WATCH: Ultra-Zionists protest Muslim-Jewish wedding saying miscegenation is ‘gravest threat to the Jewish people’

Israel/Palestine
on 87 Comments

While the Israeli army continues to pummel the Gaza Strip and its residents for a second month, the upsurge in anti-Palestinian sentiment in Israeli society shows no signs of abating. As even mainstream Israeli politicians threaten the Palestinians of Gaza with ethnic cleansing and genocide, Israel’s far-right figures take to the street to rile up racist supporters and to chase Palestinians out of public spaces and enforce racial-religious separation.

On August 17, 2014, the Israeli anti-miscegenation group Lehava protested a party in central Israel city of Rishon Letzion celebrating the union of a son of Muslim Palestinian citizens of Israel and the daughter of Jewish citizens of Israel. A bus brought activists from Jerusalem to the venue, so that they could harass wedding guests as they arrive, chant “Death to Arabs!” and hear speeches from followers of the late Rabbi Meir Kahane extolling the virtues of racial-religious purity.

Since the state only permits weddings within faith-based communities, mixed Jewish-Gentile married couples are exceedingly rare in Israel. Regardless, the far right has made fighting the phenomenon a centerpiece of its political platform. The Kahanist Knesset representative Michael Ben-Ari was denied re-election in 2013 by a narrow margin, as center-right lawmakers adopted his rhetoric and vacuumed up his votes. The Kahanists continue to organize on the ground and push the Zionist consensus even further to the right.

It is important to note that the vigilante vanguards of Lehava have received funding from the Israeli government, via its sister organization Hemla. Lehava has also testified to the Knesset that 1,000 Jewish Israeli woman have been kidnapped and forced to marry Palestinians. While the Israeli police deny that any such cases exist, it also works in tandem with anti-miscegenation patrols throughout the country that try to deter young Israelis and Palestinians from socializing.

Clearly, the most precious Palestinian rights to be violated in recent weeks have been the rights of Gazans to life and health, to safety and security, to food and shelter. But while the Israeli government seems intent on destroying any possibility of peace with Palestinians for the foreseeable future, ultra-nationalists are trying to snuff out what little hope there is of coexistence by vilifying those few Jews and Palestinians who are, against all odds, living examples of the possibility that we can all get along in the land as equals.

About David Sheen

David Sheen is an independent journalist and film maker who lives in Dimona. His website is http://www.davidsheen.com/.

Other posts by .


Posted In:

87 Responses

  1. seafoid
    August 26, 2014, 9:28 am

    Zionism has this habit of being led by extremists- Levinger in 68 in Hebron, for example. Sharon in 2000. The moderates follow the outliers and facts are created. The right wing runs rings around the left.

    It’s very unstable now and it’s very like the process that happens in the head of an abuser who goes on to commit despicable crimes.

    http://www.theguardian.com/society/2012/nov/29/research-action-accountability-child-abuse

    “I never met anyone who I believed to be beyond understanding. However reprehensible the behaviour, it usually makes some sort of sense when examined in the context of the individual’s history. The problem with the bad or evil judgments is that they offer no strategy for intervention, other than detection and punishment. We need to understand much better what drives these people, usually men, who use children to gratify their distorted needs. Then possibly such tendencies could be detected early enough to offer useful interventions before the behaviour has become consolidated into its final destructive form.”

    Zionism is well advanced on the road to its final destructive form . This wedding scene is an important step on that journey.

    • Gene Shae
      August 26, 2014, 6:21 pm

      Levinger was no way a Zionist leader. He was a popular leader among a segment of Israelis however. And Sharon became prime minister as a direct result of the peace proposal that Barak brought to Arafat being rejected and the dire security situation at the time

      • Shingo
        August 26, 2014, 7:09 pm

        And Sharon became prime minister as a direct result of the peace proposal that Barak brought to Arafat being rejected and the dire security situation at the time

        Rubbish. Six nonths After Camp David, Arafat and Barak continued their negotiations at Taba. It was Barak that walked away even though both sides stated they were in the verge of an agreement.

        As for Camp David, Israeli foreign minister at the time, Shlomo Ben Ami, admitted that the offer was so lame that even he would have rejected it.

        The intifada was started by Sharon’s provocation, followed by Israeli police firing a million live rounds into crowds of unearned demonstrators.

      • Gene Shae
        August 26, 2014, 9:05 pm

        Shingo, that was not the point, even if your timeline and recounting of history are incorrect. The point is, Israelis went from a dovish government transitioned to a security minded one in response to violence and destruction from the territories. Sharon’s visit to the Temple Mount was not as Prime Minister. He was not in that role at that point. Fatah admitted that they were waiting for an act to,unleash terror. Any civilized person would have let his visit pass for nothing more than a visit. To,say it spurred the Arabs to violence is to deprive them of humanity.

      • seafoid
        August 27, 2014, 3:42 pm

        Sharon on the haram as sharif was like bibi bombing gaza- to show the untermenschen who is in charge and also to do a public bollock scratching to impress yossi israeli. Oslo was already dead by 2000.

      • Shingo
        August 28, 2014, 7:41 am

        Shingo, that was not the point, even if your timeline and recounting of history are incorrect.

        No my timelines is absolutely accurate. You tried to pull the hasbara talking points and they collapsed under the facts.

        The point is, Israelis went from a dovish government transitioned to a security minded one in response to violence and destruction from the territories.

        Rubbish. Israeli security forces admit they fired 1.2 million rounds of live amon into crowds of unarmed demonstrators, and that was under the so called dovish government.

        Sharon’s visit to the Temple Mount was not as Prime Minister.

        It doesn’t matter, he was clearly a front runner already and what he did was hugely provocative.

        Fatah admitted that they were waiting for an act to,unleash terror. –

        No they didn’t. You are lying.

        ny civilized person would have let his visit pass for nothing more than a visit.

        It was not a visit, it was an Israeli politician staking a claim on a very sensitive site. Any civilized country would not have fired 1.2 rounds into crowds of unarmed demonstrators. To say they had no choice but to murder unarmed Palestinians (which they always do) is s to deprive them of humanity – but then again, what humanity do Zionists have anyway.

      • seafoid
        August 27, 2014, 12:36 am

        Levinger started the settlement business outside East Jerusalem with his own ‘occupation” of Hebron. And the moderates followed his example. And now there are 800,000 settlers!
        That deluded audacity. The “Zionist responses” designed to provoke a gasp of breath -“how can they be that stupid and shortsighted?”. And they are , consistently.

  2. eljay
    August 26, 2014, 9:46 am

    As even mainstream Israeli politicians threaten the Palestinians of Gaza with ethnic cleansing and genocide, Israel’s far-right figures take to the street to rile up racist supporters and to chase Palestinians out of public spaces and enforce racial-religious separation.

    So this is what it looks like when a self-proclaimed “moral beacon” state:
    – functions under the impression that morality is merely “goal + methods”;
    – scorns justice, accountability and equality; and
    – strives to be just a little bit better than Saudi Arabia, Mali and African “hell-holes”.

