Total number of comments: 75 (since 2010-10-09 07:36:23)
Samuel
liberal jew living in israel
-
-
- Resume builders: Be a broken record on Iran, cheer authoritarians … 1
- UN Committee: Israeli system ‘tantamount to apartheid’ 0
- Slater on Beinart 9
- And we live on… 1
- US official — we went to Israel first 3
- Israel lobby’s favorite senator tries to erase Palestinian refugee status … 23
- Israel takes 30 dunams of land near Salfit ‘for security … 4
- Aaron David Miller: After a short ‘peace process,’ look … 38
-
- BDS victory: South Africa strips Ahava’s ‘made in Israel’ label 713
- Video: Israeli mob demands all African refugees be deported from … 475
- Day after pogroms, Likud MK calls for internment camp for … 427
- Neverending Nakba: Israel breaks lull, attacks Gazan farmers 413
- ‘This is not fair play’: Mahmoud Sarsak’s family demands his … 389
- March of the Flags 345
- Neocons in Washington Post: Military strike on Iran would ‘calm … 323
- Nabi Saleh’s Bassem Tamimi convicted by Israeli courts based on … 293
-
- The Messiah’s Donkey: Settlers fire on Palestinian villagers as the … 235
- Aharon Appelfeld’s rage at the German language (and Arendt’s need … 156
- US to differentiate between ‘personally displaced’ Palestinian refugees and their … 129
- March of the Flags 127
- Affirming a Judaism and Jewish identity without Zionism 110
- Feeling the hate in Long Island 97
- Israeli judge to issue verdict in Rachel Corrie case 94
- WaPo’s Walter Pincus says US is ‘going above and beyond … 87
-
Recent Comments
click link to see last 100 comments- Slater on Beinart (9)
- radii: the train has left the station and a few like Beinart have noticed but think they can still run and catch it...
- Citizen: This is all tempest in a Jewish identity teapot because Congress just gave Israel $4 Billion dollars for...
- Krauss: Have you all noticed how the real liberal Zionists, even with warts and all, keep getting more and more...
- Resume builders: Be a broken record on Iran, cheer authoritarians in Gulf (1)
- Annie Robbins: Having recognized its weakness, the US knows that it will be the UN that takes the lead in Syria and...
- Did Israeli Eurovision contestant watch too much Juliano Mer Khamis? (54)
- Annie Robbins: GL, urban dictionary has PEP, just no explanation of progressive except for palestine....
- German Lefty: Annie, it looks like you got infected with the Eurovision virus. Great. The more fans, the better. The...
- US official — we went to Israel first (3)
- traintosiberia: OMG! Why I don”t have that Stockholm Syndrome yet! How long do I have to feign that I have it.
- Annie Robbins: a U.S. official…asked to remain anonymous owing to the sensitive nature of the issue. sensitive?...
- And we live on… (1)
- Talkback: They should make Gaza the most beautiful place just to p*** compulsory expellers off. Enviromental...
- Israel lobby’s favorite senator tries to erase Palestinian refugee status for millions (23)
- piotr: How many Jews who made aliya were actual refugees from Roman persecution? Thus the “Jew who taunted...
- Slater on Beinart (9)
Our Writers
- Philip Weiss
- Adam Horowitz
- Today in Palestine
- Annie Robbins
- Alex Kane
- Kate
- Alice Rothchild
- Ahmed Moor
Blogroll
Not many Jews in Ramallah or Nablus in the OT, or even in Umm-al-fahem or Taibe - "neighboorhood commitees" maybe? Not many whites in Brixton South London either - apartheid? Muslim only settlements?
And then there's Acre, Haifa, Ramle, Lod, Jaffa - all mixed cities, god help us all! Next you know there'll be interacial sex! Is that punishable by something? But what's that got to do with the price of tea in China?
The point is that the roads are not ethnically separated in any way, the ONLY criteria is having a blue ID card indicating citizenship, whether your name is Moshe or Musa or David or Doud. That is not "apartheid" however many times you repeat it. It's deliberate misuse of a concept that is abhorrant in order to blacken what you don't like. A bit like McCarthyism calling anything you disagree with "communism" however far from it in reality.
But why let reality interfere with your ideology?
Yes, but it's a very different reality if the discrimination is "citizen vs occupied" rather than "Jew vs Arab".
"Apartheid" evokes separation on a racial basis which is intolerable and immoral, and the use of this term in the I/P context of the separation barrier or roads is counter-productive and unescessarily provocative.
The road in question, and other by-pass roads, are not "Jewish" roads and not restricted to "Jews" only.
These roads are open equally to Israel's Palestinian (Muslim and Christian) citizens who make up more than 20% of its population, without any connection to which god they worship. These roads are closed to Palestinians of the OT for security reasons (justified or not).
By calling the roads "apartheid" or "Jewish only" roads, only adds fuel to the fire of claims of anti-semitic bias in this blog, and throws doubt on the accuracy of the reporting on this site.
What is "historical Palestine"? - which period of history are you refering to?
Isn't Palestine historically part of Syria? Jordan?
If you mean the 67 borders then you are saying that Palestine only started then.
