Israeli Archaeologists Unearth 2,000-Year-Old Bath

Jerusalem – An impressive ritual bath (miqve) from the end of the Second Temple period was recently uncovered in archaeological excavations the Israel Antiquities Authority is carrying out in the Western Wall tunnels, in cooperation with the Western Wall Heritage Foundation.

The miqve was discovered inside the western hall of a splendid structure that is located just c. 15 feet from the Western Wall. Parts of the building were discovered in the past and the Israel Antiquities Authority is currently exposing another one of the three halls inside it. It is one of the most magnificent structures from the Second Temple period ever to be uncovered.

The edifice is built of very delicately dressed ashlar stones and the architectural decoration in it is of the highest quality. From an architectural and artistic standpoint there are similarities between this structure and the three magnificent compounds that King Herod built on the Temple Mount, in the Cave of the Patriarchs and at Allonei Mamre, and from which we can conclude the great significance that this building had in the Second Temple period.

In his book The War of the Jews, Josephus Flavius writes there was a government administrative center that was situated at the foot of the Temple. Among the buildings he points out in this region were the council house and the “Xistus”- the ashlar bureau. According to the Talmud it was in this bureau that the Sanhedrin – the Jewish high court at the time of the Second Temple – would convene. It may be that the superb structure the

Israel Antiquities Authority is presently uncovering belonged to one of these two buildings.

According to archaeologist Alexander Onn, director of the excavation on behalf of the Israel Antiquities Authority, “It is interesting to see that in the middle of the first century CE they began making changes in this magnificent structure – at that time it was no longer used as a government administrative building and a large miqve was installed inside its western hall where there were c. 11 steps that descend to the immersion pool. It seems that the city of Jerusalem grew in this period and it became necessary to provide for the increased ritual bathing needs of the pilgrims who came to the Temple in large numbers, especially during the three pilgrimage festivals (Shlosha Regalim). Immersing oneself in the miqve and maintaining ritual purity were an inseparable part of the Jewish way of life in this period, and miqve’ot were absolutely essential, especially in the region of the Temple.”

The Western Wall Heritage Foundation is mandated to uncover the Jewish people’s past to the Temple Mount and the Western Wall. The miqve provides further evidence of the deep ties the Jewish people have with Jerusalem and the Temple.

Hamas Continues Rocket Strikes On Israel

Jerusalem – Israeli Military sources that the Hamas regime in Gaza continues to aid terrorists who launch missile, mortar and rocket attacks Israel.

“Hamas wants to show that it is a major player and that it can torpedo any agreement,” an Israeli military source said.

The Hamas regime has launched 261 aerial attacks on southern Israel since the January 18 cease fire

The fact that no one has been killed in these attacks has resulted in nearly no press coverage of the fact that Israel’s southern region remains on high alert.

On Monday, Hamas fired several times into Israel. The Israeli military responded with air force strikes on three suspected Palestinian weapons tunnels in the southern Gaza town of Rafah, which borders Egypt.

In addition, Hamas has been targeting Israeli military deployment along the Gaza security fence

On Tuesday, Israeli tanks fired at two Palestinians who were planting bombs along the security fence around the Gaza Strip.

The Hamas-aligned Popular Resistance Committee and the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine took credit for the attempt to plant the bombs, identifying the two dead Palestinian combatants as Mahmoud Nazir and Abdul Al Silawai. The statement said Nazir and Al Silawai were responsible for firing three rockets into Israel on Aug. 24.”The soldiers on the scene fired tank shells and mortar fire, and identified hitting the suspects,” the statement said.

Meanwhile, European nationals in Israel have filed suit against the EU for relaying hundreds of millions of euros to the Gaza Strip. The 15 plaintiffs said the Hamas and Palestinian militia attacks on their homes in Israel’s Negev Desert violated the European Treaty, which obligated the protection of EU nationals regardless of their residence.

“The European Union gives hundreds of millions of euros every year to aid groups in Gaza,” Mordechai Tzivin, the attorney for the plaintiffs, said. “This money cannot be allowed to target European citizens.”

Tzivin said the EU must reply to the eight-page suit by 14 Britons and an Italian national, submitted in August 2009. He said that unless the European Commission accedes to the demands of the plaintiffs the suit would be filed in the Court of Justice of the European Communities in Luxembourg.

In 2008, the EU relayed 55.6 million euro in aid to the Gaza Strip. EU states have pledged separately more than 41 million euro in additional funds to Gaza.

The European plaintiffs live near the Gaza Strip and their communities have come under missile fire over the last five years.

Hosni Loses UNESCO Secretary General Post

Egyptian Culture Minister Hosni Farouk reacts as he returns for a hearing following a break at the UNESCO headquarters on Sept. 17 in Paris. Mr. Hosni, who is campaigning to be the next head of the U.N. office that promotes cultural diversity, outraged many Jews with his comments in April 2008 vowing to burn any Israeli books found in Egypt’s famed Library of Alexandria. (Jacques Brinon/Associated Press)

Egyptian Culture Minister Farouk Hosni, who was a candidate for secretary general of UNESCO, lost the sought-after post to former Bulgarian Foreign Minister Irina Bokova. Heavy lobbying against Mr. Hosni continued until the last moment.

Mr. Hosni earned the enmity of Jews around the world when he recently promised to burn Hebrew books and boasted that he would be the last Egyptian to visit Israel.

Mr. Hosni forbid Egyptian artists to display their works in Tel Aviv and supported the denunciation of journalists who visited Israel and returned to Cairo with the conclusion that “the monster is not so terrible.”

In addition, Hosni opposed translation of Hebrew literature in Egypt, and refused to open to the Jews the records of the Jewish communities in Egypt, for fear that they would lead to property lawsuits. More than 100,000 Jews were expelled from Egypt during the 1948, 1956 and 1967 wars, without being able to sell their property and without being able to take most possessions with them, while Egyptian Jewish assets in Egyptian banks have been frozen.