  3. just
    August 26, 2014, 9:53 am

    What’s also despicable about this affair, is that ” Israel’s high court refused their application to ban demonstrations outside their wedding reception.” And, “He said that hiring the security guards had cost over $4,000 (£2,400), half of which was being paid for by the wedding hall, but the remainder the couple had to find themselves. The court decided that protesters would be allowed to picket the wedding, but only at a distance of 200m.”

    http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/aug/17/israeli-court-protesters-picket-palestinian-jewish-wedding

    And this:

    “Lehava spokesman and former lawmaker Michael Ben-Ari denounced Jews intermarrying with non-Jews of any denomination as “worse than what Hitler did,” alluding to the murder of 6 million Jews across Europe in World War Two. ”

    http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/08/17/us-mideast-israel-wedding-idUSKBN0GH0UB20140817

    State- sanctioned racism. And yet Israel is not comfortable with the Apartheid label that they’ve earned in spades. Thank for highlighting this, David.

    (I apologize if any of this is repetitive– not all of your links are opening for me right now!)

  4. Marnie
    August 26, 2014, 10:01 am

    I have to wonder how many of these protestors are americans? How can any american not be reminded of the demonstrations in the 50s and 60s against civil rights? The biggest fear was “race mixing” as they put it. This is so very disturbing on so many levels but really, nobody outside the bride and groom has anything to say about their marrying. Who are they hurting? Most, if not all of the people in that crowd of twits don’t know the couple, aren’t their neighbors, aren’t in any danger by this marriage and aren’t contributing materially to this marriage or this couple’s lives so why not keep the comments unspoken? And I’d bet money that the big concern is the “chosen” piece and “racial purity” piece which sounds so friendly and third-reichish! However, the third reich types got plenty of good advise and suggestions from the american terrorist organization known as the kkk. It would have been nice if their permission to protest had been denied, but then we wouldn’t be talking about israel.

  5. Mooser
    August 26, 2014, 11:02 am

    “Since the state only permits weddings within faith-based communities, mixed Jewish-Gentile married couples are exceedingly rare in Israel.”

    Uh, excuse me, but how on earth did they ever get away with calling Israel a Democracy? A democracy where the State controls marriage?
    A democracy which has State-supported purity squads? Sure, okay.

    • seafoid
      August 26, 2014, 1:07 pm

      Individuals who are socialized have control over what they say even though their immediate thinking reaction to something may be quite different. Israel as a society seems to have lost this capacity.

      It’s not looking good for Hatikva.

      • Mooser
        August 26, 2014, 6:14 pm

        Gosh Seafoid, I’m getting nostaligic. Why as little as two years ago this post would have produced several comments praising and extolling the necessity of Jews marrying only Jews.
        Whether they thought this could be accomplished by legal means or by oppressive social pressure with in the “Jewish community” they were unwilling to say.
        And now I’m getting an intimation of something even crazier, that the Reform Jewish denomination has endorsed a paternal, not maternal religious inheritance? I must be wrong.

    • Mikhael
      August 29, 2014, 7:16 am

      Uh, excuse me, but how on earth did they ever get away with calling Israel a Democracy? A democracy where the State controls marriage?

      States always control marriage. That’s the whole point, isn’t it? Who do you think issues marriage licenses?

      A democracy which has State-supported purity squads?

      None of the organizations or individuals protesting mixed couples are state-supported or sanctioned. Why do you make shit up?

  6. DICKERSON3870
    August 26, 2014, 11:21 am

    RE: “Ultra-Zionists protest Muslim-Jewish wedding saying miscegenation is ‘gravest threat to the Jewish people’

    MELISSA ETHERIDGE:
    My eyes are wide-open recognizing change
    It feeds the fires of the fear
    Where human love seems strange
    I’m gonna rise above
    I believe that love is love
    I’m gonna raise my hands
    With every woman child and man

    CHORUS
    I’m gonna start an uprising
    I’m gonna start an uprising of love

    Melissa Etheridge: “Uprising of Love” (Remix) Lyric Video [04:27] – https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iTKOIzSAI0s

  7. a blah chick
    August 26, 2014, 11:38 am

    I heard that the bride’s father boycotted the party, so this couple is going to have enough on their plates between the families, they don’t need bigots added to the problems. I wish them all the luck.

    What distresses me is that so many of the racist demonstrators were young women, don’t they understand this is about their rights as well? The right wings nuts are all about controlling the sexuality of Jewish women and Arab men. So these women are campaigning against their own rights, against their right to control their own bodies. What idiots.

  8. Marnie
    August 26, 2014, 1:19 pm

    I think alot of this stems from insecurity on the part of israeli men. They say “arabs don’t even think about jewish women” or some such nonsense, but the complaining I’ve heard from israeli jewish women about their israeli jewish husbands, I think its the israeli women chasing after palestinian men and not the other way around. They’ve help create this situation by condemning it so much, making such an uproar about “mixed” couples thereby making it exciting and attractive by its whole forbidden fruit vibe. When are people going to learn to let each other be. Human beings with human beings – how about that idea. “All the rest is commentary”.

    • a blah chick
      August 26, 2014, 8:53 pm

      You are so right about that forbidden fruit thing. Also I find it really hilarious how these Arab men are “enticing” Jewish femmes. One article I saw warned women to be wary of men who treated them to nice dinners or bought them flowers, complimented on their looks and (gasp!) wrote them poetry!

      I know nothing about Israeli Jewish courting rituals but maybe the men need to step it up a notch

      • Marnie
        August 27, 2014, 12:38 pm

        a blah chick – you’re a hoot!
        I don’t think they’ll be stepping it up a notch anytime soon, that involves actually believing it would be necessary and you know they think they’re the cats pajamas. They won’t step it up a notch (or really the requisite thousand notches). I think they can’t believe “their” women would be attracted to Palestinians, Africans, Asians, etc. This is so last century. Southern (and northern too) white men wouldn’t even consider that a white woman could be attracted to a black man so the genesis of the rape hysteria and the need to protect “the flower of the south” and “white womanhood.” This was the “reason” for thousands of black men being tortured, mutilated, lynched and burned. It is a well-documented horrifying history. In the meantime I have to wish the jewish male bahatz-lacha (good luck) trying to hold on to “their women”.

  9. John O
    August 26, 2014, 1:39 pm

    If they’re not being persecuted already, Israeli gays will be next.

    • just
      August 26, 2014, 5:00 pm

      Look, John O:

      “A state rabbinic court in Jerusalem has issued an order prohibiting a woman from bringing her children to meet her female romantic partner.

      Israel’s Center for Women’s Justice filed a petition this week with the country’s Supreme Court on the woman’s behalf challenging the rabbinic court’s order.

      According to the center, the rabbinic court’s order came during divorce proceedings between the woman and her husband. The couple agreed that the woman would have custody of the children, but the husband asked the court to issue an order prohibiting the woman’s partner from seeing the children.

      Without such an order, the husband said he would refuse to grant his wife a get, or a ritual divorce. The court has agreed to his request.”

      http://www.haaretz.com/news/national/1.612549

  10. seafoid
    August 26, 2014, 2:05 pm

    Surely the occupation is the biggest threat.

    http://mjrosenberg.net/2014/08/26/the-hamas-victory/

  11. Stephen Shenfield
    August 26, 2014, 2:19 pm

    Can someone explain how a “mixed” wedding is even possible in Israel? I thought such couples had to go abroad to get married (usually to Cyprus).

    • Bumblebye
      August 26, 2014, 8:09 pm

      Does it count as “mixed”? The bride converted to Islam.

    • Mikhael
      August 29, 2014, 7:11 am

      Stephen Shenfield August 26, 2014, 2:19 pm
      Can someone explain how a “mixed” wedding is even possible in Israel? I thought such couples had to go abroad to get married (usually to Cyprus).