Isn't the first defined "historical Palestine" in fact the British mandate including Jordan, in which place Israel is far from utilising "85% of historical Palestine", but rather about 35% ?
Ashkelon is both officially and legally in Israel and has been since the UN recognised the 1948 borders - look at a map and read history.
Also it's a prison that houses petty criminals and more serious criminals, so like any other prison all over the world there will always be surprise raids and riot drills - no story here.
"as they were given permission to launch preemptive attacks"
I can't find that sentence in my Hebrew or King James version of the Bible.
"la'amod al nafsham" literally means to stand up for their lives - from where the hell do you read "pre-emptive"???
I'm no scholar like the author seems to be, but there are two important errors in his essay.
Firstly, para 6, the Jews were not given permission "to go on the offensive" at any stage of the story. An exact reading of the text is 100% clear that they were given permission to DEFEND themselves against their attackers (vela'amod al nafsham) - the amazing and incomprehendable part of the story is that the original decree was to kill all Jews for no reason without the right of resisting! The author's reading into the text a Jewish "offensive" is not justifiable in any way!
Secondly, Hanukah and Purim are indeed very different stories and customs, but throuout the ages they have always BOTH been observed equally stringently by all Jews, and Zionism did not affect the observance of either. The various laws concerning the observance of both are often lumped together in one category of "Hanukah and Purim", and ironically probably the first time that Hanukah has any preference over Purim is in American Jewry who found a "kosher" alternative to Christmas to observe. Purim, not coinciding with any other seasonal or religious festival lost out in non-observant American Jewry.
You write:
"The imposition of administrative detention by Article 111 of the military state of emergency imposed by the British colonial authorities of Palestine September, 1945 is illegal on the grounds that Article 43 of the Hague international agreement of 1907 prohibits an occupying power to change the legislative reality of the country occupied."
Actually this is wrong, and the law is legal for exactly the reason you bring:
The Brits never repealed the emergency regulations when they left in '48, and when Jordan illegally annexed the territory they also did not repeal the regulations. Israel in '67 likewise did not repeal the regulations in accordance with international law so as to keep the existing "legislative reality" when they occupied the territories. Thus the regulations are in complete accordance with Hague.
Shouldn't the headline have been "Israeli court aquits Armenean Priest of violence to Haredi Jew who spat at him" thus showing that the Israeli courts dealt justly, rather than emphasize the spitting part which is not institutional but done by a disgusting ignorant individual?
Actually you have no shame, since whatever you read it can't change actual facts - the Jihad Islami group fired mortars the day before the Israeli retaliation.
This I report from my daughter who lives in the area and can hear every mortar or bombing on either side of the border. The mortars started Thursday, the retaliation on Friday night. Fact.
According to Ha'aretz (Hebrew, publicised at 19:30 Israeli time),
link to haaretz.co.il
the IDF spokesman affirmed that Israel will not allow the flotilla to reach Gaza, and explained that as per the Palmer report, the seige is in accordance with International Law.
The report also claims that the Turks vetted the participants and many activists thus didn't make it to the sailing.
Somehow I don't think this will be big news what with all the other "better" stories happening in the ME and in I/P specifically right now.
Not a promising start to a new "democratic?" Lybia - killing leader without trial after capture.
I suppose the Zios must be to blame
It could be possible that he commited twice "serious" crimes, and this second time he was sentenced to "only" say 15 years, and a 10 year suspended sentence was activated.
It's also possible that the victim of his crime was a soldier - but statistically speaking a 22 year sentence will be for murder, and a vast majority of murders are of civilians rather than soldiers. (note: he would have been sentenced in 1989, long before soldiers became specific targets as in Gaza.
But if anyone knows the exact indictment and circumstance I'll admit to being wrong. If any one knows his full name (4 names) I'll find out the exact details and publicise here.
At last we agree that holding an enemy combatant without access to the red cross in a secret location is "shocking".
Just one small difference though, Dirani admitted to holding Ron Arad and passing him on to the Iranians (from whence never to return, alive or dead), Shalit is a small fry pisher of a soldier.
Specific no, but anyone who is sentenced to 22+ years of imprisonment has to be associated with some form of murder. Attempted murder will carry a maximum of 20 years, so this is at least aiding and abbeting if not the actual commiting of murder.
Obviously a non-biased report by the Palestinian minister for prisoners.
One only has to see how all the freed Palestinian prisoners looked health-wise as opposed to Gilad Shalit to see who was treated humanely and who was incarcerated.
Wrong again seafoid. The Bible doesn't hide gory details. Here someone "forgot" to mention what he actually did to be incarcerated for so long. If the details were revealed that would make it Biblical.
Nearly, seafoid, lived in Gaza and murdered civilians.
I'll take you up on the wager and bet he has both radio and tv as well as other recreational facilities, library access and sees the sun more than once every 5 years (i.e. every day for at least an hour like any other penitential facility)
This is great RoHa! That sounds straight off the website of the English National Party - only there they are refering to Muslims, Pakistanis and Blacks.
Hasn't multicultural society reached you yet?
If you have such respect for them you might want to learn to call them by their actual name, Neturei Karta.
Go ahead and sit on the back of the bus. Give up on your female rights, degrade yourself totally to these people who will call you a whore for wearing what you probably wear everyday.