<!–
AdSys ad not found for news/world:instory –>

Turkey, Syria To Cooperate

After decades of enmity, Syria and Turkey have launched a strategic cooperation agreement. This month, the two neighbors signed an agreement meant that included cooperation in the defense and military sectors. The accord also saw the removal of restrictions along the border between Syria and Turkey.

“The brotherhood that exists between our people has been lifted to the political level with joint Cabinet meetings to be held between our two governments,” Turkish Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu said. Officials said the government of Turkish Prime Minister Recep Erdogan regarded Syria as part of Ankara’s “zero problems with neighbors” policy. They said Ankara and Damascus have decided to establish what was termed a high-level strategic cooperation panel.

“Turkey is your second country and the people of Turkey have opened their arms to welcome you without the need for a visa,” Davutoglu said.

At a joint news conference on Sept. 17, Davutoglu and his Syrian counterpart, Walid Mualem, agreed to lift customs on trade between the two countries. They said trucks that shuttle between Syrian and Turkey would be exempt from taxes.

<!–
AdSys ad not found for news/world:instory –>

“This is the biggest demonstration of cooperation, solidarity and mutual trust,” Mualem said.

However, Bulent Alireza, a senior researcher at the Washington-based Center for Strategic and International Studies commented that “the increasingly close relationship with Damascus, combined with the recent strains in the relationship with Tel Aviv, seems certain to raise additional questions about a possible change of direction in Turkish foreign policy in the Middle East.”

In 2009, Syria and Turkey launched its first military exercise. The exercise took place along the border.

The analysts said the Turkish military has not been enthusiastic over cooperation with Syria. Syria has long been seen by the Turkish military as a haven for the Kurdish Workers Party, which has been conducting a long time insurgency operation against the Turkish government.

Some senior Turkish officials said Syria has drafted plans to offer asylum to Kurdish Workers Party operatives. They said the Syrian offer, praised by neighboring Turkey, would demand that the PKK agents renounce violence and surrender their weapons.

“Our fight against the terrorist organization would be affected a great deal if some of these Syrians quit the organization and climb down the mountain,” Turkish Chief of Staff Gen. Ilker Basbug said.

In a briefing on Sept. 22, Basbug said the PKK contained an estimated 1,500 Syrian fighters, or more than one-third of the total insurgency force. He said Syrian members of the PKK were based in Iraq’s Kandil mountains.

The Syrian offer was announced by President Bashar Assad in mid-September. Assad said Syrian members of PKK could be allowed to return home if they renounce membership in the insurgency group.

“Do not expect that it will be all over soon,” Basbug said. “There are no magical formulas.”

Venezuela Becomes Key Link For Iran Policy

Iran has been using Venezuela to help import and finance weapons denied by the international community.

In an address to the Brookings Institution on Sept. 8, Manhattan District Attorney Robert Morgenthau, who has investigated Iran’s financial network and fronts, said Teheran was employing Venezuela’s banking network to evade United Nations Security Council sanctions. He said Venezuela, which was not under international sanctions, was helping Iran procure material and components for Teheran’s nuclear weapons program. Venezuela was reported to have at least 50,000 tons of uranium ore reserves”

“Generally speaking, nobody is focused sufficiently on the threat of the Iran-Venezuela connection,” Mr. Morgenthau said, adding that “in the area of mineral exploration there is speculation that Venezuela could be mining uranium for Iran.”

In return, Caracas has sought Iran’s help to make Venezuela a nuclear power in South America. In 2008, Iran opened a subsidiary of the state-owned Export Development Bank of Iran in Caracas, which months later came under U.S. sanctions. The Iranian bank in Caracas was deemed as having funneled money to Iran’s nuclear program.

“Iran and Venezuela are beyond the courting phase,” Morgenthau said. “We know they are creating a cozy financial, political, and military partnership, and that both countries have strong ties to Hezbollah and Hamas. Now is the time for policies and actions in order to ensure that the partnership produces no poisonous fruit.”

Iran and Venezuela have signed a series of cooperation agreements, including in the areas of defense, energy, finance and joint technology development. In April 2008, Venezuela and Iran signed a memorandum of understanding that stipulated full military support and cooperation. Since at least 2006, Iranian military advisers have been embedded with Venezuelan Army and were establishing weapons factories in remote areas of the country. Two years later, Turkey detained an Iranian ship bound for Venezuela that contained laboratory equipment capable of producing explosives.

“The lack of infrastructure [in Venezuela] is offset by what experts believe to be ideal geographic locations for the illicit production of weapons,” Mr. Morgenthau said. “The mysterious manufacturing plants, controlled by Iran, deep in the interior of Venezuela, give even greater concern.”

Palestinian Prime Minister Belies Moderate Image

Palestinian prime minister Salam Fayad’s plan for a Palestinian State was received with adulation and praise at the United Nations this past week in New York. Indeed, throughout the month of August, 2009, Palestinian National Authority Prime Minister Salam Fayad met with more than fifty members of the US Senate and US House of Representatives and made a fine impression on each and every one of them, from both sides of the aisle.

In press conferences held by almost democratic and republican congress people after meeting the American educated Fayad, the consistent impression that they conveyed was that Mr. Fayad represented a “moderate voice of leadership” for a future Palestinian state that could live alongside the state of Israel.

A group of Israeli peace groups received and distributed the English version of a position paper for a future Palestinian state that Mr. Fayad submitted this week to the UN, The EU, The American government and the Russian government

However, Fayad’s paper “Ending the Occupation, Establishing the State: Program of the Thirteenth Government – August 2009” would seem to belie Fayad’s image as a “moderate voice of leadership”

<!–
AdSys ad not found for commentary/op-eds:instory –>

Available on the net at:

http://www.geneva-accord.org/images/Offical%20Paper%20-%20Program%20of%20the%20Thirteenth%20Government,%20August%202009.pdf

The preface to Fayad’s paper introduces a Palestinian state that will strive for “peace, security and stability in our region on the Palestinian territory occupied in 1967, with East Jerusalem as its capital”.