      There is only religious marriage in Israel, although soon it will be possible for people officially classified as having “no religion” to marry each other in civil ceremonies, although they won’t be able to marry someone registered as belonging to another confession. Mixed couples can get married if one spouse converts to the other’s confession, or if the confession permits a wedding ceremony with someone from another religion (some Christian confessions may allow this, I think Catholicism permits it). Since this was a Jewish female marrying a Muslim male, which is permitted under Islam, they could have had a Muslim qadi solemnize the marriage and the marriage would have been registered with the Israeli Interior Ministry without need for the Jewish bride to convert to Islam. Registration of the children as Jewish or Muslim is the parents’ choice after that. If a Jewish male marries a Muslim female (something that basically never happens!) there are three possibilities–(1) they go abroad to Cyprus,;(2) the bride converts to Judaism and they marry in a Jewish ceremony; or (3) the groom becomes Muslim and they marry in a Muslim ceremony. But I’ve never heard of anything like this happening, really, except for far-Left activist Uri Davis, who converted to Islam to marry his Muslim girlfriend and now defines himself as “a Palestinian Hebrew national of Jewish origin, anti-Zionist, registered as Muslim and a citizen of an apartheid state – the State of Israel.”
      It’s not only unions between Jews and non-Jews that are impacted by the lack of civil marriage in Israel, however. For instance, a Muslim or Christian (male or female) would be unable to marry a Druze in Israel (male or female) because the Druze religion doesn’t accept any converts, so Druze marriage for the couple is ruled out, therefore the only option is get married abroad unless the Druze partner converts to Islam or Christianity, or they both get married abroad. (Or I suppose they can both become Jewish or they could both join a Christian denomination and subsequently get married by a rabbi or in a church.)

      Of course, as an Israeli Zionist patriot, I view the lack of an option of civil marriage to be one of the major defects in Israeli society, although Israel’s practices in this regard are not too dissimilar from those of our neighbors.

      http://www.csmonitor.com/World/Middle-East/2010/0829/In-Egypt-more-people-call-for-civil-instead-of-religious-marriage

      Lebanese from different confessions, like Israelis, also traveled to Cyprus to get married until just last year. I guess in this respect they are ahead of us, although it looks like conservatives are placing many obstacles in its way. Congrats to them anyway!

      http://www.al-monitor.com/pulse/originals/2013/04/lebanon-first-civil-marriage-political-change.html

      http://www.bostonglobe.com/ideas/2013/03/10/the-middle-east-fight-for-civil-marriage/lTkk16DyemRYsw4uC0b2TL/story.html

  12. Gene Shae
    August 26, 2014, 6:22 pm

    Very misleading title to call the protestors Ultra Zionists. This was by no means a rally with a Zionist agenda.

    • just
      August 26, 2014, 7:21 pm

      What do you call the protestors, Gene Shae

      (Or is it g’shrey?)

      • Gene Shae
        August 26, 2014, 8:59 pm

        I don’t support them or,think that what they did is productive. I can characterize their acts with a range of adjectives. How about extremists? What they did was not a Zionist act. It is a smear of,Zionism to state otherwise.

      • just
        August 27, 2014, 10:06 am

        “”Intermarriage in Israel is simply a catastrophe,” venerated Zionist rabbi, Rabbi Chaim Druckman, told Arutz Sheva Sunday, in reaction to the high profile wedding between an Arab man and a Jewish woman in Rishon Letzion.

        “There is no other word for it but terrible assimilation,” he said. “It is very painful. We feel the pain of intermarriage outside of Israel, in the Diaspora. This phenomoenon inflicts a holocaust upon our nation. So when it happens in the Land of Israel, among us, will we not be pained? Will we not protest this?””

        http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/184129#.U_3lfWNZivk

      • Mooser
        August 27, 2014, 1:23 pm

        “I don’t support them or,think that what they did is productive “

        Gosh, I hope nobody tells the Ultra-Zionists that! Without your approval, they will have to stop all this!

    • Stephen Shenfield
      August 27, 2014, 12:21 pm

      It’s a little too convenient to blame Zionism for everything unpleasant about Jewish life. Jews were hostile to intermarriage long before Zionism entered the equation. It was customary to mourn a son or daughter who had married out as though he or she were dead and then never speak of him or her again. One of my uncles who married a Gentile was ostracized by his mother and two of his three siblings (my mother being the exception). His mother finally relented when she received a letter from his daughter. I expect that many other Jewish Mondoweiss readers could recount similar family dramas. Tribalist attitudes can exist even among anti-Zionist Jews though they make a good fit with Zionism and I think these protestors are Zionists as well as tribalists.

      • Mooser
        August 27, 2014, 4:02 pm

        “It was customary to mourn a son or daughter who had married out as though he or she were dead and then never speak of him or her again.”

        When my mother heard I was marrying a non-Jewish girl, she immediately offered we could come live in her house! “But Mom, I said, there isn’t room…”

        Maybe, given the facts on how many American Jews marry other than Jewish people we might re-adjust our perspective on what is “customary”. We seem to have adjusted. Not that I would deny anybody the dramatic tableau of weeping parents sitting shiva for their out-married son.

      • Keith
        August 28, 2014, 4:15 pm

        MOOSER- “But Mom, I said, there isn’t room…”

        Are you actually counting on a few of us to recognize and fill in the rest of that line from “Portnoy’s Complaint?” Or is that a common Jewish joke that Philip Roth commandeered?

      • Mooser
        August 28, 2014, 8:02 pm

        “Or is that a common Jewish joke that Philip Roth commandeered?”

        Me: Ma, Ma, I’m getting married, but she’s not Jewish”
        Mom: “Good, after you’re married, you can come live in my house!”
        Me: “But Ma, it’s so small, there isn’t room!”
        Mom: (grimly) “There will be. I’m going home and put my head in the oven”

        Everybody knows that joke.

      • Mooser
        August 28, 2014, 8:36 pm

        But their are other threats besides out-marriage to Jewish marriage. Did I tell you folks about how gay marriage of all things, is threatening my marriage? It’s true, it does happen. My wife was reading so much stuff about how gay marriage was bring stability, security, and so many other benefits to couples. Well, the other day, we were having a little argument, and she got all mad, and said “You better watch out, mister, If you don’t shape up, I’m going to get rid of you, and marry a man!
        Of course, my response was devastating, and for me, lightening-quick. It took about two hours to think of it.

  13. James Canning
    August 26, 2014, 7:01 pm

    Common sense argues that a lot of intermarriage in fact would be a very good thing for Israel.

    • Mooser
      August 27, 2014, 2:27 pm

      “Common sense argues that a lot of intermarriage in fact would be a very good thing for Israel.”

      If it will help those poor chumps in Israel, I am prepared to marry more than one wife. Many people would say that’s big of me.

  14. bilal a
    August 26, 2014, 8:28 pm

    Miscegnation is an improper (actually a smear) term here, Middle eastern, Ashkenazi, and African Jews can inter-marry. Moreover the Orthodox Jewish position on intermarriage is consistent with Christian and Islamic practice:

    If a Catholic Marries a Non-Christian, How is it a Sacrament?
    http://canonlawmadeeasy.com/2013/01/17/cath-marry-non-christian/

    The problem in Israel is that ‘Jewish’ is often defined through ancestral links rather than belief.
    Atheist Jews can emigrate to Israel. Jewish Arabs may not –without Orthodox conversion.

