Christopher Hitchens has one of the most beguiling presences I've ever encountered in a media figure. He has that booming tenor that reminds one of Dylan Thomas reciting his mellifluous poetry. I hear he has a similar penchant for the 'hard stuff' as well. The words and ideas flow out of Hitchens mouth smooth as honey. Their power is almost magnetic. The high-toned English accent doesn't hurt either.

But when you step back and really examine what he's saying it's pretty much all bilge. Well, OK, maybe not all. But so much of it is that you feel that smooth, suave delivery is a betrayal or deception of sorts.

So how much does Christopher Hitchens really know about Islam? Apparently, not terribly much. He participated in a panel discussion on Warren Olney's To the Point. Towards the end of the discussion, he responded to a Muslim scholar's claim that Islam derives from the word for "peace." Here is what Hitchens said (audio):

Islam, by the way, does not mean "peace." It means "surrender," "prostration."

As even a Jew who knows any Hebrew can tell you, Islam certainly does derive from the word salaam or shalom in Hebrew. As Svend White, an Islamic studies specialist who writes Akram's Razor tells me:

...One can spin this *somewhat* by emphasizing the fact that the type of "peace" is a kind of surrender...

What is misleading about Hitchens' statement is he neglects that "Islam" connotes the peaceful "surrender" of a believer to the will of God, but not the "surrender" of a non-believer before the force or power of Islam.  Such peaceful surrender, which some see as the essence of faith, is a feature of many of the world's religions.  Hitchens is spinning Islam as a religion of violence and domination. So it's convenient to distort the religion's name as well. We see here the power of a guileful ideologue used to stir the pot of intolerance and Muslim-bashing.

Few will argue that there are not serious issues that need to be addressed between Islam and other world religions and that some Muslims defame their own religion by claiming to embody it as they kill the innocent. But Hitchens is merely a provocateur, rather than someone willing to engage in a serious dialogue on the subject.

My friend, Stefan Merken, has just published Peace, Justice and Jews: Reclaiming Our Tradition, a book that argues that peace is one of the "purest and highest" values in our tradition. If there are any skeptics reading this they will say--been there, done that. How many similar books have already been published on precisely the same subject before? While this is true, I believe that this book comes at a most opportune time. In the period since 9/11, the world has become obsessed with terror as THE only important issue facing us. In this country, all that has been important to our government has been security. Everything else has fallen by the wayside. The neocons, prominent among them many Jews, have ruled the roost for the past six years.

But now that the Bush Administration and its agenda have become discredited by the overreaching and failure of their own policies the pendulum is shifting back. It is time that we reexamine the relevance of the Jewish prophetic tradition to issues of war and peace, environmentalism, and economic justice. In an age when war and hatred are everywhere, it would profit us to study the words of the contributors to this volume who have embraced a peaceful way to resolve such conflicts. If there was nothing else worthwhile in this volume, this comment by the editors about my favorite historic Zionist figure would make the entire venture worth it:

Our chapter on...Israel calls to mind a major--if sadly, largely forgotten--figure of the Jewish past: Ahad Ha'am...whose prescient essay This is Not the Way warned that a future Jewish nation would not succeed if it emulated colonialistic thinking. "The main point, upon which everything depends, is not how much we do but how we do it," he wrote in The Truth from Palestine after he arrived home in Odessa from Palestine in 1891. He also cautioned the Jewish settlers in Palestine to consider the rights of the Arabs living there. "We think...that the Arabs are all savages who live like animals and do not understand what is happening...This is, however, a great error.

A strong dose of Ahad Ha'am is a powerful antidote to the most virulent nationalist views expressed by many on the Israeli right and their Diaspora supporters.

Murray Polner, former editor of the late, lamented Present Tense Magazine, was this book's co-editor.

Last Friday marked the first anniversary of the most traumatic day in the history of Seattle's Jewish community. It was the day that a deranged Naveed Haq barged into the Jewish federation's downtown offices, proclaimed his anger at Israel for its treatment of Arabs, and began shooting everything in sight. At the end of his rampage Pam Waechter, the campaign director was dead and five other female employees were wounded. The hatred and insanity of this massacre are garden variety as far as the world is concerned--this happens every day. But what isn't garden variety is this community's response, including the victims and the family of the perpetrator.

Seattle is a city that prides itself on its openness and tolerance and it proved it in this case. On the day of Pam Waechter's funeral an Arab-American representative of Haq's family hand delivered a letter from Haq's parents expressing profound sorrow and regret to the Jewish community. The victims, in turn, did not shout for vengeance or the death penalty. In fact, several victims families said explicitly and publicly that they did not the DA to file a death penalty charge.

Layla Bush, most seriously injured federation victim (Karen Ducey/Seattle PI)The most severely injured victim was Layla Bush with bullet wounds to her abdomen and shoulders. One bullet barely missed tearing into her heart. She walks with a cane, cannot stand for more than an hour and has nine therapy appointments each week. Yet these are her feelings now:

"I just don't want people to forget how much damage hate can do...Nothing positive comes from hatred." Bush said executing Haq would be "too easy for him." She reiterated that view Thursday, saying she favored life imprisonment.

In the aftermath of the shooting, "what made me mad is not him, but that someone with a mental history like that can get guns..." Growing up in rural Florida, she completed gun-safety classes and shot beer bottles off fence posts. She once owned a 9 mm Beretta. "I feel that handguns are made for killing people," she said. "They're not made for hunting."

Think what an extraordinary attitude it takes to make the following statement about her volunteer work at Harborview Medical Center:

We answer questions and talk with patients who have just been recently injured," she said. "It feels good for me to just give back. I feel like I've taken so much."

Norm Maleng, the recently deceased Republican DA did not file a first degree murder charge. He reviewed ten years of Haq's mental health records and determined that a lesser murder charge was more appropriate.

While one might expect the victims of such a trauma to refuse to return to their jobs almost all have (though several cannot work full time due to their injuries). The federation in turn has raised $1.3 million to entirely redesign the interior of its former offices so that the thoughts of victims or any other community member will not linger on that tragic day and space.

