Community alert for Passover:
"We are pleased to inform you that we have met with the Chicago Police Department, and there will be enhanced coverage around our neighborhoods, including all shuls, over Yom Tov. The additional police presence will be during the times that people will be walking to and from shul, and during the times that people are walking to meals. Also the Chicago Police Department, in conjunction with the Office of the Mayor, announced Jewish homes will be permitted to have loaded firearms on hand to deal with the increased occurrence of home invasions in the neighborhood."
As you may have guessed, the last sentence was my little joke. Of course Jewish homeowners in Chicago are not permitted to defend themselves, their families or their homes with handguns. The city took that right away decades ago, and the mayor is the law's staunchest supporter. Why should he need guns? He has taxpayer-financed 24-hour armed protection. The police presence in Jewish neighborhoods may succeed only in pushing crime to the east, away from the Jews. Nice for the Jews but not nice for ward residents across Western Avenue, who must feel like second-class citizens under their long-serving alderman.
Sunday, March 28, 2010
Monday, March 22, 2010
Save Passover!
Those annual "Keep the Christ in Christmas" campaigns are intriguing. The Christians have a point that their holiday has become much more than that--one celebrated by Christians, non-Christians and (misguided) Jews. Now we see attempts to celebrate Passover with unheard-of levels of non-kosher food. These attempts attest to the holiday's popularity.
I just received an emailed "Spring Event" Jewish singles party invitation at a River North nightspot. It's scheduled for next Thursday night, an intermediate day on the Passover week. If the bar were kosher-for-Passover and the appetizers were limited to kosher-for-Passover catering, this party would be a nice complement to the holiday. Unfortunately, that is not the case. The invitation acknowledges as much by noting "Passover style" appetizers (or "treif," as I would put it) and lists the cocktails available, including rum. I pointed out to the host the only kosher-for-Passover alcohol I can think of is potato vodka--not very exciting.
Before I noticed the warning attached to the end of the invitation (reprinted below), I fired off a response to the host expressing my extreme disappointment with his decision to arrange a party over Passover. I suggested that next year he host a Shavuous-themed party (but not on Shavuous), with kosher wine, cheese and cheesecake.
What disappoints me so much is that this is the one Abrahamic faith in which we see so many examples of Jewish groups and institutions playing fast and loose with the rules. Think of other faiths and try to imagine:
1. A Christian singles group or website hosting a singles event during Holy Week.
2. A Christian singles group or website hosting a singles event on Christmas Eve, after sunset.
3. A Muslim singles group or website hosting a daytime event with food during Ramadan.
4. A mosque or Muslim group hosting an event at which alcohol is served.
5. A Latter-Day Saints singles group or website hosting a dance event at which alcohol and Coca-Cola are served.
These suggestions are absurd and ridiculous because they would never happen. Christians consider their holy dates holy. So do Muslims, and they take their fast month (and alcohol abstention) seriously. I think the Mormon bans on mixed dancing, alcohol and caffeine are silly, but that's their business, not mine. Yet over Passover, we are invited to attend:
1. A Jewish singles event that advertises it will be serving food and drink that is not kosher-for-Passover.
2. Synagogues all over town hosting seders that are not kosher-for-Passover and indicated as such.
3. Non-kosher restaurants hosting seders that, surprise, are not kosher-for-Passover.
Am I missing something? Why are people (most of whom, I suspect, are well-meaning) trying to take Passover away from us? Do your part: take back Passover! There's a reason for the season! Keep kosher for Passover! Avoid non-kosher seders! Stay away from kosher restaurants--just for this week! Avoid events that serve non-kosher food and drink!
Most people don't keep strict kosher. But everyone can do his or her part to maintain the integrity of the holiday. More than any other, this holiday defines the Jewish people. Let's keep it that way.
________________________
The text of the singles event invitation disclaimer:
"If you have any questions or concerns please email us at info@----------.com. If you have concerns regarding a strict adherence to the laws of Pesach and Kashrut, please contact us for more information."
The disclaimer shouldn't say, "[P]lease contact us for more information" if you have concerns. It should say, "We recommend you join us another time." But that would run counter to the hosts' goal, which is to pack the nightclub with as many Jews as they can fit.
I just received an emailed "Spring Event" Jewish singles party invitation at a River North nightspot. It's scheduled for next Thursday night, an intermediate day on the Passover week. If the bar were kosher-for-Passover and the appetizers were limited to kosher-for-Passover catering, this party would be a nice complement to the holiday. Unfortunately, that is not the case. The invitation acknowledges as much by noting "Passover style" appetizers (or "treif," as I would put it) and lists the cocktails available, including rum. I pointed out to the host the only kosher-for-Passover alcohol I can think of is potato vodka--not very exciting.
Before I noticed the warning attached to the end of the invitation (reprinted below), I fired off a response to the host expressing my extreme disappointment with his decision to arrange a party over Passover. I suggested that next year he host a Shavuous-themed party (but not on Shavuous), with kosher wine, cheese and cheesecake.