    • Mikhael
      August 29, 2014, 6:45 am

      bilal a August 26, 2014, 8:28 pm
      Miscegnation is an improper (actually a smear) term here, Middle eastern, Ashkenazi, and African Jews can inter-marry. Moreover the Orthodox Jewish position on intermarriage is consistent with Christian and Islamic practice

      @ Bilal

      I appreciate your rigor and honesty, despite your opposition to Zionism. Indeed the Hebrew word, hitbolelut, used by the (admittedly) xenophobic and religious fundamentalist demonstrators is not even close to “miscegenation”.

      The problem in Israel is that ‘Jewish’ is often defined through ancestral links rather than belief

      I’m not sure how that is a problem.

      Atheist Jews can emigrate to Israel. Jewish Arabs may not –without Orthodox conversion.

      Many here on Mondoweiss insist on referring to Israel’s majority population of Mizrahi Jews as “Jewish Arabs” or “Arab Jews” (sic). I’m also glad that you seem aware that Middle Eastern Mizrahi Jews are not “Jewish Arabs” , as many here are convinced, but would in fact refer to the very small minority of people of non-Jewish Arab heritage who convert to Judaism. Such people, it is true, would be eligible to make aliyah, get Israeli citizenship and be considered full Jews in Israel, if converted by a recognized rabbinical court and would be free to marry any other kind of Jew. (Actually, contra to what you state, non-Orthodox conversions to Judaism completed outside Israel can be acceptable for immigration purposes to Israel (over the objections of many Orthodox Jews in Israel) , although people converted by non-Orthodox rabbis cannot be married with other Jews in Israel–though their weddings solemnized outside Israel are recognized.)

  15. Mooser
    August 26, 2014, 10:51 pm

    “Common sense argues that a lot of intermarriage in fact would be a very good thing for Israel.

    Common sense and history argues that Jews have little trouble marrying out, unless they are prevented from doing so by other Jews.

    • yonah fredman
      August 27, 2014, 12:42 am

      Mooser’s sense of history begins and ends in America.

      (I think, marrying out in Czarist Russia for example in the 19th century was only possible if the Jew converted to Christianity. If there was no conversion there was no marrying out.)

      But Mooser included the word “history” because it made his sentence sound better, not because he has any interest in Jewish history pre 1945 in any country other than America.

      • just
        August 27, 2014, 10:11 am

        That’s why you’re here, yonah.

        You can tell us what you “think” history all around the world might really be.

      • Mooser
        August 27, 2014, 11:37 am

        “You can tell us what you “think” history all around the world might really be.

        I have to live in the time and place I am. To do otherwise is to become a little insane.

      • Mooser
        August 27, 2014, 11:33 am

        Yonah, any time you think a particular historical episode is relevant, you are welcome to hop in the driver’s seat, and set the Way-Back Machine for any date you please.

        So basiocally, you want me to be terrified all the time, cause the Gentiles may kill me? You know what, Yonah, they just might. I have very little control over what other people do.
        But naturally, you all want all Jews scared out of their wits, all the time.

      • Mooser
        August 27, 2014, 11:39 am

        (I think, marrying out in Czarist Russia for example in the 19th century was only possible if the Jew converted to Christianity. If there was no conversion there was no marrying out.) –

        Thanks for the tip, Yonah! Note to self: Avoid 19th Century Russia setting on Way-Back Machine. It’s no fun.

      • Mooser
        August 27, 2014, 1:34 pm

        Further note to self: Do not send money to those bring-back-19th-Century-Czarism-in-America groups. They are no-goodniks!

  16. Citizen
    August 27, 2014, 3:14 am

    I guess this incident is an example of the “same values” aspect of US-Israel “special relationship” our congress folks are always telling us Americans we have–apparently the problem has become much more acute inside Israel due to Israel’s “Russian girls” lusting after Arab young men. You see, this type of ignorant (not brain-washed) newerJewish Israeli citizen came to Israel from the old USSR lands lacking in a good Jewish-Zionist upbringing: http://electronicintifada.net/content/israel-intermarriage-viewed-treason/8459

    Of course, an important fudging of the individual’s right to control her own body lies in the fact Israel has no Constitution. When was the Loving case, 1967?

  17. notatall
    August 27, 2014, 5:27 am

    Why does the headline refer to them as “ultra-zionists” rather than zionists? What is the difference?

    • Marnie
      August 27, 2014, 2:04 pm

      Ultra-zionists contain more fats and carbohydrates than the plain zionists, which are just as bad, though don’t cause nearly as much gas and the dreaded settlement bloat.

  18. notatall
    August 27, 2014, 9:07 am

    And they wonder why the world thinks they are crazy. According to Talmudic law, a Jew who converts remains a Jew. Hence Czarist Russia was more tolerant than Israel. Conversion is an individual choice. But in Israel even if a Palestinian converted it would not be recognized by the state — any more than pre-civil rights southern states or apartheid South Africa would have allowed black people to gain citizenship rights by declaring themselves “white.” Nothing more clearly exposes the racial foundation of Zionism and the “Jewish” state. Imagine the possibilities: millions returning to their native lands and regaining possession of the properties taken from them, merely by going through a simple procedure, like acquiring U.S. citizenship, or at most the rites of preparing for the Bar-Mitzvah. It would mark the end of the “Jewish” state — an outcome to be welcomed — for when everyone is a Jew (a citizen of Israel/Palestine) no one is a “Jew” (member of a favored race).

    • Mikhael
      August 29, 2014, 7:36 am

      notatall
      August 27, 2014, 9:07 am
      And they wonder why the world thinks they are crazy. According to Talmudic law, a Jew who converts remains a Jew. Hence Czarist Russia was more tolerant than Israel.

      You’re conflating Israeli civil law and Jewish religious law (halakha, which you call “Talmudic law”. Yes, per halakha a Jew who converts to another marriage may be a “meshummad” (apostate) but is still nevertheless considered a Jew, a renegade Jew, but a Jew nonetheless. Another Jew is forbidden to employ him or her to do tasks that a Jew is prohibited to perform on the Sabbath, because that would be tantamount to asking another Jew to desecrate Shabbat. But Israel is not ruled by halakha, (despite the wishes of many that it should be) therefore what you say is incorrect. Jews who convert to other religions in Israel can petition to have the Population Registry categorize them as Muslim or Christian and not be listed as having Jewish nationality if they so choose.

      Conversion is an individual choice.

      Yes it is.

      But in Israel even if a Palestinian converted it would not be recognized by the state — any more than pre-civil rights southern states or apartheid South Africa would have allowed black people to gain citizenship rights by declaring themselves “white.”

      Absolutely false. A non-Jew who completes a recognized conversion to Judaism in Israel (whether he is of Palestinian Arab Muslim background, Fillipino Catholic, Thai Buddhist, Congolese animist) is subsequently recognized as a Jew and would then be entitled to receive full Israeli citizenship. Not at all comparable to South Africa.

      Nothing more clearly exposes the racial foundation of Zionism and the “Jewish” state. Imagine the possibilities: millions returning to their native lands and regaining possession of the properties taken from them,

      Actually, there are indeed many Zionists who regard Palestinian Arabs as a lost segment of the Jewish people. Yitzhak ben Zvi and David ben Gurion expressed such beliefs and hoped that the presence of masses of Jews returning to the Land would spark a Jewish national awareness. One nutty activist wants to revive this idea and encourage Palestinians to readopt their Jewish roots.

      http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/132800#.VABkWPldXrw

      Of course, whether they have Jewish ancestry or not, to me, urging non-Jews to become Jewish smacks of proselytising, something Muslims and Christians do.

      merely by going through a simple procedure, like acquiring U.S. citizenship, or at most the rites of preparing for the Bar-Mitzvah.