It seems to me that there are many places in the world where hate rages which could learn from Seattle's example. It is true that shootings of this nature are extremely rare here so one might argue that we have the luxury of being able to respond to such tragedy differently. But are we really that different? I don't know. It seems to me that a response to murderous hatred that offers more of the same is the easy way out. A response to hate that offers sober reflection and emotional engagement is much harder.

Everyone knows the internet can be a nasty place. Foul language, hate, invective, inanity, you name it. But what's less known is that the Jewish web can be equally nasty. We Jews have a reputation for being disputatious and the internet is no exception. I've been blogging for nearly five years. People have wished cancer on me, called for me to be raped by Arabs and killed by "righteous Jews," called my children "simian," claimed I taught them to manufacture Palestinian suicide bombs, etc.

And as a recent Jewish Forward article points out, I'm not the only one. There are Jewish cyber-bullies everywhere:

Orthomom.blogspot.com, which covers Long Island’s Orthodox Jewish communities, was the subject of a recent lawsuit brought by a local elected official who charges that she was slandered on the blog. Last February, the official, Pamela Greenbaum, who serves on board of education in Lawrence, N.Y., filed a lawsuit in a New York state court in an attempt to force Google, whose subsidiary hosts the blog, to reveal Orthomom’s identity. Greenbaum claims that she was called a “bigot” and an “antisemite” on the blog.

In response to Greenbaum’s lawsuit, Public Citizen, a national public interest group that has played a lead role in defending free speech on the Internet, rushed in to defend Orthomom and filed a motion to quash. A decision in the case is still pending.

When Chaim Rubin of Life of Rubin defended Orthomom one of his commenters began berating him for his support of her. The going got nasty and Chaim banned him. The commenter decided to get even and created a blog called Ploni Baloney solely devoted to mocking Chaim. While he believes he knows the identity of the anonymous blogger he has no solid proof. That's precisely the problem with cyber-bullies. They are obsessed to the point of mania. But they prefer to lurk in dark, slimy places.

Steven Plaut is another Jewish cyber-bully who sees it as his role in life to protect the Jewish people from anyone who's ever voiced any criticism of Israel. As Rebecca Spence wrote in The Forward:

In 2006, Neve Gordon, a dovish politics professor at Ben-Gurion University, launched a civil suit against Steven Plaut, a hawkish professor at the Graduate School of Business at the University of Haifa, for referring to him in an article published online as a “fanatic anti-Semite” and a “Judenrat wannabe,” among other slurs. Plaut lost and had to pay more than $18,000 in fines to Gordon. Plaut is now appealing the case.

Sharon in drag under the caption: "America's bitch whore"But there is one website that is the sine qua non of Jewish cyber-bullydom. Masada2000 has everything: naked men, dildos, Ariel Sharon in drag, Michael Lerner half-naked in a bath tub, and 7,000 Jews on the S.H.I.T. list. Who could ask for more? What is Masada20000 you ask? It's a strange beast run by someone who conceals his identity behind the moniker Big Al. Big Al is angry in the same way Meir Kahane was angry. Angry at Jewish peaceniks, the Fifth Column of the Jewish people. And doubly angry at perfidious Arabs. Masada2000 has a fetish for what I call Jewish porn. It's obssessed by homosexuality and Nazism. Jews on the S.H.I.T. (Self-Hating and Israel-Threatening Jews) are 'fags,' kapos' and 'Judenrats.' It's as if the site owner absorbed the poison the Nazis spewed against Jews and become what he hates--a Jewish Nazis.

If you're an enemy of the Jewish people in their book, you clearly deserve no privacy and the List often displays images of victims and their private e mail addresses.

I have a personal confession to make. I am on the S.H.I.T. List. In fact, when one of the site's 'friends' or perhaps the owner himself notified me of my "membership" I began a campaign to get the site taken down. Besides the fact that it featured an image of me that I owned and thus violated my copyright, I thought that any site that said that Jewish female peace activists "deserved a good reaming" deserved to be reamed itself. When their webhost took the site down they moved it to a Mormon webhost who didn't seem to mind nudity and lots of F-words directed at "sand niggers" and the like.

Ultimately I failed. No matter how many examples I provided to Bluehost of multiple blatant violations of their Terms of Service, they preferred Masada2000's loot to common decency. But I'm pleased to say that where I failed, someone else succeeded. Unfortunately, I cannot tell you how Masada2000 was brought down since I don't want to let any of its friends in on the secret.

No doubt, you'll read in the comment section below some Kahanewannabe pledging that 'Masada2000 will live forever' and such like. Perhaps. But making life tougher for those who spew hate is truly a mitzvah. And to the site's supporters I say, please don't talk to me about freedom of speech. Freedom of speech does not allow you to violate the law or invade the privacy of thousands of victims by printing their e mail addresses. Besides, when the site has been taken down it has not been because of its political speech, but rather because it violated the host's Terms of Service or violated other provisions that regulate websites (sorry for being so vague). There are many other websites that present a Jewish nationalist perspective without breaking laws and invading privacy.

Miriam Felton Dansky also wrote about Masada2000 in Flack-Listed at New Voices.

Blue Angels in formation at Seafair (Richard Silverstein)

We Jews know about tribes and tribal gatherings. But what happens when you live among a tribe but don't feel yourself a full fledged member? Then tribal gatherings can be alternately strange and fascinating. Take Seattle's Seafair. Fifty years ago, Seattle was a real burg. Once known for its lumber and fishing industries, it did have Boeing and several large military bases as mainstays of the local economy, but little else. This was before Microsoft; before Amazon; before Starbucks; before biotechnology.

Remember when Richard Nixon killed the huge Supersonic Transport (SST) project in 1972, which Boeing had counted on as its production mainstay? The company responded by laying off thousands of workers. And there were no other major industries to take up the slack. The joke going the rounds was: "Will the last person to leave Seattle turn off the lights." That was then. Though Seafair predated the death of the SST, it was created in a similar context.

The city fathers felt they needed to dream up a way to put Seattle on the map. Why not take advantage of one of Seattle's prime attractions: the water. Thus began Seafair, Seattle's summertime festival.

Here's how the Seafair website describes it:

In the half century since Seafair was launched, the city that Seafair helped put on the map has matured from adolescence to adulthood. When Seafair debuted, the Seattle area was without major league sports teams, a symphony or the Seattle Center. Seattle was hungry for national recognition and attention and Seafair filled the bill with Thunderboats racing on Lake Washington and parades which featured the likes of Bob Hope and Bing Crosby.

