these components is in Israel, said Rosner. And he said that the use of the word exile instead of the common term outside of Israel, or Diaspora was part of that perspective, since it implies that living in Israel is more complete. Rosner insisted, however, that there was no taboo in the use of the word exile to describe where Jews live outside of Israel, but said simply that the term is outdated. Cherlow sees the use of language as reflective of the less than positive attitude toward Jewish existence outside of Israel, and also sees religious overtones in the use of the word exile.The core ideology of religious Zionism which Kor, as a member of the religious-Zionist community, clearly holds is that there is no place for Jews outside of the Land of Israel, and therefore the presence of Jews there must ultimately be ended. Jews cannot ignore that the State of Israel is the beginning of the sprouting of our redemption, said Cherlow, in reference to the phrase used in some religious contexts by the religious-Zionist community.The rabbi said that the word Diaspora, which for some also has negative connotations for Jewish life outside of Israel, is more acceptable because, although not neutral, it is less disparaging than exile.Living in the Land of Israel is one of the pillars of Judaism and the Jewish people, but another pillar is to preserve the Jewish people itself, said Cherlow.Diaspora implies that Israel is the center, something I believe in; there is a religiously ideological component of living in Israel. But Diaspora also implies a connection with Jews in Israel; the word exile negates that connection.Jews in Israel and around the world often have opposing views on matters of politics in Israel and the countries of the Diaspora, on the place and character of religion in the Israel, and on Jewish identity itself. Kors comments make clear the delicate fabric of the relationship between the two populations and the ever present and ongoing need for both sides to understand and empathize with each other better.

Follow this link:
References to Diaspora Jews as in exile reveals need for greater empathy - The Jerusalem Post

Germany’s ban on Hezbollah bows to Zionist pressure but is of little real importance – Middle East Monitor

Posted By on May 7, 2020

Last week, Germany finally caved in to US and Israeli pressure to ban Hezbollah outright by outlawing the Lebanese movements political wing. Berlin declared the group to be a Shiite terrorist organisation, despite it being a legitimate part of the Lebanese government and having no official branch in Germany.

The fact that just two weeks before this move German security forces broke up a Daesh cell in North Rhine-Westphalia which was plotting attacks on US bases in the country, suggests that the government in Berlin has misplaced counterterrorism priorities, not least because Hezbollahs military wing has been at the forefront of fighting Daesh in Syria.

In imposing the ban, Germany has allowed its supposedly independent foreign policy to be dictated by others. Although it is clear that it had been mulling such a ban for a while, it was only last year that Minister of State Niels Annen countered US criticism by insisting that Berlins foreign policy remained committed to finding a political solution in the wake of Britains ban on Hezbollah. Reports in late 2019 based on claims by government circles that Germany was set to impose the ban were denied by a spokesperson for the Interior Ministry.

With support from Israels murderous Mossad spy agency, the announcement of the ban was followed swiftly by insensitive raids by German police which desecrated Shia mosques in Berlin during the holy month of Ramadan, prompting Hezbollah Secretary-General Sayyid Hassan Nasrallah to condemn them as barbaric. In reality though, the ban is largely academic, as Hezbollah is a foreign organisation so the legal restrictions extend mainly to issues of finance or expressions of support within Germany.

READ: Israeli General calls for attacks against Hezbollah and Hamas

With Iranian assistance, Hezbollah emerged as a social movement reaching the needs of the then marginalised Shia community in Lebanon during the countrys Civil War (1975-1990). The military wing developed to resist Israels 1982 invasion and occupation of southern Lebanon. Hezbollahs immense political clout grew during a successful protracted guerrilla war campaign which forced the Israeli army to withdraw from Lebanon in 2000, as well as the movements political victory six years later in the war launched by Israel.

Naturally, Israel was the first country in the world to designate Hezbollah as a whole to be a terrorist organisation from its inception in 1985. The US followed suit in 1997 as did Canada in 2002. Gulf States and the Arab League outlawed the movement in 2016 due to Hezbollahs active support for the Syrian government of Bashar Al-Assad.

However, the EU has had a long-standing position not to regard the movement as a terrorist organisation. The Netherlands became an early exception in 2004 while the EU moved in 2013 to distinguish between the political and the military wings in the wake of the Burgas bus bombing attack in Bulgaria that killed five Israelis. Although the government in Sofia at the time linked Hezbollah to the incident, its successor backed away from implicating the movement, citing insufficient evidence and claiming that the EUs change in stance was not justified. That being said, most European countries have not moved to designate Hezbollah individually; they rely on the EU position.

In following Britain with its terrorist designation of Hezbollah, Germany has demonstrated that it is simply another compliant state bowing to US and Israeli demands. According to Nasrallah, [This] reflects Germanys submission to Americas will and to pleasing Israel. Irans Foreign Ministry, meanwhile, accused Germany of being compelled by its historical debt owed to Israel based on its Nazi past. In an attempt to clarify Berlins actions, Germanys Ambassador to Lebanon was summoned to the Foreign Ministry in Beirut this week and clarified that, The decision does not classify Hezbollah as a terrorist [group], but rather prohibits its activities on German soil.

READ: Amnesty board member asks why Germany hasnt banned Israel for eliminating Palestine

Nevertheless, the fact remains that Hezbollah does not pose a threat to Germany nor even the Western world. It is fundamentally concerned with defending Lebanese territorial integrity and protecting the interests of Lebanon and its allies. It also maintains its commitment to Palestinian liberation and its armed wing has maintained an effective deterrence over Israel ever since 2006.

Very real security threats to Germany and elsewhere come from the takfiri-jihadi ideology of Daesh and Neo-Nazism. According to German intelligence agency the BfV, since 2013 over 1,000 German-based Islamists have joined Daesh, and approximately a third of them have returned to Germany. At the beginning of this year, Germany announced the repatriation of 122 its citizens from Syria and Iraq who were members of Daesh.

Interior Minister Horst Seehofer said in the aftermath of Februarys terrorist attacks on shisha bars in Hanau that it is far-right extremism which is the biggest security threat facing Germany. He was joined in this view by Justice Minister Christine Lambrecht when she said that, Far-right terror is the biggest threat to our democracy right now.

Germanys closer alignment with US and Zionist interests, while welcomed by some, has been questioned by others in terms of actual effectiveness. One Tehran-based analyst, Hadi Borhani, said that the ban is of no importance: The designation of Hezbollah as a terrorist group at this time is just a hollow and baseless move with zero significance or weight. The gesture by the government in Berlin appears to be symbolic at best and, at worst, indicative of its lack of independence; it will have no strategic impact on Hezbollah in the long term.

Overshadowed by the global economic downturn and heath crisis as a result of the Covid-19 pandemic, in addition to its domestic terrorism problems, Germany clearly has its priorities wrong. The move to ban Hezbollah is a politically-motivated manoeuvre that has nothing to do with protecting its national interests.