Anything goes as long as it's anti-zionist. How pathetic can you get?
Don't other Western countries have Juvenile courts? Or are criminals under the age of 18 let off with a warning?
As mentioned in the UNICEF article, most youths get a two month or so sentence, which means that Hamas would certainly not have asked for their release as they will soon be out anyway, and in the second release in a couple of months, I'm sure Israel would love to fill the quota with children, but the sides agreed that the quota would not include prisoners who are soon to be released.
What in your humble opinions should an occupying power do with stone-throwing children until the day when the occupation will end?
OK poa here's my "fabricated excuse" for this "settlement".
1. It's not a new settlement, it already exists on the place called "Givat Hamatos". Use a GPS or Googlearth and it will show up.
2. Although you guys have a special language here and often generalize, you ought to be aware that for most all Israelis, left or right, East Jerusalem non-Arab neighbourhoods are not considered or even contemplated as "settlements". This is why many of you don't understand how Bibi could do this timing. Gilo, Pisgat Ze'ev and Givat Hamatos were not build into Arab neighbourhoods (like Silwan and Sheikh Jarrah) and are not disputed by the mainstream Israelis, including even liberals. These places are very different in the Israeli eye to Yitzhar, Itamar and Silwan, and even to "concensus" settlements like Gush Etzion and Ariel. Even if all are exactly the same by International Law, to understand the Israeli psyche you must distinguish. Many residents of East Jerusalem "settlements" are not even aware they are over the green line, unlike the rest of the WB settlements which are unmistakeable as you have to pass a barrier to get to them.
3. If the 2ss is dead then creating "facts" is irrelevant. If there still is a chance for 2ss, then this new neighbourhood is negotiable in the final settlement either by compromise (land swaps), or destroyed, or a as potential for refugee housing.
Walid - Israel didn't "renege" on its part of the bargain concerning Ron Arad, Hizbollah simply didn't come forward with any new info about him, not nescessarily for not trying, but the release of Samir Kuntar was conditional on receipt of actual new info.
Es1982 - Elhanan Tannenbaum was in fact most likely a mossad agent, a fact which of course wouldn't be openly revealed by anyone, especially not whilst under Hizbollah's control. Mossad has a history of drug-connected involvements (Amiram Nir, Harari) and it is suspect why Ariel Sharon was so super insistant in getting his release. Also he was not prosecuted on his return (ostensibly in exchange for revealing all his Hizbollah experiences).
As I mentioned above the courts are 100% legal and convened in accordance with the relevant sections of the Geneva Conv.
The Yesh Din report is 5 years old, the statistics have vastly improved since then, partly because of pressure by B'tzelem and Yesh Din.
Due process is not an internationally recognised standard to which one can measure adherence. The military courts adhere to the law of Israel and the relevant statutes of the courts and have due process in accordence with the law.
The average times of hearings is small and seemingly unfair mainly because in the vast amount of remand cases there is either agreement by the defence, or it is a request for a deferment for a few days - such a hearing takes as much time as it took me to type these words.
The presumption of innocence is not a derivative of statistical analysis but the law, and strictly enforced by all military judges as a prerequisite incumbant on the prosecution to disprove "beyond all reasonable doubt"
Most of the less serious prisoners are held in the Ofer prison near Ramallah and in the OT. Others are indeed held in Israel. But this is rather a technical problem, as were Israel to build prisons on occupied land what would the world say about stealing more lands for this purpose...?
Not true, Walid, since Oslo Israel has time and time again released prisoners early as so-called "confidence building measures". I would even say more than the number released as a result of exchanges.
I apologize O Donald for my inferior intellect in not being able to hold two thoughts in my head, not like you, an obvious intellectual giant who must have at least 23 degrees.
And to the point: you say: "one normally doesn’t trust the justice system of an occupying power enforcing an apartheid system to be scrupulously fair. Second, those prisoners who really were guilty of violence against civilians are no worse than the Israelis who killed civilians in Cast Lead"
Well, Israel is adhearing to the Forth Geneva Conv. by setting up these courts to maintain security, and in fact there is no jurisdiction in the Israeli courts to try Palestinians from the WB unless the offence was committed in Israel. So who do you think should try them?
These courts are run with all the rules of evidence and procedure according to regular Israeli law. So what's unfair?
And yes, any Israeli, soldier or otherwise, who deliberately targeted civilians should be tried in similar manner to Palestinians who do likewise.
Walid - I agree with you 100% when you say: "I consider legitimate Israeli targets only military ones. Palestinians in jail for having bombed busses or pizzerias full of civilians should not be released"
I also share your feeling that Israel should not target civilians, and that of course not all Palestinians are terrorists.
When Israel uses the expression "blood on their hands" it mostly refers to terrorists who killed civilians, and in fact the vast majority of Israeli deaths as a result of Palestinian terrorism are civilian, and thus you condemn this as well.
Well, Woody and Walid, fight it out between you. Woody says these aren't murderers as they have not had a fair trial (they have). Walid thinks they did murder but did it as part of legitimate resistance.
So did they or did they not murder, (whether justified or not)?