Over the years, Seafair built pride among the community which still resonates today. The Puget Sound of today is a robust, economically and ethnically diverse community and Seafair has become more important than ever. As major cities melt and become the same, Seafair is the fabric of our community that represents the Northwest lifestyle and keeps us unique.

Seafair has become a home town jewel that reaches nearly 2 million Puget Sound residents each summer. In fact, if you live in the Northwest, you look forward to Seafair and all the simple joys that it brings.

Seafair pirates land at Alki beach (JIm Bryant/Seattle PI)

You can hear the breathless boosterism in the copy. It's as if Seattleites still need to prove they are an interesting town, worthy enough for people to go out of their way to visit. It's sort of embarrassing to the cosmopolitan Jew in me who's been all over the world and lived in many places. It makes you feel you are in Seattle but not of it. Does a modern metropolis on the cutting edge of technology and Pacific Rim trade really need a Milk Carton Derby, pirates landing at Alki beach, gas-guzzling hydroplane races, and Blue Angels flyovers? And speaking of Blue Angels, you don't know dread or terror till you've heard an F-16 screaming a mere 200 feet or so over your head. Imagine the sound of a locomotive roaring through your bedroom while you're in the midst of a deep sleep. Or as a friend said to me: "Is this how I want my tax dollars spent??" Does Seattle really need this to create a unique urban identity?

But who can argue with the hoopla and excitement? Many thousands of tourists actually fly long distances to witness the spectacle. What they see in it I couldn't precisely tell you. I view it something like Christmas. The goyim love this thing. It's loud, annoying, in your face, and the music makes you want to tear your hair out; but they seem to be having fun and part of you doesn't want to deprive them of their pleasure. But another part wants to scratch your head in wonderment at all the foolishness.

I guess Seattle is a number of major ways remains a small town. You can feel it in the crazy fan allegiance to every hometown sports team from Huskies football to the Mariners. And that is the charm of the place and the bane of it as well. I've lived in Los Angeles, the Bay Area, New York, Dublin and Jerusalem. I truly love living in this city. But despite it's cultural offerings, it simply lacks the sizzle of a few of the above cities. There is no Koreatown, no Symphony Space, no Knitting Factory, no Carnegie Hall, no MOMA, not even LACMA. On the other hand, none of these places have the Cascades, a 20 minute commute from a home in the woods to downtown, or one of the best places in the world to bring up young children.

Masked Opens in NY todayToday's NY Times notes that a controversial Israeli play, Masked, set during the first Palestinian Intifada will open today at the DR2 Theater in Union Square:

“Masked” was something of a sensation when it opened in Israel 17 years ago. Mr. Hatsor’s first play, it won the top prize at the Acco fringe festival. His inspiration was both contemporary and ancient, specific and universal. The occupation was continuing, but there was “no reaction in the Israeli theater to the big drama happening 30 to 40 kilometers from our houses,” Mr. Hatsor, 42, said in a telephone interview from his home in Israel.

For this particular story line, however, he borrowed from the essence of Greek drama. “Conflicts between brothers are one of the oldest conflicts of all nations,” he said in a thick Israeli accent, noting that the same story has played out in Ireland, Bosnia and now Iraq.

Israelis as well as Palestinians embraced “Masked,” which was translated from the original Hebrew into Arabic and produced in Palestinian villages and cities, Mr. Hatsor said. His family comes from Iraq and Morocco, and he took it upon himself to learn Arabic, an unusual choice for a Jewish child in an Israeli school. But of his characters, he said: “I didn’t imagine them as Arabs or Palestinians, but brothers torn apart by larger forces. I asked myself, ‘What would happen if this was my brother?’ ”

As for the Jewish response, Mr. Hatsor said that at the time “many Israelis felt more and more sympathy for the Palestinian struggle,” and so were open to watching a depiction of the occupation’s awful toll on an Arab family.

Masked is a profound act of empathy by an Israeli playwright attempting to imagine the plight faced by a neighboring people with whom his own people is at war. Perhaps Ilan Hatzor is not his brother's keeper, but he definitely is his brother's witness.  Such acts of empathy in times of war can be profoundly subversive. They make you question the assumptions that led you to believe your neighbor was your enemy. They lead you to see potential bonds where only walls existed before. There is, of course, much that divides Israelis and Palestinians. Much bad blood lies between them. Plays like Masked cannot work miracles nor does anyone expect them to. But they plant seeds. They raise questions. They provoke emotions. All of which can lead to hope for a better future for the two peoples.

It is interesting to compare the theatrical response to Masked to that of another controversial play about the Occupation: My Name is Rachel Corrie. In that case, the New York Theater Workshop got a case of cold feet when it realized it might've taken on a dramatic hot potato in the Corrie play. While NYTW came out of it with a black eye for having betrayed a play they professed to like, no such thing has happened with Masked. Perhaps DR2 has learned a lesson from the Corrie imbroglio because it schedules post-performance discussions with panels including rabbis, imams, peace activists, the director and cast. These allow the audience to ask questions, argue and find catharsis after an emotional encounter.

 

