Page 1,326«..1020..1,3251,3261,3271,328..1,3401,350..»

Can We Fix the Vessels of Redemption in the State of Israel – israelrising.com

Posted By on November 26, 2019

Everything in the physical world can be used as a vessel to either draw or contain Divine Light or the opposite to block it. After all, the Creator seeks to always shine his Will on all of the Creation. The State of Israel as a tool for renewed Jewish sovereignty in the Land of Israel can either be used to complete the process of Redemption or the opposite and stall it. The chaos we are now witnessing in the State is nothing more than the vessel itself as it is structured coming to a close. The tools that came into being when it was established were either incomplete or fashioned in a way in which the light from above could not be contained.

When the State of Israel was created, it was done so as a hasty declaration and a response to the invasion of five Arab armies. True, the Zionist movement had been moving towards an independent state, but the invasion gave the Mapai a chance to take full control over the Zionist project. This had been Ben Gurions aim from the beginning. After all, the usurpation of the formal Zionist movement did not give them control over the street. The Revisionist Zionist movement, through the oratory and ideology of Valdamir Jabotinsky were far more beloved in the eyes of most Jews in Israel.

It was only when the British decided to end their control over the Holy Land due to the Jewish rebellion led by Menachem Begins Irgun and the late Avraham Sterns Lechi that Ben Gurion and others used this as a pretext to take full control over the Zionist movement.

In taking control, the Labor Zionists were able to rewrite the history books, glorifying their leadership as well as injecting Western governing concepts into the body-politic. The parliamentary structure, so unstable and not suitable for a Jewish State was used. The courts were structured in a way to enable continuous Labor and internationalist control. Any chance for a true indigenous and authentic Jewish expression so desired by the initial waves of Jewish pioneers as well as Jews that had already been living in Israel for thousands of years, were stamped out to make way for an internationalist, communist controlled bureaucracy.

The Labor Zionists never saw the State as anything but a tool to establish their long term control over the Holy Land. Any thought that the State of Israel that had risen was meant to be a vessel for the Redemptive process was an anathema for them. True, Ben Gurion paid homage to the return and could have harbored positive feelings to the idea, but the superstructure of control that was created painted a different story.

When Menachem Begin surprised the Labor establishment by breaking their electoral control of the state, the Revisionists as well as the Jews of Middle Eastern and North African descent believed that a revolution was underway.

While there was a cosmetic change, Begin and Shamir after him never put full energy into the areas of true Labor control the courts, economy, and the media.

It was not until Prime Minister Netanyahu came along that the media or at least some of it began to change as well as the economy. As things began to open up and the disastrous effects of Oslo felt, the populace turned its back on the Two State-Solution as well as social welfare programs championed by the Left.

With the current political stalemate in Israel showing no signs of letting up, one must take a look at the entire structure of the State itself within the context of how it was formed and understand that the system is begging to be changed in order to take the Redemptive Process to the next level.

Rav Kook teaches the following in Orot HaTechiya 28:

The holiness that is expressed from within the physical is the holiness of the Land of Israel. When the Shechina (Divine Presence) descended into exile with the Nation of Israel, holiness stood in opposition to the physical. But holiness which battles the physical is not a complete holiness. It is necessary that holiness become subsumed within the Divine from above, which leads to a holiness that is expressed through the physical itself. This is the foundation of repairing the entire World.

Ultimately, the vessels of Redemption which flow from Jewish sovereignty in the Land of Israel were never seen as conduit for the Holiness of our Divine mission in this world. The two remained disconnected and so 72 year later the State itself requires a true fusion of the Vessels within it to the Holiness we seek to draw into the World.

The light of Redemption can be harnessed within the State of Israel, but the concept that this is what is necessary must be injected into the conversation. The Left would like to continue its subversive control over the institutions and the Right would like to pretend it only cares about being a capitalistic Western Democracy, but neither can stand up against the current wave of yearning for something beyond what we have. The only thing missing is the right leader to clarify the path ahead and by doing so repair the vessels of Redemption strewn out in front of us.

Here is the original post:
Can We Fix the Vessels of Redemption in the State of Israel - israelrising.com

Israel, Palestine and the Politics of Race – Middle East Monitor

Posted By on November 26, 2019

Normalising Israel as a Jewish state absents Palestinian experience, history and identity claims. Yasmeen Abu Laban and Abigail Bakan, Palestinian and Jewish authors of Israel, Palestine and the Politics of Race have constructed a detailed analysis of race and power relations which has been sustained and adopted by the international community. By dispelling the conflations associated with race, the book delves into the political implications, showing how the exclusion of Palestinians on all levels politics, land and environment are all sites in which Israel is able to manipulate, thus constructing the apartheid state in full view of, and with no obstruction from, the international community.

The book tackles the subject in three sections which connect the Zionist colonial framework and its erasure of Palestine, to the historical and current global politics that endorsed Israels self-exceptionalism which, post 2001 and the US war on terror, was conflated to disseminate international identification with the settler-colonial state by constructing a purportedly common enemy. This move by Western liberal democracies draws an important point the links between racial contracts as explained by the authors and liberal democracy. The book draws upon Antonio Gramscis works on hegemony and resistance, as well as draws comparisons between Israel and other settler-colonial entities, namely Canada and the US, which established themselves upon the erasure of the indigenous populations.

Abu Laban and Bakan clarify the dynamics of the racial contract in the first chapter, deeming it ideological, material and literal. Ideologically, the authors state, Israel indeed depends upon the establishment of Israel on land that was claimed to be uninhabited, rendering the indigenous Palestinian population invisible in the most enduring and significant absence. To maintain this erasure, Zionism implemented and encouraged a conflation of terms, such as equating Palestinians with terrorism and declaring state policy critique as racism against the Jewish people. In addition, Zionism has also reshaped Holocaust memory; the authors refer to Hannah Arendts observation of the massacres confined to an atrocity against Jews as opposed to against humanity. The latter was not challenged by the international community in terms of political strategy and the contradiction which Zionism was openly promoting in terms of Israel constructed as a site of safety for Jews, built upon the ethnic cleansing of the indigenous Palestinians.