And Woody - why judge and jury? Just because the US and UK have trial by jury it doesn't make it god given. Even the ICC has no jury. And where do you know a neutral judge? Aren't we all a product of our upbringing and surroundings? Will a white judge try a black defendant "neutrally"? Judges all over, even in Israel, are appointed with the hope and call for impatiality, and Israeli judges are no worse than any other country's appointees.
Walid - if there is ground for indicting Israelis for murder then so be it. But then you will have to justify Israel kidnapping UN soldiers and holding then captive to obtain the release of the prisoners.
Although Biblical in origin, the expression "blood on the hands" entered the English language thanks to Shakespeare in "Macbeth", and shouldn't nauseate. It simply distinguishes those who actually murdered people from others who didn't.
Maybe you are nauseated as you don't like to consider murderers as being connected with blood as it dirties the non-violence myth of Palestinian resistance?
It' similar numberwise to the Hamas offer of while back, but Israel conceded in releasing those with "blood on their hands" and to allow some of the prisoners to return to the WB. Hamas conceded in not releasing all the "big fish" such as Barghouti and Sa'adat, and not insisting on all prisoners to return to their homes.
Just to put the picture straight, these are hardly "political prisoners" but prisoners who have been tried for crimes such as murder, maiming, firearm possession, making weapons, etc.
About 200 of those to be released are "lifers" which can only mean murder or aiding and abetting murder. Life imprisonment is not given to anyone else.
Only a small number are there only because of their political affiliation without some sort of violent related offence associated with the affiliation (one could say that these and only these are similar to Shalit, he belongs to the IDF but has not been personally accused of any actual crime, violent or otherwise).
Their fanilies suffered, but at least were allowed to visit their loved ones and receive letters, unlike Shalit.
Charon says:
"the Zohar which itself is a Kabbalah work, not a Jewish one"
I hope the rest of what you say is more sensible than this. Of course the kabbalah is Jewish - the word "kabbalah" is Hebrew meaning "received (tradition)". By Jewish tradition the Zohar was written by Shimon bar Yochai in about the 3rd century CE, but even sceptics agree that it was written by the JEWISH philosofer Moses Cordevero in the 13th century. Madonna and other trendy spoilt rich famous people don't make kabbalah universal.
Anyone who bothers to read the kabbalistic works, including the Zohar, will see the Jewish texts and thoughts seeping out of every page.
I think you mean Phillistines - the name Palestine comes from the Biblical arch-enemy of the ancient Israelite nation who probably came to the middle east from Crete after a tsunami washed out their civilization there. They are often refered to as the "un-circumcized" being the only people in the area at the time who did not ritually circumcize, and thus were strangers to the area.
The Jerusalem Post was formally the "Palestine Post"
The Joint Israel Appeal used to be called the Joint Palestine Appeal even into the 1970's
My father who was brought up in England, when subject to frequent anti-semitic invective, was often told by British citizens to "go back to Palestine".
We Jews-Israeli-Zionists have nothing to be ashamed of in the name "Palestine". I am proudly Palestinian. But anyhow, rose by any other name would smell as sweet.
So:
the SC doesn't know what it's doing
the President will do anything to get re-elected
Congress is hopeless as run by Aipac
the prison system is biased against minorities
You guys really live in a terrible place - how come the exit gates aren't flooded with escaping refugees, and why aren't Americans crossing the border to Mexico for a better life?
Glad I live in Israel, we don't have it nearly as bad
Yes, but all your points were put before the supreme court who gave a stay of execution for 4 more hours (after 20 years on death row and deliberations|) in order to review the case YET AGAIN, and decided not to give any more stays of execution.
This is your supreme court that you seem to think are a bunch of killers who wantonly kill the innocent - who are you that you know the facts better than them?
"the world watches as the US executes an innocent man"
That just about sums it up on this blog. You guys know the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, whilst every one else is some Jewish-Israeli-Zionist-hasbarist scumbag or idiot who knows nothing about facts or history.
You have every right to oppose capital punishment, but to know better than about 4 or 5 different law courts or committees who reviewed the evidence over and over and had no doubt as to the accused's guilt is pure "chutzpah". Maybe only you should be allowed to sit on juries as only you are wise enough to weigh up the facts?
If this is how you determine "facts" then you jeapodise all you say about the I/P conflict as equally unsatisfactory and false and not to be taken seriously. (For instance UN decisions and committee findings and the ICC decisions are false and blaming the innocent for crimes they never committed - why? Because I say so! Etc.)
"but right now Palestinian children are being arrested in the middle of the night and held in prisons in the occupied territories and brought into a children's court so that they will squeal on village elders who are organizing nonviolent protests against the wall."
I often see here demonstrations like in Bil'in called "non-violent", and even the first intifada called so. Do we disagree on the facts as to whether stone throwing occured/occurs , or is stone throwing considered in your opinions to be non-violence? (this is asked seriously and not as snark).
"And Baum continued poetically by imagining the life of the judge in that special court for children. The judge is a woman Dalit Baum’s own age, in uniform. She goes back to Tel Aviv later, as Baum does. “She is for peace. She votes for Meretz. I know her. She’s Ashkenazi.” (Nodding laughter from audience.)