It's popular in certain circles in Israel and the Diaspora to point out how impossible is the notion of making peace between Israel and her Arab neighbors. You hear it from the Likud. You hear it from the likes of AIPAC and the American Jewish Committee. There are a thousand reasons, so the argument goes, why an Arab could never make a suitable partner for peace. Prominent among these perfidious partners is Syria. Everyone knows that the Assad regime is a bunch of thugs who assassinated Rafik Hariri. Besides they're untrustworthy, support Hezbollah, shelter Hamas operatives, and call themselves brother to the even more perfidious Iran. No, it's hopeless. There can never be peace with Syria. Except there's one small fault with this argument: it's wrong on the most important counts. A senior former Israeli foreign ministry staffer met for months with a Syrian-American confidant of the Assad regime and basically ironed out most of the issues that separated the parties. At first, Ehud Olmert pooh-poohed the effort saying Alon Liel, the former foreign ministry director general, represented no one but himself (even though Liel negotiated with the knowledge and approval of the Sharon government). Then Olmert said Israel couldn't take the negotiations seriously because the Bush Administration had put the kibosh on the whole thing. That made Olmert look like an American marionette. There have been news reports saying the U.S. released Israel to pursue further discussions with the Syrians though Israel has said or done nothing to confirm this. And that is where things stand now. Two recent developments breath hope and substance into the Syria-Israel peace track. Haaretz reveals a recent poll of Syrians by Terror Free Tomorrow finds that 51% are in favor of peace with Israel in return for mutual recognition and return of the Golan. So much for those who claim that the Syrians would be an untrustworthy partner who doesn't even want peace. Polls show a majority of Israelis also favor Syrian negotiations. Don't get me wrong. There are as many reasons for Israel to distrust Syria as there are for Syria to distrust Israel. The only way to test an opposing party's good faith is to sit down and talk to them. Thus far, the Olmert government has refused to do this. But now there may be reasons to believe that hardened attitudes are beginning to shift. Last January, a group of prominent Israelis formed a new lobby, the National Movement for Peace With Syria, to pressure Israel to take the Syria peace track more seriously. The new group included former chief of staff Amnon Lipkin Shahak, former Shin Bet chief, Ya'akov Perry and former directors at the Foreign Ministry, David Kimche and Alon Liel. Ynet reports that the group recently went right into the lion's den to hold a public forum on the Israeli-Syrian peace diplomacy IN THE GOLAN which was attended by "hundreds of Golan residents." You may dispute the legitimacy of a group of self-appointed peaceniks, but the fact that Ami Ayalon and Alon Liel presented the National Movement's agenda to a group of Israelis who have the most to lose in a future peace settlement and received a respectful hearing says a great deal about the viability of peace with Syria. In fact these same Golanis have signed the following statement:

“President Assad has repeatedly declared his willingness to renew the negotiations for peace with Israel,” it says. “The Israeli government has rejected these calls, but in recent months has checked their authenticity with the help of a third party. “We call on President Bush and Tony Blair to facilitate the negotiations with American presence or representation from the Quartet. We believe such talks could remove the threat of the missiles that are currently flowing from Iran into Syria by the thousands and may soon land on our heads.”

Will Ehud Olmert and his new Labor partner, Ehud Barak, listen to this voice of pragmatism and vigorously pursue the chance for peace with Syria? Stay tuned.

"Not What We Intended" (Yudit Ilany)Well, not precisely. But I did want to introduce you to one of the most interesting and provocative Israeli English-language bloggers: Yudit Ilany of OCCUPIED. The images accompanying this post are from her terrific slice-of-life photo blog, occupiedimage. But before I do, a word on Jewish blogging. There are a lot of us out there. And while some blogs are very popular very few get the respect they deserve.

The Jewish media pretty much ignore blogs entirely as a social phenomenon or news source. And they do this to their peril because many of us are both covering important stories and breaking news that no one else is. I regularly encourage news outlets like Haaretz, JTA and The Forward to do more to include Jewish blogs in their coverage of the Jewish world--with decidedly mixed results. And it's a shame. Because you won't find Yudit Litany's Israel on any UJA or Birthright Israel mission. You'll hardly find her in the pages of any of the Israeli dailies and especially not in the American Jewish publications I mentioned above.

If we want to truly see Israel as it IS, both its strengths and weaknesses, we must peer into the dark alleyways of places like Ajami and Yaffo. Otherwise, we'll only be seeing the economic miracle, the "only democracy in the Middle East." Not that there anything wrong with seeing Israel's virtues. That's part of the picture too. But not the whole thing. That's where OCCUPIED comes in. One of the things I appreciate most about it is that she focuses on Israel writ small--the everyday joys and injustices that make Israel such a fascinating and distressing place to live.

Yudit was once a social worker and focuses with laser-like intensity on issues of social injustice and inequality within Israeli society. Her blog is a treasure for anyone who cares about making Israel a better place for all its citizens. Sometimes Yudit's posts just break your heart. Life is so unfair and things can be so unjust in Israel especially for its children. Read The Jaffa Heiress and try not to weep:

Intissar is seventeen, bright, funny, streetwise, the youngest of 10 children and until yesterday, full of hopes and dreams.

A knock on the door of the small apartment where she lives ended those dreams. Her sister's little 3 year old boy opened the door and several police men entered with arrest warrants for Intissar, her elderly disabled mother and all of her nine sisters and brothers (2 of them disabled as well). That's 11 arrest warrants in one go. Why? Because of debts, not even theirs. Debts they inherited. The story goes back a long time.

Intissar's mum developed a mental disease, when Intissar was very young, a tiny toddler, and became unable to care for her children. Intissar's father was addicted to to drugs and alcohol. The welfare department removed all children from the home and placed them in boarding schools. Intissar was only 2 years old when they took her from her parents' care and placed her in a home, in order to give her a chance... Intissar's father died about 4 years ago. Junkies with alcohol problems don't live long. After his death, all minor children were returned home by the welfare department. Their mum is still suffering from the same severe psychiatric disorder she's had for many years, and not really able to care for her daughters.

But Intissar is strong and in spite of many difficulties, she copes, somehow. But how can a 17 year old girl cope with her "heritage of debts"? Because that's the problem here. In Israel, when a person dies, and he or she leaves behind money or other possessions, these are shared by the inheritors according the the person's last will or, if there is no will, according to the law on inheritance. BUT, if the person died owing money, his or her survivors inherit [the] debt. If the person owned a house, usually the house can be sold, the debts covered and the remainder shared among the family, the cat or dog or whoever else.

Yet, in Intissar's case there is no home to be sold, there are no possessions. Her large family lives in a tiny public housing apartment in one of the worst slums in Jaffa. ...Their father was interested in one thing: getting high before cold turkey sets in. Over the years he made incredible debts. How exactly is only partially clear. Each time the water, electricity or phone were cut, he renewed the connection not by paying the bills, but by putting the new bill in the name of the next child of his 10 children. Thus, all of the 10 kids, while they never lived at home and were minors, ran huge debts at the various utility companies without knowing anything about it. I do not exactly understand how the utility companies accept contracts made by minors who are not present at all. Minors who have been made "wards of the state" and are under the responsibility of the welfare department...There is an "inheritance" of over a million NIS shared by all of the family members, and arrest warrants against all, including minor Intissar (which is illegal, by the way) because of those debts.