READ: Israel demands major changes to UN peacekeeping in Lebanon

The views expressed in this article belong to the author and do not necessarily reflect the editorial policy of Middle East Monitor.

Excerpt from:
Germany's ban on Hezbollah bows to Zionist pressure but is of little real importance - Middle East Monitor

What’s on around the J-Com: Sydney – The Australian Jewish News

Posted By on May 7, 2020

Wednesday, May 13

In conversation: Shalom Sydney Jewish Writers Festival is thrilled to announce Deborah Feldman, author of Unorthodox, in conversation with Michaela Kalowski. Bestselling book, documentary and now Netflix series, Unorthodox has cemented itself as part of the 2020 zeitgeist.Enquiries: http://www.shalom.edu.au.

Cultivating character: Join Rebbetzin Fruma Schapiro from 8pm for a series Life Wisdom from the Ethics of Our Fathers a compilation of timeless aphorisms from the sages of old offering Jewish wisdom on life, morality and character development. Continuing the ancient tradition of studying its chapters and allowing its messages to resonate with participants and inspire personal growth. Live at http://www.chabadhouse.org.au/zoom. Password 123456.

Thursday, May 14

Lunch and Learn: WIZO hosts Dr Ron Weiser AM from 1.30pm for 35 to 40 minutes followed by questions and discussion. The topic is What is Zionism? Do we even agree on what Zionism is and are there any defined boundaries? Register by emailing wizo@wizonsw.org.au.

Coffee and chat: Coffee with the rabbi at 10am with Rabbi Benjamin Elton from The Great Synagogue. Grab your hot drink and join, ask any questions or simply just connect with the rabbi. To join: http://zoom.us/j/92933315587.

Mental health: Maroubra Synagogue presents a special series, The Jewish Perspective on Mental Health, with Rabbi Michoel Gourarie from BINA. This weeks topic: Looking at specific conditions and the role of spirituality in the healing process. From 8pm. To join: https://zoom.us/j/9652583066.

Friday, May 15

Life stories: The Great Synagogue hosts an interview with Simone Green on How Nursing Triggered My Journey to Judaism from 10am. Register to receive the Zoom session link. Enquiries: admin@greatsynagogue.org.au.

Sunday, May 17

Talmud class: Sundays at 9.30am with Rabbi Nochum Schapiro. Delve into the rich texts of the Talmud. Enquiries: http://www.chabadhouse.org.au/zoom.

BINA: Personal Growth with Rabbi Gourarie Lessons from Elie Wiesels Classroom runs until June 18 (no class on May 28 Erev Shavuot) from 9.20-10.15am. To join: https://zoom.us/j/4861160823.

Monday, May 18

Learning opportunities: Kehillat Masada will offer learning opportunities on Mondays from 7pm with Contemporary Halachic Issues Corona Questions. To join: https://zoom.us/j/5991715301.

Tuesday, May 19

Learning @ KM: The BIG questions of Life Where is God in the pandemic? With Rabbi Krebs at Kehillat Masada from 7pm. To join:https://zoom.us/j/599171530.

Judaism at home: Join Rabbi Mendy Schapiro from 8pm in a Jewish literacy series about how Judaism is observed at home, touching on areas ranging from the things we do upon waking, how we eat our meals, elements of prayer and the basics of Shabbat with practical guidance as well as deeper insights about why we do what we do. Cost: $50 course/$15 class. Register: http://www.chabadhouse.org.au/JAH.

Israel update: UIA invite you to join them live from 1.30pm on Zoom for an Israel update with an in-depth analysis of the latest events in Israel and a Q&A with UIA CEO Yair Miller OAM and shlichah Jasmine Malul. To join: http://www.uiansw.org.au/zoom. ID: 783 633 425.

Wednesday, May 20

Mindfulness course: Rita Young is offering her time and expertise to WIZO with a free Introduction to Mindfulness Course hosting a session for six weeks from 7-8.30pm in your living room via Zoom. Places are limited with full commitment and participation required. Enquiries: wizo@wizonsw.org.au; (02) 9387 3666.

Get The AJN Newsletter by email and never miss our top storiesFree Sign Up

Read more:
What's on around the J-Com: Sydney - The Australian Jewish News

The Hundred Years’ War on Palestine by Rashid Khalidi review conquest and resistance – The Guardian

Posted By on May 7, 2020

Rashid Khalidis account of Jewish settlers conquest of Palestine is informed and passionate. It pulls no punches in its critique of Jewish-Israeli policies (policies that have had wholehearted US support after 1967), but it also lays out the failings of the Palestinian leadership. Khalidi participated in this history as an activist scion of a leading Palestinian family: in Beirut during the 1982 Israeli invasion of Lebanon, and as part of the Palestinian negotiating team prior to the 1995 Israeli-Palestinian peace accords. He slams Israel but his is also an elegy for the Palestinians, for their dispossession, for their failure to resist conquest. It is a relentless story of Jewish-Israeli bad faith, alongside one of Palestinian corruption and political short-sightedness.

Khalidi sets out his stall early on: the Palestine-Israel war was never one between two national movements contesting equally over the same land but was always a settler colonial conquest by Europe-based Zionists whose founding father, Theodor Herzl, laid bare the project to Khalidis great-great-great uncle in 1899: Palestines indigenous population did not matter and would anyway benefit from the modernising effects of Jewish pioneers, such as America with its westward Manifest Destiny. For Khalidi, Jewish settlers, aided by Britain from 1917, and by the US later on, colonised Palestine, creating and securing Israel through six wars: the Balfour declaration of 1917; the 1947 UN partition plan; the 1967 UN security council resolution 242; the 1982 Israeli invasion of Lebanon; the 1993 Oslo peace accords; and Israeli leader Ariel Sharons Temple Mount visit in 2000.

Palestinian leaders from elite notables in the 1930s to Yasser Arafat and PLO-Fatah in the 60s to Hamas never successfully channelled the peoples passion to resist. This is not to blame the victim. Khalidi points to the huge obstacles in the way: in Britain and later the US, Protestant Christians bought into this colonial war to civilise the native population. There is a useful tension here between colonial superstructure and the patriarchal hierarchy and cronyism underpinning Palestinian elite leadership. Jewish-Israeli perfidy is central to Khalidis study but bubbling up through the text are key moments of resistance that demanded the insurgent organisation and charisma of a Michael Collins, a Mahatma Gandhi, or a Ho Chi Minh. This never happened. Instead, the well-organised Zionist movement (and Israel) instinctively divided disunited opposition.

While mainstream Zionism publicly proclaimed that the two communities in Palestine could live harmoniously together, Jewish activists such as Zeev Jabotinsky as early as 1923 presented the honest facts: all native populations will resist colonialists and Palestinians were no different. The Jews needed an iron wall of bayonets. British rule after the first world war supported settlement until 1939 when, on the eve of another global conflict, London changed tack to garner wider Arab support. The British defeated a widespread revolt by Palestinians in 1936, in which their elites emblematically fought among themselves as they did against external enemies. There was no Irish-style Dil ireann, no nascent branches of government, and no centralised military forces to outwit the British. Britain crushed Palestinian resistance, doing the Jewish state-builders work for them. As Israel came into being in 1948, the Palestinian negotiator with the UN didnt even have a secretary. Many senior Israeli leaders came from America, knew the place, and spoke its language. In 1947, no senior Palestinian leader had lived in or visited the US.

