RSS Feed Breaking News
Updated 11/06/09 @ 01:12PM EDT
- The Union for Reform Judaism passed a resolution urging equal services for Israeli Arabs.
- The International Atomic Energy Agency has evidence that Iran may have tested an advanced nuclear warhead design, according to a British newspaper.
- The United States vetoed an Israeli plan to attack a ship bearing weapons allegedly from Iran to Hezbollah, according to a report in an Arabic-language newspaper.
- The Obama administration expects to keep working with Mahmoud Abbas despite his planned resignation as Palestinian Authority president.
- U.S. Jewish groups blasted the U.N. General Assembly for its endorsement of the Goldstone report into last winter's Gaza war.
- Reform endorse qual treatment for Israeli Arabs
- Iran may have tested secret nuclear warhead design
- Report: U.S. stopped Israeli attack on weapons ship
- U.S. sees Abbas in continuing role
- Groups blast UNGA Goldstone vote
- Israel delivers swine flu vaccines to Palestinian Authority
- Abbas announces he won’t run for re-election
- IAEA head: No worries about Iran nuclear site
- Mideast peace push cited in Obama Nobel
- Obama’s Nobel, Israel’s problem?
- Jews of color come together to explore identity
- FBI: Alleged spy wannabe asked for Israeli citizenship
- Family likely murdered by professional killer
- New signs that Ethiopian aliyah will resume
- U.S. appetite for Israeli food grows
- Female Orthodox scholars helping women talk about sex
Get this feed
Posted in: Op-Ed: Mr. President, time to 'recalibrate' on Middle East
08/17/09 01:23 PM
Ari H--I have a feeling that you are accepting the Arabs' statements at face value. Unfortunately, we also need to look at what the Arabs say to their own people and at what they said in their own meetings. It is well-known that the Arabs say one thing for Western audiences and another in Arabic. If there has been "pressure" placed on the Arabs, apparently they refuse to yield to it. On the other hand, Israel is expected to give the Arabs all they want in exchange for "peace." You claim that Netanyahu hasn't stopped settlement construction, so the Arabs aren't obligated to do something to advance the peace process. I thought the Road Map specified actions BOTH sides were supposed to take. Even if Israel's weren't "sufficient" to the other side, it was still more than the Palestinians actually did. Now there is an effort to go to the final status issues, even when the Palestinians still haven't fulfilled the minimal obligations they agreed to. Let's get the Palestinians to fulfill the obligations Savitsky listed, and then we can talk about a settlement freeze. I don't think Israel has any more to prove after withdrawing completely from Gaza. At least this showed Israel's good faith. Unfortunately, AFTER Israel left the area, the region was showered with rockets. Is this a taste of what we can expect should Israel agree to the Arab demand to withdraw to the pre-1967 borders? You seem to object to the Arabs making even a small overture to Israel and accepting Israel's demands. Yet you seem to want Israel to give the Arabs anything they want. That doesn't sound like negotiation to me. If the Arabs can demand "everything," why can't Israel? I think it is clear who doesn't want peace, and it isn't who you think. I think Savitsky and the other "Orthodox" writers may have a better grasp on what is needed for peace than you do, Ari. Unfortunately, I don't think we will see peace for the foreseeable future, the efforts by all parties notwithstanding. And I think the evidence is clear who is at fault here.
Posted in: 'Stand up and be counted'
07/28/09 04:00 PM
Archie1954, I resent the implication that American Jews have a dual loyalty. We ARE loyal Americans, but we are also members of the Jewish people--and we are loyal to both. Certainly, the USA is the greatest country in the world, where the greatest experiment in government has continued uninterrupted since 1789. However, as a loyal American, I have the right to criticize my country's policies, and in regard to Israel I have grave concerns about them. To imply that Israel's right to exist is solely based on the Holocaust ignores the long history the Jewish people have had on this land. Unfortunately, the president and the world would rather ignore this inconvenient fact. However, we will not ignore it. I don't think the best interests of the USA coincide with the Arab countries, and it would be better if our president recognized that both sides have requirements (possibly irreconcilable) that will have to be addressed if a true peace agreement is to be reached. Regardless, under no circumstances should the USA be dictating to Israel what it should do--the true negotiations should be bilateral between Israel and the Palestinians, and the Palestinians must be prepared to accept a lot less than they want, but this is what is meant by a peace between enemies.