Poetic licence aside, if one wants to take a shot at Meretz there is no need to invent "facts". Unlike Baum I do know the judge, she doesn't live in Tel Aviv, doesn't vote Meretz but rather Likud (her father is a well-known comedian who participated in pre-election polital adverts for the Likud), is extremely legally orientated, and takes very seriously the infringement of rights of the chiildren arrested and their alleged framing of political activists. Read her judgements before you judge her! One fact was right - she is Ashkenazi, so you can "nod in laughter"
No Donald, they were not "widely admired" in the Jewish community, they were known as "kahanists" and condemned by the mainstream Jewish community as extremists and harming the legitimate protests against the former Soviet Union who refused to allow Jews to practice their religion.
Most activists at the time realised that the disruption of the Bolshoi was counter-productive to a just cause, just as the disruption of the "proms" was this week.
Albeit a small set-back, but it was a set-back for achieving rights for the Palestinians.
Your friend, Annie, I assume lives in the south of Israel within target range of the Hamas and co. missiles. The description fits exactly how the people there feel every time a missile is fired.
(without expletives) what can I say to her? I'm sorry?
First of all facts - there is/was no "ceasefire" or "truce". No one asked Israel, and Israel never said it was party to any agreement with Hamas.
And even if there was an unofficial ceasefire or truce, which was supposed to start at 21:00 I/P time (as declared by Hamas), it lasted less than half an hour, for at 21:25 kassam missiles were fired into Israel from Gaza, long before Israel replied with more bombing.
Hostage - I don't know what Hebrew school you attended, but you missed out on the lesson about G-d G_d god God.
It's nothing to do with not taking the lord's (L-rd's, etc) name in vain, that commandment is about falsely taking an oath invoking god's (etc) name or vowing using god's name.
The origin of not spelling god in full is based on the verse concerning erasing all references to other gods, immediately followed by an injunction not do do "likewise to your god", i.e. erasing your god. Thus it became custom not to write god's name in full in case you might come to erase it in error later on. This of course only applied to the Hebrew names of god, which is why god's name is not written as yhwh aside from the original biblical text. Only later did it extend to the English texts.
Honour killing is not a Palestinian issue or a Muslim issue it's a third world originated issue which has arrived in western countries such as Britain, etc.
It originates in societies where women have not yet been emancipated and are treated as chattles.
Ironically the Jordanian law that "excuses" honour killings cannot be repealed according to international law which allows the occupying power to change the existing law of the occupied territory only for security reasons. (Geneva Convention I think). If Abu Mazen has repealed this law then it means that he has taken control of the reins in the WB and is acting as a leader of an independant state and not paying homage or recognitionto the occupiers - about time.
Incidently, the murdered lady's father, Ibrahim, has worked for about 30 years as a carpenter on one or more of the settlements in Gush Etzion. I think it's more likely that she was murdered for that than for some sexual indiscretion.
What a strange reply, Mooser!
I didn't write anything about religiousity or violence or anything that resembles fraud. You must have misread or misunderstood. I certainly have nothing against sharing, religiously or otherwise
America is certainly not secular. As far as I remember even its currency is emblazoned with "in god we trust" and if TV shows are accurate witnesses are sworn in with "so help me god". I think even the President is sworn in with a mention of god. You'll have to ask an American if that's accurate.
I don't think that could classify it as being a "secular" democracy with god showing up so often.
I also don't think there should be a pre-condition to "one state" of not mentioning god at all and being secular. That's for I/P to decide by democratic means.
But I assume as you didn't comment on the rest of what I said about the one state solution and making it a democracy without fixing its secular nature then you agree with that. So that's good news.
And seeing that "minhag hamakom" (the local custom) on this blog is to insult the person you comment on, I feel obliged to act as a Roman in Rome, so here goes: "You're a real Jerk" (that must have really hurt you, no?)
It's not too late - it would still be a much better strategy to campaign for the vote rather than stolen land, etc.
The "stolen land" argument will always be met by Israelis with a certain cynicism and argument about facts, believing, rightly or wrongly, that justice is with them.
But a mass movement for the vote and citizenship will really be hard to counter and will push the point home very clearly that democracy is at stake here.
The campaign should be: "No to independance, yes to citizenship and the vote" or "no to violence, yes to the vote"
The right in Israel won't know how to deal with this as they have campaigned for annexing territory - and now the Palestinians agree with them!
All claims of ROR or stolen land or international law should be put on hold, tactically and strategically, and concentrate on democracy only. Think what 40 or 50 members of the Knesset could achieve as opposed to what 44 years of resistance to occupation couldn't even scratch!
A "secular democratic" state? That's an oxymoron like a "Jewish democratic" state.
Surely the voters in the one state should DEMOCRATICALLY decide whether the state is secular or not? Chances are that the vote will be for some sort of bi-religious Jewish-Muslim state with a small christian minority.
Does a "secular democratic state" exist anywhere in the world today? I think not, and Israel-Palestine is the last place on earth where it would be suitable with such deeply felt religious affiliations of all its inhabitants, Arab or Jew alike.
In the Bible it says on the eighth day, so Jews do on the eighth day.
You can't choose to be born Jewish or Muslim, and there's no way to opt out later even by "converting" to another faith. You're stuck with it whether you like it or not.
