The sin of omission is sometimes graver yet

Letter to the editor from username: pundit02@yahoo.com
Sent at: Jul 10 2012 at 06:46 pm EDT
RE: http://www.jta.org/news/article/2012/07/10/3100306/berkley-faces-ethics-review

To the Editor:

As the agents of record for so many Jewish publications all over the world I would think that it would behoove the JTA to give all the facts of interest pertinent to a story that will probably be carried by most of them.

While it is true that U.S. Rep. Shelley Berkley (D-NV) has been a stalwart of pro-Israel policy in the U.S. Congress, and would most definitely be the same on the Senate side, I find it difficult that the JTA fails to note in this story that her opponent in this year's senate race, incumbent U.S. Senator Dean Heller (R-NV), is equally strong on issues regarding the US-Israel bond and was in fact the senator chosen by the co-sponsors to introduce the Jerusalem Embassy and Recognition Act of 2011, legislation that serves to strip the president of his/her "waiver power" and finally relocate the U.S. embassy from Tel Aviv to Israel's capital city of Jerusalem where it belongs.

I am a staunch independent and in any race I choose to look at the person running, their record their policy and their character, not at their particular party affiliation. In this case, I believe the JTA should have done the same - acknowledge in the body of the story that both candidates seeking to represent Nevada would be a strong vote for a strong and everlasting US-Israel alliance.

The sin of omission is sometimes graver yet.

Dr. Mike Cohen
Zionism, Post-Zionism & The Arab Problem
http://www.drmikecohen.info

Pro-Israel lawmaker Shelley Berkley facing ethics review

July 10, 2012

WASHINGTON (JTA) -- The House Ethics Committee has launched an investigation into U.S. Rep. Shelley Berkley, a pro-Israel lawmaker, potentially complicating the Nevada Democrat's bid for the U.S. Senate.

The investigation announced Monday, and backed by Democrats and Republicans on the committee, will focus on allegations that Berkley's championing of kidney care benefited her husband, a leading kidney specialist in Nevada.

"The Committee notes that the mere fact of establishing an investigative subcommittee does not itself indicate that any violation has occurred," said a statement from the Ethics Committee of the House of Representatives.

Berkley's office said she was "pleased with the committee’s decision to conduct a full and fair investigation, which will ensure all the facts are reviewed."

Her successful efforts to block a federal bid to close a kidney transplant center saved part of a practice co-owned by her husband.

Berkley, widely considered as among the most pro-Israel members of the House, was seen as one of a handful of chances for the Democrats to pick up a Senate seat in a year when they are defending most of their seats. She faces incumbent Sen. Dean Heller, who was named to the seat after fellow Republican John Ensign resigned in a scandal.

Committee Report: Judea and Samaria

For Immediate Release - July 4, 2012
Contact: Esther Levens - 913 648 0022

WWW.UC4i.org 

voices@unitycoalitionforisrael.org

Prime Minister Committee Report:

Israelis Have a Legal Right to Settle All Judea and Samaria

A Committee appointed by Prime Minister Netanyahu to examine the legality of Jewish construction in Judea and Samaria has issued a statement today, Tuesday, July 4, 2012 - Israelis have a legal right to settle that region. Retired Israeli Supreme Court Justice Edmond Levy, who heads that Committee, declared:

“According to international law, Israelis have a legal right to settle all of Judea and Samaria, at the very least the lands that Israel controls under agreements with the Palestinian Authority. Therefore, the establishment of Jewish settlements [in Judea and Samaria] is, in itself, not illegal.”

The committee was established by the Prime Minister to determine and cement the legal status of the outposts in Judea and Samaria, with an emphasis on communities that were not built on privately owned Palestinian land but their status was still in doubt due to legal bureaucracy.

The committee issued its report that was subsequently handed over to Attorney-General Yehuda Weinstein. In the report, Levy wrote:

“upon completing the committee’s tasks, and considering the testimonies heard, the basic conclusion is that from an international law perspective,the laws of ‘occupation’ do not apply to the unique historic and legal circumstances surrounding Israel’s decades-long presence in Judea and Samaria.”

Quoting the report: “Likewise, the Fourth Geneva Convention [relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War] on the transfer of populations does not apply, and wasn’t intended to apply to communities such as those established by Israel in Judea and Samaria.”

“...dozens of new neighborhoods have been erected, without government authorization and at times without a contiguous link to the mother community. Several were built outside the legal jurisdiction allotted to the community. This prevalent phenomenon has required large amounts of funding therefore the committee finds it hard to believe that it was done without the government’s knowledge.”

In conclusion, the report said:

“we have discovered a phenomenon within the Israeli settlement enterprise in Judea and Samaria that does not befit a country that upholds the rule of law. From now on, it must be made very clear to the proponents of the settlement enterprise and to the political echelon that they are to operate only within the confines of the law, and the various law enforcement institutions must decisively enforce the law in the future.”