Khalidi takes the reader through the long, hard years after 1948 when Israel (and neighbouring Arab states) screwed down the Palestinians. The six-day war, as America struggled in Vietnam, was a hinge event, turning the US to Israel as its prime ally against Soviet-backed Arab regimes. While presidents such as Eisenhower and Kennedy were willing to stand up to Israel, after 1967 except Bush Snr and secretary of state James Baker the rest fell into line. Khalidi lays out remarkable exchanges between US and Israeli officials (including a thrusting young Benjamin Netanyahu) in which the US rolled over.

Palestinian resistance endured, helped by the law of unintended consequences: Israels crushing of Egypt in 1967 boosted the PLO, while the 1982 Lebanon invasion prompted the 1987 intifada. Israel unintentionally resurrected Palestinian resistance by its heavy-handed actions. Arafat looms large in the books final chapters, and not to his credit. He started as he meant to continue, by cheating in student elections as a young man in Cairo. The peace after 1993 brought Arafat into Israel, where it monitored and controlled him. Nothing changed. Fatah militants who had spent time in Israeli jails tortured Hamas detainees. The Greater Israel settlement project on the West Bank continued apace, Israel arguing that Palestinians neither wanted peace nor accepted Israel, a point Khalidi contests.

The Palestinians have belied David Ben Gurions reputed comment that the old will die and the young will forget. Short of another bout of ethnic cleansing, Israel is burdened with a resentful, growing, non-Jewish population. The solution is meaningful dialogue, but this requires political will. Regrettably, it is a distant hope.

Matthew Hughess Britains Pacification of Palestine is published by Cambridge. The Hundred Years War on Palestine is published by Profile (RRP 25). To order a copy go to guardianbookshop.com. Free UK p&p on orders over 15.

This article was amended on 7 May 2020 to comply with Guardian style.

Link:
The Hundred Years' War on Palestine by Rashid Khalidi review conquest and resistance - The Guardian

Annexation of Palestine Began in San Remo | Scoop News – Scoop.co.nz

Posted By on May 7, 2020

Thursday, 7 May 2020, 9:09 amArticle: Ramzy Baroud

100 Years of Shame: Annexation of Palestine Began inSan Remo

One hundred years ago, representatives from a fewpowerful countries convened at San Remo, a sleepy town onthe Italian Riviera. Together, they sealed the fate of themassive territories confiscated from the Ottoman Empirefollowing its defeat in World War I.

It was on April25, 1920, that the San Remo Conference Resolution was passed by the post-World War I AlliedSupreme Council. Western Mandates were established overPalestine, Syria and Mesopotamia - Iraq. The lattertwo were theoretically designated for provisionalindependence, while Palestine was granted to the Zionistmovement to establish a Jewish homeland there.

The Mandatory will be responsible for putting intoeffect the (Balfour) declaration originally made on November8, 1917, by the British Government, and adopted by the otherAllied Powers, in favor of the establishment in Palestine ofa national home for the Jewish people, the Resolutionread.

The Resolution gave greater internationalrecognition to Britains unilateral decision, three years earlier, to grantPalestine to the Zionist Federation for the purpose ofestablishing a Jewish homeland, in exchange for Zionistsupport of Britain during the Great War.

And, likeBritains Balfour Declaration, a cursory mention was madeof the unfortunate inhabitants of Palestine, whose historichomeland was being unfairly confiscated and handed over tocolonial settlers.

The establishment of that JewishState, according to San Remo, hinged on some vague understanding that nothingshall be done which may prejudice the civil and religiousrights of existing non-Jewish communities inPalestine.

The above addition merely served as apoor attempt at appearing politically balanced, while inreality no enforcement mechanism was ever put in place toensure that the understanding was ever respected orimplemented.

In fact, one could argue that theWests long engagement in the question of Israel andPalestine has followed the same San Remo prototype: wherethe Zionist movement (and eventually Israel) is granted itspolitical objectives based on unenforceable conditions thatare never respected or implemented.

Notice how thevast majority of United Nations Resolution pertaining toPalestinian rights are historically passed by the GeneralAssembly, not by the Security Council, where the US is oneof five veto-wielding powers, always ready to strike downany attempt at enforcing international law.

It isthis historical dichotomy that led to the current politicaldeadlock.

Palestinian leaderships, one after theother, have miserably failed at changing the stiflingparadigm. Decades before the establishment of thePalestinian Authority, countless delegations, comprisedthose claiming to represent the Palestinian people, traveledto Europe, appealing to one government or another, pleadingthe Palestinian case and demanding fairness.

Whathas changed since then?

On February 20, the DonaldTrump administration issued its own version of the BalfourDeclaration, termed the Deal of the Century.

The American decision which, again, flouted international law, paves the wayfor further Israeli colonial annexations of occupiedPalestine. It brazenly threatens Palestinians that, if theydo not cooperate, they will be punished severely. In fact,they already have been, when Washington cut all funding to the PalestinianAuthority and to international institutions that providecritical aid to the Palestinians.

Like in the SanRemo Conference, the Balfour Declaration, and numerous otherdocuments, Israel was asked, ever so politely but withoutany plans to enforce such demands, to grant Palestinianssome symbolic gestures of freedom and independence.

Some may argue, and rightly so, that the Deal of theCentury and the San Remo Conference Resolution are notidentical in the sense that Trumps decision was aunilateral one, while San Remo was the outcome of politicalconsensus among various countries - Britain, France, Italy,and others.

True, but two important points must betaken into account: firstly, the Balfour Declaration wasalso a unilateral decision. It took Britains allies threeyears to embrace and validate the illegal decision made byLondon to grant Palestine to the Zionists. The question nowis, how long will it take for Europe to claim the Deal ofthe Century as its own?

Secondly, the spirit ofall of these declarations, promises, resolutions, anddeals is the same, where superpowers decide by virtueof their own massive influence to rearrange the historicalrights of nations. In some way, the colonialism of old hasnever truly died.

The Palestinian Authority, likeprevious Palestinian leaderships, is presented with theproverbial carrot and stick. Last March, US President DonaldTrumps son-in-law, Jared Kushner, told Palestinians that if they did notreturn to the (non-existent) negotiations with Israel, theUS would support Israels annexation of the West Bank.

For nearly three decades now and, certainly, sincethe signing of the Oslo Accords in September 1993, the PAhas chosen the carrot. Now that the US has decided to changethe rules of the game altogether, Mahmoud Abbas Authorityis facing its most serious existential threat yet: bowingdown to Kushner or insisting on returning to a deadpolitical paradigm that was constructed, then abandoned, byWashington.

The crisis within the Palestinianleadership is met with utter clarity on the part of Israel.The new Israeli coalition government, consisting of previousrivals Israeli Prime Minister, Benjamin Netanyahu and BennyGantz, have tentatively agreed that annexing large parts of theWest Bank and the Jordan Valley is just a matter of time.They are merely waiting for the American nod.

Theyare unlikely to wait for long, as Secretary of State, MikePompeo, said on April 22 that annexingPalestinian territories is an Israeli decision.

Frankly, it matters little. The 21st century BalfourDeclaration has already been made; it is only a matter ofmaking it the new uncontested reality.

Perhaps, itis time for the Palestinian leadership to understand thatgroveling at the feet of those who have inherited the SanRemo Resolution, constructing and sustaining colonialIsrael, is never and has never been the answer.

Perhaps, it is time for some serious rethink.

Ramzy Baroud is a journalist and the Editor ofThe Palestine Chronicle. He is the author of five books. Hislatest is These Chains Will Be Broken: PalestinianStories of Struggle and Defiance in Israeli Prisons(Clarity Press, Atlanta). Dr. Baroud is a Non-residentSenior Research Fellow at the Center for Islam and GlobalAffairs (CIGA), Istanbul Zaim University (IZU). His websiteiswww.ramzybaroud.net

Scoop Media

Become a member Find out more

View post:
Annexation of Palestine Began in San Remo | Scoop News - Scoop.co.nz

How an obscure TV channel drove a wedge between Israeli settlers and their evangelical allies – Haaretz

Posted By on May 7, 2020

Jews, as a matter of tradition, do not proselytize, and neither do they tolerate it from others.

So it comes as no surprise that a new evangelical channel, recently launched on Israeli cable television and dedicated to taking the gospel of Jesus into the homes and lives and hearts of the Jewish people, would set off a storm.

The Hebrew-language channel Shelanu is the Israeli affiliate of God TV, an international Christian media network that broadcasts in some 200 countries around the world.

What was not expected was that the outcry would be loudest among those Israelis known for their deep ties to evangelicals: religious, right-wing Jews. These two groups, after all, share a common interest in Israel controlling the West Bank (an area they refer to as Judea and Samaria or the Biblical Heartland) and a common disdain for Palestinian rights.

And yet, leading the campaign both on- and offline to get the new evangelical channel taken off the air is a group of Israelis who regularly lead Christian tours of the Biblical Heartland; who raise money among Christians for projects in the West Bank settlements; who organize and host interfaith Bible classes; and who provide Israels Christian allies with news from the Holy Land suited to their particular interests.

What has riled them so much?

Im trying to convince other Israelis that we can start to trust Christians once again, and that they do not have ulterior motives and, lo and behold, God TV is demonstrating that there are in fact very clear strong ulterior motives in their support for Israel, said Rabbi Tuly Weisz, an Orthodox rabbi who immigrated to Israel from the United States and has been engaged ever since in creating bridges between Israel and the international evangelical community.

We've got more newsletters we think you'll find interesting.

Please try again later.

The email address you have provided is already registered.

That shatters the faith of people like me, who had hoped we were making a difference in Jewish-Christian relations, he added.

God TV signed a seven-year contract with Israeli cable television company Hot to host the channel. More than 700,000 Israeli households subscribe to the provider, which controls nearly half the multichannel market in the country.

The new channel was officially launched last week to coincide with Israeli Independence Day.

A few days later, the Cable and Satellite Broadcasting Council said it was conducting an investigation to determine whether Shelanu had violated the terms of its license. That license, which had been awarded by the regulatory body, prohibits any programming that wields undue influence on viewers. This would include proselytizing.

Weisz said that people like him, dedicated to improving Jewish-Christian relations, were devastated that the new channel had been approved by an Israeli regulatory body.

It is entirely damaging to everything I and others in the religious community, who love Christian Zionists, have been working toward, said Weisz, who is the publisher of Israel365 a daily newsletter distributed to some 250,000 Christian Zionists around the world. It sets us back 10 years.

Christian Friends of Israeli Communities raises about $1 million a year for West Bank settlement projects, with almost all of the donations coming from evangelicals. Its founder and Israel director, Sondra Baras, said her relationship with her Christian partners and donors has long been based on their willingness to set aside any evangelizing agenda.

That has been the conditions that we and others like us put before our Christian friends all the time, and it has been our stated policy since we started 22 years ago, she said. One of the things weve been doing is trying to get Christians to understand how offensive this is, because many of them have been taught since childhood that Jews have just been waiting to be saved. They have no idea that we are very comfortable with who we are.

When Baras first ventured into this line of work, there was considerable opposition among Orthodox Jews living in the settlements especially their rabbinical leaders, who feared these Christians were secretly out to convert them. Over the years, the opposition has dwindled as such fears have proven to be ungrounded.

Unfortunately, though, there are still some big, powerful people out there who cant let go of this evangelizing, and that CEO who says hes going to bring the gospel here in Hebrew hes not the kind of guy Im friendly with at all, Baras said. I want nothing to do with him.

She was referring to a video message, announcing the launch of Shelanu, in which God TV CEO Ward Simpson said the network has been given government permission to broadcast the gospel of Jesus Christ Yeshuah the Messiah in Israel on cable TV in the Hebrew language. Never before, as far as we know in the history of the world, has this ever been done.

That controversial video has since been removed from God TVs website.

Yishai Fleisher, spokesman for the Jewish community in Hebron a major flashpoint of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict accused God TV of crossing a red line.

We honor and love and appreciate our friendship with the evangelical world. We have many shared values with these people, like a belief in the rights of the Jewish people to the Land of Israel, he said. However, in every relationship there are red lines, and when they are crossed, that can be painful. Missionizing is one of those red lines.

Fleischer said it was no coincidence that he and other allies of the Christian right were leading the protest against the new cable channel.

Because of our ties to them and our interest in their world, we were the first to know about this. And because we want to protect our relationship with them, we were the first to call it out.

Follow this link:
How an obscure TV channel drove a wedge between Israeli settlers and their evangelical allies - Haaretz

COVID-19 ethics fighting the last war – IJN – Intermountain Jewish News

Posted By on May 7, 2020

Last week a group of distinguished physicians wrote a letter to the IJN noting with satisfaction that all of the heinous distinctions that the Nazis imposed during the Holocaust have been ethically eliminated during the COVID-19 pandemic.

The letter represents the considered yet impassioned thinking of the Lessons Learned group of the Holocaust Genocide Contemporary Bioethics Program at CU Center for Bioethics and Humanities.

The letter stated:

Triage, which may have to be performed in the face of a disaster, is usually not the role of the treating physician. That job should go to an independent group of clinicians who are blind to the patients race or religious background and whether theyre disabled, homeless or a major hospital donor. The people making the triage decisions should not even have access to that information, says Dr. Matthew Wynia, director of the CU Center for Bioethics and Humanities.

Wynia is also identifiedas an advisor to the Colorado Governors expert emergency epidemic response committee, a team of providers helping finalize guidelines for patient care should medication, critical care equipment and ICU beds be in short supply.

It is always necessary to remind the world of the ethical disfigurations of the Nazis. The CU program is to be saluted for sustaining this focus. It cannot be taken for granted. Especially with the growth of Holocaust denial and the simple passage of time, not to mention the passing of the survivors, programs such as CUs are critical.

That said, the focus during the current COVID-19 pandemic needs to be broadened. Otherwise, it willdivert attention from new ethical dilemmas the pandemic poses and we will end up fighting the last war, ethically speaking.

The new ethical dilemmas presented by the COVID-19 pandemic surely need to be faced wholly without reimporting the heinous ethics of the Nazi era. However, to exclude Nazi ethics is necessary but not sufficient.

In the COVID-19 era, it is not enough not to discriminate on the basis of race, religion and other markers invoked by the Nazis. These markers have been so radically excluded from the definition of medical ethics in modern medicine in the US that to highlight them alone may obscure the new, devastating dilemmas of the COVID-19 era. To be sure, modern ethical standards are not always adhered to, and the Lessons Learned group at CU is helpful in reiterating these standards. But the current challenges are not covered by reference to the Nazis.

The CU letter wrote:

Factors clinically or ethically irrelevant to the triage process (e.g. race, ethnicity, ability to pay, disability status, national origin, primary language, immigration status, sexual orientation, age, gender identity, HIV status, religion, VIP status, or criminal history) should not be used to make Crisis Standards of Care triage decisions.

This long list seems to be comprehensive, but it doesnt touch the slippery slope and the slippery language of potential dilemmas in the COVID era.

For example: included in the list of irrelevant criteria for a triage process is age. Age should be irrelevant, but it wont be if COVID-19forces massive triage. Given the current state of medical ethics, age will simply be redefined. Definition language is perhaps the one aspect from an earlier time, including but not limited to the Nazis that distorts our current ethical decisions. We cover up ugly realities with sanitized language. So yes, age per se will perhaps not be invoked in triage decisions. Rather, we will have this:

Patient X [elderly, but not referred to as elderly] cannot be expected to gain from these scarce resources as much as Patient Y [younger, but not referred to as younger], so take the resources from Patient X and give them to Patient Y; or:

Patient X is more likely to use up precious medical resources than someone else, so give them to someone else.

Of course, these comments could be said of any person of any age, but in reality it is the elderly about whom they will be said disproportionately, very disproportionately. That is discrimination on the basis of age, straight out, however artfully it might otherwise be put.

De facto, if two people show up needing critical care and one is elderly, and there is sufficient equipment or personnel to care for only one of the two, the likelihood is that the elderly person will be discriminated against.

In fact, unlike the Lessons Learned group at CU, the official Colorado guidance against discrimination during the COVID-19 crisis does not even mention age as an excluded, discriminatory criterion for triage decisions.

Which is hardly surprising. I have before me a COVID-19 report from the Hastings Center titled, Ethical Framework for Health Care Institutions & Guidelines for Institutional Ethics Services Responding to the Coronavirus Pandemic. Among other things, it states:

First come, first served is an unsatisfactory approach to allocating critical resources: a critically ill patient waiting for an ICU bed might be better able to benefit from this resource than a patient already in the ICU whose condition is not improving.

The COVID-19 deaths have tragically shown that a critically ill patient who is not improving can be of any age. Equally shown is that the great preponderance of these critically ill patients are the elderly. Euphemized in the antiseptic language in the Hastings report, or in other assurances that there should be no age discrimination, is discrimination on the basis of age. Who is kidding whom?

There is other chilling language in the Hastings report that should rivet those concerned about medical ethics during the coronavirus. This Hastings language includes: withdrawal of life-sustaining treatment; prioritize the community above the individual in fairly allocating scarce resources; consequences of contingency levels of care for patient-centered care.

It is not hard to discern the ethical premises in this language.

It is not only possible but likely that all of Hastings ethics premises can be put into play entirely without Nazi-like discrimination on the basis of religion, race, ethnicity, ability to pay, disability status, etc.

The CU Lessons Learned letter states:

In catastrophic circumstances, doctors should try to save as many lives as possible. But equally important is to protect the countrys social fabric and preserve confidence in institutions, which can erode when people feel as if the lives of certain citizens are valued more than others.

What is the criterion for measuring whether the lives of certain citizens are valued more than others? It is, of course, the classic markers of discrimination. But not only them. In fact, they will not be major markers in the COVID era if, G-d forbid, hospitals beds are inadequate, medical equipment is scarce and personnel shortages abound. Then, the searing questions will mostly be different:

Was I pushed aside because I was not deemed valuable enough for society, based on my age, or my prior physical condition, or my lack of stamina to push hard enough, or to find the right bureaucrat or physician to advocate for me?

Without confronting these questions, yes, indeed, a massive COVID-19 run on the medical system would erode the countrys social fabric. Confidence in at least its medical institutions would decline.

The good news is that as of now, at least, it looks like we have socially distanced enough and stayed home enough to have prevented the worse case scenario of medical systems crashing down, at least in Colorado.

But the ethics questions remain. They are extremely disturbing, even if the COVID-19 pandemic is vanquished. I fear that this pandemic has opened a Pandoras box. Prioritizing one human life over another may gain acceptance, even inevitability.

The CU letter states:

The mistakes and shortcomings of medicine during the Holocaust should inform our decision-making in medical ethics during todays pandemic. May we merit pursuing a principle of Jewish law in science and humanity, that of pikuach nefesh, saving a life. The preservation of human life overrides virtually any other rule.

The Holocaust may well be avoided by a firm commitment to pikuach nefesh. But to my knowledge, no scheme for the murder of undesirables is contemplated by any politician, medical professional or volunteer during the COVID crisis. To uphold the principle of pikuach nefesh in the COVID era is to confront challenges more complicated than swearing off the Nazi mind and methodology. That was black-and-white. The potential medical dilemmas in the COVID crisis are not.

How is the principle of pikuach nefesh to be sustained in guidelines for patient care should medication, critical care equipment and ICU beds be in short supply?

For guidance on this critical matter, I, for one, would not want to rely on the unstated but all too pervasive end-of-life medical ethics in this country as I have seen and heard them actually practiced.

Caring daily for my late mother, of blessed memory, for years as she approached the age of 100, I had more than enough opportunity to see these ethics as articulated by everyone from physicians to social workers to EMTs to medical equipment providers. My mother preponderantly received very good treatment, but it would have been denied had the professionals alone made the decisions (with a couple of notable exceptions). End-of-life premises in the US are scary. Again, who is kidding whom? This is the world in which pikuach nefesh is compromised. This is no secret. It is not going to be different if a full blown COVID-19 run on the medical system occurs.

Medical ethics transcends being against the Nazis and then finding some agreed upon alternative principles. There is no way to preserve the principle of pikuach nefesh without reference to a Divine system. Life is sacred, or it is not.

Whatever the ethical criteria for triage might be, they cannot ethically include choosing who will live and who will die by withdrawing treatment from one person in favor of another.

Related

See the original post here:

COVID-19 ethics fighting the last war - IJN - Intermountain Jewish News

HR Inzko: This Year will mark several Important Anniversaries in Bosnia and Herzegovina – Sarajevo Times

Posted By on May 7, 2020

This year will mark several important anniversaries. In July, we will commemorate 25 years since the Srebrenica Genocide. Measures related to pandemic may make it necessary to reduce the scale of commemorative events, but the tragedy nonetheless looms large in our collective memory. International courts have ruled that what happened at Srebrenica in July 1995 was genocide, and nothing can change that. This was the ICTY court which was established in 1993 by Security Council. No one can rewrite history. But in Bosnia and Herzegovina, there are still some who deny the genocide, who reject war crimes verdicts and who glorify convicted war criminals that are getting monuments and having student dormitories named after them. This must stop. I urge all peoples to recognize each others suffering everyone suffered, absolutely and come together to mourn. There is probably also a need to legally regulate the issue of genocide and holocaust denial, High Representative Valentin Inzko stated on Wednesday.

October this year will mark 20 years since UN Security Council Resolution 1325, the landmark resolution affirming the role of women in conflict prevention and resolution, peacebuilding, peacekeeping, humanitarian response and in post-conflict reconstruction. In this respect, I commend the State-level Ministry for Human Rights and Refugees Agency for Gender Equality for maintaining the UNSCR 1325 Action Plan Coordination Body.

Lastly, November will mark 25 years since the General Framework Agreement for Peace was reached in Dayton, and December will mark 25 years since its signing in Paris. In the spirit of renewing commitments, the authorities of Bosnia and Herzegovina, and the international community, should recommit to preserving the Dayton structure through strengthening the State-level institutions and the competencies they have assumed in accordance with States prerogatives under the Constitution of Bosnia and Herzegovina. This does not mean centralization but strengthening the functionality of the state.

We should recall that the first lines of the preamble to the Constitution of Bosnia and Herzegovina stress the importance of respect for human dignity, liberty, and equality, as well as peace, justice, tolerance and reconciliation. The sooner that the parties fully commit to these values, the sooner my mission will be complete.

And, above all, BiH must improve the rule of law and the fight against the big pandemic called corruption. This is the cornerstone of democracy and functionality of any country. Young people tell me now that they are leaving Bosnia and Herzegovina not because they have no jobs, but because of the lack of rule of law. I think we have to pay more attention to this issue. I am encouraged to see that BiH officials have recommitted themselves to the implementation of EU priorities to change certain legislation in this area. But this is clearly not enough. The rule of law is not only about adopting legislation; it is about the full implementation of this legislation. It is an ongoing commitment, the state of mind, and a way of life.

The international community must not lose sight of what is at stake in Bosnia and Herzegovina and work together to preserve its collective investments in time and money over the last 25 years not for their own sake, but in honour of the lives that were lost during the conflict and in honour of those who survived and are still hoping for a better future for themselves and future generations. We should be patient with BiH and cautious about changing the international setup in BiH. We should as the international community work together. Unity is our biggest strength. This is the only recipe for success in our efforts to ensure the long-term stability and viability of the BiH state.

In the end, dear colleagues, allow me to recall that in many countries of the world, we are commemorating the end of World War II these days and are grateful to theAllied Forces who defeated Nazism. This happened also in my own country Austria, and our gratitude is expressed in many monuments constructed 75 years ago.

In Austria, the Allied Forcesstayed some 10 years and oversaw the return of democracy. They prevented a revival of fascism and supported our impoverished country with the MarshallPlan. On a wider scale, the one-timegreatest enemies, France and Germany, are now not only pillars of the EuropeanUnion, but global pillars of peace and stability. This should never be forgotten.

There can be no better example of reconciliation and forward-looking agendas. Here I have in mind also the situation in Bosnia Herzegovina, where ultimately peace, stability and prosperity will prevail.

Excerpt from:

HR Inzko: This Year will mark several Important Anniversaries in Bosnia and Herzegovina - Sarajevo Times

Lost Children of the Holocaust – Yated.com

Posted By on May 7, 2020

The long-awaited opening of the secret Vatican Holocaust archive lasted just a week before the coronavirus pandemic shut it down again.

But that was long enough for researchers to uncover documents which proved that Pope Pius XII, accused of being a silent bystander during the Holocaust, had reliable information in 1941 that Jews were being systematically annihilated.

These disclosures overturned defenders claims that the popes silence was based on uncertainty about the facts until late in the war. They also cast doubt on the accuracy of the Vaticans 11-volume work glorifying the papacy of Pius XII.

Events in those volumes are often described out of context; the chronology is unreliable, observed German historian Hubert Wolf in Religion News Service.

While these revelations made headlines in many quarters, in the Jewish community they sparked only passing interest. That is because popes silence during the Holocaust was never the great mystery of the age.

A far more burning issue is the subject of thousands of Jewish children who had found sanctuary with Catholic families or Catholic monasteries, convents and orphanages during the war. The newly-opened Vatican archive was expected to shed light upon this subject, of intense interest even seventy-five years later.

What became of these child survivors hidden in Catholic institutions? So many of them were never recovered. They spent lifetimes in complete ignorance of their Jewish roots. The pain over their loss has never abated.

Untold numbers of frantic Jewish parents, fleeing the Nazis in Poland, France, Belgium, Slovakia, Holland and elsewhere had placed their children in the care of non-Jewish neighbors, employees and Catholic shelters, in the hope that they would survive.

A great many of these hidden children were baptized and raised as Christians without their parents knowledge or consent. Some assumed Christian identities on their own to escape detection.

No one has exact numbers for this survivor population under the churchs auspices. What is known is that the Nazis and their collaborators murdered a million and a half Jewish children, and that between 100,000 and 200,000 survived the Holocaust.

By late 1945 and early 1946, heads of Jewish organizations believed that about 10,000 of those children were in Catholic institutions or with non-Jewish families.

With the opening of the Vatican archive last month, Jewish groups harbored hopes that the names, birthplaces and identifying information of thousands of child survivors would finally be disclosed.

From One Painful Odyssey to the Next

In many instances, the hidden children were the only surviving members of their families. In other cases, relatives not only existed but desperately searched for these youngsters hidden in non-Jewish homes or institutions. Finding them, instead of marking the joyous end of an odyssey, often launched survivors on a new one as rescuers refused to give up the children.

Sometimes the motive was emotional: they had grown attached to the children and couldnt part with them. In other cases, greed dominated the discussion and the return of the children was conditional on extravagant payments.

Most intransigent of all were the religious arguments: the Catholic church insisted that once baptized, the child belonged to the church and had to be raised as a Christian.

The knowledge that several thousand child survivors were thankfully returned to the Jewish community has never erased the pain over the countless souls who were not.

The Finaly Affair: Bris Milah in the Danger Zone

Although the Vatican has again closed the Holocaust archive to the public, the forgotten chapter of the lost child survivors has been re-opened, igniting fresh interest in cases of relatives who fought intense, often drawn-out battles to recover Jewish children.

One of the most famous of these is the Finaly Affair, the extraordinary case of Robert and Gerald Finaly, born to Austrian-born parents Dr. Fritz and Anne Finaly after the couple fled to La Tronche, France.

Despite hiding their identities as Jews in very perilous times under the Nazi-Vichy regime, the Finalys gave both their sons a bris milah. This act of faith would one day sway the highest French court in the land, in a bitter custody battle between the boys Jewish relatives and the Catholic church that had them baptized.

In February 1944, the Nazis occupied the entire France and aided by French collaborators, began implementing the Final Solution. Dr. Finaly was arrested while walking on the street and his wife Anne a few hours later in their apartment. Both of them were sent on one of the last transports from France; the freight cars left on March 3, 1944, from the notorious Drancy interment camp and disgorged their passengers at Auschwitz.

If We Dont Come Back

A few days before their arrest, the couple had been warned by friends about impending raids but had no time to arrange a safe hiding place. Fearing the worst, Fritz and Anne had entrusted two and a half year-old Robert and 18-month old Gerald to one of their Christian neighbors.

Along with the children, the neighbor was given a leather suitcase containing Dr. Finalys medical equipment, jewelry, photographs, documents, and the addresses of his two sisters in New Zealand and a third sister in Israel.

An attached letter begged the neighbor, if the Finalys did not return at the end of the war, to transfer the children to their aunts, Mrs. Grete Fischel and Mrs. Luise Rothbaum in New Zealand, or to Mrs. Yehudit Rosner in Israel.

Finding the task of caring for the toddlers overwhelming, the Finalys Christian friend transferred them to a Catholic orphanage in Grenoble supervised by a middle-aged Catholic headmistress, Antoinette Brun.

In February 1945, upon learning of the death of Dr. Fritz and Anne in Auschwitz, Mrs. Grete Fischel reached out to Brun, thanking her for her great kindness to her orphaned nephews, and stating her wish to bring them to New Zealand. Grete said she had already initiated efforts to have them transferred, offering to pay all expenses including a professional chaperone to accompany them.

Her written overtures were met with a brusque refusal by Brun, who wrote back in hostile tones. She said that since she had shown the courage to take the boys in when it was dangerous to do so, no one has the right to break the bonds of affection [between her and them].

Recounting events many years later in a memoir, Miriam Lavah, a cousin of the Finaly boys, recalled that Brun had made bizarre claims, accusing the childrens relatives of wanting a stake in their inheritance, although clearly none existed. The woman appeared unhinged.

My Aunt Grete went to all possible lengths to work around Mlle. Brun; she used English and French Red Cross people as intermediaries, and got other prominent people to intercede, wrote Lavah. But there was no budging this woman.

In 1948, after three years of fruitless efforts to negotiate the boys return, Mrs. Grete Fischel sought the assistance of her sister and brother-in-law in Israel, Moshe and Yehudit Rosner. The Rosners in turn asked an acquaintance in Grenoble, French-speaking Moshe Keller, to intercede on their behalf.

Extraordinary Activist

Keller turned out to be an extraordinary activist, compassionate, resolute and tireless, never throwing in the towel despite facing an enemy that appeared to have the full backing of the Catholic church. A chemical engineer by profession, he ultimately sacrificed his livelihood to fight for the return of the Finaly children.

His first move was to pay a visit to Brun. As soon as the headmistress heard the purpose of visit, she heaped abuse on him before throwing him out. Cowardly, ungrateful Jews, under the slightest danger you ran away like frightened mice, leaving your children to the care of others, and now you have the nerve to ask for them back? she fumed. You dont know me yet never ever are you going to see these boys.

To Kellers retreating back, she flung out, I had them baptized, you hear? They are little Catholics. [The Finaly Affair, Moshe Rosner, 2005].

Brun had in fact not only arranged for the boys to be baptized, she had won custody of them in a French court, concealing from the judge the existence of relatives who wanted to care for them.

This subterfuge drove home to the Rosners the reality of who they were dealing with. They embarked for France to join forces with Keller, realizing there was no choice but to take legal action.

What followed were five years of costly, intense, exhausting legal battles in French courts; first, to overturn Bruns custody by exposing her lies and shenanigans, and then to force the church, who was clearly calling the shots, to relinquish the children to their biological family.

Case Hits Spotlight; Divides France

After years of legal hearings and counter suits, a high-ranking French court ruled in 1951 that Brun was required to return the children to their relatives. As the court contained no mechanism to enforce its ruling, however, Brun continued to defy it.

With the help of her sister and the Catholic clergy of Grenoble, she had the boys, now eight and nine years old, taken to Switzerland under assumed names. When their identity was discovered, authorities ordered them returned to France and turned over to Mrs. Rosner.

Abetted by church officials, Brun then had them whisked away to another hideout. Then 11-year old Robert kept a diary, in which he described being on the run with his brother, fleeing from school to school, church to church, house to house in the never-ending flight from the evil much-feared Mr. Keller. Young Robert also described their brutal flight across the Pyrenees mountains during a snowstorm, to the Basque region of Spain, through knee-deep snow. We were in sandals and summer clothes, freezing to death, he writes. At the time, he felt his and his brothers lives were at stake and their only hope of surviving was to follow Bruns instructions, however bizarre, in order to remain under the churchs protection.

When a police investigation uncovered evidence that several nuns of the Notre Dame de Sion order and Basque priests had arranged and executed the boys kidnapping, the case exploded into the public spotlight. Headmistress Brun and her clergy cohorts were arrested and ordered to divulge the childrens whereabouts.

In the spirit of true martyrs, they refused to give any information, including from which higher authority they were taking orders. The arrestees were sentenced to a brief period of incarceration. In the meantime, the children had disappeared.

By this time, the custody battle over Gerald and Robert Finaly had stirred passions throughout France that, in the words of a French journalist, had not spilled forth with such intensity since the Dreyfus Case. It was a media bonanza and the French press milked it to the hilt.

The case pitted French anti-clerics against French Catholics. Politicians calling for obedience to the laws of state clashed with clergymen insisting on the higher authority of Divine law, particularly regarding baptism.

Secular voices who saw the church trying to encroach on individual liberties, were outraged that its officials refused to honor the rights of parents to choose the religious identity of their children.

Amid all this uproar, pro-church groups railed at the Jews for being ungrateful, for making demands and allegations after Christians put their lives at risk to save them and their children.

The anti-Semitism the case unleashed reverberated through Europes shattered Jewish communities, still trying to recover from the horrors of the preceding years. The specter of a new outbreak of Jew-hatred hung over the tiny survivor communities.

And while passions raged over the case, the two young boys at the heart of the storm had vanished without a trace.

To be continued

*****

Secret Vatican Mandate

In 2004, historian Alberto Melloni discovered a bombshell document in the Church Archives of Issy-les-Moulineaux, a Catholic commune in southwestern Paris.

Written in French and approved by the Holy Father (Pope Pius XII), the document, dated October 23, 1946, communicated the Vaticans intention to retain custody of Jewish children saved by Catholics during the Holocaust.

According to an Associated Press story, the document instructed French church authorities that Jewish children baptized as Roman Catholics should remain within the church. Even if that meant not returning them to their own families once the occupation ended.

Within a few weeks, the story turned explosive.

Historian Daniel Jonah Goldhagen (Hitlers Willing Executioners) charged the document with ordering a criminal deed, and characterized the pope who presumably authored it as one of the most rampant would-be kidnappers of modern times.

Pius XIIs defenders, meanwhile, argued that the document had been falsely attributed to him, and misinterpreted.

Researchers and historians, however, said there was little doubt about its authenticity, noting it came from the Paris Nunciature, the Vaticans diplomatic representation in France.

Pope to Church leaders: Ignore Rabbi Herzog

The document is a summary of a previous Vatican communications, say researchers, which advised church officials on how to decline requests Rabbi Isaac Haleivi Herzog for assistance in locating survivor children and restoring them to Jewish hands.

The Eminent Father decided thatthere should be no response to the Grand Rabbi of Palestine, the document declared.

During the Holocaust, Rav Herzog tried to meet with the Pope to beg for his intercession to save Jews. Twice he was refused. Only after the war was he granted an audience.

On March 10, 1946, the rov sat down with Pius XII at the Vatican for about an hour. He begged the pope to return Jewish orphans in monasteries to their relatives and the Jewish community. In particular he sought a special papal appeal to all priests to reveal the whereabouts of Jewish children in Catholic custody.

According to the rovs summary of the meeting, the pope threw out a few gracious remarks about wanting to help but kept his words bland and made no commitment.

Rav Herzog was no fool. He saw through the platitudes to the popes true answer.

A short time later, addressing a crowd who had assembled at an airport in Chicago to greet him on his arrival there, the rov appeared somber and sad.

My dear friends, he began. I come not from Yerushalayim but from Rome. I have just met with Pope Pius XIIWe spoke about the terrible war when many Yiddishe kinder found shelter in monasteries across Europe.I pleaded with the pope that the time has come for these children to be identified and returned to the remnants of their families. I asked him to release those children back to their heritage.

Suddenly, to everyones shock, the rov began to cry. The pope did not agree, he said brokenly. He said that once a child is baptized, Rachmana litzlan, he can never be returned. My dear friends, we lost the children!

After a few moments, the rov composed himself. We lost them, he repeated sadly, locking eyes with the faces turned toward him and resting his gaze on the youngsters in the crowd. But we have you! he said emotionally. We have you!

Secret Document Bans Return of Jewish Children

Although its certain Rabbi Herzog never saw the Vaticans secret 1946 document presenting guidelines about how to deal with pleas to take Jewish children out of the church, he was strikingly on target in his reading of the pope.

The secret 1946 document sets forth five policy points in response to Jewish demands for custody of the survivor children, the gist of the message being that baptized children belong to the church.

First, nothing should be put in writing, the document exhorts. Second, the initial answer to petitioners should be that the church must investigate each case on its own.

Third, children who have been baptized cannot be given to institutions that cannot assure their Christian education.

Fourth, regarding children without parents or relatives, it is not appropriate that they be entrusted to people who have no right to them, at least up to the time when they can decide for themselves. Including children who have not been baptized.

Finally, If the children have been entrusted [to Catholic institutions or families] by the parents and the parents now come to claim them, provided the children havent received baptism, they can be given back.

We knew that after the war, Jewish organizations did everything in their power to obtain a letter from the pope asking institutions sheltering hidden Jewish children to turn them over, wrote French journalist Catharine Poujol after the Vaticans incriminating document came to light in 2004.

Today, we have the evidence that a contrary order came from the Vatican.

The popes order was an attempt to graft a rejected medieval doctrinethe supreme authority of the Catholic churchonto a modern western democracy. Laffaire Finaly would ultimately doom that effort.

Original post:

Lost Children of the Holocaust - Yated.com

DM Bennett Green Lights Project to Create Disability Access at Cave of the Patriarchs – The Jewish Press – JewishPress.com

Posted By on May 7, 2020

Photo Credit: courtesy, Spokesperson

Defense Minister Naftali Bennett has authorized a project to create a disability-access entrance to the Cave of the Patriarchs in Hebron, saying its a project that is long overdue.

The time has come to move forward. We have green-lighted the elevator project to end the many years of discrimination at the site, Bennett said Sunday in a statement.

Every person, irrespective of whether or not they are disabled, should have the opportunity to visit the tomb, which is an important Jewish heritage site, he said.

This is what it means to develop the settlements, with deeds and not words. I thank the prime minister and the foreign minister for their help in this matter.

There is no doubt anyone with difficulty negotiating the ancient stone steps to the Tomb of the Patriarchs would heartily agree.

Construction of an elevator will make the Tomb wheelchair accessible; it would also make the site available to the elderly, the infirm and those with very young children, difficulty with balance and/or other physical issues.

Under the terms of an agreement signed between Israel and the Palestinian Authority in 1997, construction of an elevator would require the approval of the PA-controlled Hebron municipality. But because the site itself is under the control of the IDF, and since the Hebron municipality objects to the project, Israel has placed it under the authority of the Civil Administration.

The Defense Minister instructed the Coordinator of Government Activities in the Territories (COGAT), Brigadier General Kamil Abu Rukon, to take all action necessary to carry out the task, including expropriating land near the site, in order to advance the project, according to a ministry statement.

Bennett also authorized the Supreme Planning Council to complete all necessary planning procedures with the Hebron municipality.

The OppositionHanan Ashrawi, Member of the PLO Executive Committee, described work to make the Cave of the Patriarchs accessible to disabled people as Israeli aggression.

Israels approval of the confiscation of Islamic Waqf land belonging to the Ibrahimi Mosque in Hebron is an egregious assault on Palestinian land and a grave violation of international law as well as signed agreements, she stated last month.

This is a provocative and irresponsible action that will stoke religious sensitivities, she added.

She called on UNESCO and responsible international actors to assume its obligations under international law to defend the Ibrahimi Mosque and its vicinity from this act of thievery.

The Palestinian Authority has denied any Jewish connection to the site.

Content by TPS was used in this article.

More:

DM Bennett Green Lights Project to Create Disability Access at Cave of the Patriarchs - The Jewish Press - JewishPress.com


Page 1,109«..1020..1,1081,1091,1101,111..1,1201,130..»

matomo tracker