Don't know when Muslims do it (I think at about one month) but for sure it's before 18 years old.
Why has the comment thread become JEWISH circumcision orientated?
Where have all the regular Muslim commentators disappeared to? You're not embarrassed in front of your friends about this dogma are you? Or are you afraid of losing support here on the I/P issue if you defend the Quran's view of circumcision?
I'm with you "mutilated " Muslims on this one - and on the Halal/Kosher meat issue - why don't I hear the Muslim support here for circumcision?
Dental treatment?
Acupuncture?
Enjoyed the humour around the serious topic, but one has to say a few words about the religious viewpoint.
It doesn't matter what you might say about mutilation, sexual pleasure or child rights neither Jews nor Muslims will change their practices. Even if it were to be made illegal (as was in Soviet Russia) Jews and Muslims will find the way to clandestinely and illegally circumcise. Muslims won't "correct" the Quran and Jews won't change the Torah.
For a Jew it is the last vestige of the most assimilated of Jews. I think I am not mistaken if I say that the Muslims are the same.
Ironically, this and ritual slaughter of animals for food, is the most uniting factor of the two religions which often clash.
And dare I say that many an anti-semite or Islamophobe has tried over the centuries to ban circumcision or ritual slaughter on apparent "humanistic" grounds whilst the true undercurrent is barely below the surface. It didn't catch on then, and won't catch on now.
I'd be interested to read comments here from some of your regular Muslim commentators to see what they think.
" and were forbidden to DO anything to bring about the general return to Zion, so that EVEN TO PRAY for it was forbidden"
You obviously misunderstood your Naturei Karta teacher. The NK prayerbook (siddur) is in no significant way any different from any orthodox siddur, and contains umpteen daily prayers for the return to zion.
The obsession with NK on progressive blogs where they are quoted or discussed is totally out of proportion. They are such a small minority and insignificant to mainstream Judaism that bringing them up in any argument is just a time waster for fruitful discussion. A bit like quoting Amish as representative of Christianity.
Craig:
I have never met a so-called "Christian Zionist", and even if I had, I would never claim to dissect what I think that they believe.
As a Christian you have every right to your opinion of Christian sects that are not in accordence with your values or ideology, but I think you have a bit of a "chutzpah" to tell orthodox Jews that their understanding of the "old" Testament (which they call the Tenach, Bible) is wrong, and that they don't actually have a correct understanding of their own faith or their scriptures.
Originally religious Jewry rejected Zionism mainly because of its secular base. What you call the three oaths from the Talmud were in fact only two incumbent on Jews, the third was an oath for the GENTILE world :(Talmud Babli, Tractate Ketubot, last two or three pages)
The first: Not to return to Israel "en masse" (="like a wall")
The second: Not to rebel against the nations where the Jews are in exile
The third (to the gentiles): Not to oppress the Jews in exile "too excessively".
The modern religious schools say that the gentiles broke their oath (shoah, etc) and thus the Jews are absolved from their two oaths, which they kept judiciously for nearly 2000 years. This is a turning point in religious Jewish thought, and aside from one or two extremist sects (Satmar, Neturai Karta) is accepted by all, at least tacitly.
You should read the parts of the Bible that say the covernant of the Israelites with god is everlasting, and that after exile there will be return, and that god will never totally spurn his people. It's easy to show how other religions have got it wrong. The challenge to a person is to adhere to his own beliefs in spite of the difficulties it may involve. I could bring scholarly sources rejecting the divine authorship of all Testaments and the Quran, and "prove" that all the scriptures contain internal contradictions -but will that convince anyone here or anywhere else of the "incorrectness" of their particular religion/cult/sect/creed/belief?
Let everyone have his religious beliefs and interpret them for himself.
And in any case, do you believe that the current I/P conflict has anything to do with how you or me or anyone else reads the Bible or the Quran or the so-called "new" Testament? Because if you do then we have to argue about to whom god has actually spoken in fact, and then we're on a very slippery slope!
Israeli-Palestinian-Druze-Bedouin-etc citizens all have the same ID cards.
The orange (now defunct) and green IDs are for the OT Palestinians.
East Jerusalem Palestinians and Golan Druze have IDs like Israeli citizens.
But don't forget to mention who actually killed him
How ironic...
No, seafoid, justice is always relative and in the eyes of the beholder - how else can you explain a court of appeal that changes the "justice" meted out by a lower court?
Is justice a function of knowledge and experience?
In my Zionist "space" Jews and "goys" (should be "goyim") have equal rights before the law.
Who in your opinion is a "rational, objective observer"?
He hasn't yet been born.
And what possible interest has the shabak to arrest an innocent party and make him confess to what he didn't do? Who benefits? The shabak themselves are at the front line of exposure to a potential murderer who will not be looked for because someone else has taken the rap erronously!
Whether you like zionism or not, Israel or not, you have to admit that the shabak usually gets its man, whatever the methods.
Eljay
Firstly, do you realise that by using epithets like "zio-supremists" you make a laughing stock of yourself to anyone that isn't a card carrying progressive anti-zionist?