What disappoints me so much is that this is the one Abrahamic faith in which we see so many examples of Jewish groups and institutions playing fast and loose with the rules. Think of other faiths and try to imagine:
1. A Christian singles group or website hosting a singles event during Holy Week.
2. A Christian singles group or website hosting a singles event on Christmas Eve, after sunset.
3. A Muslim singles group or website hosting a daytime event with food during Ramadan.
4. A mosque or Muslim group hosting an event at which alcohol is served.
5. A Latter-Day Saints singles group or website hosting a dance event at which alcohol and Coca-Cola are served.
These suggestions are absurd and ridiculous because they would never happen. Christians consider their holy dates holy. So do Muslims, and they take their fast month (and alcohol abstention) seriously. I think the Mormon bans on mixed dancing, alcohol and caffeine are silly, but that's their business, not mine. Yet over Passover, we are invited to attend:
1. A Jewish singles event that advertises it will be serving food and drink that is not kosher-for-Passover.
2. Synagogues all over town hosting seders that are not kosher-for-Passover and indicated as such.
3. Non-kosher restaurants hosting seders that, surprise, are not kosher-for-Passover.
Am I missing something? Why are people (most of whom, I suspect, are well-meaning) trying to take Passover away from us? Do your part: take back Passover! There's a reason for the season! Keep kosher for Passover! Avoid non-kosher seders! Stay away from kosher restaurants--just for this week! Avoid events that serve non-kosher food and drink!
Most people don't keep strict kosher. But everyone can do his or her part to maintain the integrity of the holiday. More than any other, this holiday defines the Jewish people. Let's keep it that way.
________________________
The text of the singles event invitation disclaimer:
"If you have any questions or concerns please email us at info@----------.com. If you have concerns regarding a strict adherence to the laws of Pesach and Kashrut, please contact us for more information."
The disclaimer shouldn't say, "[P]lease contact us for more information" if you have concerns. It should say, "We recommend you join us another time." But that would run counter to the hosts' goal, which is to pack the nightclub with as many Jews as they can fit.
Sunday, March 21, 2010
Does free speech cut both ways?
Much has been written about the anti-Israel fervor at the University of California-Irvine, fueled by its Muslim Student Association. MSA-UCI proudly participates in "Israel Apartheid Week" every year (just ended earlier this month). Last month, Israeli Ambassador to the U.S. Michael Oren gave a speech on the UCI campus. MSU-UCI organized a protest. MSU members attended the speech and attempted to disrupt the speech by shouting down Ambassador Oren. They were ejected and arrested by campus police. That video is here: http://bit.ly/ag7n4O
With the help of a member of MSU who is also on the student council, Associated Students of UCI, MSU managed to pass an ASUCI resolution condemning the police action and praising the actions of the MSU students who disrupted Oren's speech. The Jewish students' reaction is detailed here: http://bit.ly/9wOZrv The YouTube video of their appearance before ASUCI is here: http://bit.ly/cQ9oUU
In a post on MSA's own blog, MSA strongly objects to being investigated by the FBI (really?) for possible fundraising efforts on behalf of Hamas, which is illegal in the U.S. MSA alleges the FBI investigation was at the behest of the Zionist Organization of America. Perhaps this is just an opportunity for MSA to play the victim. In any case, the group's blog, at msuuci.com, had this to say about free speech: "This is only the most recent attempt to silence the MSU and restrict its constitutional right to freedom of speech, religion and association." And, "If anyone is acting illegally, it is the ZOA, by seeking to discard the very principles of the First Amendment in trying to shut us up and shut us down."
Apparently only one group on campus is entitled to free speech at UCI, and that would be the Muslim Student Association. It enforces its First Amendment smackdown with the aid and abetting of the student council, ASUCI.
What if MSU acted this way toward another group it philosophically opposes? Say, a group that advocates for gay rights? How would that play at a liberal campus in California?
I checked for Clubs and Associations at www.campusorgs.uci.edu. There is not just a club for gay students, but a Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender Resource Center, funded by student fees (and most likely taxpayer dollars). Its website is: www.lgbtrc.uci.edu.
For the destroy-Israel movement, Amir Abdel Malik Ali is a great speaker. You can see him here: http://bit.ly/rflRl The MSU website has a link for his speeches at UCI, but it didn't work when I tried it: www.msuuci.com/?=p1579. He is a great speaker and a great representative for his movement despite being a racist, a bigot and a demagogue. This is because he is African-American and does not have a Middle Eastern accent or appearance that characterizes so many men in the movement. This makes him much more appealing. I wonder how appealing he would be if he turned his attention to gay rights, which, as a devout Muslim, I'm sure he vehemently opposes. What if he spoke out against gay rights on campus? Would he be roundly booed? Shouted down? What if MSU organized a group attendance effort for a gay-rights speaker and shouted him down? Would the group receive widespread condemnation? Would it risk being kicked off campus by the dean of students?
It's worth a thought: to turn political correctness upside down. When it comes to Israel, the Muslim Student Association is the darling of the campus liberal extreme Left. When it comes to gay rights, though, MSA members better keep their damn mouths shut. Because they know what would happen if they picked that fight. Students just might exercise their First Amendment right to send MSA packing.
