IDF: No Gaza ground operation due to fear of war with SyriaFear?
The main reason the Israel Defense Forces is not currently recommending a major ground operation in the Gaza Strip is fear that war might break out with Syria this summer, IDF sources say.
Technorati Tag: Israel and IDF and Gaza and Syria.
The House of Representatives is scheduled to vote next week on a resolution calling for President Bush to move the American Embassy in Tel Aviv to Jerusalem, strengthening Israel's position against recurring diplomatic efforts to take away its capital.Although the resolution is not going to force Bush to recognize Jerusalem as the capital of Israel--presidential candidates have promised to move the embassy since 1980--there is some political capital to be gained:
The resolution, which passed the House Committee on Foreign Affairs on May 23, commemorates the 40th anniversary of Israel's victory in the Six Day War that unified Jerusalem. It also calls on Mr. Bush to adhere to the Jerusalem Embassy Act of 1995, which authorized the funds to begin moving the embassy and declared that it was American policy to recognize the city as the capital of the Jewish state.
The House resolution, scheduled for a floor vote on Tuesday, "reiterates its commitment to the provisions of the Jerusalem Embassy Act of 1995 and calls upon the President and all United States officials to abide by its provisions."
While Mr. Bush promised as a first-time presidential candidate to begin the process of moving the embassy, he has exercised a waiver in the 1995 law to avoid penalties the law imposes for failing to move the embassy. The fact that a Democratic-controlled Congress would press him on the issue could signal that he and Secretary of State Rice, who has been aiming to revive peace talks between Israel and the Palestinian Arabs, have little domestic political leeway to pressure Israel for concessions on its capital.[emphasis added]Unfortunately, the fact that Barak once put Jerusalem on the bargaining table has already taken the shine off of Israeli claims of an "Undivided Jerusalem".
Technorati Tag: Israel and Jerusalem and President Bush and Democrats.
MAN OR BEAST
Rabbi Avi Shafran
It is hardly surprising that one of the most outspoken evangelists of atheism would have less-than-kind words about a man who empowered religion in American politics. But writer Christopher Hitchens went even beyond his usual eloquent obnoxiousness by commencing his comments in Slate about the late Jerry Falwell by asserting that “the discovery” of the Baptist minister’s “carcass” has significance mainly for “credulous idiot[s].”
The word chosen by the petulant writer to refer to Reverend Falwell’s mortal remains is telling. As a self-declared and proud “antitheist” whose most recent book carries the subtitle “How Religion Poisons Everything,” Hitchens has no reason to view human beings as different from animals in any essential way. It is a stance that can lead to things like Princeton ethicist Peter Singer’s support for killing severely disabled babies and the unconscious elderly. As Professor Singer has explained: “The life of a newborn is of less value than the life of a pig, a dog or a chimpanzee.” If antitheist Hitchens asserts some inherent human specialness, he is not only insufferable but inconsistent.
Reverend Falwell, by contrast, made his reputation by forcing the American body politic to consider that the human sphere, by virtue of a Divine plan, is uniquely, meaningfully different from all else on earth. The idea that men and women possess a spark of the Divine, that our lives hold the promise of holiness, is the beta-point – after the alpha affirming God – of religious belief.
Which is why Falwell, who coaxed religious Americans to raise a voice they hadn’t known they possessed, focused largely on issues that spoke to the holiness of human life. Like the preciousness of even its potential, and how the act able to create new human beings should be regarded as something more than a meaningless equivalent of its analogue in the animal world.
Predictably, such ideas make people like Hitchens crazy. The writer was rendered apoplectic by the reverend’s daring to voice opposition to the societal sanctioning of feticide, or of intimate relationships considered immoral by traditional Jewish, Christian, Muslim, Hindu and Buddhist believers alike. Hitchens decried the “puddl[ing]” of the reverend’s “sausage-sized fingers into the intimate arrangements of people who had done no harm.” Hitchens’ hatred is so fervid it extends to Falwell’s very digits.
Nor is the cantankerous Divinity-denier content to just damn the late reverend (so to speak; Hitchens, of course, denies any ultimate reward or punishment). He insists on smearing him, too, with the tar of anti-Semitism.
Associating the Moral Majority founder with an assortment of unsavory characters on the sole basis of their common commitment to Christian belief, Hitchens sneers that Falwell must have hated Jews. The tar, though, doesn’t stick. I don’t know what Falwell may have held in his heart of hearts, but a verdict of guilty on a charge of Jew-hatred needs something more than guilt by the remotest association.© 2007 AM ECHAD RESOURCES
Ah, though, Hitchens points out, Jews are “unsaved” in the reverend’s theology.
Well, yes, some Christians’ beliefs entail a rejection of Judaism. Jewish belief, no less, rejects Christianity (at least for Jews). Theological affirmations, however, need not bespeak animus.
It is odd, in any event, that an atheist would be so exercised by a Christian’s belief about the spiritual merit, or lack thereof, of non-Christians. It certainly doesn’t bother this Jewish believer (who, well, believes he knows better).
I am not oblivious to how religions can beget – and have begotten – hatred and violence. Nor am I certain that there is no future (or even present) for Christian Jew-hatred. There are, after all, rabidly anti-Semitic groups in the American heartland that claim a Christian mandate for their hatred. Nor, to be honest, can I help but wonder what prejudicial lusts might yet lurk in the heart of former president Jimmy Carter and other similarly myopic defenders of populations pledged to drive Jews into the Mediterranean.
But the vast majority of contemporary Christians – including even those like Falwell who believe Jews can get to heaven only by becoming Christians – do not menace members of the tribe these days; and I respect a Christian’s right to his belief just as I wish that he or she respect mine to my own.
And so, while, as a believing Jew, I was not a Falwell-follower and was not always enamored of some of his pronouncements , he deserves credit not only for his support of Israel against her sworn enemies but for his determination, whatever else he may have said or believed, to call attention to the idea of the Divine.
Some, in the spirit of the Yiddish proverb that describes the best of worlds as one filled with “religious Jews and irreligious Goyim,” might prefer a horde of Hitchenses to a flock of Falwells. There is ample evidence, it cannot be denied, for the spawning of evil in the name of faith.
But let us also recall some historical wages of Godlessness – like Stalin’s “Great Purge” or Mao’s massacres or the Cambodian killing fields. And so, I am not convinced that the proverb has it entirely right. While religion can, and often is, misused, there is much to be said for a society pledged, however imperfectly, to the Divine, over one that regards human beings as nothing more than quickened carcasses.
Technorati Tag: Jerry Falwell and Christopher Hitchens and Anti-Semitism.
Technorati Tag: Israel and Gaza and Media Bias.
A reader e-mails:
A family in Bayswater had a terrible fire erev Yom Tov and their house that they were renting completely burned down. B”H they all got out okay, but the father who saved the entire family plus all the tenants in the house, has some 3rd degree burns and cuts. This happened at 4am on Sunday. The family of 7 (5 kids ranging from 6 months to 13 years), have lost everything they own. There was no insurance. The people to contact are Ilanit at the Sephardic Beit Medrash of Bayswater @ 917-796-7865 or Batia @ 917-257-1078. Checks can be made out to:Tizku L’Mitzvot!
Bayswater Neighbors Fund
c/o Richard Altabe
637 Meehan Avenue
Far Rockaway, NY 11691
“Israel has a right to defend itself. However, I urge Israel to avoid reacting disproportionately and innocent victims among the civilian population. International law is binding on us all. There can be no peace without justice,” he addedSo, Israel can defend itself, but only so long as:
Technorati Tag: Fauxtography.
Technorati Tag: President and Abbas.
Understanding history is difficult unless one understands the psyches of the major players in history. This applies not only to individuals but to groups as well. Members of relatively homogeneous groups tend to think similarly and knowing how they think is a critical piece of the puzzle in understanding how they act.Continue reading Part I
Unfortunately, historians generally do not put primary emphasis on the state of mind of the subjects of their histories. Events are listed and discussed but not the psychology of the people involved. There are a number of reasons for this: historians are trained to deal with facts and to discount conjecture, and there is no greater conjecture than to guess how someone thinks. The reluctance to look at history through this prism is perhaps also due to an understandable reluctance to place entire groups of people into a single bucket, as this seems to be too close to racism. Paradoxically, today's Western mindset where the disgust of racism is paramount may be hurting the understanding of the mindsets of other cultures and historical periods.
In starting this series of posts, I am engaging in some hubris. I am not a historian, nor a psychologist, nor a demographer, nor a sociologist, and I'm not even a professional writer. To make matters worse, I do have biases that I freely admit. Even with these shortcomings, I hope that I can contribute in a small way to the understanding of today's issues revolving around the Arab-Israeli conflict. Especially in this case, there is really no dividing line between history and current events, and too much history glibly assumes that all people think the same way - an error that has great ramifications in our time as well.
In the wake of the 1948 birth of the state of Israel came the creation of a wholly new people, known today as "Palestinians." They became a people as a result of a confluence of events that, in the end, brought them together and gave them a shared identity. This essay will attempt to show how these Arabs who originally came from all over the Middle East ended up perceiving themselves as a separate people, how their Arab mindset became the specifically Palestinian Arab mindset, and ultimately how the Palestinian Arabs became who they are today.
One other note: leaders of societies do not necessarily reflect the thinking of their people, and the Palestinian Arabs have had many leaders who acted in ways that were counterproductive to their people as a whole. This essay is not as concerned with the psychology of the leaders nearly as much as with the Palestinian Arabs themselves, as a group.
Technorati Tag: Israel and Palestine and Jewish History.