It reminds me of my student days going to the Socialist Workers Party (Trotskyist) meetings where they banded around "comrade" and marxist dialectics as if the whole world used the same language. It just made them look like fools in everyone else's eyes.
Secondly, of course everyone should always be accountable for his crimes, a banality if there ever was one, but the whole problem is that one man's crime is another's "resistance" or "retaliation". Each side sees its own actions as legitimate whereas the other sees it as a crime worthy of punishment.
Justice is in the eyes of the beholder.
Is your problem lack of due process or that the innocent has confessed to what he didn't do?
You're right that there is lack of due process here by American standards. Hell, we don't even have trial by jury but by a panel of judges (neither also in civilian courts and civil cases).
But that doesn't mean that the two teens are automatically guilty, nor that even if they had no due process that their confessions are false. That is for the court to decide. And before you say that there are no aquittals then see the recent aquittal of one of the alleged "Ramallah lynch" perpertrators.
According to reports (may or may not be true) their DNA was linked to the crime scene and they boasted that they wished to become "shahids"and actually be killed in the act.
As for Israel "calling for the death penalty" for them - no such call has been made by "Israel" - as with every atrocity there are always the extremists who shout "death" or "bring back the birch" but it has been Israel's policy for the prosecution not to ask for the death penalty even though it is on the statute books in the Military courts (if all three judges have the rank of at least Lt-Col. (most are Majors). There is only one recorded case when the prosecution requested the death penalty, and the prosecutor did it on his own initiative and was relieved of his duties immediately afterwards!
MRW
"“The embargo ended in March of 1974.” The consequences didn’t. That’s when they started."
This thread seems to imply that America should never do what it thinks is in its best interest if in the long run it costs taxpayer's money. Many times I've seen here that if the American people knew how much aid it gives Israel they would change their point of view and lobby their congressmen, etc.
Foreign aid is given for two reasons:
1. Charity to help struggling economies of poor countries
2. Military aid to protect countries that uphold the long and short-term interest of the US
Israel comes under the second category - not just because of Aipac, but because of the interest of having a stable ally in the Middle East who can be relied upon, at least relatively to the other neighbouring regimes. It doesn't want Israel to become a Syria/Iran/Lybia who act against American interests.
It's not the ignorance of the American people that "allows" this to happen. They know and still decide that it's better for America to support Israel financially than not to support her.
You can argue that this is not fair or just, but it is a genuine factor in American strategy.
Danaa
Just for the record:
I'm not a "zio-troll"
Don't get paid
Don't give grades to other writers as per their quality.
I just have an opinion different to yours and to others as per the facts and the possible solutions to the I/P conflict.
If anyone does get paid it's those who seem to have the time to write on all and every comment on-line and never seeming to leave the blog - don't they have jobs?
Avi
I fail to see how refering to me as the male sexual organ furthers your argument. (for the ignorant, even a sefaradi Jew such as me knows that "shmuck" in yiddish is the penis)
Moreover, like most human beings I talk through my buccal cavity and not per anum. Your strange assumption of the origin of my verbal capability ("you speak out of your ass"), together with my above mentioned statement leads me to believe that you have certain fixations which Zigmond Freud may have dealt with in his works.
Actually Phil and many commentators are saying the same thing as many Zionists.
Phil claims (paraphrasing) that all the world's troubles could have been averted but for the I/P conflict, and at the blame of the Zionists.
Zionists claim that all the world's troubles could have been averted but for anti-semitism, at the blame of the anti-semites
Same conclusion, different blame.
But I prefer the Zionist version since the Jews seemed to suffer long before and without connection to zionism (crusades, inquisition, muslim conquests) and more recently the holocaust - all of them heavily connected with the Jewish people, and no way they could be blamed for them.
Avi
You really twisted the argument.
When Israelis claim that Palestinians were "encouraged" to leave their villages in 48 by the Arab leadership all hell breaks loose here, as it is claimed that the Israelis "expelled" the Palestinians.
Now you do the exact same invention of "hasbara" that the Jews of Sepharadi origin were "encouraged" to leave their homes by the Zionists instaed of the truth that they were expelled brutally without their possessions by nearly every Arab country in the late 4os and 50s.
Sometimes lies are so big that people come to actually believe them!
I'm sorry that your parents suffered by the hands of ashkenazim on their arrival, but your chip on your shoulder has seemingly grown too big to bear and hence your rage blinds your vision of the facts.
For instance, if the Zionists "forced" your parents to leave, why did they need to leave without their possessions and live in a maabara? Didn't their enlightened country of origin let them sell their property first, or rather give them financial encouragement to stay?
Annie
I forgot an important point - the bible, whether fact, fiction, myth or god's word is a major part of Jewish national identity throughout the centuries.
The Jews until about 150 years ago would not even question its authenticity, and it is a basic point of reference to the Jewish nation even if it is considered by some as a complete pack of lies from a historical point of view.
One cannot dismiss it as a source, as subjectively to Jews it moulds their identity even if objectively is not completely reliable.
The best sources for starters would be the Talmud and any standard Jewish orthodox prayer book (a reform prayer book may have removed the references, I'm not sure). Then there is the Kuzari (R. Yehudah Halevi, c. 11th century).
