Disproportionate Force: Pesach, The IDF, And My Daughter

I was visiting family in Ohio during Pesach, and davened in a shul where an old chevrusa of mine is the rabbi--Rabbi Hanan Balk. While I always enjoy his drashas, one in particular made an impression on me, and after Pesach I asked him to fax me the text he quoted--it comes from Leading The Passover Journey: The Seder's Meaning Revealed, The Haggadah's Story Retold by Rabbi Nathan Laufer. Rabbi Laufer, a talmid of the Rav, deals with why the Rabbis seek to increase the potency of the plagues the Egyptians suffered, and explains it in a way that is relevant today:

While the plagues themselves represented a powerful response to Egyptian evil, the Rabbis in this midrash on the plagues felt the need to multiply that powerful response four and five times so that it became overwhelming rather than merely "measure for measure." In so doing, the Rabbis in the Haggadah are teaching us that to effectively parry forces of radical evil, one needs to use overwhelming rather than merely commensurate force. While commensurate force is an important limiting factor in petty criminal law (e.g., one may not use lethal force to stop a common pickpocket) in dealing criminally with heinous or potentially lethal crimes, as well as in dealing politically with radically evil regimes, one needs to exercise power that goes beyond a mere proportionate response; to the evil perpetuated.

Overwhelming force is necessary against an evil regime for two reasons. First, the total impact of all the evil perpetrated by the individual members of the regime is greater than the mere sum of its parts. This totality of evil needs to be met with an appropriately vigorous, even exponentially powerful response. Second, in order to create a deterrent effect, the punishment for the evildoers needs to be greater than the evil perpetuated...

Interestingly, besides seeing the relevance to the response Israel must take against the terrorist attacks against it, another application occurred to me--L'havdil:

At home, we have a curious situation where our 16 month old son occasionally picks on our 9 year old daughter--occasionally biting her. 

My immediate reaction of course, especially considering the age difference, is to tell her that under no circumstances should she hit him--rather she must tell him firmly "no biting!"

Listening to my friend's drasha, it occurred to me how absurd my demand was. The baby has no real understanding of what is being said to him, nor can we afford to wait around for him to understand what is being said and to comprehend the concept of consequences. Better for my daughter to 'hit him'--on the shoulder or hand in a firm but not vengeful way along with the verbal message.

This after all is the way of HaShem as well: the punishments had a pedagogic component and were not purely out of wrath--just as when resorting to anger we learn we should exhibit the anger but not allow ourselves to be controlled by it. 

Similarly, this is what we expect of the IDF: during Operation Cast Lead, while civilian casualties are unavoidable, we expect that no identifiable civilian will ever be purposely targeted. The operation is to make a point, not to blindly strike out in anger.

A lesson we all should remember--and teach the world.

Technorati Tag: Passover and Pesach and Haggadah.

The Politics Of Blame And Yom HaShoah: A Survivor Did More Than Just Survive

I came across On Work and Freedom: For Holocaust Remembrance Day and Durban II on a new blog called The Word Well. He is writing about his 91 year old grandmother, who was liberated from the camps. This part especially caught me eye:

...I don’t know of any Holocaust survivors who entered a café in Germany or Poland circa 1946 or 1996 or 2006 and blew themselves up to liberate their family’s land or business stolen by the Nazis. Nor do I know of any Holocaust remembrance conferences where the chief subject is hating Hitler and his SS and the German and Polish and Hungarian people who kept quiet. The subject is remembering the dead and the lost. And how we’ve moved on. Grown, beyond survival. Celebrating the fact that Hitler ultimately failed miserably, precisely because he did not manage to infect his victims with the thing that drove him: Hate.

My grandmother was poor when she arrived in the US. And oppressed. She had almost no one left in the world and hasn’t smelled a thing since the day they told her what that smoke was coming out of the chimneys back in Auschwitz. (The one who told her, a week or so into her stay, was a drunk guard, with a gruff laugh, who she struggled not to believe, until it was heinously clear he had spoken the truth.)

Obviously, however, she had read the “welcome sign” on the gate. It said, horribly: Work makes you free. So she worked… on herself. On remembering her dead but forgetting about revenge or about stewing in what she’d lost. She worked on raising a moral, productive, educated family. On “living her best life.” She worked 12 hour days alongside my grandfather to feed their kids when there was no one alive to call for a loan. (She had been fairly well-to-do back in Seredna.)