Yet Fayad’s 38 page position paper reads like a declaration of war, not of peace.

Fayad asserts that “Jerusalem” will be the Palestinian capital of the Palestinian state – not East Jerusalem.

In case anyone was wondering if Fayad had made a typographical error by not mentioning “east” Jerusalem as the capital of a future Palestinian state, Fayad repeats – ten times – that he means Jerusalem, all of Jerusalem. Fayad leaves nothing to the imagination, and writes that the Palstininian stat will ” Protect Jerusalem as the eternal capital of the Palestinian state”, because Fayad asserts that “Jerusalem is our people’s religious, cultural, economic and political center. It is the Flower of Cities and Capital of Capitals. It cannot be anything but the eternal capital of the future Palestinian state. Jerusalem”

Fayad goes on to claim that Jerusalem “is under threat” and that ” the occupying authority is implementing a systematic plan to alter the city’s landmarks and its geographical and demographic character in order to forcibly create facts on the ground, ultimately separating it from its Palestinian surroundings and eradicating its Arab Palestinian heritage”.

Fayad further claims that “Palestinian life in Jerusalem is under daily attack through systematic violations perpetrated by the occupation regime” and that “It is the right and the duty of all Palestinians to protect their land, reject the occupation and defy its measures”, adding that the Palestinian state “bears special responsibility for nurturing our people’s ability to persevere and protect their homeland”.

Fayad ads that the Palstinian government will maintain its “unreserved commitment to defending the Arab character and status of Jerusalem…. The Government will continue to do all that is possible to achieve this goal. The Government will work with all organizations to preserve the landmarks of Jerusalem and its Arab Palestinian heritage, develop the city, and secure its contiguity with its Palestinian surroundings”.

Fayad frames Jerusalem as an illegal settlement, postulating that “the occupying authority is pursuing its intensive settlement policy in and around Jerusalem…The occupation regime has shut down our national institutions, neglected the development of Palestinian life, continued to demolish and evacuate Palestinian homes, and restricted access to sacred Christian and Islamic sites”

Fayad goes so far as to present a practical plan to Arabize Jerusalem:

Maintaining Jerusalem as a top priority on the Government’s agenda and·” highlighting its predicament in the media. Launching a programs to promote the steadfastness of Jerusalemites, including: Strengthen Palestinian institutions in Jerusalem, providing financial support to help them deliver services to citizens”.

Fayad reassures his readers that a future Palestinian state would not be satisfied with Jerusalem, the west bank and Gaza as the national home for Palestinians, and says that the Palestinian government will continue to advocate for “Palestinian refugees in accordance with relevant international resolutions, and UN General Assembly Resolution 194 in particular”, which mandates that Palestinian refugees and their descendents have a right to return to the homes and villages that Palestinians left during the 1948 war and its aftermath.

Fayad reminds Palestinians that “the refugee issue will remain under the jurisdiction of the PLO, through its Department of Refugees’ Affairs…in a manner that does not exempt the United Nations Relief and Works Agency (UNRWA) from its responsibilities”

In the view of Fayad, UNRWA will therefore continue to confine Palestinian refugees a their descendents to the indignity of refugee camps, under the premise and promise of the “right of return”.

Meanwhile, Fayad expresses full support for Palestinians who have been convicted of murder and attempted murder, saying that “the state also has an enduring obligation to care and provide for the martyrs, prisoners, orphans and all those harmed in the Palestinian struggle for independence”.

Fayad simply cannot understand why Palestinians convicted of capital crimes should be jailed.

Fayad proclaims that “the continued detention of thousands of Palestinian detainees and prisoners in Israeli prisons and detention camps in violation of international law and basic human rights, is of great concern to all Palestinians” and declares that “Securing the freedom of all these heroic prisoners is an utmost Palestinian priority and it is a fundamental duty all Palestinians feel to honor their great sacrifices and end their suffering” and demands the “freedom of all Palestinian detainees and prisoners and will continue to strive to secure their liberty”.

Fayad also asserts that the PLO and have signed “all provisions of agreements signed with Israel”, yet forgets to mention that the PLO never ratified the signed agreements with Israel.

On October 6, 1993, PLO chairman Arafat could not get a quorum for the PLO executive to ratify the Oslo accords that Arafat had signed with Rabin on the White House lawn.

On April 24, 1996, the Palestinian National Council would not cancel the PLO covenant and has never ratified the PLO covenant, despite the PLO commitment to do so as an integral part of the Oslo accord. The PLO Covenant has yet to be cancelled.

Fayad’s view of justice is well articulated in this piece when he states that “All Palestinians are equal before the law”.

Anyone who is not a Palestinian is therefore not equal.

Fayad declares that the Palestinian State will be an Islamic state and “Promote awareness and understanding of the Islamic religion and culture and disseminate the concept of tolerance in the religion through developing and implementing programs of Shari’a education as derived from the science of the Holy Qur’an and Prophet’s heritage”.

In sum, Fayad concludes with a demand for a Palestinian state in the next two years, along the parameters that he has outlined, with an Palestinian state that will have all of Jerusalem as its capital, in an Islamic Sharia state that will campaign for all convicts to be freed, for all refugees to return to the homes and villages that they left in 1948.

A voice of moderation?

It would be interesting to know if the peace groups that distributed Fayad’s working paper ever bothered to read it.

A Message of Humility for Yom Kippur

Just as God envelops Himself in a cloud of mystery and invites each individual to penetrate it, so do we fashion our own clouds that prevent us from attaining closeness with God

The human clouds are formed by self-absorption.

What is the substance of the human clouds that hide God’s radiance?