Do you read Hebrew? Do you know Aramaic? There is the Soncino translation to the Talmud which is sometimes a bit tiresome, but true to the text with a good index. Many prayer books have a translation to English on parallel pages.
Most identifying Jews until about 200 years ago would also have been religious and not secular, as pre-renaissance society demanded some form of religious affiliation. A non-believer would probably go through the religious motions or convert to another religion and be lost to the Jewish nation. Spinoza being a notable exeption and payed the price for it.
It's only in the last 200 or so years that there has been an attempt to define a non-religious (or, perhaps, better, a non-believing) Jewish identity.
Theo
You're so wrong on this one.
Jews may not be of one ethnicity but have always considered themselves a nation - just take a look at the siddur (Jewish prayer book mostly composed from talmudic times about 1800 years ago), there Jews are called "am yisrael" (the people of Israel) or "am hashem" (the people of god). In the bible they're even called "a stiff-necked nation" - good or bad they/we are a nation.
No zionist invention, just a return to roots and realisation of a dream after a long diaspora.
A good analogy is the "British people" - all are members of the British nation, but many trace their ethnicity from the Punjab, the West Indies, Malaya, etc. Even the royal family has German and Greek origins. But all are still "British". And the American "nation"?
The Jewish nation has existed for thousands of years, and is also a religion and a culture and a heritage all in one. Not every thing fits into little boxes and can be defined as you would have in black and white terms.
Legitimate to discuss and disagree with Israel's policies and even to argue against zionism, but no need to distort the history of the Jews and invent for them a solely religious identity, something which at no time in history was ever fact.
Al-J is freely available on both major Israeli cable tv companies, "Yes" and "Hot". Not even censored.
Bet that surprises the demonisation of Israel camp. I wonder if any Arab country outside Palestine has Israel tv on its cable menu?
We don't seem to have read the same Megillah. In the one we read here on Purim there is no vengence at all - only self defence. The people who were killed by the Jews were those who rose up to kill the Jews, and after the Jews were granted permission (yes, permission, otherwise they would be forbidden to defend themselves but allow thenselves to be killed) they actually fought back against those who wantonly tried to kill them.
No innocent victim was killed, no spoil taken, no vengence. The Jews simply didn't go that time like sheep to the slaughter. That is why god's name is hidden - he didn't have a job there at all - the Jews just did what is expected of any human being - to fight back, no need for miracles or other divine intervention. This is the message of the Megillah - do what you know is right without waiting for the divine to guide or interfere.
By the way, both kuf and het are gutterals and very similar if pronounced correctly as the Yemanite Jews do.
Is there something I don't know about Iran that causes a few people on this blog to act as if they are groupies for Iranian interests?
Even if the proof is scant about Iranian nuclear plans, shouln't one be just a little scared that there MIGHT be something there? Aren't you evn a little scared?
The attempt to paint Iran as the "great white hope" of a new non-USA free world frightens me!
The article concerning Thatcher and British diplomats is about papers from 1980, so the alleged nuclear threat in 1973 was before this.
I stated that the British diplomats got it completely wrong, as there have been wars since, but no nuclear threat. I stand by my word that the diplomats were panicing or maybe even deliberately falsifying intel?
Well Thatcher got it right on both counts - first about Begin and then about the PLO.
But the British diplomats missed out completely - 30 years on, and at least 3 wars later with its Arab neighbours (depending how you count), and still no nuclear bomb used by Israel (not even a threat).
Interestingly enough it's the elected representative who knows better than the so-called proffessional civil servants.
It's called rhetoric.
But you could try anwsering the questions as best as possible, in an intelligent and informative manner, and you might even convince me or someone else.
The problem is that this is a lose-lose siuation:
If the Western (and Russia's and China's) intel is wrong, then the Western world is defenseless against its enemies, as it knows jack s--t about them or their plans.
If the intel is right, then Iran's denial and eluciveness smacks of future expected belligerence on its behalf, and the world is thus tumbling into war.
Help!!!
Sorry to be in the ultimate defensive mode here after such an impressive analysis of the last 25 years, but the article doesn't explain two major points:
1. If Iran genuinely does not have a nuclear weapons programme, why do all the major Western powers and China and Russia agree to sanctions against them? Are these countries so easily fooled by "false" or "inaccurate" intel?
2. Maybe all the intel or estimates were/are accurate at the time, but as a result of counter operations, sanctions, etc. the estimate is actually delayed and therefore the forecasts are readjusted from time to time in accordance with the success or failure of the various overt and clandestine operations.
The best any of us laymen can say is that we don't really know where Iran's nuclear capabilities stand, if at all.
The Hebrew for integrity is "yoshra" יושרה
Of course it's not true.
The halachic problem is defining the exact moment of death according to religious rulings which may differ to medical opinions. Thus many orthodox Jews feel eager doctors may "murder" clinically dead people (halachically still alive) for their organs and so don't sign donation cards.
Also there is popular folklore that a body which is mutilated will not rise from the dead at the time of the resurrection. (no halachic basis).
This leads to a dearth of available organs in Israel and thus those who need a transplant have to look elsewhere for any organ, Jewish or otherwise.
Ironically the pig is the best non human skin transplant available.