Posted in: Israeli hotels sign modesty code
07/02/09 03:00 PM
Sorry, Norman, but I disagree strongly with the comment "We aren't members of the same tribe." Whether you like it or not, we ARE members of the same tribe. Yes, some of the observances of the haredim aren't what some of us would like, but if you don't want to go to one of those hotels, there are plenty of others in Israel that will accommodate you. I am seriously worried about your dividing us up into "mainstream" and "non-mainstream" Jews. I sometimes wonder if "mainstream" is often translated into "secular." Therefore, if one is even somewhat religious (not even "dati" but "masorti" in the language of Israeli Jews), some people would lump this person into the "non-mainstream" category. I submit that just because the majority of Israelis may identify as secular doesn't mean that they should run roughshod over the non-secular, just as the haredim should respect the fact that the majority of Israelis are non-haredim (although they don't have to like it). I think we all have to recognized that Israel is a special country in our eyes and in the eyes of the world. Ultimately, it CAN'T be a country like all others. It is called the Holy Land for a reason. As uncomfortable as it makes some of us, we may have to accept that we Jews cannot necessarily do anything we want in Israel, because we do have to live with one another as Jews, and both the religious (including the haredim) and the secular have to accept each other as Jews (this does not mean forcing each other to approve of the other's actions, but managing to respect the differences).
Posted in: Debating the settlements
06/29/09 01:51 PM
All right, if Ms. Whitson wants Israel to relocate the settlers within the 1967 borders (which are NOT recognized borders, merely cease-fire lines) and compensate Palestinians for their losses, then the Arab countries should compensate the Jews who lived in their lands for centuries (about the same population as the Arabs who were displaced in 1948) for THEIR losses. Lots of luck. She cites the Geneva Convention, but the applicability of this is disputed. She also cites the ordeals the Palestinians go through. Has she thought that if some of those Palestinians didn't commit suicide bombings, shoot rockets into Israeli territory, etc., there would be no need for those checkpoints? I will state again that these 1967 borders were merely cease-fire lines. They are NOT "secure and recognized borders" called for in UN resolutions. And I might remind everyone that Resolution 242 required withdrawal from "territories," NOT "all" or "all the" territories. In a final settlement, these borders are to be negotiated, and they were not anticipated to be the same as the 1967 borders. The Palestinian apologists can complain all they want, but at best the West Bank is "disputed," not "occupied" territory, and it should be determined through honest negotiations where the border should be.
Posted in: Will a settlement freeze bring anything from the other side?
06/29/09 01:40 PM
On the contrary, the Palestinians and the Arab world have everything to do regardless of what the Israelis do with the settlements. They are obligated by the Road Map to actually take action to stop the terrorism and incitement, including in their educational institutions, regarding the conflict. Unfortunately, it seems that their idea of "peace" is different from ours, so it's not likely that even if Israel did freeze the settlements that would make a difference in their stand. The commenter would have us believe that Israel is the criminal in this situation. On the contrary, Israel did not illegally settle this land; many other sources have indicated that these settlements are legal under international law. Jordan, in fact, illegally seized the West Bank; it was captured in war by Israel in 1967. The actual ownership is in dispute at best, since the West Bank was part of the Palestine mandate, which was meant to be a Jewish country. The justification for Jews being in this land is that it is indeed the land promised to the Jews in Biblical times. Sadly, we are hearing the Palestinian narrative repeated. What seems to be ignored is that it is the Arabs (and the Palestinians in the immediate area) that have "systematically brutalized" the Jews, first in Arab countries where they lived for centuries, then in Israel. It's time for a proper settlement of this conflict, but surrendering everything and getting nothing in return is not the answer--the Arabs have to fulfill their commitments before Israel does more for them.
View all comments »