"Faces"This story reminds me of Bleak House and the family living together in debtors prison until one of them can work off the debt. But of course, Dickens story takes place in 'backward' Victorian England. While this is the 21st century, right?

The Torah says that the sins of the fathers must not be visited upon the children. How in heaven's name can such injustice exist? Who protects the children? Anyone?

Here's some backgrouind on Yudit by way of self-description:

Photographer educated at Hebrew U and Hadassah College of Technology, both in Jerusalem, Israel. Worked as documentary photographer in Israel, the West Bank, Gaza and Europe, specializing in "the story behind the news" and portraits. Works as art photographer using of combinations of digital and ancient techniques such as cyanotype, van dyke browns etc, printing on various media, including stone, cloth and metal. Occasional graffiti maker (when I'm extremely pissed off at what's happening in society). Does graphic design and photography for various NGO's and non profit orgs. Also for many people in the 'hood. Usually for free. Teaches photography and cinema as a tool of empowerment, especially with young women. Participates in different community art projects. Participated in a number of group and solo exhibitions and about to open another one (if all goes well) this september

Likes: art in all forms, shapes and smells, reading, hiking and espresso

Hates: meeting jellyfish & cheese

Distrusts: house-owners & lawyers.

I hope you'll be able to spend some time getting to know, if you don't already, how the "other half" of Israel lives.

I saw A Mighty Heart last night, the movie about Daniel Pearl's abduction and murder, and I was surprised. First, I liked the movie and expected not to. Second, it was not the anti-Muslim screed I'd expected it to be. If anything was a subject made for exploitation Hollywood style it was this story. An American-Jewish reporter goes to Pakistan to report on the teeming world of Islamic extremism. He goes seemingly with an open mind and American values of inquisitiveness and tolerance. His values are met by jihadi hatred, kidnapping and ultimately beheading. Could you have any better recipe for a suspense potboiler full of leering, evil Arabs?

Yet, Michael Winterbottom the director, chooses to avoid this obvious pitfall (and he faces many others as well). He decides he is going to try to write a story about two idealistic children of the world (Daniel and Marianne Pearl) thrown into the maelstrom of third world poverty, desperation and religious hatred. Despite being tested in the deepest and most painful ways it is possible for a human to be tested, the Pearls both retain their humanity intact. This is a hopeful movie. But its hope doesn't come cheaply or easily. It is hope wrested from violence and suffering. Perhaps this is the only type of real hope there is--hope based on adversity.

The main element of this film is confusion. Everything and everyone is a swirl of movement and emotions. Hardly anything remains in one place very long. The camera sweeps through the teeming streets of Pakistan's fetid urban centers providing the full panoply of human energy and misery. The crowded slums actually become a character in themselves in the film. Winterbottom does this in an ingenious way. He doesn't really have to tell you about the social conditions in third world Muslim countries that serve as the breeding ground for Islamic extremism. No characters have to engage in long conversations about it to explain it to the audience. The camera does it for you.

But there is one element I felt the filmmaker didn't explore fully enough. You have to admit that the decision by a young American Jewish journalist to accept an assignment in Pakistan, hotbed of some of the most rabid anti-Israel, anti-western sentiment in the world, strikes one as quixotic or perhaps even nuts. Why did Pearl do it? What were his reasons for taking this assignment? What was the Wall Street Journal's thinking in making this assignment?

I'd like to know more about Daniel Pearl. What did he believe both as a journalist, a Jew and human being. What were his private thoughts about the imams, sheikhs and jihadis he covered in Pakistan? The movie doesn't covey much of this and I wish it did more. It would've explained much to me that is lacking in the motivations of the key characters.

On a less momentous note, I wish the character of the Pakistani police inspector had been more explosive and energetic. The role as written portrays a genial, humane, soft-spoken man. What about someone who shrieks, who loses his temper, who hits people, who curses, who is wily, but still retains his humanity? Personally, I think it would've added to the drama of the situation.

I was struck by one element of the plot. At the end in voiceover, Marianne Pearl tells us that just before he was beheaded Daniel looked into the camera and said he was a Jew and that a street in Bnei Brak (Israel) is named for his grandfather, who founded the town. This is Pearl reaching back into his Jewish soul for something he is proud of, something that will mark his life, something he can leave after his death for others to know what was important to him as he faced his fate. It was also the ultimate act of rebellion against his captors--saying to them: "you can kill a Jew, but my grandfather helped build a Jewish country and it will live on after me despite your hated and violence."

I am grateful that A Mighty Heart didn't lapse into parody or propaganda. It portrayed a confusing, multi-faceted event with admirable nuance and emotional complexity.

Well, OK. Not exactly. It's not a love poem to the entire Israeli right. Just to one particular member of it, Moshe Arens. And not even a love poem for all his views. But for a column in today's Haaretz expressing his opposition to the Knesset's Jewish National Fund bill, its recent attempt to enshrine racism into Israeli law.

Thanks to Amechad, one of my readers, for pointing me to this pleasantly surprising view from the godfather of the modern Likud and former defense minister:

Last week the Knesset passed in preliminary reading a law that would require the Jewish National Fund (JNF) to allocate land that it owns only to Jews. Presumably this means that Jews who are not citizens of Israel would qualify, but Israel's Arab citizens would be barred from access to land owned by the JNF. A blatant violation of the norms of democracy.

But wait a minute, you might say, was not the Jewish National Fund founded in 1901 so the Land of Israel could be redeemed and come under Jewish ownership? Yes, of course, but something else happened in the meantime. In May 1948, the State of Israel was established, guaranteeing equality to all its citizens. The ultimate purpose of the Zionist Congress that decided on the establishment of the JNF - the establishment of a Jewish State in Palestine - has been achieved. In a democratic state one cannot condone laws that discriminate between citizens on ethnic grounds. That was certainly not part of Herzl's vision of the Jewish State.

...The proposed JNF law has nothing to do with this mission. Hopefully, it will not go beyond the preliminary reading in the Knesset.