      LOLZ! Now THAT is funny. Although anyone can become a Jew through conversion in theory and such people are definitely eligible to gain Israeli citizenship, contrary to your statement, there is nothing “simple” about it. We’re talking years of study and immersion in Jewish life. It’s not about sprinkling holy water or asking people to repeat “la ʾilaha illa ‘allah, Muhammadun rasul al-Lah” three times! WHat makes you think it’s so quick and easy to get US citizenship too?

  19. marty_mcfly
    August 27, 2014, 2:22 pm

    Crazy. Moderate Zionists everywhere must be appalled, but you can’t really blame them. No-one could have predicted that a movement designed to create an ethnically Jewish state would lead to pervasive racism

    • notatall
      August 27, 2014, 6:22 pm

      Many people could have predicted what happened, and did so, including Hannah Arendt, Albert Einstein and a long list including Jews and non-Jews. Jews as such are not an ethnicity, any more than Methodists, although in some places, e.g. Eastern Europe, their distinctive way of life gave them characteristics of an ethnicity. But that never applied to all Jews.

    • notatall
      August 27, 2014, 6:29 pm

      Many people could have predicted what happened, and did so, including Hannah Arendt, Albert Einstein and a long list of Jews and non-Jews including the American Council for Judaism. Jews as such are not an ethnicity, any more than Methodists, although in some places, e.g. Eastern Europe, their distinctive way of life gave them characteristics of an ethnicity. But that never applied to all Jews.

      • marty_mcfly
        August 28, 2014, 3:03 am

        I had no idea I was so subtle! :) Perhaps the irony in my comment would have been easier to spot if I had phrased it thus: ‘no-one could have predicted that institutional racism would lead to pervasive… er, racism’. This must be why Facebook introduced that [satire] tag…

        The second part of your comment doesn’t make a lot of sense to me though. Might as well say ‘White isn’t an ethnicity, it’s a colour’. Like it or not, a word is just a sound and, regardless of etymological coherence, it’s meaning stems from the way in which it is used. The far-right in Israel, among others, are explicit in their use of it as a racial term.

        Perhaps it would be more accurate to say that Jewish is one word that is (like many English words) applied to distinct concepts, including ethnicity and religion, and that those concepts are just as distinct as White and Methodist. And of course ethnicity itself is a complex spectrum isn’t it? So while classifying people according to race can be a meaningful exercise, it is not necessarily any more definitive than any other system of classification.

        Put another way, you may postulate about the finer points of Jewish ethnicity as I am free to speculate about whether or not Pluto is a planet. But if we agree that human beings are first and foremost individuals then why not leave those circular, pointless discussions to racists and simply unite behind the principle that racism itself is fundamentally wrong, whether it comes in the guise of jew-only settlements, roads, immigration policies, opposition to so-called intermarriage, martial law, random attacks or any other kind of racist abomination

      • marty_mcfly
        August 28, 2014, 3:37 am

        *”it’s meaning”

        Doh! I meant to say ‘its meaning’, of course

      • notatall
        August 28, 2014, 5:23 am

        Sorry I missed the irony. But “white” is not an ethnicity. An ethnicity is based on common culture–language, religion, etc. “White” is a social position, assigned regardless of such elements–like “Jew” in Israel. The Zionists took people from fifty countries, speaking different languages, practicing different religions (or no religion at all), and assigned them the status of “Jew,” a position with social, political and economic (but not cultural) meaning. That is what modern scholars refer to as a “race” (a purely social formation, since biologically “race” makes no sense).

      • Stephen Shenfield
        August 28, 2014, 11:46 am

        Russian has two words corresponding to “Jew” — yevrei means Jew in the “ethnic” sense, yudaist in the religious sense. (Actually Judaist does exist in English but is rarely used.) Not all yudaisty are yevrei and in Russia today the majority of yevrei are Christian or atheist.

        At certain times and places Jews have constituted a separate group in terms of language and culture, such as Yiddish speakers in 19th century Russia or Ladino speakers among Jews of Spanish origin. Then there are Falashas from Ethiopia, Bukharan Jews, Tat-speaking “mountain Jews” from the Caucasus, etc. So Jews have belonged to various ethnic groups, some of them specifically Jewish and many others not. They are certainly not a single ethnic group, but nor is an ethnic element in their identity always absent.

        Zionism has created a completely new ethnic group of Ivrit speakers who are mostly but not wholly of Jewish origin.

    • Marnie
      August 28, 2014, 1:42 am

      Marty McFly – you’re kidding about the 2nd sentence, right because there is no other outcome of a “movement designed to create an ethnically jewish state………..” . You’re making a joke, sarcasm, I get it! Forgive my rush to judgment its just that there is so much craziness out there it’s getting harder and harder for me to tell sarcasm from actual opinion. As the hipsters say – my bad!

      • marty_mcfly
        August 28, 2014, 3:20 am

        You’re correct (see above) but please accept my apologies nonetheless. In a debate that incorporates the views of people who believe in talking snakes, the world being created in 6 days and the existence of a bearded man-like create who is simultaneously a transcendent universal being, maker of all things and, to quote Sam Harris, “some kind of omniscient real estate broker”, you could very reasonably argue that sarcasm was not an appropriate way to contribute to the discussion…

      • Mooser
        August 28, 2014, 4:00 pm

        marty-mcfly, I see the engenderment of a great Mondo article in your comment! A post called “Who Knew?”. And that question would be answered by quotes from among the many people, Jewish and not, who were able to very accurately predict the consequences Zionism must lead to. “Who Knew?” indeed!

  20. Mikhael
    August 27, 2014, 5:48 pm

    David Sheen (or whoever translated and captioned the video) is deliberately lying when he uses the word “miscegenation” a word that was not used once by any of the demonstrators at this rally. Miscegenation is properly defined as “the interbreeding of people considered to be of different racial types”. The people at the rally used the Hebrew word “התבוללות” —hitbolelut which literally means assimilation, as in losing one’s culture and heritage and being absorbed into a foreign environment, and holds no racial connotations like the word “miscegenation” does. The young lady who has converted to Islam is literally abandoning her heritage and family, and that is what the crowd (including her own father) was protesting, not that she married anyone of different “race” (i.e., miscegenated). Of course, in democratic Israel she has every right to marry whosoever she chooses, and this was publicly affirmed by the newly appointed president of the State of Israel, in a statement he made condemning these protests:

    There is a red line between freedom of speech and protest on the one hand, and incitement on the other. Mahmoud and Morel from Jaffa have decided to marry and to exercise their freedom in a democratic country. The manifestations of incitement against them are infuriating and distressing, whatever my opinion or anyone else’s might be regarding the issue itself. Not everyone has to share in the happiness of Mahmoud and Morel — but everyone has to respect them. Among us and within our midst there are harsh and sharp disagreements but incitement, violence and racism have no place in Israeli society. …We are a free people in our country, in opinion and action, and I wish the young couple health, satisfaction and happiness.

    Rivlin is correct and the demonstrators were wrong to interfere in this couple’s freedom of choice to marry whom they please. Nevertheless, they also have a right to protest and express their opinions. Mixed Arab-Jewish marriages have occurred in the country since Israeli independence and in nearly every case it is a Jewish woman marrying a Muslim-Arab man. However, only religious marriage ceremonies are permitted within Israel. Islam permits Muslim men to marry Jewish or Christian women (even if the Jewish bride doesn’t convert to Islam, she can marry a Muslim man but must consent that children who are issue of the marriage be raised as Muslims); however, Islam prohibits Muslim women from marrying non-Muslim males. Although Judaism prohibits Jews, male and female alike, from marrying non-Jews, many Israeli Jews have non-Jewish spouses who they married abroad and such unions are recognized by the state as legal marriages. Without justifying or excusing the anti-assimilationist protesters’ actions in interrupting the private affairs of their fellow citizens, few people would have noticed this wedding if it had taken place in an Arab area, but the fact that it was held in a large hall in Rishon le Tsiyyon, a mostly Jewish city that was hit by several rocket attacks recently caused a sensation. Again, even though this was perceived as antagonizing some, I don’t justify the protests although they still have a legal right to protest as long as they keep their distance and don’t physically intimidate or harass the newlyweds or guests.
    Of course, anyone familiar with the intolerance that exists in Arab society in Israel knows that Muslim Arab citizens of Israel would not react kindly if a Muslim woman in Israel converted to Judaism to marry her Jewish boyfriend and then announced that the wedding would be held in a Muslim-majority Arab town such as Umm el Fahm. Of course, such an event will always be counterfactual and will never take place, because, assuming that a Muslim Arab girl from Israel survived long enough to date an Israeli-Jewish man without getting her throat slit by her brothers, if the happy couple announced their engagement publicly and held the wedding in an Arab locale, mere protests would not ensue, but bloodsoaked riots. That’s why it’s always Jewish women with Muslim men when these kinds of liaisons occur.

    • Annie Robbins
      August 27, 2014, 8:24 pm

      for your edification, wiki has the same definition of as you do for Miscegenation, however we’ve been thru this same conversation many times here at MW wrt the word apartheid , as it pertains to the meaning of “racial types” so here’s wiki:

      Miscegenation (/mɪˌsɛdʒɨˈneɪʃən/; from the Latin miscere “to mix” + genus “kind”) is the mixing of different racial groups through marriage, cohabitation, sexual relations, or procreation.[1]

      and if you open their embed and check out their definition of racial groups here’s what you get: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Race_(classification_of_human_beings)

      Race is a classification system[specify] used to categorize humans into large and distinct populations or groups by anatomical, cultural, ethnic, genetic, geographical, historical, linguistic, religious, and/or social affiliation.

      iow, cultural, ethnic, historical, linguistic, religious, and/or social affiliation all applies. and it becomes irrelevant is they didn’t use the word “Miscegenation” itself or a different word, if they were protesting “the mixing of different” ethnicities. iow, it doesn’t matter that they were protesting Miscegenation for a reason or for your justification, that being: –hitbolelut which literally means assimilation, as in losing one’s culture and heritage and being absorbed into a foreign environment – See more at: http://mondoweiss.net/2014/08/zionists-wedding-miscegenation.html/comment-page-1#comment-706009.

      iow, if i claim i am in the aryan brotherhood because i believe in preserving the white race and don’t want my white brothers and sisters to “lose one’s culture and heritage and being absorbed into a foreign environment ” it doesn’t mean i am not protesting Miscegenation. it just means i am doing it under a cause, a cause more commonly understood as racism. and here’s the legal definition: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Racism#Legal

      Nevertheless, they also have a right to protest and express their opinions. – See more at: http://mondoweiss.net/2014/08/zionists-wedding-miscegenation.html/comment-page-1#comment-706013

      yeah, and the kkk has a right to do that in this country too. your point?

      david sheen is not “deliberately lying”, he’s telling the truth. you just don’t like the implication. they were protesting the mixing of different ethnic groups through marriage, cohabitation, sexual relations, or procreation. that is exactly what they were doing.

      now, the only question we should be asking here is if you are “deliberately lying” or merely woefully misinformed.

      • Mikhael
        August 28, 2014, 7:32 am

        Annie Robbins August 27, 2014, 8:24 pm
        david sheen is not “deliberately lying”, he’s telling the truth. you just don’t like the implication. they were protesting the mixing of different ethnic groups through marriage, cohabitation, sexual relations, or procreation. that is exactly what they were doing.

        now, the only question we should be asking here is if you are “deliberately lying” or merely woefully misinformed.

        The point is that David Sheen deliberately mistranslated the Hebrew word “hitbolellut” used by the protesters as “miscegenation”– which means racial mixing–because it sounds a whole lot worse than “assimilation”. An assimilated Jew in the Diaspora can have two Jewish parents and marry another Jew with two Jewish parents, but is assimilated if he knows nothing of Jewish religion, culture or heritage and can’t read or understand a word in the Jewish national language, Hebrew. If this Jewish couple put a Christmas tree in their home and do an Easter egg hunt for their kids, or converts to the Jesuscult, then they are “mitbolelim”–assimilated–and live a lifestyle of “hitbolelut”–which refers to immersion in a foreign culture to the extent of not knowing your own– and that is the exact word that the protestors used.

        iow, if i claim i am in the aryan brotherhood because i believe in preserving the white race and don’t want my white brothers and sisters to “lose one’s culture and heritage and being absorbed into a foreign environment ” it doesn’t mean i am not protesting Miscegenation. it just means i am doing it under a cause, a cause more commonly understood as racism. and here’s the legal definition

        There is Jewish nationality, but there is no Jewish race. I’m not sure what you mean by “white culture”, but I’m pretty sure that the Aryan Brotherhood would not accept a non-white who wholeheartedly adopts “white culture” –which is, what–moonshine, tuna casseroles, and Lawrence Welk?
        Again, the concept of hitbolelut, which is the word that was used, has nothing to do with racial or ethnic mixing–miscegenation–and Sheen deliberately mistranslated it to provoke. Those who are opposed to assimilation–hitbolelut– would not condemn a Jew who marries a sincere convert to Judaism from any racial or ethnic background. If the young groom had converted to Judaism instead of his bride converting to Islam, it still might be what you term “miscegenation” but not assimilation–or rather, it would be assimilation by a Muslim Arab into the Jewish People and its culture and religion, but these fanatic Jews would not be condemning it . If that counterfactual had occurred, it would be Muslims who would vehemently protest the nuptials, especially if they had the cheek to hold the ceremony in an Arab-Muslim locale. I stated earlier that I cannot think of any instances (I’m sure they occasionally occur, but I don’t know of any) of Arab-Jewish marriages where the bride is Muslim and the groom is Jewish. There are many instances of Muslim men marrying Jewish women, however, for the reasons I mentioned earlier, and although religious Jewish society condemns all kinds of intermarriage between Jews and non-Jews (whether a Jewish male with a non-Jewish female or a non-Jewish male with a Jewish female) conservative Arab Muslim society specifically doesn’t tolerate any Muslim female marrying or dating a non-Muslim male. However, there have been a few prominent cases in Israel of Muslim men who have converted to Judaism and married women born into Jewish families. I cannot imagine that the same ultra-nationalist religious types of people who picketed this wedding would be upset if a Muslim Arab man who converted to Judaism to marry a Jewish girl. In all likelihood, they would be delighted and celebrate the fact that they got a Muslim Arab to switch sides. So their fear and horror of Jews assimilating and losing their religion, culture and national connection-i.e., -hitbolellut–has nothing to do with a fear of procreating with someone who is not of the same “race” whatever that means.

        And again, I agree wholeheartedly with what the President of Israel said regarding this issue, that the couple has the right to do what they want, and that it is nobody’s business but their own.

      • Marnie
        August 28, 2014, 12:55 pm

        “There is Jewish nationality, but there is no Jewish race. ”

        Yes, there is no jewish race, muslim race, christian race, etc.
        So how can a jewish woman convert to another religion and still be called jewish? Wishful thinking? Denial? Refusal to let go? Sounds like a psychiatric problem.

      • Mikhael
        August 29, 2014, 6:22 am

        Yes, there is no jewish race, muslim race, christian race, etc.
        So how can a jewish woman convert to another religion and still be called jewish? Wishful thinking? Denial? Refusal to let go? Sounds like a psychiatric problem.

        Because being a Jew means more than just belonging to a faith community, it is being part of a national group. Jewish peoplehood and culture exists independently of Judaism, the religious belief system. There may not be such a thing as a Jewish race, but there is such thing as a Jewish people, a Jewish nation. Although an individual is free to define him or herself as he or she pleases, conversion to another religion doesn’t automatically erase one’s belonging in the Jewish people, just as there are many Jews, members of the Jewish nation, who have no belief in any of the tenets/dogma of Judaism nor do they observe any of its rituals. Since there are so many secular and atheist Jews, of course there can also be Muslim/Christian/Buddhist Jews. If an Armenian, a member of the Armenian people. converts to Hinduism or Islam and leaves the Armenian Apostolic Church, he may have abandoned the traditional religion of most fellow Armenians but he does not cease to be Armenian. Other Armenians may regard him as someone who has abandoned his heritage and people, but he is still Armenia, though his offspring may not be. So it is with a Jew who converts to another religion. A perfect example is the late archbishop of Paris, Jean Marie Lustiger, who always regarded himself as a Jew and was so regarded despite having converted to Catholicism in his youth.

        http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jean-Marie_Lustiger

        Despite this, as an Israeli citizen living in a democratic country, the young lady is free to to declare herself a non-Jew. In fact, if she had an official conversion to Islam and so requests from the Interior Ministry and the Population Registry, she can now have herself re-classified as an Arab Muslim citizen of Israel, because change of one’s nationality and religion is permitted under Israeli civil law, although such a concept is not known under halakha, Orthodox Jewish religious law.

    • Marnie
      August 28, 2014, 12:33 am

      “Nevertheless, they also have a right to protest and express their opinions. Mixed Arab-Jewish marriages have occurred in the country since Israeli independence and in nearly every case it is a Jewish woman marrying a Muslim-Arab man. However, only religious marriage ceremonies are permitted within Israel”.

      At a wedding? This is a normal occurrence at a wedding? How many protesters were at your wedding? Funny how they cherry pick their favorite “democracy bites” and forget about all of the rest. However, many people have pointed out, much better than I, that this marriage was between 2 muslims and not a “mixed” marriage at all. And your next sentence – where’s your proof and other than that WHO CARES? The rabbis deviated from the torah (not big news) when convenient, and changed patrilineal descent to matrilineal descent, on the pretense of all the “rape” of jewish women, um, right. That sounds especially incredulous considering your claim “in nearly every case it is a Jewish woman marrying a Muslim-Arab man”.

      Love the way you tried to justify the behavior of the morons in the video. I’m sure if you’d have posted at the JPost or Arutz Sheva you’d have had rave reviews.

      • Mikhael
        August 28, 2014, 8:04 am

        Marnie
        August 28, 2014, 12:33 am

        At a wedding? This is a normal occurrence at a wedding? How many protesters were at your wedding?

        It has nothing to do with what is “normal” or with what is nice. It has to do with the right of citizens to express their opinions in a democracy.
        Seriously, can’t you fu**ing read? I wrote clearly above: “Rivlin is correct and the demonstrators were wrong to interfere in this couple’s freedom of choice to marry whom they please. Nevertheless, they also have a right to protest and express their opinions.

        The Israeli Supreme Court ruled that they could protest but they had to keep their distance from the wedding hall, and that they couldn’t harass or intimidate the celebrants. That was also the correct decision, similar to the decision the US Supreme Court made regarding the Westboro Baptist Church picketing the funerals of slain US military personnel. It’s also what allows Arab citizens of Israel and far-left activists to peacefully protest as well.

        However, many people have pointed out, much better than I, that this marriage was between 2 muslims and not a “mixed” marriage at all.

        The young lady is free to define herself religiously as a Muslim if she so pleases. It doesn’t alter the fact of her Jewish nationality, as being a Jew is not merely a matter of religious confession or faith. Her Muslim in-laws will always regard her as a yahudiya no matter what.

        And your next sentence – where’s your proof and other than that WHO CARES?

        Where’s my proof of what? That marriages between Jews and Arabs (mostly Muslims) is nothing new in the State of Israel? They’ve been occurring over the past 65 years. In nearly every case it’s been Muslim men marrying Jewish women. Who cares? Well, I certainly uphold the right of any citizen of Israel marrying whomsoever they please for as long as they can stand to be married (I’ve been married three times myself, once in the States to a non-Jewish woman, in fact) , but I can tell you that the vast majority of Muslims in Israel won’t accept a Muslim woman marrying a non-Muslim man–not only a Jew, but an Arab Christian or Druze. It basically never happens, at least not here.

        The rabbis deviated from the torah (not big news) when convenient, and changed patrilineal descent to matrilineal descent, on the pretense of all the “rape” of jewish women, um, right. That sounds especially incredulous considering your claim “in nearly every case it is a Jewish woman marrying a Muslim-Arab man”.

        Non sequitur much? Why are you bringing up the alleged rationale for matrilineal descent initiated some 2,000 years ago, when we are discussing the fact that in the modern State of Israel, Jewish-Musim intermarriages are nearly always between Muslim men and Jewish women, and almost never the way around? Secular Israeli Jewish men often disregard the rabbinical prohibition on cohabiting with non-Jewish women and often bring home foreign brides from their travels abroad, from Thailand, from Moldova, the USA, in the past Israeli-Jewish kibbutzniks frequently used to marry buxom shiksa Scandinavian volunteers. Occasionally these foreign women would undergo a pro forma conversion to Judaism (sometimes sincerely) but often these marriages were entered into abroad. I’m sure that if there was not such a serious taboo in Arab -Muslim society against “their” women marrying non-Muslims, more Jewish dues would date and marry chicks from Muslim families. The thing that deters them is fear of getting their throats slashed and their bodies mutilated by the angry family members of the girl.

      • Marnie
        August 28, 2014, 12:49 pm

        Seriously, I can f’ing read. Can you f’ing shut up? Is self-aggrandizement something you can stop anytime or are you a hard core addict?

      • Mikhael
        August 29, 2014, 6:28 am

        Marnie August 28, 2014, 12:49 pm
        Seriously, I can f’ing read. Can you f’ing shut up? Is self-aggrandizement something you can stop anytime or are you a hard core addict?

        I find it necessary to use a lot of verbiage to refute the many lies you and others dispense so casually. Often, each untruth requires unpacking and deconstruction, and I never claimed to be so talented a writer as to be able to cut to the meat of the matter in a concise manner; but truth is more important than style.

        – See more at: http://mondoweiss.net/2014/08/zionists-wedding-miscegenation.html/comment-page-1#comment-706377

      • Mikhael
        August 28, 2014, 8:11 am

        Marnie
        August 28, 2014, 12:33 am
        Love the way you tried to justify the behavior of the morons in the video. I’m sure if you’d have posted at the JPost or Arutz Sheva you’d have had rave reviews

        Love the way you have zero reading comprehension at all. What part of my stating in democratic Israel she has every right to marry whosoever she chooses and the demonstrators were wrong to interfere in this couple’s freedom of choice to marry whom they please. can you not understand?

      • Marnie
        August 28, 2014, 12:35 pm

        Gee, whoops! That little part you’re referring to sounded a lot like your entire post, completely disingenuous and condescending. Excuse me for not being able to sift through your opus and being able to discern your fact from your fiction, your humanity from your zionism; it all smelled the same big daddy. Thanks for pointing out the hasbara talking points again – democratic israel? Really, you’re standing by that? Did you try arutz sheva?

      • Mooser
        August 28, 2014, 4:05 pm

        Marnie, when I see a post over a paragraph long from Mikeal, I treat it as if it were somebody standing in a corner, muttering, with his hands working in his pockets, and looking shifty-eyed at everybody in the room. I would avoid such a person.

      • Mikhael
        August 29, 2014, 4:28 am

        Marnie
        August 28, 2014, 12:35 pm

        democratic israel? Really, you’re standing by that?

        What don’t you understand about a democracy protecting the right to freedom of speech short of an outright explicit incitement to violence? It’s what allows Ra’ed Salah and his crew to foam at the mouth against Israel too. You can’t legislate tolerance.

        Did you try arutz sheva?

        Are you referring to the fact that Arutz 7 was a past victim an attempt at Israeli government censorship when it’s original offshore radio station was shut down for operating without a license, because of its hard right-wing views (much like Abie Natan’s left-wing radio station was shut down)? The original rationale for shutting down Arutz 7 was that it was unlicensed and interfered with other stations’ frequencies, it’s been allowed to operate as a Web station though.

        Or are you trying to suggest that I should only comment on Arutz 7?Yes, I read (and sometimes comment on) Arutz 7, although I have very little in common ideologically with most commenters there. The Arutz 7 crowd, like the Mondoweiss crowd shares the same goal, no 2-state solution.

  21. JeffB
    August 27, 2014, 7:52 pm

    @David

    ultra-nationalists are trying to snuff out what little hope there is of coexistence by vilifying those few Jews and Palestinians who are, against all odds, living examples of the possibility that we can all get along in the land as equals.

    David the place where you posted this is mostly anti-normalization. They mostly don’t like moves towards coexistence in the social realm. FWIW I agree with you that this anti-intermarriage stuff is destructive to Israel’s long term future. The best way to resolve the Palestinian issue long term is for there to only be one people, and that happens through making babies together. Israel has dissolved lots of the tension between Sephardic, Ashkenazic, Mizrahi through intermarriage.

    • Annie Robbins
      August 27, 2014, 8:42 pm

      “mostly don’t like moves towards coexistence in the social realm – See more at: http://mondoweiss.net/2014/08/zionists-wedding-miscegenation.html/comment-page-1#comment-706013

      where do you come up w/this stuff? maybe you should find out more about what anti normalization means. the whole purpose is resist occupation and move towards equal rights in the social realm and all other realms. normalization is belief that normalizing occupation will lead to the end it. it won’t.

    • Marnie
      August 28, 2014, 1:50 am

      ‘The best way to resolve the Palestinian issue long term is for there to only be one people, and that happens through making babies together”.

      Oh brother, where are thou? Now with the “making babies together” codicil? Took the romance straight out with that one. Rule #1 – Must get with the making babies together. Rule #2 – Said babies must be raised as ??? Stay out of people’s bedrooms, FULL STOP.

    • Marnie
      August 28, 2014, 8:28 am

      “Israel has dissolved lots of the tension between Sephardic, Ashkenazic, Mizrahi through intermarriage.”

      Bollocks.

      The ashkenazis love their superior I’m better than you status in the state of israel. “Former president Moshe Katsav, who was born in Iran, implied that the charges against him were motivated by racism against Israelis of Middle Eastern origin, who had traditionally been marginalized by Jews of European heritage.

      “I saw myself as a symbol for all those who are not part of the elite clique born with silver spoons in their mouths … who believe that only they can represent the people of Israel,” he said.”

      Yeah Jeff, no tension here.

      • James Canning
        August 28, 2014, 1:31 pm

        Surely intermarriage helps reduce the divisions. Perhaps marriage between Jews of all sorts, and non-Jews, would help too.

      • Mooser
        August 28, 2014, 4:14 pm

        “Perhaps marriage between Jews of all sorts, and non-Jews, would help too.”

        Oh, maybe, but who is willing to brave the unknown, and face the wrath of their community? Who, for the first time ever, will step forward and take this plunge into the wedded abyss?

        Oh, only about %50 of American Jews, that’s all. Oh don’t worry, I do believe the Reform Jewish denomination has gone to patrileneal religious inheritance, too!

        Oh, it’s Israel you are talking about? Yes, it would help, so the Jewish State has many laws making it nearly impossible.-

      • Mooser
        August 28, 2014, 4:09 pm

        Marnie, when a Zionist tells you anything, and I mean anything about Israel, Zionism, Judaism, or anything even remotely connected with that, you are supposed to shut up and listen.
        Omniscience and omnipotence are Zionism’s immediate benefits, even if you can’t actually go and steal somebody’s house.

      • Marnie
        August 29, 2014, 12:25 am

        Again, you are so right! I keep getting sucked in to the vacuum. I’ve got to find something better to do with my anger, huh?

  22. just
    August 28, 2014, 10:38 am

    “Published On: Mon, Aug 18th, 2014

    Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s son Yair is threatening to sue the “Free Israel” NGO for using an image posted on Netanyahu Jr.’s Facebook page, showing him with his Norwegian girlfriend Sandra Leikanger.

    Free Israel decided to use Yair’s and Sandra’s picture to push their message that every human being has the right to marry whomever he or she wishes. The campaign came in response to a right-wing campaign launched by an organization called Shalhevet (Flame) against the wedding last night of an Israeli Arab and his Jewish betrothed who converted to Islam.

    But Yair Netanyahu refused to become anyone’s mascot, and he posted the following message on the Free Israel page:

    “Shalom, I am Yair Netanyahu. I demand that you remove my picture which you’ve been using without my permission. It’s a private picture from Facebook which exposes you to a lawsuit. I expect it to come down today. Especially since I disagree with the content of your campaign.”

    Then he added: “If it’s not coming down in the next hour I’m starting legal proceedings.””

    http://jewishbusinessnews.com/2014/08/18/netanyahus-son-threatening-to-sue-pro-assimilation-website-using-his-picture-with-christian-girlfriend/

    • Marnie
      August 28, 2014, 12:30 pm

      How can anything from Facebook be private? I hope he explained his disagreement with his girlfriend before blasting his message on Free Israel.

      • Mooser
        August 28, 2014, 4:18 pm

        “How can anything from Facebook be private?”

        People do have strange relationships with social media, don’t they?

  23. Stephen Shenfield
    September 5, 2014, 6:50 am

    I just discovered that BJP politicians in India are waging a campaign against the same phenomenon of Moslem men attracting Hindu (in this case) women. They call it “love Jihad” and claim that international terrorist groups are behind it. The response they advocate is to teach Hindu women karate! See:

    http://blog.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2014/09/04/hindu_nationalists_exploitation_of_love_jihad_Modi_BJP

Leave a Reply