1. For the politician, arrogance

2. For the investor, a rising or falling stock market

3. For the accountant, ways to avoid paying taxes

4. For the retiree, retention of the zest of youth

5. For the businessman, the pursuit of wealth

6. For the hostess, serving the perfect meal

7. For the grandparents, pride in their grandchildren

8. For the professor, a model class

Each one of us creates a cloud relative to our particular circumstances.

In and of themselves, these actions are noble, but they can form a cloud that separates us from God.

The cloud is thickest when we attribute our joys, our skills, our accomplishments, our accrued social honor and wealth to our own efforts, and we forget that there is a higher power that influences what we do and what we have. In short, when we look inward, instead of outward.

Rabbi Joseph Solveithick asked who has to destroy the cloud? Whose task is it to reveal God t o the world? Man in general and the Jewish people in particular. The text of Jewish mystical literature, the Kabbalah describes God as a King tied up in chains who cannot extricate Himself by his own efforts. It is we who have to unchain Him so that His revelation will be acknowledged by all. It is we who have to destroy the cloud that serves as a barrier between us and Him.

When God said to Avraham -“Go out of your land”, He meant, Now that you have discovered Me, you have to reveal Me to the world. “Go out into the world and tell them about Me”.

When a Jew reveals the essence of God, this is “zivug” -coupling, a unification of the divine and the human. It is a holy act.

The “kedushah” – holiness – spreads over the entire world and the individual is enriched in everything – thinking differently, acting differently, seeing differently, feeling differently, a release of tension, a sense of serenity.

In conclusion, Yom Kippur is the time when we become aware of the cloud surrounding God and the clouds that we have created that block our access to Him.

How do we remove these clouds? In three ways:

1. By becoming more conscious of the presence and assistance of God in everything we do.

2. By being thankful for His blessings,

3. And by being so self-aware as Jews that, in public and private, we sanctify God’s name – “Kiddush hashem” –by acting according to Judaism’s highest ethical and moral standards.

When Did Anti-Zionism Become An International Issue?

For more than 20 years after the establishment of the State of Israel, anti-Zionism was a regional phenomenon – a conflict between Arab and Jewish national movements. In the Soviet Union and in Eastern Europe, the Soviets exploited antisemitism for political purposes, but it was seldom part of international debate until after the Six-Day War in 1967.

By the end of the 1960s, and since 1975, anti-Zionism became international in scope. It first appeared in the universities in the West where the New Left, in cooperation with Arab student associations, attacked Israeli policy. 1

When the United Nations General Assembly passed Resolution 3379 on November 10, 1975, and declared “Zionism is a form of racism and racial discrimination,” it significantly expanded anti-Zionism into the sphere of international nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) and therefore into Third World countries. This was accomplished in collaboration between the Arabs and the Soviet Union that endowed anti-Zionism with legitimacy and official recognition.2

After the First World War, the Arabs expected Greater Syria – which included Palestine and Lebanon – to become a sovereign Arab empire. Instead, the French and the British divided the area into what the Arabs considered “irrationally carved out” entities that became the present-day states of Saudi Arabia, Syria, Trans-Jordan (later Jordan), Iraq, and Israel. The Arabs were outraged that a “non-Arab embryo state in Palestine” had been inserted into an area where it would never be accepted. They claimed that this shattered their dreams of unification and impeded their search for a common identity. 3

The fight against a Jewish homeland became an integral part of their struggle “for dignity and independence.” Israel’s existence, they claimed, “implied that not only a part of the Arab patrimony, but also parts of Islam, had been stolen. For a Moslem, there was no greater shame than for that to happen.” The only way to eliminate this deeply felt affront – this “symbol of everything that had dominated them in the past” – was to rid the area of “imperialist domination.” 4

Zionism was branded the enemy of the Arab national movement, but Arab governments use the Arab-Israeli conflict to divert attention from their own domestic, social and economic problems. If this were not a real concern, they claim, it would not resonate so strongly among the Arab masses. 5

Historian Bernard Lewis says Arab fixation with Israel “is the licensed grievance. In countries where people are becoming increasingly angry and frustrated at all the difficulties under which they live – the poverty, unemployment, oppression – having a grievance which they can express freely is an enormous psychological advantage.” 6

The Israeli-Arab conflict is the only local political grievance that can be openly discussed. If they were permitted freedom of speech, Lewis believes that the obsession with Israel would become far less important. Like most people, Arabs are concerned about their own priorities. For the Palestinian Arabs, who view themselves as permanent victims, the main issue is their struggle with Israel. If Arabs in other countries were permitted to focus on their own problems, they would do so. 7

For Arabs, the attempt to blame Western imperialism is nothing more than an excuse to attack Israel, historian Jacob Talmon asserted: “For decades the Arabs have been obsessed by memories of past glories and prophecies of future greatness, mocked by the injury and shame of having an alien and despised race injected into the nerve center of their promised pan-Arab empire, between its Asian and African halves, just at a time when the colonial powers had started their great retreat from their colonial possessions in Asia and Africa.” 8

To lessen their feelings of shame for losing every war against Israel, the Arabs attributed the success of the Jewish settlement and the Israeli military triumphs of 1948 and 1956 to Western imperialism. As the representative of the Great Powers, Israel became the Arabs’ scapegoat whenever they became frustrated in their attempt to transcend “centuries of social, economic, and cultural development, and catch up” with the West. 9

The crushing defeat of the Arabs in the 1967 Six-Day War shattered this fantasy and accentuated Arab humiliation, since the Israelis won without the backing of any imperialist nations. 10

At the same time, the Arabs persecuted their own Jewish residents. Jews were attacked in Yemen, Lebanon, Tunisia, and Morocco. Synagogues were burned and Jews were arrested and detained. In Damascus and Baghdad, Jewish leaders were fined and imprisoned, and 7,000 Jews were expelled after their property and most of their belongings were confiscated.11

Despite this treatment of Jews in Arab lands, the 1.2 million Arabs under Israeli governance did not experience any systematic mistreatment. Perhaps the greatest trauma for the Arabs was that Israel had conquered 42,000 square miles – and was now three-and-a-half times larger in size than before the war. 12

Anti-Zionism entered the international scene when Israel and Egypt reached political rapprochement after the Yom Kippur War by signing an interim agreement on September 1, 1975. That agreement emphasized, “The conflict between them and in the Middle East shall not be resolved by military force but by peaceful means.”13

Concerned that this might lead to peace, the Soviets, Syria, and the PLO tried to exclude Israel from international nongovernmental organizations (NGOs), like UNESCO, “for having transgressed the United Nations Charter, and having failed to adopt its resolutions.” When this strategy failed, they began to question Israel’s legitimacy and discredit and condemn Zionism in the UN, and to internationalize their propaganda against her.14

1. Yohanan Manor, “Anti-Zionism,” (Jerusalem: World Zionist Organization, 1984): 8.

2. Ibid.

3. Saul Friedlander and Mahmoud Hussein, Arabs and Israelis: A Dialogue (New York: Holmes and Meier, 1975), 6, 18, 21.

4. Ibid., 9, 34.

5. Ibid.

6. “Islam’s Interpreter,” The Atlantic Online (April 4, 2004), Online.

7. Ibid; Friedlander and Hussein, Arabs and Israelis: A Dialogue, 32-33, 36.

8. Jacob L. Talmon, Israel Among the Nations (London: Weidenfeld and Nicolson, 1970), 169-170.

9. Ibid.170.

10. Michael B. Oren, Six Days of War: June 1967 and the Making of the Modern Middle East (New York: Oxford University Press, 2002), 305-306.

11. Ibid., 306-307.

12. Ibid.

13. Manor, “Anti-Zionism,” 9-10.

14. Ibid.10.

Dr. Alex Grobman is a Hebrew University trained historian. He is a former director of the Simon Wiesenthal Center, and the author of a number of books, including Nations United: How The U.N. Undermines Israel and The West, Denying History: Who Says The Holocaust Never Happened and Why Do They Say It?, and a forthcoming book on Israel’s moral and legal right to exist as a Jewish State.


Why do Some American Rabbis “Fast for Gaza”?

Sixty-two rabbis from the liberal streams of American Judaism are participating in a monthly “Jewish Fast for Gaza” which, according to their manifesto (crafted by one of the project’s coordinators, Rabbi Brant Rosen) “seeks to end the Jewish community’s silence over Israel’s collective punishment in Gaza that has resulted in a humanitarian crisis of overwhelming proportions.

Why the fast? In Leviticus we read: “Do not stand idly by when your neighbor’s blood is being spilled” (19:16).

The other project coordinator, Rabbi Brian Walt, is pleased by the response in support of the Fast for Gaza, pretentiously named Ta’anit Tzedek. He writes: “It has been incredibly heartening to find so many rabbis willing to participate in this initiative. It takes a lot of courage. I hope that this is one small step in breaking the Jewish community’s silence over what is happening in Gaza.”

With all of Walt’s pride, only a few of the 62 participants would be considered rabbis of national prominence, although Rosen has gained notoriety because of his visit to Iran (like his Neturei Karta compatriots), from where he wrote: “While I prefer not to weigh in on the rhetorical hairsplitting debate on [President Mahmoud] Ahmadinejad’s notorious 2005 threat to wipe Israel off the map, I’ll only suggest that our attitudes and foreign policy must be based on real intelligence and understanding, and not fear-based, knee-jerk assumptions.”

THAT ONLY 62 of approximately 3,000 liberal rabbis in the US joined Walt’s and Rosen’s cause does not warrant bragging rights. Quite the opposite; it indicates a colossal failure for what is clearly an anti-Israel act. Indeed, there are sound reasons for such an embarrassingly low participation, one of which is that in the explanation for the fast, there is barely a hint of support for Israel, although there is a token line condemning Hamas’s rockets.

Because of a total lack of balance, the tenor of Rosen’s and Walt’s comments strikes one as anti-Zionist, bordering on anti-Semitism. It is bad enough that these rabbis are being led by someone like Rosen, who refuses to “weigh in” on Iranian threats of genocide against Israel, but, given the views of some Christian and Muslim signatories to the fast, they are aligning themselves with Israel’s hostile detractors.

Have any of these self-appointed spiritual guardians of the Jewish people ever initiated a similar act of identification with innocent Israelis in the South, whose lives and livelihoods were threatened daily by incessant bombings from Gaza, even though, to their credit, some of the rabbis did visit Sderot.

What about during the height of the second intifada when civilians, both Jewish and Arab, were murdered on buses, at malls, in restaurants, in their homes, or when 500,000 Israelis, again both Jewish and Arab, were displaced from the North as missiles rained down on them during the Second Lebanon War? Did these rabbis carry out an act of self-denial to empathize with them and do something equally dramatic to protest the economic hardships the country underwent?

The literature of the fast group states that Israel has employed the blockade since January 2006, right after Hamas won the elections. However, rockets were landing on Israel years before those elections and before any blockade, just as there was terrorism before 1967. And what of the violent takeover of Gaza by Hamas, which was a surefire indication that Hamas would heat up the southern border and begin a concentrated effort to smuggle arms?

After Israel evacuated the settlements and pulled the army out of Gaza, what did the world see? Hamas destroyed public buildings and infrastructure for greenhouses left behind which could have served the social, medical, economic and agricultural needs of Gazan society. With hatred overwhelming self-interest, is it any wonder that Israel was concerned about a Hamas-controlled ministate next door – one that also terrorizes its own residents and witnesses hundreds of Palestinians killed by Palestinians?

Israel had no choice but to react.

Has its response resulted in collective punishment? Yes – however, let’s examine the notion of collectivity. There is a direct link between collective punishment and collective responsibility. In Israel there are dozens of human rights groups that protest its actions in the territories, claiming that the many are forced to suffer for the behavior of a few. It would be morally irresponsible not to speak out. By not protesting, we become complicit partners in those actions.

BUT WHERE were the Palestinians demonstrating against Hamas’s rocket fire on schools, factories and homes – a deliberate act of collective punishment? (They might find themselves incarcerated, kidnapped or murdered.) Do Gazans really expect not to suffer regardless of the behavior of their leaders? Should fair-minded people absolve Hamas for the collective punishment it brought upon itself as a result of the collective punishment its indiscriminate bombings imposed upon Israel?

How well have these rabbis examined the blockade? Is it as total as they claim? Do they think that concern about arms smuggling is completely bogus, or do they consider that the blockade justifies shooting at Israelis, while Israel’s response deserves wholesale condemnation? Have they no regard for the history and present reality – and the complexities – of what goes on in the South? Their one-sidedness speaks for its prejudicial self.

I consider myself a human rights activist. I oppose any policy that deprives humanitarian aid as well as the basic means for Gazans to live a normal life – electricity, water, gas. A country’s moral steadfastness is tested during conflict. I have frequently criticized the blockade in my column. But one would expect that Jewish criticism of Israel would be predicated on a love for the country – an emotion that is not faintly expressed in the rabbis’ Fast for Gaza movement.

Perhaps, unlike my Diaspora colleagues, having served in Gaza I can appreciate the context of what is happening. I sympathize with my fellow citizens, not only in the South but throughout the country, who have suffered the atrocities perpetrated against them by Palestinians. The Fast for Gaza rabbis fail to recognize that Palestinians do not hold a monopoly on pain. There are victims on both sides of the conflict.

Because of this failure to acknowledge that there are two narratives to the Middle East imbroglio, this minuscule group of rabbis has left sensitivity toward Jewish suffering out of the equation, and sadly stand idly by when their fellow Jews’ blood is being spilled. That is what their fast represents.

Their Web site (www.fastforgaza.net), along with Walt’s and Rosen’s declarations, implies that they care not at all about an objective critique of an Israel that should be “a light unto the nations,” but rather care only about painting Israel as an “evil empire,” thereby justifying their and others’ blatant assault on the very legitimacy of a Jewish state.

Richard Goldstone is to be Investigated for Criminal Activity

Let’s start at the end. Richard Goldstone perpetrated a moral crime. Not against the State of Israel but against human rights. He turned them into a weapon for dark regimes. Goldstone was not negligent. He did this with malice.

The criticism that was made in the first days following the report was on the basis of preliminary study. But time passes. And the more that the details of this report are revealed, the more it becomes clear that it is a libel. A libel with legal cover. A libel that was prepared in advance to incriminate the State of Israel, in the service of Libya and Iran. Goldstone willingly took up the loathsome role. He supplied these countries with the goods. The claim that “the discourse of rights” has become the dark forces’ most effective tool is a familiar one. The Goldstone report is the supreme expression of this. Its legal terminology is exemplary. It gushes about international human rights treaties. But it cannot hide the result: It is a libelous indictment of the State of Israel, in the service of the axis of terrorism and evil. Yes, there is marginal – very marginal – lip service regarding criticism of Hamas. Goldstone’s ilk is a sophisticated lot. They now reiterate from every stage, and Goldstone does it well, that they were actually objective. Here, they also leveled criticism at Hamas. How enlightened of them!

Goldstone sold his soul for an endless series of lies. Even Mary Robinson, who is not known as an admirer of Israel, understood that, “This is unfortunately a practice by the [UN Human Rights] Council: adopting resolutions guided not by human rights but by politics. This is very regrettable. ” She refused to take the post. Goldstone took it and carried it out with excessive enthusiasm. If international law worked as it should, if the representatives of dark regimes did not have an automatic majority in it, Goldstone would have to stand trial. But this is impossible. And therefore, not only Israel but every moral person, every person for whom human rights are important, must declare Goldstone a criminal. Here is the proof.

***

Let’s start with what is not in the report. In its almost 600 pages there is not one word – there simply isn’t! – about Hamas’s ideology. Hamas has a covenant. This covenant is the basis for the conflict between Israel and the demonic entity that has arisen in Gaza. This covenant is pure anti-Semitism. This covenant makes it clear that Hamas is no different from the Taliban. On the contrary, it is worse. The leaders of Hamas also declare – in their own voices – their solidarity with the Taliban, their desire to take over the entire free world, their hatred of Jews and their abrogation of the ceasefire with Israel. But there is not one word in the Goldstone report about this. Contrary to the general impression, Israel is not Hamas’s main victim. As in other

cases where radical Islam grows, most of Hamas’s victims since Israel’s withdrawal from Gaza – have been Muslims. Hamas’s Kassam rockets, suicide terrorists, abductions and military operations do not stem from the occupation or the blockade, as the Goldstone Mission either claims or hints. All of these actions stem from an Islamo-fascist ideology that massacres mainly Muslims. Even during Operation Cast Lead, Hamas killed more Palestinians than Israelis. Goldstone and his cohorts did not hear about this.

It was one thing if Goldstone had just ignored the link between ideology and actual practice. But in addition, when he jumps to Israel, he takes the trouble to disparage the Zionist enterprise. Thus, for example, in Article 207 of the report, in a footnote, he tells about confiscated Palestinian property. Not that it has any relevance. But the sophisticated Goldstone had to provide Hamas with justifications. Historic accuracy? Certainly not. This is another product of the industry of lies. Because the property robbed and confiscated from Jewish refugees who were forced out of Arab countries was greater than Arab property left behind in Israel. But let us not confuse Goldstone by investigating the truth.

***

There is no need to go far in order to expose the lies. It is possible to start with the first paragraph. There, Goldstone says that he was granted the authority, “to investigate all violations of international human rights law and international humanitarian law that might have been committed at any time in the context of the military operations that were conducted in Gaza.” Really?

At this stage, let us go to the UN Human Rights Council decision to appoint the mission. Article 14, regarding the mission’s authority, says: “To investigate all violations of international human rights law and international humanitarian law by the occupying Power, Israel, against the Palestinian people throughout the Occupied Palestinian Territory, particularly in the occupied Gaza Strip, due to the current aggression, and calls upon Israel not to obstruct the process of investigation and to fully cooperate with the mission.”

The difference is Heaven and Earth. Goldstone, I repeat, is not stupid. He is a sophisticated jurist. He understands that the Human Rights Council decision puts him in a bind. There is no demand for an investigation. There are instructions to investigate only Israel, while fixing blame in advance. Thus Article 14 and thus others in the same document. How does Goldstone square the circle? First, he does not mention Article 14 – which is the source of his authority – throughout the entire report. And second, in cooperation with the Council President, who was authorized to appoint the mission (but not to change its responsibilities), the authorization is improved in order to present a false objectivity. You see, Goldstone will claim in fawning interviews – we were authorized to investigate both sides. He is lying and he knows that he is lying.

It is not only the lie in the first paragraph. It goes on. In order to supply the goods, Professor Christine Chinkin, an expert on international law, was recruited to the mission, for example. There is only one problem. Before being appointed to the mission, Chinkin signed a petition that determined in advance that Israel had perpetrated war crimes. Can someone who took a position in advance sit on the mission? And indeed, the mission was presented with a legal suit for her dismissal. The suit was denied. There is absolutely no difference between the “judge’s” pre-determination and the Council’s. And when dozens of jurists petitioned the mission to dismiss Chinkin, Goldstone rejected them. It is clear why. The identity between the judge and the Council was absolute.

We must tarry another moment on the Council’s decision. Any enlightened person should give deference to human rights and the international bodies dealing with them. This Council is the UN’s most important body. And indeed, it seems that 33 countries participated in the vote on establishing the mission. And the results: Not one western democracy supported the decision; most abstained. One country voted against – Canada. The third-world countries voted in favor, as did all of the Islamic countries.

Can such an automatic majority – of non-democratic countries – be taken seriously? Certainly not. The Council will not send a Libyan representative to discuss human rights The representative from Pakistan, a country which caused millions of refugees only two months ago, in the framework of a just struggle against several hundred Taliban fighters – will find it hard to talk about “collective punishment” on CNN. For the charade of accusing Israel, one needs an internationally renowned jurist. He’ll do the work. The automatic dark majority does not need to convince itself. It needs someone to publish articles in The New York Times and Ha’aretz, and appear on the BBC.

This is how to turn Israel into a pariah. This is propaganda that even Goebbels the genius didn’t dream of. He is also a Jew; he even has a “Zionist” past. There could be no casting more perfect.

***

A precise study of the report reveals how the libel was perpetrated. This is no cheap, old-fashioned libel. This is a much more sophisticated libel. Now it is called a “narrative.” The Goldstone mission builds the narrative one stage after another. Does libel start with the Kassams that began to fall in 2001? No way. Does the Executive Summary say anything about the thousands of Kassams that have been fired since and have turned the lives of the residents of southern Israel into hell? Not with Goldstone. After the clauses regarding the appointment of the mission members, relevant international law, methodology and Israel’s non-cooperation, the mission gets down to business. The findings. The factual determinations and the verdict.

***

And indeed, the narrative begins with Article 27 (of the Executive Summary), entitled “The Blockade.” According to the article, Israel imposed a blockade. Why? What happened? How did it start? Were there thousands of rockets? Did Hamas take military control of the Strip, while massacring dozens – maybe hundreds – of Palestinians? There is not a word in the opening account. Neither is there any mention of Hamas’s internal terrorism against innocent Palestinians.

And this isn’t all. If there is a blockade, it is not only Israel’s responsibility. The Hamas regime has a long border with Egypt. It seems that this border is completely open. Hundreds of tunnels operate there on a regular basis and deliver everything the Hamas regime wants. The mission’s Executive Summary makes no mention of the tunnels, the open border with Egypt or the smuggling. And what does the report say about the blockade? “Gaza’s economy is further severely effected by the reduction of the fishing zone open to Palestinian fishermen.” This is an amazing example of the mission’s being recruited for the industry of lies. And the Palestinians established industries before the “blockade”? See, there is free movement of materials, through the tunnels. The problem is that Hamas has chosen only one raw material. Explosives. And there is also a flourishing industry. The production of rockets. “For the Palestinian people,” claimed Fathi Hamad, a Hamas member of Parliament, “death became an industry.” This even appears in Article 475. But Goldstone, the Devil’s advocate, insists on blaming Israel. The same Fathi, in the same speech, admits with his own voice that Hamas, ” created a human shield of women, children, [and] the elderly.” This is also cited in the report. But Goldstone, ” does not consider it to constitute evidence.” (Article 476) Certainly. When the result has been pre-determined, even the explicit, filmed and recorded admission of a senior Hamas official, like the video footage of the use of children, will not change the conviction. Is it possible to call such work by Goldstone “negligence”, or is it a crime, in the service of a terrorist regime?

Article 28 simplistically determines that Israel is the occupying power. Why? Because. Only in Article 88 does the mission see fit to mention the disengagement. As if it had no bearing on the story. As if Israel had not proven that it had no interest in the Strip. As if Israel had not fulfilled all of its obligations. As if Israel had not left the Palestinians to their fate, so that they could govern themselves, without a single soldier or settler.

Article 29 says that Israel embarked on Operation Cast Lead. Were there barrages of rockets beforehand? They appear later on but not in the Executive Summary. Apparently, they are not relevant. This is how one constructs a lie. Start with a blockade. Then a criminal assault. That’s the Executive Summary.

The mission’s lie repeats itself when it presents a false picture of permanent Israeli aggression. In exactly the same way, the mission says, in Article 193, that Israel began Operation Defensive Shield and caused the killing of hundreds of Palestinians. There is not even one word about the series of terrorist attacks on cafes, restaurants and buses. There is not one word about the Passover massacre at the Park Hotel in Netanya, in which 30 Israelis were murdered – a massacre which broke Israel’s long restraint.

Article 30 deals with the number of casualties but ignores – of course – any study which proves that most of the Palestinian casualties were Hamas personnel. In order to strengthen the impression, the report presents the number of Palestinian dead as opposed to the number of Israelis. The proportionality creates the result. So many Palestinians were killed. So few Israelis. According to this logic, NATO perpetrated war crimes in bombing Yugoslavia in 1999, because the results were similar to those in Gaza: Over 1,000 Yugoslav dead (mostly civilians) and zero casualties among the NATO forces. Thus in Afghanistan as well. Far more Afghans, civilians and fighters, have been kille d than NATO soldiers. Does this turn the NATO countries and soldiers into war criminals? And there will yet be proportionality issues. Pakistan sought to get rid of the vexing problem caused by several hundred Taliban fighters. It caused thousands of dead and millions of refugees. Thus also in Lebanon, when it was obliged to fight a few hundred Fatah al-Islam fighters. Their refugee camp, Nahr al-Bared, was destroyed. Hundreds were killed and tens of thousands became refugees.

The world understands that these are the proportions of dealing with terrorists, who hide among civilians. But when Goldstone comes to Israel – he refuses to understand even though Hamas’s threat to Israel is greater than the Taliban’s threat to Europe or Fatah al-Islam’s to Lebanon. Goldstone knows the new battlefields. But he ignores because the goal was to demonize Israel. And therefore, he must lie and mislead.

Article 32 deals with Israel’s bombing of Palestinian Authority buildings, rejects the Israeli claim that these were part of the, “Hamas terrorist infrastructure,” and determines that these were, “deliberate attacks on civilian objects in violation of the rule of customary international humanitarian law.” Certainly. If they ignore the fact that Hamas is a terrorist entity that uses terrorism mainly against innocent Palestinians as well – the result is that this is a legitimate political body. Maybe even a charitable organization. Now it is possible to understand why the mission ignores the Hamas Covenant. It is no coincidence. It is easier to square the circle that way.

***

How is Hamas absolved of responsibility for serious crimes? The Goldstone report cites hundreds of inquiries that were carried out by various groups. One of the groups cited is, of course, Amnesty International, which has provided countless hostile reports against Israel. These are cited extensively. But there was another Amnesty report, issued on 21.2.09. This surprising report reviews a series of incidents in which Hamas eliminated dozens of Fatah members, during the time of Operation Cast Lead, in Gaza. And here’s the surprise: Of all the reports, it is this one which is not mentioned in the Goldstone report. There is mention of attacks on Fatah personnel (in Article 80, for example), but with exaggerated effort to minimize the significance of the matter.

The general impression is that Goldstone is much more critical towards Fatah than towards Hamas. For example, Goldstone blames Fatah for the “refusal to cede control of the security institutions” in favor of the Hamas (Article 190), causing the confrontation between the factions. Hamas, according to the whole report, is a completely legitimate body that should control the security institutions. Goldstone stubbornly refuses to see the very anti-Semitic and terrorist nature of Hamas, an entity whose very existence is a crime against humanity.

***

It is possible to continue, article after article, in order to expose the construction of the deceptions and the lies. The mission details 36 factual events that prove, as it were, that Israel perpetrated war crimes. In their reduced framework below, let us examine the attack on the Abd Rabbo family. This event became one of the most prominent symbols of Operation Cast Lead, received widespread coverage and was mentioned in many reports. The Goldstone report devotes ten articles (768-777) to this incident. The mission repeated the claim that family members waived a white flag and that its daughters were murdered in cold blood by Israel. This claim is not only negligent, it is also a malicious lie. Thorough checks have shown that family members agave different and contradictory versions. One of the claims was that this was cold-blooded murder because there were no Hamas personnel in the area. It seems that this claim has also been refuted, by contradictory testimony, even byTime magazine, to the effect that there were indeed Hamas personnel in the area. Moreover, it seems that Al-Hayat Al-Jadida reports that, “”The Abd Rabbo family kept quiet while Hamas fighters turned their farm in the Gaza strip into a fortress .” The testimony is contradictory and the Time and Al-Hayat Al-Jadida reports were supposed to be before the mission. But there is not even a hint of them in the Goldstone report, which publishes a libel, even though it has already been contradicted. The objective has been marked. The facts will not confuse the mission.

***

The foregoing is only the tip of the iceberg. Space is too short to detail the parade of lies known as “the Goldstone Report.” We have presented here only isolated examples about the method. Goldstone, who chose to collaborate with the dark majority, supplied the goods. The report deserves a much closer study. The State of Israel must establish a commission of inquiry, led by top-notch jurists, in cooperation with their colleagues from around the world, in order to examine article after article, claim after claim, and refute the libel. Israel should also inquire its own misdeeds. The argument here is not that Israel is exempted from criticism. Every loss of human life is regrettable, and should be examined, in order to see how much Israel is responsible (as I recommended in previous article). But not in the way of the Goldstone Fact Finding Mission. The deeper one digs into the report, the more it becomes clear that Goldstone is a criminal hiding under the umbrella of human rights. On behalf of human rights, he and his lies must be exposed. The truth must come to light.

* * *

—————————————-

To the readers:

Any comment or additional information about the deception and the lies of the report or the members of the commision will be welcomed at my email: Ben-Dror Yemini (bdeyemini@gmail.com).

Links to translated articles:: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ben_Dror_Yemini