In all the thinking I've done about this law in the past week or so even I hadn't thought of the preposterous proposition that I, who am not an Israeli citizen, could lease JNF land in Israel; but an Arab who is an Israeli citizen cannot. Why? Because he is Arab and I am Jewish. Is this the type of Israel we want to embrace?

I am happy the State of Israel exists. I am happy it has served as a haven for Jews who needed a safe home of their own in the past century. But must we Jews lord our superior rights over Israel's Arab brothers and sisters?  Is this what our ancestors meant when they called for Israel to be a "light unto the nations?"

Infertility is an issue most people know very little about. But that doesn't stop those same individuals from having strong opinions on the subject. Strong opinions based on ignorance are often deeply misinformed and prejudicial. Such is the case with infertility. A subject more fraught with personal anguish, confusion and ignorance you'll be hard put to find.

Jews have a special interest in infertility. There has been much talk about the decline in Jewish fertility. We are having less children and we are having them later in life as we tend to marry later than our parents and grandparents. As a result, fertility issues tend to rear their ugly head when a Jewish couple is ready to have children. That's precisely what happened to my wife and I. We were married in our 40s and had no previous children. When we started trying we found we couldn't conceive naturally. That started us on the maddening, exhausting, intense whirlwind of fertility treatment.

Our final stop before turning to adoption was egg donation, a procedure by which a young woman's donated egg is impregnated with the husband's sperm and the resulting embryo implanted in the wife. Getting to egg donation as a viable option is sometimes difficult for a woman. It means that her genetic material will not be present in the resulting child (though she will carry the fetus to term). For women culturally inculcated with the notion that they carry the responsibility to bring children into the world, the notion that this child will be yours emotionally, but not yours genetically can be hard to surmount.

For Jews, especially Orthodox Jews, it is sometimes important that the female egg donor be Jewish. There is a halachic requirement that a mother must be Jewish for a child to be considered Jewish. And since the birth mother is not genetically related to the child, there is some question as to whether the egg donor should be Jewish. Some rabbis say that the contributions of the gestational mother are so critical to the process that she should halachically be considered the actual mother.

My wife and I didn't care whether our donor was Jewish. It just so happened that the NYU Fertility Clinic we chose (where our doctor was Jamie Grifo) has a large Jewish clientèle and maintains relationships with brokers who specialize in securing Jewish donors. The donors for both our children (we have a 6 year old boy and 2 year old twins) were Israeli. Their ethnic backgrounds were very similar to our own. In fact, our 2 year old daughter looks enough like my wife that people point it out to her.

Though we never had to face the question of whether our children were Jewish if they had a non-Jewish donor, I would have sided with the rabbinical opinion that the sweat and equity exerted by my wife during pregnancy earned her the halachic title of "mother."

Finally, as a member of a formerly infertile couple, I can't say enough how important these treatments are. Many of us want to bring children into the world and but for biological impediments cannot do so. Procedures like egg donation allow us to make our dreams come true. I urge anyone facing the problems that my wife and I faced to consider the path we chose. There are many online resources available, but one of the best is RESOLVE.

Finally, there is the question of how to deal with your children once they are born. Do you tell them? If so, when? And what and how do you tell them? We've chosen the route of absolute openness. We told our first child he was an egg donor baby when he was about 3 years old or so. We talk openly about our childrens' origins with friends, family, neighbors and virtually anyone. Some parents in similar circumstances choose to address these issues differently. There is no single correct way to deal with this. But my approach is that there is too much fear and ignroance swirling around infertility. I want to lower the curtain and make egg donation as normal as natural childbirth in the average person's mind. If my openness on the subject will open a single person's formerly closed mind then it will have been worthwhile.

 For more of my blog posts on infertility and egg donation.

I was listening to KBCS (Bellevue, WA) and the DJ played a song that knocked me out. Being Jewish, having a strong interest in Israel, and knowing Hebrew, whenever I hear Hebrew anywhere my ears perk up. But this song didn't start out in Hebrew. It started out in an African language I didn't recognize (which later turned out to be Amharic) with a performer calmly speaking lyrics. Only later did the song switch to Hebrew lyrics and the melody and lyrics took on tremendous urgency and passion. I was listening to Bo'i ("Come") a huge Israeli hit by the Idan Raichel Project. And the Amharic comes by way of Israel's large Ethiopian community which immigrated during Operation Moses in 1984. The Ethiopians have found it hard to integrate into Israel since it is a largely ethnically fragmented society. The power of music is that it can acknowledge these tensions and overcome them by integrating the sounds of diverse cultures into a single song. What impresses me about Raichel's music is that he is attempting in musical terms to create an amalgam of all of the cultural and ethnic strands that constitute Israeli culture. He is doing this much more boldly than most other Israeli performers who are content to perform in a conventional and largely derivative western idiom. Raichel is searching for something more. He recognizes that Israel is not in Europe or Brazil, but rather smack in the middle of the Middle East. To achieve a genuine Israeli sound that recognizes and embraces this fact is a great achievement. What is also remarkable is that Raichel is of Ashkenazi ethnic background. He does not come naturally by way of embracing Israel's eastern roots. So in a sense his is a rebellion on many fronts against normative culture. Here is what Raichel's biography says at his website about his family background:

Idan Raichel, the architect of this unique recording project, is a 29-year old keyboardist, producer and composer from Kfar Saba. Idan was born in 1977 to a family with Eastern European roots, and although music was an important part of his upbringing, his parents did not place much emphasis on performing music from his particular cultural background. “I think the fact that I didn’t have strong family musical roots is what made me be very open to music from all over the world,” says Idan. Idan started playing the accordion when he was 9 years old, and even at this young age was attracted to the exotic sounds of Gypsy music and tango.