With the help of a member of MSU who is also on the student council, Associated Students of UCI, MSU managed to pass an ASUCI resolution condemning the police action and praising the actions of the MSU students who disrupted Oren's speech. The Jewish students' reaction is detailed here: http://bit.ly/9wOZrv The YouTube video of their appearance before ASUCI is here: http://bit.ly/cQ9oUU
In a post on MSA's own blog, MSA strongly objects to being investigated by the FBI (really?) for possible fundraising efforts on behalf of Hamas, which is illegal in the U.S. MSA alleges the FBI investigation was at the behest of the Zionist Organization of America. Perhaps this is just an opportunity for MSA to play the victim. In any case, the group's blog, at msuuci.com, had this to say about free speech: "This is only the most recent attempt to silence the MSU and restrict its constitutional right to freedom of speech, religion and association." And, "If anyone is acting illegally, it is the ZOA, by seeking to discard the very principles of the First Amendment in trying to shut us up and shut us down."
Apparently only one group on campus is entitled to free speech at UCI, and that would be the Muslim Student Association. It enforces its First Amendment smackdown with the aid and abetting of the student council, ASUCI.
What if MSU acted this way toward another group it philosophically opposes? Say, a group that advocates for gay rights? How would that play at a liberal campus in California?
I checked for Clubs and Associations at www.campusorgs.uci.edu. There is not just a club for gay students, but a Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender Resource Center, funded by student fees (and most likely taxpayer dollars). Its website is: www.lgbtrc.uci.edu.
For the destroy-Israel movement, Amir Abdel Malik Ali is a great speaker. You can see him here: http://bit.ly/rflRl The MSU website has a link for his speeches at UCI, but it didn't work when I tried it: www.msuuci.com/?=p1579. He is a great speaker and a great representative for his movement despite being a racist, a bigot and a demagogue. This is because he is African-American and does not have a Middle Eastern accent or appearance that characterizes so many men in the movement. This makes him much more appealing. I wonder how appealing he would be if he turned his attention to gay rights, which, as a devout Muslim, I'm sure he vehemently opposes. What if he spoke out against gay rights on campus? Would he be roundly booed? Shouted down? What if MSU organized a group attendance effort for a gay-rights speaker and shouted him down? Would the group receive widespread condemnation? Would it risk being kicked off campus by the dean of students?
It's worth a thought: to turn political correctness upside down. When it comes to Israel, the Muslim Student Association is the darling of the campus liberal extreme Left. When it comes to gay rights, though, MSA members better keep their damn mouths shut. Because they know what would happen if they picked that fight. Students just might exercise their First Amendment right to send MSA packing.
Is the seder the right time for song parodies?
In his Chicago Tribune blog, Eric Zorn annually lists various song parodies he and his fellow seder guests sing at the seders Zorn and his wife attend. (Mrs. Zorn is Jewish.) According to his March 18, 2010 post, he wrote "Super-Kosher Manischewitz, Exodus and Moses" to the tune of "Supercalifragilisticexpialidocious," the famous Mary Poppins song. The post is here: http://bit.ly/cBN2Mp
Hmmmm.
On one hand, that's fine. This isn't Yom Kippur, after all. If Eric, his wife and other seder guests want to have a little fun at a truly joyous occasion, they should knock themselves out and have a good time. Publicizing this rite of spring might persuade others the seder isn't a drag. Perhaps that Jewish minority that doesn't attend seders might be show up for one.
On the other hand: I can hear family members screaming at me because I make seder requirements so restrictive. Just one restriction: the seder must be kosher for Passover. Zorn doesn't indicate whether his seder is kosher or not. He may not know. Regardless of whether his seder is kosher, I'm pretty sure it doesn't matter to him. He's not Jewish, but just as important, he doesn't grasp the gravity of the importance of the holiday. We escaped from Egypt--not just physically, when it actually happened, but spiritually, every Passover. Zorn misses out on that spiritual component of Passover, and that plays a very important role in a seder. For that reason alone, the seder must be kosher for Passover.
Hmmmm.
On one hand, that's fine. This isn't Yom Kippur, after all. If Eric, his wife and other seder guests want to have a little fun at a truly joyous occasion, they should knock themselves out and have a good time. Publicizing this rite of spring might persuade others the seder isn't a drag. Perhaps that Jewish minority that doesn't attend seders might be show up for one.
On the other hand: I can hear family members screaming at me because I make seder requirements so restrictive. Just one restriction: the seder must be kosher for Passover. Zorn doesn't indicate whether his seder is kosher or not. He may not know. Regardless of whether his seder is kosher, I'm pretty sure it doesn't matter to him. He's not Jewish, but just as important, he doesn't grasp the gravity of the importance of the holiday. We escaped from Egypt--not just physically, when it actually happened, but spiritually, every Passover. Zorn misses out on that spiritual component of Passover, and that plays a very important role in a seder. For that reason alone, the seder must be kosher for Passover.
Thursday, March 18, 2010
CAMERA highlights mainstream media's smackdown
As the crisis between Israel and the US administration unfolded, an upsurge in Palestinian violence and public invective against the Jewish state was frequently distorted and minimized by the media.
On March 16, 2010, the Palestinian leadership –– Fatah as well as Hamas – called for a "day of rage," inciting their followers to riot after the dedication of the newly rebuilt Hurva synagogue in Jerusalem's Jewish Quarter. The synagogue had been destroyed in 1948 when Jordan seized the Jewish Quarter and expelled its residents. Following the historical pattern of their predecessors, the Palestinian leaders called for jihad in defense of Muslim holy sites, falsely claiming that the opening of the synagogue was the first step in Israel's plan to take over or destroy a Muslim shrine, the Al Aqsa mosque.
The New York Times article reporting on the rioting did not even bother to mention the Palestinian call to violence, nor was an anti-Semitic screed delivered in protest against the Hurva synagogue by Hamas reported. CNN's Newsroom, meanwhile blamed Palestinian violence on Israeli actions.
A few days earlier, the Palestinian Authority renamed a public square in Ramallah after Dalal al-Mughrabi, a Palestinian terrorist responsible for the 1978 Coastal Road Massacre, in which 38 civilians (including 13 children and an American photographer) were murdered and 71 wounded.
Much of the media, however, downplayed or ignored entirely this Palestinian incitement and glorification of terrorism. Instead, the focus was almost entirely on Israel's alleged "provocations" – the announcement that it would build new homes in Jewish neighborhoods in annexed Jerusalem. It was this stated intention by Israel, the public was informed, that threatened the possibility of peace negotiations. "One of the biggest obstacles to peace," the Financial Times declared, is the expansion of "settlements." Palestinian calls to kill Jews were not similarly labeled an "obstacle to peace.".
CNN’s Newsroom
CNN’s "Newsroom" essentially absolved the Palestinian leadership from blame and even justified Palestinian rioting, arguing that it was Israel’s rededication of the Hurva synagogue, and not the falsehood-fueled calls to riot, that sent Palestinians "over the edge."
The March 16, 9 AM newscast featured Kyra Phillips explaining the source of tension in Israel’s capital, and in the process, revealing her ignorance of the history of Jerusalem:
Here's the crux of the battle. The U.S. wants Israel to nix construction plans for east Jerusalem that would integrate the predominantly Arab part of the holy city. And as you know for centuries, Palestinians have always wanted this land as their state...
...Palestinians already angry about those construction plans have been sent over the edge by the reopening of a synagogue in east Jerusalem...
...Hamas called the protests after -- or called for the protests, rather, after yesterday's reopening of a synagogue that was destroyed during the 1948 Arab/Israeli war. [emphasis added]
The idea that Palestinian nationalism is a "centuries-old" phenomenon is dubious at best. Historian James L. Gelvin points out that "Palestinian nationalism emerged during the interwar period in response to Zionist immigration and settlement," and that "Palestinian nationalism developed later than Zionism."
Middle East scholar Bernard Lewis notes that the very concept of a Palestinian nation "was unknown" through the Ottoman period that ended in 1919. Even "the concept of Arab nationalism" did not reach "significant proportions before the outbreak of World War I."
This viewpoint is shared by many Middle East experts.
CNN’s 10 AM newscast similarly had Paula Hancocks justifying the Palestinian incitement by explaining that it was "because of that announcement last week of these 1,600 new homes in east Jerusalem." She expanded her blame-Israel theme:
This will always wind the Palestinians up as they're worried that Israel will try to push Palestinians out of east Jerusalem and also because there was a synagogue that was re-opened just 300 meters or so from the Al Aqsa mosque on Monday night. And that has caused tensions to rise and Hamas, the leader of Hamas, Khaled Meshaal, in Damascus called for a day of rage today.
Again, CNN falsely cast the rioting as a grassroots response to an Israeli provocation, without noting the Palestinian leadership lied about their mosque being in danger.
New York Times
Perhaps best typifying the focus on Israel while whitewashing the major Palestinian role in deepening the conflict was an article by Ethan Bronner in the March 17th edition of the New York Times, published the morning after the Palestinian "day of rage."
The article virtually ignored the Palestinian violence (which Ha’aretz analysts Avi Issacharoff and Amos Harel described as "more serious than anything similar over the past two years ") as well as its most immediate cause.
Instead, its focus was on Israeli building. Nineteen of the article’s 26 paragraphs dealt with Israeli construction in disputed territory. Only two referenced the violence, which resulted in numerous injuries and included rock throwing and even live fire by Palestinians.)
The reporter didn’t bother to inform readers that the violence was largely a response to the incitement. For example, there was no mention in this article of this Hamas statement:
We call on the Palestinian people to regard Tuesday as a day of rage against the occupation's [Israel's] procedures in Jerusalem against al-Aqsa mosque.
As Reuters acknowledged in its reports about the violence, "Hamas and Palestinian officials affiliated with its rival Fatah movement have said the restoration work at the ancient Hurva synagogue in the Jewish Quarter of Jerusalem's walled Old City endangered al-Aqsa, situated some 400 meters away."
But although an earlier story by Isabel Kershner (about the rededication of the Hurva Synagogue, but not about the violence) did reference Hamas’s claim about the alleged "destruction of the Al Aksa Mosque" and relayed the American characterization of such claims as "incitement," Bronner’s article mentioned nothing about the incitement to violence, and misleadingly focused on Israel by stating only that the Palestinian rioters were "protesting Israeli control and construction in East Jerusalem."
Neither New York Times story informed readers that it was not only Hamas, but also Mahmoud Abbas’s supposedly-moderate Fatah movement, that spread lies about the mosque. As Ha’aretz’s Amos Harel and Avi Issacharoff put it,
the Palestinian Authority is playing a very dangerous game – perhaps the most dangerous of it all – over Jerusalem and specifically the Temple Mount. Mohammed Dahlan, who is not known for his religious fervor, Khatem Abdel Kader, who holds the Jerusalem portfolio in Fatah, and others called Sunday on Israeli Arabs and residents of East Jerusalem to go to the Temple Mount today to "protect it from the Jews."
Also ignored in both Times articles was the virulent anti-Jewish hate speech accompanying Hamas’s lies about the destruction of the mosque. Hamas leader Mahmoud Zahar stated that the Jewish people were destined to be destroyed.
"You who are opening Hurva are heading towards ruin," Zahar is quoted saying on the Web sites of the Israeli daily Yediot Ahronot and Hezbollah’s Al Manar.
"Wherever you have been you've been sent to your destruction. You've killed and murdered your prophets and you have always dealt in loan-sharking and destruction. You're destined to be destroyed. You've made a deal with the devil and with destruction itself – just like your synagogue."
Washington Post
By contrast, a March 16 column by Washington Post commentator Richard Cohen, who has not hesitated to criticize Israel in the past, criticizes the media’s one-sided blaming of Israel. After noting that editorialists have been slamming Israel for its construction plans, he asserts:
it would have been nice for those same editorialists to have paused in their anti-Israel jihad to wonder a bit about the virtually simultaneous Palestinian veneration of terrorists. In fact, the determination in the West, particularly Europe, not to hold Palestinians morally accountable for terrorism -- as well as their commonplace anti-Semitism -- is a repugnant form of neocolonial mentality in which, once again, the Palestinians are being patronized.
On March 16, 2010, the Palestinian leadership –– Fatah as well as Hamas – called for a "day of rage," inciting their followers to riot after the dedication of the newly rebuilt Hurva synagogue in Jerusalem's Jewish Quarter. The synagogue had been destroyed in 1948 when Jordan seized the Jewish Quarter and expelled its residents. Following the historical pattern of their predecessors, the Palestinian leaders called for jihad in defense of Muslim holy sites, falsely claiming that the opening of the synagogue was the first step in Israel's plan to take over or destroy a Muslim shrine, the Al Aqsa mosque.
The New York Times article reporting on the rioting did not even bother to mention the Palestinian call to violence, nor was an anti-Semitic screed delivered in protest against the Hurva synagogue by Hamas reported. CNN's Newsroom, meanwhile blamed Palestinian violence on Israeli actions.
A few days earlier, the Palestinian Authority renamed a public square in Ramallah after Dalal al-Mughrabi, a Palestinian terrorist responsible for the 1978 Coastal Road Massacre, in which 38 civilians (including 13 children and an American photographer) were murdered and 71 wounded.
Much of the media, however, downplayed or ignored entirely this Palestinian incitement and glorification of terrorism. Instead, the focus was almost entirely on Israel's alleged "provocations" – the announcement that it would build new homes in Jewish neighborhoods in annexed Jerusalem. It was this stated intention by Israel, the public was informed, that threatened the possibility of peace negotiations. "One of the biggest obstacles to peace," the Financial Times declared, is the expansion of "settlements." Palestinian calls to kill Jews were not similarly labeled an "obstacle to peace.".
CNN’s Newsroom
CNN’s "Newsroom" essentially absolved the Palestinian leadership from blame and even justified Palestinian rioting, arguing that it was Israel’s rededication of the Hurva synagogue, and not the falsehood-fueled calls to riot, that sent Palestinians "over the edge."
The March 16, 9 AM newscast featured Kyra Phillips explaining the source of tension in Israel’s capital, and in the process, revealing her ignorance of the history of Jerusalem:
Here's the crux of the battle. The U.S. wants Israel to nix construction plans for east Jerusalem that would integrate the predominantly Arab part of the holy city. And as you know for centuries, Palestinians have always wanted this land as their state...
...Palestinians already angry about those construction plans have been sent over the edge by the reopening of a synagogue in east Jerusalem...
...Hamas called the protests after -- or called for the protests, rather, after yesterday's reopening of a synagogue that was destroyed during the 1948 Arab/Israeli war. [emphasis added]
The idea that Palestinian nationalism is a "centuries-old" phenomenon is dubious at best. Historian James L. Gelvin points out that "Palestinian nationalism emerged during the interwar period in response to Zionist immigration and settlement," and that "Palestinian nationalism developed later than Zionism."
Middle East scholar Bernard Lewis notes that the very concept of a Palestinian nation "was unknown" through the Ottoman period that ended in 1919. Even "the concept of Arab nationalism" did not reach "significant proportions before the outbreak of World War I."
This viewpoint is shared by many Middle East experts.
CNN’s 10 AM newscast similarly had Paula Hancocks justifying the Palestinian incitement by explaining that it was "because of that announcement last week of these 1,600 new homes in east Jerusalem." She expanded her blame-Israel theme:
This will always wind the Palestinians up as they're worried that Israel will try to push Palestinians out of east Jerusalem and also because there was a synagogue that was re-opened just 300 meters or so from the Al Aqsa mosque on Monday night. And that has caused tensions to rise and Hamas, the leader of Hamas, Khaled Meshaal, in Damascus called for a day of rage today.
Again, CNN falsely cast the rioting as a grassroots response to an Israeli provocation, without noting the Palestinian leadership lied about their mosque being in danger.
New York Times
Perhaps best typifying the focus on Israel while whitewashing the major Palestinian role in deepening the conflict was an article by Ethan Bronner in the March 17th edition of the New York Times, published the morning after the Palestinian "day of rage."
The article virtually ignored the Palestinian violence (which Ha’aretz analysts Avi Issacharoff and Amos Harel described as "more serious than anything similar over the past two years ") as well as its most immediate cause.
Instead, its focus was on Israeli building. Nineteen of the article’s 26 paragraphs dealt with Israeli construction in disputed territory. Only two referenced the violence, which resulted in numerous injuries and included rock throwing and even live fire by Palestinians.)
The reporter didn’t bother to inform readers that the violence was largely a response to the incitement. For example, there was no mention in this article of this Hamas statement:
We call on the Palestinian people to regard Tuesday as a day of rage against the occupation's [Israel's] procedures in Jerusalem against al-Aqsa mosque.
As Reuters acknowledged in its reports about the violence, "Hamas and Palestinian officials affiliated with its rival Fatah movement have said the restoration work at the ancient Hurva synagogue in the Jewish Quarter of Jerusalem's walled Old City endangered al-Aqsa, situated some 400 meters away."
But although an earlier story by Isabel Kershner (about the rededication of the Hurva Synagogue, but not about the violence) did reference Hamas’s claim about the alleged "destruction of the Al Aksa Mosque" and relayed the American characterization of such claims as "incitement," Bronner’s article mentioned nothing about the incitement to violence, and misleadingly focused on Israel by stating only that the Palestinian rioters were "protesting Israeli control and construction in East Jerusalem."
Neither New York Times story informed readers that it was not only Hamas, but also Mahmoud Abbas’s supposedly-moderate Fatah movement, that spread lies about the mosque. As Ha’aretz’s Amos Harel and Avi Issacharoff put it,
the Palestinian Authority is playing a very dangerous game – perhaps the most dangerous of it all – over Jerusalem and specifically the Temple Mount. Mohammed Dahlan, who is not known for his religious fervor, Khatem Abdel Kader, who holds the Jerusalem portfolio in Fatah, and others called Sunday on Israeli Arabs and residents of East Jerusalem to go to the Temple Mount today to "protect it from the Jews."
Also ignored in both Times articles was the virulent anti-Jewish hate speech accompanying Hamas’s lies about the destruction of the mosque. Hamas leader Mahmoud Zahar stated that the Jewish people were destined to be destroyed.
"You who are opening Hurva are heading towards ruin," Zahar is quoted saying on the Web sites of the Israeli daily Yediot Ahronot and Hezbollah’s Al Manar.
"Wherever you have been you've been sent to your destruction. You've killed and murdered your prophets and you have always dealt in loan-sharking and destruction. You're destined to be destroyed. You've made a deal with the devil and with destruction itself – just like your synagogue."
Washington Post
By contrast, a March 16 column by Washington Post commentator Richard Cohen, who has not hesitated to criticize Israel in the past, criticizes the media’s one-sided blaming of Israel. After noting that editorialists have been slamming Israel for its construction plans, he asserts:
it would have been nice for those same editorialists to have paused in their anti-Israel jihad to wonder a bit about the virtually simultaneous Palestinian veneration of terrorists. In fact, the determination in the West, particularly Europe, not to hold Palestinians morally accountable for terrorism -- as well as their commonplace anti-Semitism -- is a repugnant form of neocolonial mentality in which, once again, the Palestinians are being patronized.
Congresswoman, are you on Israel's side?
Pollak For Congress
## FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE ##
March 17, 2010
Rep. Jan Schakowsky: Take a stand against the administration's attacks on Israel
This morning on the Don Wade & Roma show on WLS AM, Rep. Jan Schakowsky claimed that the Obama administration's attacks would not hurt the U.S.-Israel relationship. She the attacks were "not going to harm the long-term or even the short-term relationship between the United States and Israel," and she compared the argument to a marital dispute.
It is a completely inappropriate analogy, and one belied by the statement by Israeli Ambassador Michael Oren that "Israel's ties with the United States are in their worst crisis since 1975" and that this was "a crisis of historic proportions." Rep. Schakowsky is failing in her duty to speak truth to power on behalf of the residents of her district, who overwhelmingly support a strong U.S.-Israel alliance.
It is time for Israel's friends in the United States to stand up and be counted. I call on Rep. Jan Schakowsky to join me in condemning the Obama administration's ongoing attack on Israel, America's most steadfast ally. I urge her to denounce the dangerous posture of J Street, the far-left organization that she helped found in Chicago last month and which is backing the administration's hostile approach against the Jewish State.
Last week, the Obama administration attacked Israel for announcing that it would be building new apartments in a Jewish neighborhood in East Jerusalem-an area that the White House had agreed would not be part of the "settlement freeze," and which will be part of Israel in any peace agreement with the Palestinians. Despite apologies from the Israeli government, the administration has continued to attack Israel in the U.S. media.
Members of both parties have criticized the Obama administration for its overreaction, which amounts to incitement against Israel and has created the worst crisis in U.S.-Israel relations in 35 years, according to Israeli ambassador Michael Oren. There was no similar criticism from the administration when Palestinian leaders dedicated a public square in honor of a terrorist the day after Vice-President Joe Biden's visit.
In the wake of criticism from Biden, David Axelrod, Hillary Clinton and others, Hamas has sent violent protestors into the street to denounce Israeli construction in Jerusalem, including the reconstruction of a centuries-old synagogue that was destroyed by Jordan after 1948. The Obama administration has given Palestinian leaders a new precondition for negotiations, without demanding that they live up to their commitments to stop terror.
Rep. Jan Schakowsky has been totally silent. But J Street, the far-left organization she helped found and build, has gleefully celebrated the crisis, calling on supporters to sign a petition supporting the administration's stance against Israel. As Rep. Schakowsky told J Street at its Chicago opening last month: "I've been a supporter of J Street since its inception." She is also the #3 money recipient from J Street PAC this cycle.
The administration and J Street are wrong in their attacks on the Israeli government. Banning Jews from Jewish neighborhoods in Jerusalem smacks of bigotry and gives Palestinian leaders an excuse to avoid peace talks. The attacks also embolden Israel's enemies at a time when the U.S. and Israel must stand together against Iran. It is time for Rep. Schakowsky to decide: where does she stand-with J Street or with Israel?
I call on Rep. Schakowsky to join me in taking a stand. Speak up for America's 62-year relationship with the only democracy in the Middle East. Stop the rhetoric that is more vitriolic than anything the Obama administration uses against America's enemies. Stop public demands for unilateral Israeli concessions. Start focusing on Iran's nuclear program, instead of joining Iran in attacking the Jewish presence in Jerusalem.
Rep. Schakowsky is the voice for J Street in Chicago and across the nation. She hosted their first gala dinner and was a featured speaker at their first national conference. It is up to her to speak out against J Street's petition drive and against the anti-Israel attacks of the Obama administration. Her silence, as long as it continues, will stand as evidence of her true beliefs about Israel. She must take a stand, before more damage is done.
## FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE ##
March 17, 2010
Rep. Jan Schakowsky: Take a stand against the administration's attacks on Israel
This morning on the Don Wade & Roma show on WLS AM, Rep. Jan Schakowsky claimed that the Obama administration's attacks would not hurt the U.S.-Israel relationship. She the attacks were "not going to harm the long-term or even the short-term relationship between the United States and Israel," and she compared the argument to a marital dispute.
It is a completely inappropriate analogy, and one belied by the statement by Israeli Ambassador Michael Oren that "Israel's ties with the United States are in their worst crisis since 1975" and that this was "a crisis of historic proportions." Rep. Schakowsky is failing in her duty to speak truth to power on behalf of the residents of her district, who overwhelmingly support a strong U.S.-Israel alliance.
It is time for Israel's friends in the United States to stand up and be counted. I call on Rep. Jan Schakowsky to join me in condemning the Obama administration's ongoing attack on Israel, America's most steadfast ally. I urge her to denounce the dangerous posture of J Street, the far-left organization that she helped found in Chicago last month and which is backing the administration's hostile approach against the Jewish State.
Last week, the Obama administration attacked Israel for announcing that it would be building new apartments in a Jewish neighborhood in East Jerusalem-an area that the White House had agreed would not be part of the "settlement freeze," and which will be part of Israel in any peace agreement with the Palestinians. Despite apologies from the Israeli government, the administration has continued to attack Israel in the U.S. media.
Members of both parties have criticized the Obama administration for its overreaction, which amounts to incitement against Israel and has created the worst crisis in U.S.-Israel relations in 35 years, according to Israeli ambassador Michael Oren. There was no similar criticism from the administration when Palestinian leaders dedicated a public square in honor of a terrorist the day after Vice-President Joe Biden's visit.
In the wake of criticism from Biden, David Axelrod, Hillary Clinton and others, Hamas has sent violent protestors into the street to denounce Israeli construction in Jerusalem, including the reconstruction of a centuries-old synagogue that was destroyed by Jordan after 1948. The Obama administration has given Palestinian leaders a new precondition for negotiations, without demanding that they live up to their commitments to stop terror.
Rep. Jan Schakowsky has been totally silent. But J Street, the far-left organization she helped found and build, has gleefully celebrated the crisis, calling on supporters to sign a petition supporting the administration's stance against Israel. As Rep. Schakowsky told J Street at its Chicago opening last month: "I've been a supporter of J Street since its inception." She is also the #3 money recipient from J Street PAC this cycle.
The administration and J Street are wrong in their attacks on the Israeli government. Banning Jews from Jewish neighborhoods in Jerusalem smacks of bigotry and gives Palestinian leaders an excuse to avoid peace talks. The attacks also embolden Israel's enemies at a time when the U.S. and Israel must stand together against Iran. It is time for Rep. Schakowsky to decide: where does she stand-with J Street or with Israel?
I call on Rep. Schakowsky to join me in taking a stand. Speak up for America's 62-year relationship with the only democracy in the Middle East. Stop the rhetoric that is more vitriolic than anything the Obama administration uses against America's enemies. Stop public demands for unilateral Israeli concessions. Start focusing on Iran's nuclear program, instead of joining Iran in attacking the Jewish presence in Jerusalem.
Rep. Schakowsky is the voice for J Street in Chicago and across the nation. She hosted their first gala dinner and was a featured speaker at their first national conference. It is up to her to speak out against J Street's petition drive and against the anti-Israel attacks of the Obama administration. Her silence, as long as it continues, will stand as evidence of her true beliefs about Israel. She must take a stand, before more damage is done.
Does the White House consider Israel a threat?
FROM: RJC Legislative Affairs Committee
SUBJECT: Congress Must Reject Obama's Threats to Unravel U.S.-Israel Alliance
The latest news reports make it clear that the Obama administration's campaign of criticism against Israel threatens to do irreparable damage to relations with our valued ally.
* The Washington Post reports that
In an effort to get peace talks back on track, the Obama administration is pressing Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu to reverse last week's approval of 1,600 housing units in a disputed area of Jerusalem, make a substantial gesture toward the Palestinians, and publicly declare that all of the "core issues" in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, including the status of Jerusalem, be included in upcoming talks, U.S. officials said.
*The New York Times tells us that the administration is looking to "turn the tables" on Israel's leaders, language more suited to dealings with an enemy than with an ally. The Times' reporting suggests that after a failed, months-long effort to entice the Palestinians into direct negotiations with Israel, the administration now wants Israel to accept the Palestinians' preferred framework - one in which our diplomats would negotiate for them.
*And at the Atlantic.com, Jeffrey Goldberg reports that Obama's ultimate aim is to destroy Israel's current government in hopes that the current governing coalition would be replaced by a more pliant one.
What happened to the promise made back in the 2008 campaign that during an Obama presidency, "the United States will stand shoulder to shoulder with Israel"?
Fortunately, more and more members of Congress are protesting what House Republican Whip Eric Cantor aptly describes as an "opportunistic move by an administration that wants to impose its view... onto our ally."
At first, most of those speaking up were Republicans. But now more Democrats have begun to break with the administration.
At this point, Obama and his lieutenants are isolated. Yet they show no signs of admitting their error.
We need to encourage more members of Congress to speak up, so that the administration will stand down.
Please take a moment to call or email your Congressman and two U.S. Senators. Urge them to speak out against the Obama administration's pressure campaign against Israel.
*Information about how to contact your Congressman can be found at https://writerep.house.gov/writerep/welcome.shtml (you will be directed to a site where you can identify who your Representative is and send him or her an email) -- or by calling 202-224-3121.
* Information about how to contact your U.S. Senators can be found at http://www.senate.gov/general/contact_information/senators_cfm.cfm -- or by calling 202-224-3121.
Key points to emphasize:
* It is outrageous that the Obama administration is attacking an ally even as it coddles hostile nations like Iran and Syria.
* The cause of peace is set back when Israel's foes are led to believe that significant diplomatic gains can be achieved through American pressure - and without reciprocal concessions.
* The Obama administration's obsession with the peace process - even when the Palestinians demonstrate by their actions that they are not ready to make peace - has become a distraction from the effort to curb Iran's nuclear ambitions.
Thank you for weighing in on this urgent and timely matter. This is the moment when we need to raise our voices!
SUBJECT: Congress Must Reject Obama's Threats to Unravel U.S.-Israel Alliance
The latest news reports make it clear that the Obama administration's campaign of criticism against Israel threatens to do irreparable damage to relations with our valued ally.
* The Washington Post reports that
In an effort to get peace talks back on track, the Obama administration is pressing Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu to reverse last week's approval of 1,600 housing units in a disputed area of Jerusalem, make a substantial gesture toward the Palestinians, and publicly declare that all of the "core issues" in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, including the status of Jerusalem, be included in upcoming talks, U.S. officials said.
*The New York Times tells us that the administration is looking to "turn the tables" on Israel's leaders, language more suited to dealings with an enemy than with an ally. The Times' reporting suggests that after a failed, months-long effort to entice the Palestinians into direct negotiations with Israel, the administration now wants Israel to accept the Palestinians' preferred framework - one in which our diplomats would negotiate for them.
*And at the Atlantic.com, Jeffrey Goldberg reports that Obama's ultimate aim is to destroy Israel's current government in hopes that the current governing coalition would be replaced by a more pliant one.
What happened to the promise made back in the 2008 campaign that during an Obama presidency, "the United States will stand shoulder to shoulder with Israel"?
Fortunately, more and more members of Congress are protesting what House Republican Whip Eric Cantor aptly describes as an "opportunistic move by an administration that wants to impose its view... onto our ally."
At first, most of those speaking up were Republicans. But now more Democrats have begun to break with the administration.
At this point, Obama and his lieutenants are isolated. Yet they show no signs of admitting their error.
We need to encourage more members of Congress to speak up, so that the administration will stand down.
Please take a moment to call or email your Congressman and two U.S. Senators. Urge them to speak out against the Obama administration's pressure campaign against Israel.
*Information about how to contact your Congressman can be found at https://writerep.house.gov/writerep/welcome.shtml (you will be directed to a site where you can identify who your Representative is and send him or her an email) -- or by calling 202-224-3121.
* Information about how to contact your U.S. Senators can be found at http://www.senate.gov/general/contact_information/senators_cfm.cfm -- or by calling 202-224-3121.
Key points to emphasize:
* It is outrageous that the Obama administration is attacking an ally even as it coddles hostile nations like Iran and Syria.
* The cause of peace is set back when Israel's foes are led to believe that significant diplomatic gains can be achieved through American pressure - and without reciprocal concessions.
* The Obama administration's obsession with the peace process - even when the Palestinians demonstrate by their actions that they are not ready to make peace - has become a distraction from the effort to curb Iran's nuclear ambitions.
Thank you for weighing in on this urgent and timely matter. This is the moment when we need to raise our voices!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