Palestinian Womens Activism: Nationalism, Secularism, Islamism

Internationally, the existing hegemonic discourse had already been established by other settler-colonial states which now occupied the helm of the international arena. Canada is specifically mentioned in the book due to its track record of supporting Israels erasure of Palestinians a trend which the Canadian government only diverted from very recently. In terms of Israeli and Canadian exclusion of the other, the authors note that Canada had refused Jewish refugees in the aftermath of World War II, yet its support for Israel makes it complicity in the Zionist dispossession of the Palestinian people.

Israels racial profiling a political move in line with white supremacy was globally adopted after September 11, 2001. The book shows how Israel perfected the racial strategy against Palestinians and, as a result of the global emphasis on surveillance in accordance with the racial contract, extended its self-exceptionalism to Western liberal democracies and their exclusionary politics. Abu Laban and Bakan explain, We suggest that what could be considered as a certain Palestinianisation has occurred in liberal democracies, generalising a sense of fear or threat in response to those who are socially sorted as terrorists.

The racial strategy forms the premise of Israels militarisation against indigenous Palestinian resistance. Since the Nakba, the authors argue, Palestinians have been treated as an existential threat to the territory redefined as the Jewish state of Israel, constructed by the state as exclusively and ethnically Jewish. To show how Israel perfected the purported terror threat from Palestinians, the book delves into specific periods of Israel colonisation from 1948 onwards, making the point that Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu had used the war on terror phrase in 1996; by 2001, Israels racial contract and militarised surveillance influenced the US designation of the war on terror. It is this assimilation to Israel, particularly by the US, which further absents the Palestinian people by creating victims out of the colonial oppressors.

Within the international community, this anomaly is not challenged adequately. Abu Laban and Bakan observe the Zionist manipulation to deny, forgive and forget Western European racism towards the Jewish population and to ascribe Jewish survival to the colonial state building project associated with Israeli military occupation of Palestinian land. The UN, while providing a platform for articulating human rights, is beyond doubt exclusionary in the authors words, contradictory and inconsistent from its earliest, foundational years. An important point highlighted in the book is the UNs facilitating representation while still rendering Palestinians subjugated to a relationship of a stateless people to an international organisation made up of states.

READ: Where the Bird Disappeared

Just as the book shows the historical trajectory of Israel and Palestine within the UN context, it also traces the current apartheid back to 1948 which is deemed unique due to the ethnic cleansing and settler-colonialism which founded the current reality. The racialised expression of Israels obsession with a demographic majority necessitates a future one-state as post-apartheid reality. However, the authors describe this as a necessary first step in expanding democratic rights to those who have been victims of colonial settlement.

Global response to Israels racial contract has largely been sustained through coercion and complicity. To counter the hegemonic racism, the authors suggest global solidarity which is currently epitomised by the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) Movement.

Abu Laban and Bakan have excelled in illustrating an important aspect of Israels settler colonialism and international complicity which is less scrutinised when speaking about Palestinian dispossession. In prioritising the politics of race and its influence within the global scene, the authors shed light on how Israel influenced global politics through its colonial entrenchment in Palestine, as its designation as a Jewish state and, above all, the social sorting applied against Palestinians which has become a blueprint for surveillance and repression of minorities elsewhere.

More:
Israel, Palestine and the Politics of Race - Middle East Monitor

Jewish Religious Holidays, Politicization on Campus Discussed at Town Hall – NYU Washington Square News

Posted By on November 26, 2019

Jewish students called for religious holidays off, greater understanding of differing identities within the Jewish community and better kosher food accommodations at a town hall hosted by members of the Student Government Assembly on Friday.

In the past, Zionist and anti-Zionist Jewish groups on campus have clashed over the latters support for a protest of Israels treatment of Palestinians the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions movement. Zionist groups in particular have expressed they feel antagonized by protests of Israel, calling BDS anti-Semitic.

Gallatin sophomore and Vice President of Hillel at NYU Avital Krifcher, who attended the event, said groups for Jewish students should not be involved in these political discussions.

Clubs on campus that identify as Jewish have a responsibility to separate politics and religion, Krifcher said. It can be very detrimental to people who identify as Jewish or non-Jewish, or Zionist or anti-Zionist, to identify one and define it as the other.

Advertisement

Krifcher mentioned an April 2018 celebration of Israeli Independence Day held by Zionist student groups, protested by pro-Palestine groups Students for Justice in Palestine and Jewish Voices for Peace. She said students may incorrectly perceive Jewish groups there as representative of all Jewish students at NYU.

When it came to the rave in the park last year, it is important to both distinguish the clubs organizing them and their affiliation with Jewish students, Krifcher said.

CAS senior Michael Bearman, Senator at-Large for Marginalized Jewish Students, represents Jewish students who identify as queer, of color and/or non- and anti-Zionist and said hes felt uncomfortable in Jewish institutional spaces.

One of the big things I am working on now is making a space for non- and anti-Zionist Jews in the Bronfman Center, to make the center more accessible for marginalized Jews, Bearman said. The only [Jewish] club not explicitly Zionist is Jewish Voice for Peace and the club has not really had a close relationship with the Bronfman Center and so I am trying to make those ties a little stronger this year.

Stern senior and Senator at-Large for Jewish Students Revital Chavel co-hosted the town hall with Bearman. Chavel spoke about her push for NYU not to hold classes on Jewish religious holidays such as Yom Kippur and Rosh Hashanah. Some holidays involve fasting, restrictions on electricity and writing and attendance of synagogue for prayer for a large portion of the day.

Chavel wrote a letter backed by SGA to NYU last semester urging it to do so following a petition in 2017 with the same goal. Currently, NYUs policy does not allow students to be penalized for missing a class due to a religious holiday, although it does not cancel classes for them either.

The effect [of the holidays] is that students who observe these laws end up having a lot of days where they cant be working, they cant go to class and they cant take notes, Chavel said. [The letter] will allow the professor to know that this is happening and not so they assume off the back of their head, Oh, this student is just taking a vacation day.

Regarding religious inclusivity on campus, Jewish students at the town hall expressed that, besides holidays, food can be an area of difficulty for those who keep kosher.

The Kosher Eatery on campus is one of the few places Jewish people can eat, said Stern sophomore Eitan Ginsburg, who is also president of a club supporting Orthodox Jewish life on campus, Shalhevet. Creating more inclusivity on campus is important, even with regard to food.

Attendees said having a forum to express complaints left them feeling positive about NYUs trajectory in addressing issues facing specific communities at the university. Aside from Fridays town hall, there has been a a Latine Town Hall, Financial Aid Town Halland one for undocumented, first-generation and low-income students this semester.

I thought [the Town Hall] was really fantastic, said Krifcher. I think more events like this would be really beneficial not only for Jewish students but for all students on campus so that everyone feels more unified.

Krifcher hopes events like the town halls spur more dialogue among not only Jewish students but those of other faiths as well.

As a marginalized group we face a lot of the same challenges like many other religious groups on campus, Krifcher said. It would be fantastic for religious students to get together on campus and deepen their faiths through conversation and dialogue. We all face a lot of the same challenges when it comes to misconceptions and stereotypes [in regard to] a specific faith, and this is a great way to start bridging those gaps.

A version of this article appeared in the Monday, November 25, 2019, print edition. Email Roshni Raj at [emailprotected].

Advertisement

View original post here:
Jewish Religious Holidays, Politicization on Campus Discussed at Town Hall - NYU Washington Square News

UK’s Zionist terror networks GnasherJew, Labour Against Anti-Semitism, Sussex Friends of Israel and their latest terror tool Labour Anti-Semitism…

Posted By on November 26, 2019

Samantha Bentley writes:

A couple of months ago a fellow UK Labour Party supporter asked us if we had heard about the anti-Semitism map. We had not, so our friend sent us the link and suggested we looked to see if we were on the map. We honestly thought that we would never find our name on that map as we are not, and never have been, racist in any way. We are sure you can imagine our shock and anger to not only to find our names but also also our locations on the map. Not only were we angry about being labelled anti-Semitic but also at our private information being put on the map for everybody to see. It is a total invasion of our privacy and goes against data privacy regulations which are upheld by the Information Commissioners Office (ICO).

The creator of the map is Ray Baker, one of the pro-Israel, right-wing, racist trolls who use the GnasherJew account on Twitter. He resides in a place called Penclawdd in Swansea, Wales. His employment records show that he is working, or has worked, for Quintiles (now called IQVIA) and Fujitsu. His Twitter ID is @LaughingDevil1.

At the end of this piece we provide a link to the map plus a link to the ICO websites complaints page. If you find yourself on the page, then we would advise you to make a complaint. We have made complaints and we do know that many others have also complained.

Who is behind this map? we hear you ask. The creator of the map is Ray Baker, one of the pro-Israel, right-wing, racist trolls who use the GnasherJew account on Twitter. He resides in a place called Penclawdd in Swansea, Wales. His employment records show that he is working, or has worked, for Quintiles (now called IQVIA) and Fujitsu. His Twitter ID is @LaughingDevil1. You can also find him on Facebook. The host site for the map is owned by an Israeli company which, when contacted about the map, stated it had no control over what its users published on the internet.

Ray Baker had decided who to put on the map utilising information gathered on Twitter and using the GnasherJew, Labour Against Anti-Semitism (LAAS) and Sussex Friends of Israel accounts (the information used is logged on each persons entry on the map). When asked whether he had created the map, Ray Baker had no problem in admitting that he had, and said that he had done it so there was a record of anti-Semitism around the world.

They [the fake anti-Semitism Zionist networks] claim to be fighting anti-Semitism but the truth is that they are all rampant Islamophobes and are using the fight against anti-Semitism to hide the truth.

The creation of this map is part of the ongoing smear campaign by pro-Israel factions and the campaign of harassment and bullying by GnasherJew, Sussex Friends of Israel, LAAS, the Campaign Against Anti-Semitism and others to try to scare supporters of Labour Party leader Jeremy Corbyn and those who support Palestine. They claim to be fighting anti-Semitism but the truth is that they are all rampant Islamophobes and are using the fight against anti-Semitism to hide the truth. The pro-Israel groups are scared of Corbyn becoming prime minister because it will mean the end of aid for Israel and the beginning of help and aid for Palestine.

The campaign of harassment and bullying by these right wing [pro-Israel] elements has resulted in people leaving social media platforms like Twitter; losing their jobs when their employers have been contacted and told a load of lies about them; having family members being approached and told lies; suffering from anxiety and / or depression due to the stress of continual harassment and bullying.

There is a contingent within the Gnasherjew faction that is pro-Israel and it has been duped by GnasherJew. We will save this for another piece but we will share this with you now. The person behind the creation of Gnasherjew is called John Arnott he resembles a typical English Defence League member in appearance (bald, beer belly). He lives in Oxfordshire and will be furious about the twinning of Oxford with Ramallah in Palestine.

The campaign of harassment and bullying by these right wing [pro-Israel] elements has resulted in people leaving social media platforms like Twitter; losing their jobs when their employers have been contacted and told a load of lies about them; having family members being approached and told lies; suffering from anxiety and / or depression due to the stress of continual harassment and bullying. The behaviour of these elements is a disgrace and a blight on all social media sites. The lack of censure by Twitter and Facebook against these elements is equally disgraceful.

Here are the links mentioned earlier to the complaints page of the Information Commissioners Office and to the Labour Anti-Semitism Map:

A huge thank you to Sally Eason and Labour Left Voice for their research, which made this article possible. John Arnott seems to be obsessed with Sally and with trying to make her life miserable. GnasherJew has made the closing of the Labour Left Voice Twitter account its raison detre (so far it has failed). Thanks also to Jason, Janie, Helen and Sian for reading the drafts of this article and for being sounding boards.

See the original post here:
UK's Zionist terror networks GnasherJew, Labour Against Anti-Semitism, Sussex Friends of Israel and their latest terror tool Labour Anti-Semitism...

Gov. DeSantis’ political allies at home and abroad are beset by scandals, with Israel’s Netanyahu indicted and Trump facing impeachment – Florida…

Posted By on November 26, 2019

Even before he became the governor of Florida, Ron DeSantis aspired to become this countrys most-pro-Israel governor.

He aligned himself with both President Donald Trump and Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, sharing their advocacy of an aggressive Zionism. DeSantis underscored his fidelity through a high-profile trade mission to Israel in late May, his first foreign trip as governor.

Now both of those political allies are beset by corruption scandals Trump under threat of impeachment, Netanyahu under indictment on bribery-related charges.

Trump appears not to have suffered much in support from his base, elements of which DeSantis shares. Neither do political analysts contacted by the Florida Phoenix believe that Netanyahus indictment will splash mud on Floridas governor.

I dont think it has any major impact at the end of the day, said Rick Wilson, the GOP political strategist turned Trump antagonist.

The people who really vote based on Israel are evangelical Christians, and theres nowhere else for them to go, he told the Phoenix Monday via text message.

A Democratic consultant, Steve Schale, replied in a similar way.

For those who are inclined to vote for him based on his approach to Israel or for social conservatives who see it as a rallying point for the right the issue is more about his priorities than the specific prime minister. And those likely to take a negative view of him because of Netanyahu probably already have a negative view of them both, Schale said via email.

In some way, the flip played out in the other direction for President Obama, for whom the right tried to paint as anti-Israel because of his poor relationship with Netanyahu, but that relationship had no impact on the vast majority of Jewish voters who voted for him anyways.

The pro-Israel stance was an important component of Trumps and DeSantis appeal to Jewish voters. It also appeals to evangelical Christians. DeSantis, for example, enjoyed 77 percent support among white Protestant evangelicals in his 2018 campaign. That group supports Israel out of belief that God gave to the Jewish people perpetual rights to the land on both sides of the Jordan River, and also because of Israels central role in Second Coming prophesies.

Netanyahu has courted the same constituency, telling evangelicals at one point that Israel has no greater friends than Christian supporters of Israel.

The governors press office did not respond to a request for comment. Of the four independently elected Florida Cabinet members approached for comment, only Republican Chief Financial Officer Jimmy Patronis replied.

Floridas Cabinet, through the trade mission and the resolution earlier this year, made it clear that we stand with our closest ally and the only democracy in the Middle East. Our states leadership will not be deterred in this support, Patronis spokesman Devin Galetta said via email.

The conservative Republican governors embrace of Netanyahu included meeting with him during DeSantis and the Florida Cabinets late May trade mission to Tel Aviv and Jerusalem. Following their talk, DeSantis referred to the P.M. by his nickname, Bibi, and called him a really strong leader.

DeSantis said Netanyahu had favorably impressed him during a 2015 address to Congress one arranged by the Republican leadership as a rebuke to then-President Obama and panned by Democrats as hyperpartisan.

I told him after that speech I had so many constituents who said, Heck, why dont we elect Netanyahu here? So, if it doesnt work out for him, I think he probably could get elected in the United States if he wanted to, the governor told a pool reporter on the Israel trip.

The governor also has endorsed Netanyahus expansion of Jewish settlements in the occupied territories, and led the Cabinet in sanctioning Airbnb when it moved to curb listings for Israeli-owned properties in the West Bank. The company subsequently abandoned that policy.

Theyre the only country in the region that shares our values that has a democratic form of government and thats really been successful, the governor told reporters in Israel.

And yet their enemies play for keeps. If their enemies had the wherewithal to drive Israel into the sea, they would do it, DeSantis said. If Iran could wipe Israel off the map tomorrow, they would be willing to do it. Weve got to understand thats out there, and weve got to remain tough.

The trade delegation included a number of activists for the Zionist cause, including Eytan Laor, the Israel-born political consultant who sits on the board of the Endowment for Middle East Truth, which describes itself as an unabashedly pro-America and pro-Israel think tank; Bob Diener, the online hotel-booking entrepreneur who serves on the board of the Development Corp. for Israel, which sells Israeli government bonds in the United States; and Becker & Poliakoff shareholder Ellyn Bogdanoff, who works with Jewish organizations including the Holocaust Documentation Center.

Not listed as a trade delegate was gambling billionaire Sheldon Adelson, a DeSantis and Trump campaign donor who ended up attending the ceremonial signing of a memorandum of understanding promising student exchange and cooperative research programs between Florida Atlantic University and Ariel University.

Note: The university is located in an Israeli-occupied area of the West Bank. Additionally, the governor and Cabinet staged a ceremonial meeting in the new U.S. embassy in Jerusalem, which President Trump established there to underscore support for Israel and its settlement policies.

Ironically, perhaps, the indictment against Netanyahu lists Adelson was the victim of one of the bribery schemes, which would have benefited a rival publisher to Adelsons Israel Today newspaper, which is circulated for free in Israel.

DeSantis meeting with Netanyahu happened just hours after the prime minister was forced to dissolve Israels Knesset having failed to form a coalition government. That set up a snap election in September, following which Netanyahu again failed to form a government. At last word, rival Blue and White party leader Benny Gantz announced that hed failed to form a government.

Florida Politics reporter A.G. Gancarski asked DeSantis at the time whether hed embraced Netanyahu too closely. The governor thought not.

Ill work with whoevers there. From the perspective of Israel, they need allies, DeSantis said.

Read more:
Gov. DeSantis' political allies at home and abroad are beset by scandals, with Israel's Netanyahu indicted and Trump facing impeachment - Florida...

Israel May Be Taming Hamas, but It Must Proceed with Caution – Mosaic

Posted By on November 26, 2019

In the Jewish states latest round of fighting with Palestinian Islamic Jihad, Hamas sat out the conflict almost entirely, and the IDFwith only a few exceptions in the final roundsstruck exclusively at Islamic Jihad targets. By deterring Hamas, writes Hillel Frisch, Jerusalem may have also succeeded in driving a wedge between it and Islamic Jihad, which, like the divide between Hamas and the Palestinian Authority, could work to Israels advantage. Frisch probes the benefits, and the limits, of this divide-but-dont-conquer strategy:

There are two possible solutions to the violence emanating from Gaza. Either embark on a massive fourth round of conflict like the 2014 confrontation and hope that it will bring Hamas to non-belligerency . . . or adhere to the taming Hamas approach used by Netanyahu since [the border riots known as] the March of Return began at the end of March 2018, which minimizes the sticks and maximizes the carrots for keeping the peace.

Initiating a massive round [of fighting], including a ground offensive into Gaza, . . . plays into the hands of Tehrans regional strategy to use the Palestinian card to deflect the focus from its buildup in Syria, and entails other obvious costs in terms of lives and treasure. . . . The costs of [the latter] strategy are equally obvious. Any carrots offered to Hamas might buy peace and ameliorate the humanitarian crisis in Gaza, but Hamas will use those same carrots to enhance its military capabilities.

Just as Israel tamed the PAin part because after 2007, [both] faced a shared enemy in Hamas and Islamic Jihadgiving rise to unprecedented levels of security cooperation between the two, Israel and Hamas are cementing a mutual interest in weakening Islamic Jihad.

As auspicious as this wedge in Islamist ranks may be, however, . . . Israel should give the fewest carrots and concessions possible, knowing full well that some of these carrots are quickly converted into firepower to be used against Israel in the future. This also means scuttling the visions promoted by Benny Gantz and [some Israeli analysts] who argue that Israeli sticks should be accompanied by a Marshall Plan of goodies to improve the welfare of Gazas inhabitants. That only worked after Germany and Japan were totally defeated and a mutual threat to the Western alliance, the Soviet Union, emerged.

Read more at BESA Center

More about: Benny Gantz, Gaza Strip, Hamas, Islamic Jihad, Israeli Security

Continue reading here:
Israel May Be Taming Hamas, but It Must Proceed with Caution - Mosaic

Opinion | Here’s Why We Protested Hen Mazzig At Vassar – Forward

Posted By on November 26, 2019

This is one of a number of responses to what happened at Vasser when an Israeli speaker, Hen Mazzig, was protested last week.

On Thursday November 14, at 5 p.m., around 25 members of Vassars Students for Justice in Palestine chapter along with other students gathered on the third floor of Rockefeller Hall to voice our opposition to a talk by Hen Mazzig titled The Indigenous Jews of the Middle East: Forgotten Refugees.

The stories of Mizrahi Jews and their struggle both outside and within Israel deserve attention. But those of us who demonstrated believed this talk would be little more than pro-Israel propaganda, given Mazzigs record.

Mazzig served for five years as a commander in the Israel Defense Forces. While Mazzig served as a humanitarian officer, the military he served has killed thousands of Palestinians in the last few decades alone. Given what we gleaned from Mazzigs previous talks, we felt certain he would ignore the IDFs practice of torturing, imprisoning, harassing, demolishing the homes of, cutting resources off from, and murdering the Palestinian people, as well as multiple UN condemnations of the IDFs human rights violations. Instead, Mazzig paints the Israeli military as a progressive gay haven with his coming out story.

This tactic folds into a larger strategy used on the pro-Israel right thats been coined Pinkwashing the tactic of diverting attention away from the occupation of Palestinian land, the dispossession of Palestinian rights and property and the miserable conditions of life in Gaza under blockade, by focusing on Israel as LGBTQ-friendly; Israel has made a concerted effort to brand itself as an international gay vacation destination. Meanwhile, Palestinian queer liberation organizations like Aswat, Al Qaws and Palestinian Queers for Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions have spoken out against Pinkwashing; as the director of Al Qaws put it, When you go through a checkpoint, it does not matter what the sexuality of the soldier is.

Its not just his gay identity that Mazzig uses. He likes to champion intersectionality and his Mizrahi identity, but he has a penchant for attacking intersectional leaders. He has attacked Linda Sarsour and Congresswoman Ilhan Omar, as well as other supporters of BDS, specifically targeting SJPs across the country with insults and false information.

Instagram

A now-deleted photo from Hen Mazzigs Instagram feed.

For these reasons, we felt it was appropriate to voice our dissent from those who chose to invite Mazzig. This is how we did so:

We remained in the hallway for the duration of our demonstration, holding signs which included phrases like, Stop Pinkwashing, Resistance is Not Terrorism, Free Palestine, Dont Normalize Zionism and Palestinians are Indigenous. We played music by Palestinian artists, passed out flyers explaining our position, and spoke with attendees.

Only a handful of students attended the event, outnumbered greatly by administrators, professors, and staff. At around 5:40 pm, we began chanting outside the doors of the talk. We yelled, From the river to the sea, Palestine will be free, How do you spell justice? BDS!, From Kashmir to Palestine, occupation is a crime, Stop the killing, stop the hate, Israel is an apartheid state, and When I say free, you say Palestine! Free - Palestine!

The chants lasted for about seven minutes before we all left the building and the talk went on.

Although we do not believe that Zionism should have a platform, especially not one funded by our student government, we did not prevent anyone from attending the talk or stop Mazzig from speaking.

But despite our concerted to effort to allow him to speak, Mazzig proceeded to smear us on social media. After the talk, Mazzig tweeted that one of these chants, From the river to the sea, Palestine will be free, had been used by Hamas when they call for the genocide of all Jews. He said we chanted for his death.

This absurd and intentionally incendiary claim was based on the myth that From the river to the sea was originated by Hamas. This is untrue, and was a clear attempt to discredit critics of Israel as Hamas terrorists.

The phrase is a popular slogan among a wide range of Palestinian resistance and nationalist groups. And for us, freedom for Palestine certainly does not translate to the genocide or dispossession of all Jews. It is a demand for total decolonization, for a recognition of the right of return, and for the dismantling of an unequal regime.

The conflation by Mazzig and others of anti-Zionism with anti-Semitism is itself an anti-Semitic tactic, as it falsely represents the Jewish community and tells them what they ought to believe. This misrepresentation erases the brave work of many Jewish people who actively speak out against Israeli apartheid, including many members of SJP at Vassar.

False accusations of anti-Semitism directed at activists acting in solidarity with Palestinians distract from real instances of anti-Semitism. When people like Mazzig hurl these accusations, they are doing so in order to escape legitimate criticism and to divert attention away from the injustices carried out by the Israeli government.

We do not hold Jewish liberation and Palestinian liberation as antithetical to one another but see the struggles as intertwined. We believe it is both possible and necessary to stand against anti-Semitism and to stand with the BDS movement and the Palestinian fight for freedom.

But our college sided with this smear against us. In the early hours of Friday, November 15, Vassar College President Elizabeth Bradley released a statement indirectly addressed our protest. A group of students disrupted the speaker by chanting outside the lecture hall for some time, she wrote in a statement. People who were in the lecture expressed that the chanting was intimidating and hard to listen to. The words have been associated by some people with anti-Semitism.

While we understand that some who attended the event felt that the protest was, as Bradley put it, intimidating and hard to listen to, we are steadfast in our belief that this discomfort was necessary and does not compare to the actual situation in Palestine, where 70,000 Palestinians must cross Israeli Military Checkpoints on their commute to work every day, and over 50 Israeli laws discriminate between Jewish and non-Jewish citizens of Israel.

In the few days since our student government approved funding for Mazzigs talk, Israeli forces have killed 34 Palestinians and wounded hundreds of others. Fighting against Israel should only intimidate those who have a stake in devaluing Palestinian lives, and like those who fought against apartheid in South Africa, we see ourselves on the right side of history.

There is no sense of belonging on a campus that brings a speaker who promotes racist ideology and has a history of attacking students in SJP chapters. There is no flourishing of opposing ideas when the Israeli government is cutting off two million Gaza residents from access to clean water. There is no room for diverse viewpoints around the shooting and bombing of unarmed Palestinians. There is no free exchange of ideas to be had about the forced dispossession and ethnic cleansing of Palestinians.

Ezra Mead is a junior at Vassar. He is submitting this oped on behalf of the members of Students for Justice in Palestine at Vassar.

The views and opinions expressed in this article are the authors own and do not necessarily reflect those of the Forward.

Read more:
Opinion | Here's Why We Protested Hen Mazzig At Vassar - Forward

Israeli Towns and Villages in the West Bank Are a Political Issue, Not a Legal One – Mosaic

Posted By on November 26, 2019

Critics of the State Departments determination that Israeli settlements in land acquired during the Six-Day War are not illegal have objected on three distinct grounds: that it constitutes a radical break with 40 years of U.S. foreign-policy consensus, that it misinterprets the law, and that it makes peace less likely. All these objections are wrong, explains Douglas Feith. To the first objection, he notes that in 1981 Ronald Reagan reversed the Carter administrations position that the settlements were illegal; it was the Obama administration that broke with 35 years of precedent when it tacitly reverted to Carters position in 2016. As for the others, Feith writes:

[The Carter administrations argument] ignored entirely the rights of Jews under the 1922 Palestine Mandate, which called for close settlement by Jews on the land. How could those rights have been extinguished by Jordans unlawful attack on Israel in 1948 or by Jordans . . . West Bank annexation in April 1950, which the United States never recognized? [Even Carters advisers] admitted that Jordan was not the legitimate sovereign of the West Bank between 1949 and 1967.

Carter held the conventional view that the Arab-Israeli conflict is in some essential way about the settlements. Trump-administration officials see it differently. Their view evidently is that the conflict reflects the hopes of Israels enemies that they can weaken the Jewish state, separate it from its U.S. ally, and ultimately destroy it. What fuels the conflict is the notion that Israel is a vulnerable, alien presence that lacks roots, legitimacy, and moral confidence.

For years, anti-Israel propaganda concentrated so intensely on attacking the settlements as illegal because that line of argument was deeper than a criticism of policy: it called Israels legitimacy into question. As Israels chief enemies know, asserting that the Jews have no right to live in the West Bankan important part of the ancient Jewish homelandcalls into question the Jews right to have created Israel in the first place.

By moving the U.S. embassy in Israel to Jerusalem, recognizing Israeli sovereignty over the Golan Heights, and declaring the West Bank settlements legal, Trump administration officials are strengthening U.S. ties to Israel. They are systematically contradicting those who argue that Israel can be isolated and destroyed. In the despair of the eliminationists is the best hope for a negotiated peace.

Read more at National Review

More about: Barack Obama, Jimmy Carter, Settlements, US-Israel relations, West Bank

Continued here:
Israeli Towns and Villages in the West Bank Are a Political Issue, Not a Legal One - Mosaic

Universities Enabling the Hijacking of Free Speech When Jews are Involved – The Times of Israel

Posted By on November 26, 2019

In a country where multiculturalism has a reverent following and criticism of protected minorities has essentially been criminalized as hate speech, it is more than ironic that on some Canadian campuses radical students have taken it upon themselves to target one group, Jewish students, with a hatred that is nominally forbidden for any others. And with a recent incident that took place on November 20th, York University, in particular, has now revealed a troubling pattern of tolerating physical and emotional assaults by pro-Palestinian radicals against Jewish students and others who dare to demonstrate any support for Israel or question the tactics of Islamists in their efforts to destroy the Jewish state.

Herut Canada, a Zionist movement dedicated to social justice, the unity of the Jewish people, and the territorial integrity of the Land of Israel, was sponsoring an on-campus event featuring Reservists on Duty, former IDF soldiers who would be discussing BDS and the particular challenges facing the IDF in its interaction with terrorism. But Yorks perennially-radical group, Students Against Israeli Apartheid at York University (SAIA York), was having no part of the visit and, joined by off-campus members of the equally radical Antifa organization, disrupted the event with some 600 activists heckling, chanting through bull horns, and even physical assaulting other studentsall aimed at shutting down the event and preventing attendees from hearing what the guests from the IDF had to say about negotiating for peace.

What was particularly revealing, and chilling, about the hate-filled protest (or riot, more accurately) was the virulence of the chants and messages on the placards, much of it seeming to suggest that more sinister hatreds and feelingsover and above concern for Israeli military operationswere simmering slightly below the surface. Many of the furious protestors, for instance, shrieked out, Viva, Viva Intifada and Long live the Intifada, a grotesque and murderous reference to the Second Intifada, during which Arab terrorists murdered some 1000 Israelis and wounded more than 14,000 others.

That pro-Palestinian student activists, those who purport to be motivated by a desire to bring justice to the Middle East, could publicly call for the renewed slaughter of Jews in the name of Palestinian self-determination demonstrates quite clearly how ideologically debased the human rights movement has become. Activists on and off U.S. campuses, who never have to face a physical threat more serious than getting jostled while waiting in line for a latte at Starbucks, are quick to denounce Israels very real existential threats and the necessity of the Jewish state to take countermeasures to thwart terrorism. And quick to label the killing of Hamas terrorists by the IDF as genocide, these well-meaning but morally-blind individuals see no contradiction in their calls for the renewed murder of Jews for their own sanctimonious cause, not to mention the irony of the protestors decrying the very presence and alleged barbarity of the IDF at York while simultaneously calling for the continued murder of Jews in the name of Palestinian self-determination.

Other protestors were less overt in their angry chants, carrying signs and shouting out the oft-heard slogan, Free, Free Palestine, or, as they eventually screamed out, Viva, viva Palestina! That phrase suggests the same situation that a rekindled Intifada would help bring about, namely that if the fictive nation of Palestine is liberated, is free, there will, of course, be no Israel between the Jordan River and Mediterraneanand no Jews.

Another deadly chorus emanated from protestors during the rally: Resistance is justified when people are occupied! That is an oft-repeated, but disingenuous and false notion that stateless terrorists have some recognized human right to murder civilians whose government has purportedly occupied their territory. It may be comforting for Israels ideological foes to rationalize the murder of Jews by claiming some international right to do it with impunity and a sense of righteousness. Unfortunately, however, as legal experts have inconveniently pointed out, the rally participants and their terror-appeasing apologists elsewhere are completely wrong about the legitimacy of murder as part of resistance to an occupying force.

Something is clearly amiss on North American campuses, and the York incident is emblematic of a much larger problem endemic to universities today, that anti-Israel activists have hijacked the dialogue of the Israeli/Palestinian conversation and have decided that they, and they alone, should and will decide whose views will be heard and whose will not, something that supporters of Israel have been experiencing for more than a decade already. Anti-Israel campus activists have conducted an ongoing campaign to delegitimize and libel Israel, and their tactics include a concerted attempt to shut down dialogue and debateanything that will help to normalize Zionism, permit pro-Israel views to be aired, or generate support for the Jewish state.

The tendentious, virtue-signaling brownshirts at York who attempted to suppress the speech of pro-Israel speakers whose views they had predetermined could not even be uttered on campus share a common set of characteristics with groups like the radical Students for Justice in Palestine (SJP) who have led the assault against Israel and Jewish students who support it: it is they, and they alone, who know what it acceptable speech, what ideas are appropriate and allowed, which groups are victims of oppression and should, therefore, receive special accommodation for their behavior and speech, which views are progressive (and therefore virtuous) and which views are regressive (and therefore hateful), which cause is worthy of support and which is, because of its perceived moral defects, worthy of opprobrium.

Leading up to the York event, protestors had put up posters that read, All Out. No Israeli Soldiers on Our Campus. To help further reinforce the malignancy of the IDF, the posters included a photograph of a grotesque Jewish soldier brandishing an automatic weapon over a cowering Arab child. As other anti-Israel groups have expressed with chants and posters calling for Zionists Off Our Campus and similar messages targeting Jews and other supporters of Israel, the York posters reveal a very dangerous trend on campuses in which self-righteous, morally-preening brats take it upon themselves to speak for entire universities in deciding which views will be tolerated and which must be suppressed. That York administrators, and officials at many other universities as well, regularly allow this represents a failure by academia to live up to its oft-professed goal of encouraging free and open expression and debate.

York administrators may be cautious about curbing the speech of SAIA York, particularly because its members are perceived to be a protected minority group, but the issue here is not about speech but about behavior. In fact, Yorks own student code of conduct specifically prohibits threats of harm, or actual harm, to a persons physical or mental wellbeing, including verbal and non-verbal aggression verbal abuse; intimidation; [and] harassment all of which were clearly violated by the demonstrators physically intimidating protests. Yorks Community Standards for Student Conduct specifically prohibits: disruption of, or interference with, University activities, such as: causing a substantial disorder . . ; creating dangerous situations (intentional or not); making or causing excessive noise; disrupting classes, events or examinations . . ; [and] blocking exit routesall of which regulations were violated by the rioters at the November 20th event.

More importantly, the notion that a vocal minority of self-important ideologues can determine what views may or may not be expressed on a particular campus is not only antithetical to the purpose of a university, but is vaguely fascistic by relinquishing power to a few to decide what can be said and what speech is allowed and what must be suppressed; it is what former Yale University president Bartlett Giamatti characterized as the tyranny of group self-righteousness.

The sententious activists fueling this ideological bullying may well feel that they have access to all the truth and facts, but even if this were truewhich it demonstrably and regularly is notit certainly does not empower them with the right to have the only voice and to disrupt, shout down, or totally eliminate competing opinions in political or academic debates. No one individual or group has the moral authority or intellectual might to decide what may and may not be discussed, and especially young, sanctimonious studentswhose expertise and knowledge about the Middle East, in particular, is frequently characterized by distortions, lies, lack of context, corrosive bias against Israel, and errors in history and fact.

University officials regularly proclaim that they have a commitment to the principles of freedom of inquiry, freedom of speech and freedom of association. But that empty exhortation has shown itself, repeatedly, to be, at best, disingenuous, and, at worst, a masking of the true intention of campus radicals: enabling favored victim groups to utter vitriol and libel against Israel and Jews, with the pretense that they have somehow encouraged intellectual debate and productive political discussion. This is not rigorous debate and dialogue at all; it is Jew-hatred dressed up in academic clothes.

There is no other explanation for why educated, well-intentioned and humane individuals, experiencing paroxysms of moral self-righteousness in which they are compelled to speak out for the perennial victim, can loudly and publicly advocate for the murder of Jewswho already have created and live in a viable sovereign stateon behalf of a group of genocidal enemies of Israel whose tragic condition may well be their own doing, and, at any rate, is the not the sole fault of Israels. That these activists are willing, and ready, to sacrifice the Jewish state, and Jewish lives, in the name of social justice and a specious campaign of self-determination by Palestinian Arabs, shows how morally corrupt and deadly the conversation about human rights has become.

And its lethal nature and intent should frighten us all.

More here:
Universities Enabling the Hijacking of Free Speech When Jews are Involved - The Times of Israel

Columbia University to Hold Israel Divestment Referendum; Supporters Chant ‘From the River to the Sea, Palestine Will Be Free’ – Algemeiner

Posted By on November 26, 2019

The Columbia College Student Council (CCSC) meets on Nov. 24, 2019. Photo: Screenshot / CCSC.

Student leaders at Columbia University in New York voted on Sunday to hold a referendum on divestment from Israel, following a multi-year push by anti-Zionist students and protests from the campus Jewish community.

Columbia College Student Council (CCSC) representatives voted 25-12 via secret ballot in favor of the initiative, which was brought forward by members of Columbia University Apartheid Divest (CUAD).

The measure, which will appear on the Spring 2020 elections ballot, will ask students whether the university should divest from companies that profit from or engage in the State of Israels acts towards Palestinians that, according to CUAD, fall under the United Nations International Convention on the Suppression and Punishment of the Crime of Apartheid acts against Palestinians, the student-run Columbia Spectator reported.

CAUD has called on university officials to divest since 2016, drawing opposition from Jewish and Zionist groups on campus. An earlier CUAD attempt to pass the ballot initiative was voted down by the CCSC this past March by a margin of 20-17, and in 2017 by a margin of 26-5.

Following the vote, supporters of the referendum were recorded chanting, From the river to the sea, Palestine will be free. The slogan has been used by Palestinian nationalists from advocates of the boycott, divestment, and sanctions (BDS) campaign to members of the US-designated terrorist group Hamas to refer to the establishment of a Palestinian state in the territory between the Jordan River and Mediterranean Sea, in place of Israel.

Ofir Dayan president of Columbia Students Supporting Israel (SSI), who shared footage of the chants with The Algemeiner said the call was genocidal by referring to the elimination of the only Jewish state.

The role of student government is to unify people, to teach tolerance and acceptance, not to encourage people to call for genocide, she said.

Dayan also took issue with the wording of the referendum, arguing, its completely not neutral.

This has nothing to do with fostering dialogue, with peace or security it has everything to do with dialogue that does not include Jewish students, does not include pro-Israel students, she continued. Were going to fight this referendum with all our powers, because we understand that the sole purpose of it is to marginalize us.

The Zionist student group Aryeh alsocondemned the referendum, calling the CCSC vote both appalling and reprehensible.

Aryeh is deeply disappointed in the CCSC representatives who voted in favor of the referendum, ignoring the overwhelming concern voiced by Jewish students in the room for their safety and well-being on Columbias campus, the group stated. While we articulated that we believe in both a Palestinian and a Jewish state, CUAD shamefully revealed that they do not believe in the right of a Jewish state to exist.

Having to defend the right for Jewish self-determination for the third time in four years has made the Jewish community feel targeted and isolated, Aryeh added, before applauding SSI, JStreet CU, and Hillel, and the CCSC representatives who came together and stood up for the Jewish community in the face of such intolerance.

Supporters of the resolution pointed to its endorsement by several student groups, among them the Black Students Organization,Columbia Queer Allianceand Native American Council, and said the referendum would create space to hold important conversations.

It is not a matter of silencing the opinions people already hold nationally and on this campus, Siri Ketha, a junior and member of Students for Justice in Palestine, told the Spectator. In fact, not allowing this question to pass would be a direct impediment to the so-called dialogue you wish to foster. How could dialogue be fostered if this conversation keeps getting confined to this room specifically?

In a statement released Sunday evening, Columbias Office of University Life pointed out that the Student Councils vote does not express a view for or against the referendum question, but rather seeks the views of Columbia College students.

Divestment decisions are not made through referendums, but a process involving the Universitys Advisory Council on Socially Responsible Investing (ACSRI), which advises Columbias Trustees on ethical and social issues that arise in the management of the investments in the Universitys endowment, it explained.

The body, which includesstudents, faculty, staff, and alumni, is empowered to review and analyze proposals from members of the Columbia community; if ACSRI agrees to a proposal, it then presents that proposal to the President and University Board of Trustees.

Columbia President Lee Bollinger has previously rejected the idea of divesting the universitys endowment from companies over their ties to Israel, saying in March, I dont support that. We should rarely, rarely make a decision not to do something unless there is a consensus in the campus that this is wrong,

On the issue raised, there is not a consensus; there is a whole host of views about this, he noted. On the cases where [change] has happened, there has been a consensus.

A similar referendum passed at Barnard College in 2018, following a student government hearing that was criticized for excluding the voices of students opposed to the BDS campaign. The measure was later criticized andrejectedby Barnard President Sian Leah Beilock.

CAUD and CCSC did not immediately respond to The Algemeiners requests for comments.

Link:
Columbia University to Hold Israel Divestment Referendum; Supporters Chant 'From the River to the Sea, Palestine Will Be Free' - Algemeiner


Page 1,326«..1020..1,3251,3261,3271,328..1,3401,350..»

matomo tracker