Here is some background of how he came to his interest in Ethiopian music:

After he was discharged [from the IDF] Idan starting working as a counselor at a boarding school for immigrants and troubled youth. Notably, the school was filled with young people from Ethiopia who were part of Israel’s growing community of Ethiopian Jews. It was here that Idan first started getting familiar with Ethiopian folk and pop music. While most of the young people in the school rejected their own cultural traditions in an effort to assimilate into mainstream Israeli society, a small core of Ethiopian teenagers remained fans of Ethiopian music. They passed around cassettes of songs from artists like Mahmoud Ahmed, Aster Aweke, Gigi and others, and the exotic, otherworldly melodies piqued Idan’s curiosity. “I started to hear lots of cassettes from Addis Ababa. Village music, like Ethiopian pop and reggae, or the native village songs,” says Raichel. “I noticed that immigrants from the Ethiopian community changed their names when they got to Israel. They try to assimilate into Western culture and don’t keep their roots.” He wanted these kids to “remember that they like hip-hop but they are not from Harlem, they like reggae but they are not Bob Marley. The Ethiopians have a great culture that should be cherished.” Idan started going to Ethiopian bars and clubs in downtown Tel Aviv. It was like entering another world, a country within a country that remains a secret from most Israelis. As his connections to the community deepened, Idan began attending Ethiopian synagogues, weddings and other ceremonies, and he began to learn more about Ethiopian music and culture.

And this provides a pretty good summary of Raichel's musical mission:

Idan was a unique talent that offered a new vision for how Israelis, their neighbors in this volatile region, and people all over the world, can cherish their own cultural traditions, celebrate their differences and through respectful collaboration create new and inspiring expressions.

While this may sound quite prosaic to a westerner steeped in multiculturalism, to know Israeli society is to understand how radical such an all-embracing view is. Israel is a country that devours cultural difference and subsumes it into an artificial "Israeliness." Ethnicity is frowned upon. When you become an oleh chadash (new immigrant) you tend to flee your past adopting a Hebrew name and even a new Hebrew surname to eliminate your Diaspora past. So what Raichel is doing is quite radical and refreshing. But hey, none of this cultural-social analysis would matter worth a damn if the music didn't groove and it does. The World's Marco Werman interviewed Raichel for the radio program. It's a short, breezy interview but worth a listen.

Any Jewish boy or girl who's ever attended Hebrew school knows about the blue Jewish National Fund (JNF) pushke (or charity box), into which parents and teachers encouraged us to throw our pennies, nickels, dimes and quarters. They taught us to perform a mitzvah by giving tzedakah to support the building of the Jewish homeland. Thus, the Jewish National Fund was the Red Cross of Jewish life, a "mom and apple pie" charity doing nothing but good for our people.

How times change! Last week, the Israeli Knesset passed, on first (of three) readings, the Jewish National Fund bill which allows the JNF, owning 13% of Israel's land, to refuse to lease to Arab citizens (and all non-Jews). Many American Jews and Israelis are incensed at what they perceive as the betrayal of Israel's democratic values and are hoping the Knesset buries the bill in committee or defeats it on next reading. A group of Israeli-American and American Jewish bloggers have created an online petition asking the Knesset to refuse to accede to such blatant discriminatory practices and embrace true democratic values. You may sign the petition here.

The JNF is a charity established in the early 20th century to raise funds to purchase land for Jewish settlement within Israel. As such, its land has historically been restricted to Jewish use. In 1950, Israel had a problem on its hands. 700,000 Israeli Arabs had fled during the War of Independence. The State had absorbed this land but was worried that the former owners might seek to reclaim it. The government came up with a legal sleight of hand: it transferred it to the JNF because it was a quasi-private charity which by charter could not transfer land to non-Jews. Presto-chango, problem solved--or so they thought.

But the Israeli supreme court, in a landmark ruling, said that the JNF can no longer discriminate against the non-Jews. The Court maintained that such a ban defies the norms of a democratic state and must be ended. This left the government in a new pickle. It wanted to restore the status quo which allowed the JNF to refuse access to Arabs. That's how the chief sponsor of the bill, a member of the ruling Kadima party, came up with this proposal.

And lest you think that such racism flourishes only in the dim, dark recesses of Israel, the bill passed 64-16 on first reading and was supported by a good number of Labor party MKs including Ami Ayalon, who ran for party leader last month has made a hallmark of working for Israeli-Palestinian peace.

The JNF has not distinguished itself in its response to the bill. In yesterday's Jerusalem Post, its U.S. director pooh-poohed the notion of Israel as a democratic state:

"For 2000 years, I don't remember that we were praying and dreaming that we can't wait to establish a democratic state in the Middle East, but we did say that we can't wait to reestablish a Jewish homeland."

The problem with this statement is that it flatly contradicts Israel's Declaration of Independence which states:

THE STATE OF ISRAEL will...foster the development of the country for the benefit of all its inhabitants; it will be based on freedom, justice and peace as envisaged by the prophets of Israel; it will ensure complete equality of social and political rights to all its inhabitants irrespective of religion, race or sex.

In truth, the notion of Israel as a Jewish homeland has always co-existed rather uncomfortably with the notion of Israel as a democracy. As the Jewish State, it currently discriminates in many ways in favour of its Jewish citizens. But as a democracy it includes a sizable minority of Arab citizens and accords them various rights and privileges (though they are generally inferior to Jewish ones). While polls of Israeli Jewish attitudes indicate a high level of prejudice against Israeli Arabs, social developments - which include the High Court ruling - have been very gradually eroding some of the more odious discriminatory regulations.

This legislative attempt to restore to the JNF its right to discriminate in favour of Jews may be seen as a rump effort by the Israeli right to take back its prerogatives and return to the era when Jews predominated and there was never a doubt that Arabs were second-class citizens. Is it too much to expect a majority of the Knesset to see this and put down this attempt to enshrine Jewish dominance into the law of a state otherwise proud to call itself a democracy?