The committee’s recommendations include the following:

          The government must clarify its position on the issue of Israeli settlement in Judea and Samaria to prevent varying interpretations of its policy; a new community will only be built after the government or an authorized ministerial committee has approved it;

         the expansion of a community outside the bounds of its authorized jurisdiction must first be approved by the defense minister or a ministerial committee on settlements, in coordination with the prime minister.

On the other hand, the committee declared that the encouragement provided by the government to the settlement enterprise constituted authorization. According to the committee, communities that were built on land owned by the state, or privately owned Israeli land, with the help of government bodies could not be classified as “unauthorized” due to the absence of an official government decision to authorize them.

The very assistance provided by the government in their establishment constitutes implicit authorization.

Under these circumstances, the report concluded, the evacuation of such communities would be impractical and another solution, such as compensation or land swap, should be implemented.


Therefore, the committee recommends in its report, the government should avoid issuing demolition orders for these communities because it is the government itself that created this situation in the first place.

It was also recommended that the government should speed up the examination of the communities whose status isn’t defined. They suggested that the government define these disputed communities’ status in terms of evacuations or demolitions only after a thorough investigation and a full legal proceeding. In order to ease the lives of the residents, the committee suggested the establishment of special courts in Judea and Samaria specifically to settle land disputes.

To prevent uncertainty and to promote stability, the committee encouraged Israelis and Palestinians to record their land purchases within an agreed upon time frame of between four and five years, after which anyone who did not complete the process would lose rights to property. The committee further proposed that Israelis would only be allowed to purchase land in Judea and Samaria under the auspices of an authorized body.

Americans who support Israeli sovereignty over all of the land designated to  "reconstitute the ancient Jewish homeland" (quoted from the landmark decision at San Remo, Italy, April 25, 1920) rejoice at the definitive findings of this committee.  Israel has finally cast off the bonds of false accusations and is no longer accepting the false designation of "occupation". That terminology is finally put to rest by the findings of PM Netanyahu's  Committee.

It is truly a "landmark" decision handed down by this authoritative source.

The UCI Campaign to move the United States Embassy is substantiated by this edict which validates the Supreme Council of Allied Powers granting of rights by the Supreme Council of Allied Powers international law. This ruling adds credence to the Unity Coalition for Israel (UCI) campaign to promote the United States becoming the first nation to accept the legality of International Jewish claims to Jerusalem as the eternal Capital of Israel. The Congressional purchase of the land on which to build the Embassy was completed after passage of the Jerusalem Embassy Act of 1995 was approved overwhelmingly by both houses of Congress.

The original Embassy Act reflects the will of the American people. Therefore in our campaign we urge Congress to finally pass House Resolution 1006 and companion  Senate bill ????; together they will eliminate the Presidential waiver granting the President the right to defer implementation of the move of the U.S. Embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem every 6 months for "security reasons". All presidents since 1995 have used this waiver to delay the move, thus repeatedly thwarting the public outcry for action.

--"NEXT YEAR IN JERUSALEM"-- 

is the prayer repeated by Jews all over the world for more than 3000 years.

We hope to gather in Jerusalem in 2013 for the U.S. Embassy ground-breaking that can soon become reality! 

#30#

Supreme Court vs. Israel

The A Monkey Wrench In The Works – The Supreme Court vs. the Declaration of Independence

by Haim Misgav

The declaration of the establishment of the State of Israel was anchored constitutionally in the Basic Law: Human Dignity and Freedom. Ever since, it was determined, basic human rights must be founded upon recognition of the worth of man, the sanctity of his life and upon his existence as a free man, and all these must be fulfilled in the spirit of the principles appearing in the Jewish state’s Declaration of Independence.

One need not be a distinguished legal scholar in order to understand that this document grants clear preference to Jews. The Jewish state is supposed to be the national home of the Jewish people – exclusively. Its gates will be opened wide before Jews alone. The borders of the Jewish state were not determined in the Declaration of Independence nor were the borders of the Land of Israel, as all that mattered to the founders of the State of Israel was to emphasize that the Land of Israel was from time immemorial the homeland of the Jewish people in which its spiritual, religious and political identity was shaped and in which it created national and universal cultural assets and bequeathed the eternal Book of Books to the entire world.

At the same time, it is important to remember that the rights of the Jewish people to the land of Israel were also recognized in international documents; both in the November 2, 1917 Balfour Declaration and in the League of Nations Mandate, granted to the British. Thus, universal legitimacy was granted to the historic connection between the Jewish people and the Land of Israel and to the Jewish people’s right to reestablish its national home.

Unfortunately, the Jewish people themselves, or at least large segments of it, once again fail to believe in the vision of the founders of the Jewish state. Led by phony elites, which are manifest in the central governmental institutions, the Supreme Court, the State Attorney’s office, at the upper echelon of elected officials or at central junctions of the media and the cultural world, decisions are made, which, for all intents and purposes, deny the very right of the Jewish people to the Land of Israel.

Thus the Supreme Court decisions validate the baseless thesis that the territories conquered in the Six-Day War are subject to the early nineteenth century Hague Regulations and the Geneva Convention because those territories are occupied by the State of Israel in a “belligerent occupation”. Those decisions, adopted with the agreement of the Office of the State Attorney, first and foremost suffer, obviously, from moral flaws as they ignore the fact that there is no difference, legal or otherwise, between the territories conquered in 1948 during the war of Independence and those conquered 19 years later.

The Arabs have not relinquished one or the other – however, ironically, they receive legal support for their claims from the Supreme Court of the Jewish state.

It is unfortunate that many Jews do not believe in their ability to sustain the national home of the Jewish people in the Land of Israel. The legal system and all of its subsidiaries has mobilized, not for the first time, in support of the Prime Minister’s delusional course of action. The Attorney General has already initiated “special” courts for the settlers in the true Bolshevik tradition. Blatantly anti-democratic actions are being undertaken in every corner of our public life. The Prime Minister’s office acts as if it owns the country. Cronies are appointed to the most prominent positions. Anyone who doesn’t fall into line – is dismissed in shame.

If what is happening now is not stopped – and it is hard to envision any public force able to stop what is happening – the fate of the State of Israel will be bitter indeed. The vision of its prophets and founders is liable to collapse all at once.
Haim Misgav

The declaration of the establishment of the State of Israel was anchored constitutionally in the Basic Law: Human Dignity and Freedom. Ever since, it was determined, basic human rights must be founded upon recognition of the worth of man, the sanctity of his life and upon his existence as a free man, and all these must be fulfilled in the spirit of the principles appearing in the Jewish state’s Declaration of Independence.

One need not be a distinguished legal scholar in order to understand that this document grants clear preference to Jews. The Jewish state is supposed to be the national home of the Jewish people – exclusively. Its gates will be opened wide before Jews alone. The borders of the Jewish state were not determined in the Declaration of Independence nor were the borders of the Land of Israel, as all that mattered to the founders of the State of Israel was to emphasize that the Land of Israel was from time immemorial the homeland of the Jewish people in which its spiritual, religious and political identity was shaped and in which it created national and universal cultural assets and bequeathed the eternal Book of Books to the entire world.

At the same time, it is important to remember that the rights of the Jewish people to the land of Israel were also recognized in international documents; both in the November 2, 1917 Balfour Declaration and in the League of Nations Mandate, granted to the British. Thus, universal legitimacy was granted to the historic connection between the Jewish people and the Land of Israel and to the Jewish people’s right to reestablish its national home.

Unfortunately, the Jewish people themselves, or at least large segments of it, once again fail to believe in the vision of the founders of the Jewish state. Led by phony elites, which are manifest in the central governmental institutions, the Supreme Court, the State Attorney’s office, at the upper echelon of elected officials or at central junctions of the media and the cultural world, decisions are made, which, for all intents and purposes, deny the very right of the Jewish people to the Land of Israel.

Thus the Supreme Court decisions validate the baseless thesis that the territories conquered in the Six-Day War are subject to the early nineteenth century Hague Regulations and the Geneva Convention because those territories are occupied by the State of Israel in a “belligerent occupation”. Those decisions, adopted with the agreement of the Office of the State Attorney, first and foremost suffer, obviously, from moral flaws as they ignore the fact that there is no difference, legal or otherwise, between the territories conquered in 1948 during the war of Independence and those conquered 19 years later.

The Arabs have not relinquished one or the other – however, ironically, they receive legal support for their claims from the Supreme Court of the Jewish state.

It is unfortunate that many Jews do not believe in their ability to sustain the national home of the Jewish people in the Land of Israel. The legal system and all of its subsidiaries has mobilized, not for the first time, in support of the Prime Minister’s delusional course of action. The Attorney General has already initiated “special” courts for the settlers in the true Bolshevik tradition. Blatantly anti-democratic actions are being undertaken in every corner of our public life. The Prime Minister’s office acts as if it owns the country. Cronies are appointed to the most prominent positions. Anyone who doesn’t fall into line – is dismissed in shame.

If what is happening now is not stopped – and it is hard to envision any public force able to stop what is happening – the fate of the State of Israel will be bitter indeed. The vision of its prophets and founders is liable to collapse all at once.


--Dr. Haim Misgav is an attorney and a lecturer at the Netanya Academic College as well as at Bar Ilan University. His book, Conversations with Yitzhak Shamir, is available here:



NATIV  ■ Volume Eighteen  ■ No. 3 (104)  ■  May 2005 ■ Iyar 5765 ■ Ariel Center for Policy Research

A Monkey Wrench In The Works – The Supreme Court Vs. The Declaration Of Independence

Second-chance holiday by Rabbi Shlomo Riskin

Shabbat Beha'alotcha 5772
Bamidbar (Numbers) 8:1-12:16
June 8, 2012

'In the second month [Iyar] on the afternoon of the fourteenth day, he shall prepare it [the second Passover Sacrifice]; and he shall eat it with matzot and bitter herbs' (Numbers 9:11) 

One of the many injunctions in this week’s portion is that of Pessah Sheni – “second Passover” – a “second chance” for anyone who was ritually impure on Passover to bring the festival sacrifice and eat it four weeks later. At this time, though there would be no festival and no prohibition of hametz (leaven) one could partake in this delayed Passover sacrificial meal with matza and bitter herbs.

Although the analogy is not completely apt, this strange combination of Passover, hametz and matza sparked within me some significant childhood memories which may contain important lessons regarding our attitude toward different kinds of “religious” observances.

Throughout his life, my paternal grandfather, Shmuel, was a communist. In Czarist Belorussia, he organized the workers in his father’s factory to protest against their boss. In 1906 he escaped from Siberia to New York and opened a woodworking business, which he handed over to the workers as soon as it became profitable. He was a Yiddishist – an atheist who wrote a regular column for the Freiheit (the New York Yiddish communist newspaper) – and he truly believed that “religion was the opium of the masses.”

When I was about three years old, he crafted for me a miniature “stool and table” set as a special gift; it remains in our family until this very day. He then asked me to try to place my fingers in the manner of the kohanim during the priestly benediction; when I did it successfully, he kissed me on the forehead and admonished me: “Remember, we are kohanim, Jewish aristocracy. Always be a proud Jew.”

As he left the house, I remember asking my mother what “Jew” and “aristocracy” meant.

Another childhood memory is of a train ride we took together from Bedford-Stuyvesant, where I lived, to Kings Highway, where he lived. Two elderly hassidim boarded the train and sat directly opposite us; three neighborhood “toughs” began taunting the hassidim and pulling at their beards.

My grandfather interrupted his conversation with me and looked intently at the drama unfolding in front of us. As soon as the train came to a stop, he lunged forward, grabbed the three hoodlums, and literally threw them out of the compartment. Trembling with fear, as the doors closed with the toughs outside, I asked my grandfather, “Why did you protect them? You aren’t even religious.”

Nonchalantly, he responded, “They are part of our Jewish family. And you must always protect the underdog.

That’s what Judaism teaches.”

And now the point of my reminiscences. In the Brooklyn of my childhood, there were two Passover Sedarim; the first we celebrated at the home of my religious maternal grandmother, and the second with my communist grandfather. On his dining room wall hung two pictures, one of Franklin Delano Roosevelt (who he thought was bringing communism to America) and the other of Joseph Stalin.

On the beautifully set table were all the accouterments – matza, maror (bitter herbs), haroset, the egg and the shank bone – but on the side were fresh rolls for family members who preferred pumpernickel to the “bread of affliction.” We read from the Haggada and my grandfather read passages from Marx, Engels and Shalom Aleichem about communist idealism and our obligations to the poor. For an 11-year-old who adored his intellectual and idealistic grandfather, there seemed to be no contradiction between the different foods and the various and variegated readings.

When I came upon the fascinating law of Pessah Sheni, the “second chance” Passover sacrifice that features the roasted meat, the matza, maror and haroset together with the hametz and without the usual festival prohibitions, this was the closest thing I could imagine to my grandfather’s Seder. An evening that featured the “peoplehood” and familial aspects of a celebration which taught us to identify with the slave, the stranger, the downtrodden, but without fealty to God who placed restrictions upon our diet and our activities. My grandfather was “far away” from the traditional definitions of observance; he was even “defiled by death” – the spiritual death of communism that had captivated his intellectual world like an evil, seductive slave woman (Rav A.Y. Kook, Iggarot R’eya 137).

Such a Seder has no staying power; to the best of my knowledge, none of my Riskin cousins have Jewish spouses or attend Passover Sedarim. By the end of his life, my grandfather himself understood this. In our last discussion before his fatal heart attack, while reclining on the bed of a Turkish bath, he told me of his great disillusionment with communism after reading of Stalin’s anti-Semitic plots against Jewish doctors and Yiddish writers of the Soviet Union.

“I gave up too much too soon for a false god. I yearn for the Sabbaths of my parents’ home. I now understand that all of communist idealism is expressed in the words of our Prophets and experienced in the Passover Seder. You are following the right path…”

============================================================

Rabbi Shlomo Riskin is the founder and chancellor of Ohr Torah Stone Colleges and Graduate Programs, including the Center for Jewish & Christian Understanding and Cooperation (http://www.cjcuc.org) and chief rabbi of the Israeli city of Efrat.

Media: It’s about Iran and the Arabs… Mofaz: It’s about the Jews!

So, Benjamin Netanyahu and Shaul Mofaz reached an agreement that saved the country hundreds of millions of NIS, saved us all from a needless election campaign, and put us exactly where we would have been after the dust and election stickers were cleared (give or take a dozen or so coalition members and sans the new stock of celebrity politicians – but don’t you worry, they will be here soon enough).

What fascinates me in all this is not the fact that we are not going to elections. If you read what I posted Sunday and stated on the radio this week and last – THAT is no shocker. What is a shock and really fascinating is how little the media and pundits think of the all-new and powerful Mofaz. Fact is that they think so little of him that they are completely ignoring his entire statement in the Knesset from 02:30 this morning.

Big mistake.

Shaul Mofaz made it abundantly clear that his singular motivation, his overriding goal in making this deal with Netanyahu is election reform. All the rest is gravy. He repeated himself over and over and yet - nada! It’s all about Iran and the Arabs they continue to clamber and claim - and Mofaz says no! It’s all about the Jews! It’s about how decisions are made in the Jewish State!

Amazing!

I tend to believe the man. I served under him during Operation Defensive Shield ten years ago and learned that he is no dummy. He is also no political novice. He maneuvered cleverly for the past few years and ultimately took control of his party. Rather than crash and burn in a futile election cycle he made peace with his rival so that the two of them can figure out how to stay in power 18 months from now.

Mofaz listed the four major issues on the table right now and then, over and over, repeated and reiterated that election reform was job one! He went as far as to state that if that is all this coalition of 94 achieves in the next 18 months – it would still be worth it! He took no jobs; he asked for no positions; he didn’t even ask to get rid of Ehud Barak at this point. All he is looking for is a way to use the next 18 months to save his own political career via a new election system. Works for me said Bibi! Let’s give it a try!

Will they succeed? G-d only knows. But together they are much stronger than each of them on their own. Since no real issues separate the two, only political enmity and personal ego, they may find a key that works – or at least gives them both a better shot at keeping the rest of the pack at bay - on that agenda they can agree as well.

What leads me to this conclusion? Just listen to the man! He says so straight and honest and to the cameras. He explains this motivation in clear words that cannot be misinterpreted.

So why do the pundits and the media choose to ignore him? Because he pulled a fast one and did the unexpected – political pundits who make up much of our news cycle and information don’t like that. They don’t like surprises and they don’t like being woken up at 02:30 in the morning to be told that their headlines and their fancily concocted Op-Eds are no longer valid. It happened with the Netanyahu victory over Peres in 1996 and it happened again last night. The guys who were shown up in 1996 still use every waking moment to try and punish him for that.

Professor Amnon Rubinstein, former Minister of Education representing the fringe-left, anti-Zionist yet ultra-honest Meretz party, went to sleep early that night in 1996 and awoke to what he called “a nightmare.” Yet, honest man that he is, he is the only Israeli pundit to tell the people the truth this morning. In a guest blog post on the Hebrew Walla site Rubinstein calls the coalition “shaky” and “short-lived” - this blogger agrees on both counts. He also points out that the one bright and shiny spot in this agreement is the off-chance that they will in fact focus on what Mofaz said they will focus – election reform.

Also interesting to note who stopped the presses and who didn’t. Center-left leaning Yediot Achronot and center right-leaning Israel HaYom stopped the presses, trashed the old paper and produced a new one. Left-leaning Ma’ariv and the hard-left agenda setter Ha’aretz both chose to stick to the “Supreme Court evicts Jews” headline. On which side of the political fallout do each of these papers fall? Who stands to gain? Who stands to lose?

“All politics are local,” said the great US speaker Tip O'Neill. In Israel, since even G-d is a local call, all politics are actually party politics and all party politics boil down to personal politics

Watch this pair closely my friends. Some of us are not going to like what we see.

About the Author: IDF Lt. Col. (Res.) Mike Cohen, PhD is the editor of “Zionism, Post-Zionism & The Arab Problem” (Hebrew: 2011 Gefen Publishers, Jerusalem; English: 2012 Professors for A Safe Israel & Westbow Press) and the first “Traveling Scholar” appointed by Rabbi Shlomo Riskin for his Center for Jewish & Christian Understanding & Cooperation, a member of the Ohr Torah Stone Educational System in Efrat, Israel. His website is: drmikecohen.info

Elections in 2012? Not So Fast Jose…

YERUSHALAYIM, ISRAEL: Very few people know the real reason Israel jumped from preparations for another summer of disruptive street demonstrations by bored young people who want free housing in the center of Tel Aviv to mourning the prime minister’s father to a vicious election campaign all in less than 24 hours.

I for one am not convinced that we are in a true election cycle just yet and no – I’m not claiming to be one of those in the know.

What I am advocating is that we all take a deep breath and look reality in the face.

Many of the MK’s supposedly voting to go to elections will not be reelected. Many of those sitting in government will not be in the next government. Since we know that the majority (if not all) of the people in those seats care first and foremost for numero uno, why are they so willing to suddenly shorten their term in office? I contend that they are not doing this willingly – something else is motivating the move.

We have to take a good hard look at the goings on that started late last week and continue “with fervor” at this moment as the “campaign” kicks off.

There are a number of factors that may have caused the “need” for elections – some personal, some political, some visible and yet others less visible. More convincing, to my mind, are the reasons NOT to go to elections.

Let’s take a look at some arguments – shall we?

1. Several seemingly powerful people were looking at the upcoming summer and wondering where it was leading them on a personal and party level. To name but a few:

·         Avigdor Lieberman (Minister of Foreign Affairs, head of secular Zionist Yisrael Beiteinu party) is fearful that his indictment will be upheld and that he will have to face a trial on fraud and racketeering charges;

·         Eli Yishai (Minister of Interior Affairs, political leader of Sephardic religious Shas party) is spooked by the possibility of the return of Aryeh Deri, the powerful leader of Shas past who has completed his court-ordered political exile and is vying for a return to power;

·         Shaul Mofaz (leader of the opposition and the Kadima party, former Chief of Staff and Minister of Defense) is interested in solidifying his role at the head of Ariel Sharon’s creation (Kadima) and in “cleaning house” of any memories of Ehud Olmert and Tzippy Livni.

·         Ehud Barak, the defense minister and leader of the Atzmauth faction (with no party, or electoral power behind them) is holding on to a tenuous positions as the prime minister’s left-leaning fig-leaf and designated “settler” basher. 

2. Yair Lapid, the bright star of the moment, starts putting together his own political grouping, flirting with Tzippy Livni who, despite reports of her political demise, has yet to chirp her last political statement on the Israeli scene. Many truly powerful people, popular names in banking and industry are flirting with this new party as well (as we see by the way in every Israeli election cycle).

3. Former PM Ehud Olmert, former IDF Chief of Staff Gabi Ashkenazi, former Mossad director Meir Dagan and former Shaback director Yuval Diskin among others yapping away in public, voicing their personal opinions on Iran and the need to stop the bomb. This new epidemic of “formers” taking to the microphone and the media shook many in the Israeli establishment and caused an uproar that called the current leadership into question. Elections allow these statements to be used and abused by friend and foe alike and people such as Mofaz did not want to get stuck holding the cup for all of them.

4. Mitt Romney solidifying his place as the GOP nominee for president means that the race is on domestically in the United States. If elections take place in Israel while the American campaign is at its peak the current administration will not have the time, resources or energy to get involved in internal Israeli affairs – as happened to Netanyahu last time he faced off against Barak in 1999 – when then president Clinton sent money and advisors to help the Labor leader unseat the Likud one.

5. The Knesset calendar which includes the expiration of Tal Law and the need to legislate a more just and equal system of responsibilities, the budget (always a hot ticket item), and the Supreme Court’s insistence that it alone will decide where and how Jews will live in Israel, created many cracks in the society – cracks that are broadened by an election cycle but can also be temporarily fixed by a new coalition agreement.

There are many more and I can go on for a while, but I will stop here as I think the point has been made: personal issues, legal issues, court issues, budget, legislation, party politics, US elections AND Iran, all make for a good reason to shake things up, find new partners and make new agreements.

BUT! And here is the big one – in Israel one does not have to go to elections in order to shake up the government infrastructure. As we saw when Barak was having internal problems as leader of Labor, all one has to do is “reshuffle” the seats, add some chairs, give more people a personal body guard, a bigger car, a budget and a title, and walla! We have a new coalition agreement and a new government.

Will some bolt if this is done – oh yes – no question there will be threats. But think of it this way – if Netanyahu trades up – say brings in Mofaz and his 28 seats – as a stay against a move by Lieberman (15 seats) or Shas (11 seats) – even if both bolt (which they won’t) – he still has a net gain of two, and less headache from a potentially strong opposition.

Livni has already quit the Knesset and by law has to be reelected to come back, Deri is not in until he finds (or founds) a political home and gets elected; Lapid is still an outsider along with his fancy partners at least until new elections are held; Lieberman is bringing in some heavy names such as Yair Shamir (son of former PM Yitzchak) and Ze’ev Jabotinsky (grandson of) to shore up his flank (and his party in case he has to resign); and Barak is political dust in the hands of Netanyahu. As Netanyahu learned this week – his biggest headache and gamble is within his own party ranks – all this does not add up to a PM who wants new elections.

I am not saying we are not going to elections – I am not saying we are. I am just saying – lets wait and see how the cards fall and (if and) when the election law is passed – then we can start the new party (or parties)…

My experienced political gut tells me we are in for a Netanyahu-Mofaz surprise…

Happy Re-Birth Day Israel!

By IDF LTC (Res.) Mike Cohen, PhD
April 25, 2012
drmikecohen.info

YERUSHALAYIM, ISRAEL: Jews the world over rejoice today as the modern miracle of Israel celebrates 64 years. There are those among us who would boycott her. There are those among us who would sanction her. There are those among us that would sing her praises all the while acting against her best interests. The question is – why?

On the right, there are those who are unhappy with the decisions of Israel’s leaders. Firing mid-level officers for doing their job after months and months and months of “showing restraint” and sending the police to drag Jews out of their homes while allowing massive illegal Arab building to continue unabated in the Galil and elsewhere does not help this cause.

On the left, there are those who are unhappy with the decisions of Israel’s leaders. Passing laws that legalize Jewish settlement in all parts of the Land of Israel, protecting Israel’s civilians with roadblocks and military might while holding hard-core murderers and terrorists in jail does not help this cause.

So who is the “true” supporter of Israel? Who has her best interest at heart? Which side is the right one and which is wrong?

In Israel, there are at least 24 hours a year where this question, for the most part, is put aside. These 24 hours are followed, with nary a second to breathe in between, with 24 more where again, for the most part, these questions are put aside.

Yom HaZikaron and Yom Ha’Atzmaut – the Day of Remembrance and the Day of Independence - find the vast plurality of Israel standing in unity. We unite as a people at the worst of times – and we also unite as a people at the best of times. We may argue the merits of this decision or that until our faces are blue – but if G-d forbid something horrible happens – or by the grace of G-d something great happens, suddenly, left and right unite.

Why? How is it that we can put aside our disagreements, be they petty or of major consequence, at our moments of greatest emotion? Would it not be logical that when emotions are highest and the adrenaline is pumping hardest – we would become more ornery? More upset with each other? More divisive?

No. This is not the Jewish way and it never has been.

We are a people of extremes. We have always been a people of extremes. We have extreme intellectual faculties, extreme opinions, extreme rules, extreme ideas, extreme dreams and extreme ideas. (Please don’t get me started on the extreme levels of pressure we put on ourselves and our children and the infamously extreme levels of Jewish guilt we all live with.)

We are also a people of extreme successes and failures. Just look at the world news – for every Jew winning a Nobel Prize in this discipline or that – a Jew is failing us all and going to jail for his/her crimes. For every victory in the field, there is a failure of command, leadership or political courage that causes us to beat ourselves up from the right, the left, and more often than not – from both. Yet, when faced with the news of each extreme success and each extreme failure – we put aside our differences and look at that person as a brother, a sister, a member of the tribe, for better or for worse – as a fellow Jew.

In his seminal 1956 address Kol Dodi Dofek (The Voice of My Beloved is Knocking) the great Rav Yosef Ber Soloveitchik zt”l (The Rav) analyzed the miracles of Israel’s re-birth and found at least six knocks of HaShem at the doors of humanity. Each of these knocks, (military, political, educational, religious, sociological, communal) was unique but dependent. They may have been independent knocks but they were all very dependent on one another to be heard and acted upon. The changes that each knock of HaShem represented were in and of themselves extreme – and called for major changes in the global society and the Jewish one if they were to be heard and acted upon. The knocks of HaShem called for an unprecedented and extreme level of unity. The knocks called for an extreme level of hand holding and cooperation between diverse groups who traditionally did not get along.

A people of extremes, the survivors of extreme hate in Europe, Asia, Africa and in fact in America of that era too, were called by HaShem to hear Him knocking for extreme change, to come together in extreme unity and to help Him build an rejoice in an extreme miracle.

We Jews are an extremely tight knit family. Families fight and argue, yell and scream, rant and rave – especially when things are stable. But push a family into the corner, or provide it with reason for celebration – and, usually, family members they will come together in profound and extreme ways.

This is the simple answer to such a profound question. This is the reason why we can sing and dance together, cry together, mourn together, fight together, defend together, celebrate together and build together. We are a family, a family re-born in our home after 2,000 years of dealing on our own with our neighbors cruelty and brutality and our own despair at separation from each other.

We are a family of extremes, of diverse opinions and a multiplicity of priorities. Yet we are a family. We fight each other within like a family and we protect each other from outsiders like a family.

Let’s recognize the extreme miracle of Israel’s re-birth after 2,000 years.

Happy Re-Birth Day Israel! Welcome Home to the Family of HaShem!

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

IDF LTC (Res.) Mike Cohen, PhD is the first traveling scholar appointed by Rabbi Shlomo Riskin’s Center for Jewish & Christian Understanding & Cooperation, a member of the Ohr Torah Stone Educational System in Efrat, Israel. He is the editor of the recently published book Zionism, Post-Zionism & The Arab Problem (Hebrew: 2011 Gefen Publishers, Jerusalem; English: 2012 Professors Press & Westbow Press). His website is: drmikecohen.info

CJCUC Appoints Dr. Mike Cohen as its Traveling Scholar

CJCUC Appoints Dr. Mike Cohen as its Traveling Scholar

January 3, 2012

EFRAT/ISRAEL: With the mandate to assist and enhance the Center for Jewish-Christian Understanding and Cooperation’s (CJCUC) relations with the Christian communities in North America, Rabbi Shlomo Riskin has appointed Dr. Mike Cohen as the first “CJCUC Traveling Scholar.” Dr. Cohen has served as CJCUC’s Israel faculty member since the Center’s establishment in 2008. He has taken leave of his position at Bar-Ilan University’s Overseas Program in Israel to accept this appointment.

Since Rabbi Riskin’s appearances on Glenn Beck TV during the Restoring Courage events in Israel, the number of Christian clergy and leaders wishing to bring the Rabbi’s message of a Religion of Peace to their congregants has risen dramatically. “I am honored to serve Rabbi Riskin’s vision and help in a small way to facilitate a new dawn in relations between Christians and Jews,” Cohen said. “At a time when Israel appears to be isolated on the international stage, we have learned that Christians worldwide have come to be our stalwart supporters. It is imperative for both ancient biblical faith communities to join hands and bring a prayer of peace and friendship to the world.”

With over two decades of experience in the development of relationships between Christian and Jews, as a political and security strategist, and a veteran officer in Israel’s elite counter-terrorism forces, Dr. Cohen “brings a unique perspective about what the Restoration of Zion means in biblical, theological and modern day terms,” Rabbi Riskin remarked. During Israel’s Operation Defensive Shield in 2002, Dr. Cohen was assigned as an IDF reserve officer to the National Emergency Response & Negotiation Team in Bethlehem tasked with handling the multifaceted and potentially explosive crisis surrounding the Church of the Nativity’s seizure by terrorists.

“Dr. Cohen and I are friends from our days at the Israeli Consulate in New York, where we both served in different ministries fostering relationships between Israel and the North American Christian communities,” CJCUC’s Executive Director David Nekrutman said. He added, “This appointment gives CJCUC a huge opportunity to expand our network into Asia and Europe, while Dr. Cohen continues to advance the relations in North America that I have developed over the last four years.”

Cohen is a graduate of Yeshiva University and the City University of New York. He is the editor of Ordinary People Extraordinary Spirit and is now working on a project that will highlight the non-Jewish contributions to the rebirth of the Jewish State. To book Dr. Cohen at your place of worship, please contact CJCUC at 516-882-3220.

In U.S., Hopes for Arab-Israeli Peace Still Low, but Up Slightly

In U.S., Hopes for Arab-Israeli Peace Still Low, but Up Slightly

Eli E. Hertz: Proximity Talks (1)

"The truth may not always win, but it is always right!" - Eli E. Hertz


Palestinian Arab aggression against the territorial integrity and political independence of Israel cannot and should not be rewarded.


May 24, 2010 | Eli E. Hertz

Professor, Judge Schwebel, the former President of the International Court of Justice (ICJ) explains why Israel has the better title in the territory of what was Palestine, including the whole of Jerusalem:

"(a) a state [Israel] acting in lawful exercise of its right of self-defense may seize and occupy foreign territory as long as such seizure and occupation are necessary to its self-defense;

"(b) as a condition of its withdrawal from such territory, that State may require the institution of security measures reasonably designed to ensure that that territory shall not again be used to mount a threat or use of force against it of such a nature as to justify exercise of self-defense;

"(c) Where the prior holder of territory had seized that territory unlawfully [Jordan]; the state which subsequently takes that territory in the lawful exercise of self-defense [Israel] has, against that prior holder, better title.

"As between Israel, acting defensively in 1948 and 1967, on the one hand, and her Arab neighbors, acting aggressively, in 1948 and 1967, on the other, Israel has the better title in the territory of what was Palestine, including the whole of Jerusalem."

http://www.mythsandfacts.com/