Read the whole thing.

Technorati Tag: Yom HaShoah.

In Light Of The International Perception Of Obama, Netanyahu Pushes Back (Updated)

From The Washington Post:

Israel Puts Iran Issue Ahead of Palestinians
Shift on One Tied to Progress on Other

The new Israeli government will not move ahead on the core issues of peace talks with the Palestinians until it sees progress in U.S. efforts to stop Iran's suspected pursuit of a nuclear weapon and limit Tehran's rising influence in the region, according to top government officials familiar with Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu's developing policy on the issue.

Ed Morrissey puts Netanyahu's move into perspective:

Give Benjamin Netanyahu credit for learning from the experience of others. The new Israeli Prime Minister has watched Barack Obama get pushed around on the international stage for the past 100 days, and figures that he can redefine a relationship, too. Bibi will tell Obama that Israel will move no further on Palestinian peace talks until the US removes the threat from Iran

If accurate, maybe we will finally see a different Israel--one that is not quites as easily pushed around as in past years. 

I remember when we felt the same way the first time Netanyahu was Prime Minister. I recall reading one source back then that went so far as to point out that while walking and talking with President Clinton, Clinton put his arm around Netanyahu's shoulder--a gesture implying superiority--immediately after which Netanyahu put his arm around Clinton, balancing the equation. 

That is a bit much for me, but Obama's apparent lack of gravitas (American Thinker claims he has more levitas than gravitas) on the international stage may make him more of a pushover than Bush--how's that for change.

David Hazony writes:

Lieberman is not just an ideologue but a shrewd political player, and together with Netanyahu, Israel is taking a foreign-policy stance that is overtly independent of the Obama Administration. This may make things trickier for the State Department in the short run, but down the road it will make it much easier for the Israeli government to strike deals, make concessions, or, alternatively, serve Israel’s interests by refusing to make concessions. Israeli voters do not want to feel disenfranchised by American pressure.

The US is not used to the idea of an Israel that stands up for itself and refuses to automatically make concessions. In the short term, that may give Israelis a certain amount of self-respect. The key is the long term--whether Israel can take such a position consistently without appearing to be outright rejectionist. Of course, the Palestinian Arabs have shown themselves quite a adept at this, but that is mostly because have cornered the market on being the underdog victim, a position that Israel lost long ago.

Not so long ago, it was considered a slam dunk that an Obama Administration would put the screws to Israsel pure and simple.

Now that is not so obvious.

But neither will Netanyahu's task be easy.

UPDATE: Yid With Lid notes the denial by Israel of what the Washington Post article said, coming from the Jerusalem Post:

Deputy Foreign Minister Danny Ayalon on Wednesday denied a report that Israel will not move ahead with diplomatic talks with the Palestinians until the US places more pressure on Iran to stop its nuclear weapons program.

"We will deal with the Palestinian issue as if there is no Iranian issue, and with the Iranian issue as if there is no Palestinian issue," Ayalon said.

He was responding to a Washington Post article published earlier in the day that claimed the "new Israeli government will not move ahead on the core issues of peace talks with the Palestinians until it sees progress in US efforts to stop Iran's suspected pursuit of a nuclear weapon and limit Teheran's rising influence in the region."

Hmmmm, "We will deal with the Palestinian issue as if there is no Iranian issue, and with the Iranian issue as if there is no Palestinian issue"--that's an odd paraphrase of Ben Gurion's "We will assist the British in the war as if there were no White Paper and we must resist the White Paper as if there were no war."

But in Ben Gurion's case, his message was that Israel's problem with Great Britain would not prevent them from joining them against the greater menace. 

Is Ayalon saying that Israel will still cooperate with the US in the search for an equitable peace with the Palestinian Arabs even while pursuing its own interests in defense against Iran?--or merely that both issues will be pursued concurrently.

Ben Gurion was making an important point. 
If Ayalon is doing nothing more than resorting to clever rhetoric, then Israel has not made much progress yet after all.

Technorati Tag: Israel and Netanyau and Obama.

Video: Egyptian State TV On Jews And Starbucks

A sample of peace with the Muslim world in action:

[Hat tip: Eric Trager]

Technorati Tag: Starbucks and Queen Esther and Purim.

Video: A Taste Of Durban II--Elie Wiesel Called Zio-Nazi

The US contribution to the UN at work:

Technorati Tag: Durban II and Elie Wiesel and UN.

The Harman Case: Another Attack on Jewish Influence, Revenge Against Harman, Or A Slap At Obama? (Updated)

Those who thought there would be fewer attacks on the Israel Lobby with Bush and the "neo-cons" out of office now find that there is one more carryover from the Bush years.

We now read in CQ Politics from Jeff Stein, "CQ SpyTalk Columnist":

Sources: Wiretap Recorded Rep. Harman Promising to Intervene for AIPAC

Rep. Jane Harman , the California Democrat with a longtime involvement in intelligence issues, was overheard on an NSA wiretap telling a suspected Israeli agent that she would lobby the Justice Department reduce espionage-related charges against two officials of the American Israeli Public Affairs Committee, the most powerful pro-Israel organization in Washington.

You can check out the transcript of an online Stein had about his article here.

Where to begin? Is this simply part of the Pelosi-Harman feud?

Most focus instead on the implications of Israeli influence.

Israel Matzav, wonders whether the timing has to do with AIPAC spy case--in an attempt to bolster the weak and questionable case.

Legal Insurrection differs and writes:

As others have pointed out, the story is replete with open questions, such as who was the "suspected Israeli agent," and whether such person was Israeli or American or other. Others question the timing, coming soon before the trial of the AIPAC officials is to take place (after the DOJ suffered serious legal setbacks on the case)..

...The leak of the Harman wiretap cannot be divorced from the looming Iran issue. What else could explain the timing of a leak of a conversation which took place years ago? Leaking such a conversation would have little or no effect on the upcoming trial, but would affect the ability of supporters of Israel on Capital Hill from being heard in support of Israel's right of self-defense.

Legal Insurrection also notes the reference to a "suspected" Israeli agent--"which means there likely is no hard evidence that the person was actually acting on behalf of the government of Israel, as opposed to merely being a supporter of Israel".

The Strata-Sphere raises questions about the story--not the least of which is the denial by The New York Times that Harman ever asked the Times to hold back on its warrantless wiretapping story, as is alleged in the original CQ story.

Foreign Policy points out a second discourdant note in the CQ article, noting a difference of opinion of whether the NSA or the FBI was actually behind the wiretap--claiming that "Hill intelligence committee sources cast doubt Monday on whether the NSA was the relevant agency here"--as Stein has claimed.

So besides questions about who this leak is directed against, there are questions about whether the leak itself is accurate. Keep in mind that according to Stein in his online discussion of his article:

The fact is, there is no "timing" to any "leak."

No sources "came forward," so to speak.

I learned about this quite a while ago and was just recently able to turn my full attention to it. Total coincidence.

...The story was not "planted" on me to influence any other events -- in particular the looming AIPAC trial or things related to the NSA's warrantless wiretapping program. I've known about it for some time but just not been able to pull it together until now for various reasons.

But this continues to be view as just that--a leak.

Under Bush, these sorts of 'leaks' were said to be undercutting his administration.

What about now, under Obama?

According to the Foreign Policy article mentioned above, the leak is actually a push back against Obama:

As U.S. President Barack Obama appeared at the CIA Monday, a conflagration sparked by his administration's decision last week to release Bush-era memos describing harsh interrogation techniques was having gasoline poured on it.

Though Obama pointedly said he would decline to pursue any legal action against the intelligence officers involved, his decision seems to have left the intelligence community, and in particular its Bush-era leadership, feeling targeted. Even as Obama chief of staff Rahm Emanuel reiterated the White House's desire to move forward, several former intelligence directors and former attorney general Michael Mukasey took to the talk shows and oped pages to argue against the Obama administration's decision to release the memos.

The memos' release coincided with a report in the New York Times last week alleging that the NSA had captured the communications of an unidentified congress-member without a warrant and committed other recent abuses as part of the controversial domestic surveillance program.

So it's perhaps not surprising that Bush-era intelligence officials might want to push back against a Democratic congresswoman and, by extension, the Democratic Congress as well. After all, even as the Obama administration insists it opposes any legal action against those involved, Democrats on the Hill might feel pressured to step up their investigations and even pursue legal actions. The message of the pushback is loud and clear: Congress and the Democrats weren't innocent in these activities either.

Maybe this whole case is nothing more than giving Mr. Obama a proper welcome to Washington.

[Hat tip: Soccer Dad]

UPDATE: In his new blog, RubinReports, Barry Rubin points out a number of incongruencies in the CQ story:

o The CQ story fails to take into account the way the NSA operates
o Due to FBI intimidation, AIPAC has already completely disassociated itself from the 2 AIPAC employees and has let them go

Read the whole thing.

Technorati Tag: Jane Harman and AIPAC.

More Claims About Israel's Influence

This article has been rewritten and reposted as:

The Harman Case: Another Attack on Jewish Influence, Revenge Against Harman, Or A Slap At Obama?

"US Presidents and the Jews: From George Washington to George Bush"

Note: I first came across this in September 2003 on The Jewish Post--the URL at the time was www.jewishpost.com/jp0803/jpn0803j.htm, but that no longer works and 'search' is disabled on the site. [Update: as per the comment below, the article is now accessible in the Jewish Post archives]

While a number of versions of this are floating on the Internet, only 2 give the correct source--Tina Levitan, author of First Facts in American Jewish History: From 1492 to the Present. Of the others, many add Clinton and Bush 43 to the list (claiming that the former had more Jews in his cabinet than all previous presidents combined and--falsely--that the latter had none). This new version is falsely ascribed to Professor Sherman L. Cohn, Georgetown University Law Center, who has written:

The email is a forgery. I did NOT write it. I vouch for nothing in it. Moreover, like you, I know that there is false information in the forgery. Whatever else one says about George W. Bush, he has appointed at least two Jews to is cabinet: Attorney General Michael Mukasey, an Orthodox Jew, and Secretary Michael Chertoff, the son of a conservative rabbi. Moreover, I know that Bush has appointed Jews as federal judges.

This forgery has been floating around for over a year. Well over 100 persons have inquired of me as to its veracity. I have asked each of them to please send this message to all persons to whom he or she sent the forgery, as well as to the person who sent the forger to him or her, and ask that person to do the same.

Since he is only calling the appended part referring to Bush 43 a forgery, I see no problem passing along the original piece--sorry for the long winded intro.

US Presidents and the Jews: From George Washington to George Bush

Who was the first President to attend a synagogue service? To receive a Torah as a gift? To name a Jew to his cabinet?

You'll find the answer to these and other curious queries in this non-partisan feature prepared by a lady who knows this subject well, except who will be the first Jewish President of the United States.

GEORGE WASHINGTON was the first President to write to a synagogue. In 1790 he addressed separate letters to the Touro Synagogue in Newport, RI, and to Mikveh Israel Congregation in Savannah, GA, and a joint letter to Congregation Beth Shalom, Richmond, VA, Mikveh Israel Philadelphia, Beth Elohim, Charleston, S. C., and Shearith Israel, New York. His letters are an eloquent expression and hope for religious harmony and endure as indelible statements of the most fundamental tenets of American democracy.

THOMAS JEFFERSON was the fist President to appoint a Jew to a Federal post. In 1801 he named Reuben Etting of Baltimore as US Marshall for Maryland.

JAMES MADISON was the first President to appoint a Jew to a diplomatic post. He sent Mordecai M. Noah to Tunis from 1813 to 1816.

MARTIN VAN BUREN was the first President to order an American consul to intervene on behalf of Jews abroad. In 1840 he instructed the U.S. consul in Alexandria, Egypt to use his good offices to protect the Jews of Damascus who were under attack because of a false blood ritual accusation.

JOHN TYLER was the first President to nominate a U.S. consul to Palestine. Warder Cresson, a Quaker convert to Judaism who established a pioneer Zionist colony, received the appointment in 1844.

FRANKLIN PIERCE was the first and probably the only President whose name appears on the charter of a synagogue. Pierce signed the Act of Congress in 1857 that amended the laws of the District of Columbia to enable the incorporation of the city's first synagogue, the Washington Hebrew Congregation.

ABRAHAM LINCOLN was the first President to make it possible for rabbis to serve as military chaplains. He did this by signing the 1862 Act of Congress which changed the law that had previously barred all but Christian clergymen from the chaplainry. Lincoln was also the first, and happily the only President who was called upon to revoke an official act of anti-Semitism by the U.S. government. It was Lincoln who cancelled General Ulysses S. Grant's "Order No. 11" expelling all Jews from Tennessee from the district controlled by his armies during the Civil War. Grant always denied personal responsibility for this act attributing it to his subordinate.

ULYSSES S. GRANT was the first President to attend a synagogue service while in office. When Adas Israel Congregation in Washington D.C. was dedicated in 1874, Grant and all members of his Cabinet were present.

RUTHERFORD HAYS was the first President to designate a Jewish ambassador for the stated purpose of fighting anti-Semitism. In 1870, he named Benjamin Peixotto Consul-General to Rumania. Hays also was the first President to assure a civil service employee her right to work for the Federal government and yet observe the Sabbath. He ordered the employment of a Jewish woman who had been denied a position in the Department of the Interior because of her refusal to work on Saturday.

THEODORE ROOSEVELT was the first President to appoint a Jew to a presidential cabinet. In 1906 he named Oscar S. Straus Secretary of Commerce and Labor. Theodore Roosevelt was also the first President to contribute his own funds to a Jewish cause. In 1919, when he received the Nobel Peace Prize for his efforts while President to settle the Russo-Japanese War, Roosevelt contributed part of his prize to the National Jewish Welfare Board.

WILLIAM HOWARD TAFT was the first President to attend a Seder while in office. In 1912, when he visited Providence, RI, he participated in the family Seder of Colonel Harry Cutler, first president of the National Jewish Welfare Board, in the Cutler home on Glenham Street.

WOODROW WILSON was the first President to nominate a Jew to the United States Supreme Court. Standing firm against great pressure to withdraw the nomination, Wilson insisted that he knew no one better qualified by judicial temperament as well as legal and social understanding, confirmation was finally voted by the Senate on June 1, 1916. Wilson was also the first President to publicly endorse a national Jewish philanthropic campaign. In a letter to Jacob Schiff, on November 22, 1917, Wilson called for wide support of the United Jewish Relief Campaign which was raising funds for European War relief.

WARREN HARDING was the first President to sign a Joint Congressional Resolution endorsing the Balfour Declaration and the Palestine Mandate supporting the establishment in Palestine of a national Jewish home for the Jewish people. The resolution was signed September 22, 1922.

CALVIN COOLIDGE was the first President to participate in the dedication of a Jewish community institution that was not a house of worship. On May 3, 1925, he helped dedicate the cornerstone of the Washington, D.C. Jewish Community center.

FRANKLIN D. ROOSEVELT was the first President to be given a Torah as a gift. He received a miniature Torah from Young Israel and another that had been rescued from a burning synagogue in Czechoslovakia. Both are now in the Roosevelt Memorial Library in Hyde Park. The Roosevelt administration's failure to expand the existing refuge quota system ensured that large numbers of Jews would ultimately become some of the Holocaust's six million victims. Fifty-six years after Roosevelt's death, the arguments continue over Roosevelt's response to the Holocaust.

HARRY S. TRUMAN, on May 14, 1948, just eleven minutes after Israel's proclamation of independence, was the first head of a government to announce to the press that "the United Stated recognizes the provisional government as the de facto authority of the new state of Israel." Truman was also the first U.S. President to receive a president of Israel at the White House - Chaim Weizman, in 1948 and an Ambassador from Israel - Eliahu Elat in 1948. With Israel staggering under the burdens of mass immigration in 1951-1952, President Truman obtained from Congress close to $140 million in loans and grants.

DWIGHT D. EISENHOWER was the first President to participate in a coast-to-coast TV program sponsored by a Jewish organization. It was a network show in 1954 celebrating the 300th anniversary of the American Jewish community. On this occasion he said that it was one of the enduring satisfactions of his life that he was privileged to lead the forces of the free world which finally crushed the brutal regime in Germany, freeing the remnant of Jews for a new life and hope in Israel.

JOHN F. KENNEDY named two Jews to his cabinet - Abraham Ribicoff as Secretary of Health, Education and Welfare, and Arthur Goldberg as Secretary of Labor. Kennedy was the only President for whom a national Jewish Award was named. The annual peace award of the Synagogue Council of America was re-named the John F. Kennedy Peace Award after his assassination in 1963.

JIMMY CARTER in a number of impassioned speeches stated his concern for human rights and stressed the right of Russian Jews to emigrate. He is credited with being the person responsible for the Camp David Accords.

GEORGE BUSH I in 1985 as Vice President had played a personal role in "Operation Joshua," the airlift which brought 10,000 Jews out of Ethiopia directly to resettlement in Israel. Then, again in 1991, when Bush was President, American help played a critical role in "Operation Solomon", the escape of 14,000 more Ethiopian Jews. Most dramatically, Bush got to the U.N. to revoke its 1975 "Zionism is Racism" resolution.

Tina Levitan is the author of First Facts in American Jewish History: From 1492 to the Present, published by Jason Aronson Publishers

Technorati Tag: Jewish History and US History.

Iran Loves A Good Kidnapping

Noah Pollak notes:

Why does the Iranian regime have such a penchant for abductions? And why are they often timed to follow American announcements of a desire for diplomacy? Because in the eyes of the Islamic revolutionaries, the overthrow of the American-backed shah in 1979 was proof not only of the revolution’s divine ordination, but of America’s weakness and the ease with which the Great Satan could be disgraced. The regime has never paid a price for the provocations that started at our embassy in Tehran — the Marine Corps barracks bombings in Lebanon in 1983, the 1994 bombing of a Jewish community center in Buenos Aires that killed 85 people, its campaign of assassinations and bombings in Europe during the 1980’s, its sponsorship of Hezbollah and Hamas, etc.

Israel is not alone in being unable to teach a permanent lesson to the terrorists who attack its citizens--does anyone seriously think that Syria will ever pay a price for its assassination of Rafik Hariri?

Pollak's recounting of the history of Iran and kidnappings includes back in 1987, when Iran justified the abduction of Westerners in Beirut on the basis of the fact that, well, what else is an oppressed people supposed to do?

The Speaker of the Iranian Parliament today defended the seizure of Western hostages in Beirut and other terrorist actions by Lebanese groups, saying the Lebanese had no other way to defend themselves.

Referring specifically to recent kidnappings in Beirut, the speaker, Hojatolislam Hashemi Rafsanjani said, ''The people of Lebanon are so ignored and so oppressed that they have no other defense for themselves other than this.''

Even back then it was clear that there was no terrorist act that could not be justified based on one pretext or another.

And there is no excuse that the West will not use to continue to use negotiation and diplomacy with terrorists and their enablers.

Technorati Tag: Iran.

Obama's $900 Million Bailout of Gaza: Hamas Is Not General Motors

Ed Morrissey is not impressed by the nearly $1 billion that Obama is ready to send to the terrorists that run Gaza. Can the US be any more successful keeping the money out of the hands of the terrorist rulers of Gaza than it was in keeping money and influence out of the hands of Saddam Hussein?

Obama says that the money flowing into Gaza from the US will not go to Hamas, which remains on the State Department terrorist list. The money may not directly go to Hamas, but Hamas controls the flow of goods and services throughout Gaza. Any resources flowing into Gaza will eventually wind up in the hands of Hamas, probably almost immediately by comandeering the aid as it enters Gaza, or through a series of kickbacks from the NGOs that get it.

Pretending otherwise is silliness; it’s the same pretense that people used about the UN Oil-for-Food Program in assuring people that Saddam Hussein didn’t get any of the money. Hamas controls Gaza almost as completely as Saddam did Iraq.

Besides, as Claudia Rosett has already pointed out, every dollar that Obama gives Gaza is one less that Hamas will have to put out of its own pocket towards the upkeep of Gaza--and siphoned off instead towards firing more rockets at schools in Israel.

Or does Obama think that by bailing out the terrorist group, he will have some sort of influence on Hamas.

Hamas is not General Motors.

Technorati Tag: Obama and Gaza and Hamas.