The gag order imposed on media reporting of the Shin Bet treason case against Azmi Bishara has been lifted. Unfortunately, we don't know much more now than we did before. But at least it has freed Bishara from enough constraints that he has published a sharp rebuttal to the charges (as much as they are known) in the L.A. Times. Haaretz has reported the case based on anonymous security sources giving their view of the charges. A dubious proposition journalistically, but that seems to be how Israeli media operates giving (too) wide latitude toward government sources. It also would be nice to see a whole lot more "alleges" in this dispatch since otherwise we're to assume we should accept the Shin Bet's allegations as truth. Here is what those sources report:

The police and Shin Bet have sufficient evidence to indict former MK Azmi Bishara for crimes such as contact with the enemy, say sources who have seen the evidence in recent weeks. The sources say it will be very difficult for Bishara to refute the evidence, even if he appears in person to participate in police interviews. ...Most of the allegations involve contact with Hezbollah intelligence agencies, which the police and the Shin Bet say were responsible for collecting intelligence on Israel during the Second Lebanon War. The bulk of the evidence is based on wire taps of Bishara's telephone conversations with Hezbollah agents. These recordings were authorized by the Supreme Court. The evidence also suggests that Bishara assisted Hezbollah in broadening the impact of its attacks on Israel by helping direct its rocket barrages and offering recommendations on how to carry out psychological warfare against Israelis. Bishara is also suspected of transferring to Hezbollah military information, but the military censor has imposed a gag order on that information. In addition to the evidence suggesting that Bishara's activities were tantamount to treason, investigators are working on an angle involving financial violations. The investigators are trying to connect evidence to suspicions that Bishara violated the law forbidding the funding of terrorism. The evidence is based on the testimony of a family of Jerusalem-based money changers who say they have delivered hundreds of thousands of dollars in cash to Bishara's home in Beit Hanina. The funds have also not been declared to the tax authorities as required by law. The investigators have so far been unable to trace the money and are not sure whether Bishara kept the funds or distributed them to other organizations. The police are considering initiating an investigation in a number of countries where the funds are known to have originated or passed through.

Continue reading...

This is my first post as Jewcy guest blogger and allow me to say how grateful I am to Jewcy's editors for allowing an obstinate Jewish progressive Zionist crank like me to speak my mind about a few of the big issues besetting Israel and the Jewish people over the coming week.

There is a rather vociferous group of Christian Zionist evangelicals calling themselves Christians United for Israel, who I call (with a nod to James Besser of Jewish Week) the "Not One Inch" crowd. These are the fanatics who support Israel to the hilt. They're opposed to giving back a single inch of land that God promised to the Jewish people in the Good Book. In truth, they don't so much support Israel, as support the agenda of the extreme fanatical settler movement.

The apogee of such evangelical fanaticism is Rev. John Hagee, who drew a standing ovation at AIPAC's last national conference when he called for Israel to start a pre-emptive war against Iran. There's a wee problem with the good Reverend's theology since he believes that in order for "Our Lord" to return there will be a massive world conflict in which fully one-third of the Jews will be killed. I assume the one-third includes most of the readers of Jewcy (unless of course you share a fundamentalist settler view of the Israeli-Arab conflict). I know it will include me.

But now you can rest easy knowing there are also evangelicals who don't want to see us fry in the End Times. They also support what I consider to be a far more reasonable, balanced approach to the Israeli-Palestinians conflict. Laurie Goodstein, the NY Times' excellent religion reporter, writes that:

...Conservative evangelicals who claim a Biblical mandate to protect Israel have built a bulwark of support for the Jewish nation — sending donations, denouncing its critics and urging it not to evacuate settlements or forfeit territory.

Now more than 30 evangelical leaders are stepping forward to say these efforts have given the wrong impression about the stance of many, if not most, American evangelicals.

On Friday, these leaders sent a letter to President Bush saying that both Israelis and Palestinians have “legitimate rights stretching back for millennia to the lands of Israel/Palestine,” and that they support the creation of a Palestinian state “that includes the vast majority of the West Bank.”

They say that being a friend to Jews and to Israel “does not mean withholding criticism when it is warranted.” The letter adds, “Both Israelis and Palestinians have committed violence and injustice against each other.”

The letter is signed by 34 evangelical leaders, many of whom lead denominations, Christian charities, ministry organizations, seminaries and universities.

Evangelicals for Social Action have, over the past year, broken from some of the most conservative social and political positions espoused by the likes of Pat Robertson and Jerry Falwell. Goodstein reports that they've acknowledged, to the chagrin of the more radical members of the evangelical community, that global warming is a serious environmental issue. They've also denounced the use of torture in dealing with terror suspects.

You may read the letter they drafted for President Bush. It's the picture of moderation, something that cannot be said of Pastor Hagee's views:

As evangelical Christians, we embrace the biblical promise to Abraham: “I will bless those who bless you"...We know that blessing and loving people (including Jews and the present State of Israel) does not mean withholding criticism when it is warranted. Genuine love and genuine blessing means acting in ways that promote the genuine and long-term well being of our neighbors. Perhaps the best way we can bless Israel is to encourage her to remember, as she deals with her neighbor Palestinians, the profound teaching on justice that the Hebrew prophets proclaimed so forcefully as an inestimably precious gift to the whole world.

Historical honesty compels us to recognize that both Israelis and Palestinians have legitimate rights stretching back for millennia to the lands of Israel/Palestine. Both Israelis and Palestinians have committed violence and injustice against each other. The only way to bring the tragic cycle of violence to an end is for Israelis and Palestinians to negotiate a just, lasting agreement that guarantees both sides viable, independent, secure states. To achieve that goal, both sides must give up some of their competing, incompatible claims. Israelis and Palestinians must both accept each other’s right to exist. And to achieve that goal, the U.S. must provide robust leadership within the Quartet to reconstitute the Middle East roadmap, whose full implementation would guarantee the security of the State of Israel and the viability of a Palestinian State.

This development probably won't be music to AIPAC's ears since it prefers its evangelicals to be unquestioning boosters of Israel. But think of it--do we want evangelicals rooting for Israel to fight to the last drop of Israeli blood for a maximalist resolution of the conflict; or do we want evangelicals friends telling us what is truly in our long-term best interest even if it causes us momentary discomfort by forcing us to realize we may have to make compromises we'd prefer not to make?

I know which type of friend I'd prefer. The one who tells it like it is and not as I'd prefer it to be. The one who deals in reality rather than fantasy. The one who really cares for me on my terms instead of the one who sees me as a means to an end.

The gag order imposed on media reporting of the Shin Bet treason case against Azmi Bishara has been lifted. Unfortunately, we don't know much more now than we did before. But at least it has freed Bishara from enough constraints that he has published a sharp rebuttal to the charges (as much as they are known) in the L.A. Times. Haaretz has reported the case based on anonymous security sources giving their view of the charges. A dubious proposition journalistically, but that seems to be how Israeli media operates giving (too) wide latitude toward government sources. It also would be nice to see a whole lot more "alleges" in this dispatch since otherwise we're to assume we should accept the Shin Bet's allegations as truth. Here is what those sources report: