Gena Raivich http://jta.org/user/profile/1105 en-us rkampeas@jta.org Copyright 2009 2009-11-08T;03:12:00-05:00 The last I heard, neither Israel nor the US were any longer filing any vocal protest against Hosny. It was just that Hosny was simply useless for most of the countries that contribute to UNESCO. They simply soberly assessed their interests and said they don't need that jerk. 2009-11-08T;03:12:00-05:00 Kol Ha-Kavod to Rep Cantor for speaking Truth to Power By the way, there will certainly be more Jewish Republicans in the next House of Representatives. I've just heard Sen Joe Lieberman is also thinking of reregistering, now that he's no longer on the Dem ticket, :-) Wouldn't that be nice?! 2009-11-08T;03:12:00-05:00 Ari, don't be silly. Of course the US vetoed every single piece of criticism because they considered it in its own right. When there was no Israel, remember, Franklin D Roosevelt didn't lift half a fingure to destroy the death camps or the railroads leading there. Why? Proportionally, the Jewish population in the US in the 30-40s was larger than it is now. So what gives? The reason US (and UK) did not intervene then was simply because they were not in competition. But after Germany was defeated, and Israel managed to defend itself, suddenly the US became interested in keeping Israel in the Western camp. So the more weakness Israel shows, the less intimidating it is, the less it is also an interesting ally. 2009-11-08T;03:12:00-05:00 Well, well well, DRE again - hasn't changed in the last 70 years I remember quite well the times when Goebbels and Hitler were appealing to the good Jewish groupds to condemn the evil acts perpetrated by the rest of the Jewish-Cosmopolitan-Bolshevist whatever, evildoers. If you would read the "Stuermer" even then, those Germans were also very concerned for the fate of the Muslims in the League of Nations mandate. 2009-11-08T;03:12:00-05:00 There are 3 different areas: A) the eastern Kinneret coast, B) the western part of the Golan heights and C) the eastern part of the Golan heights, which all have different legal qualities. The eastern Kinneret coast (A) was part of the *Palestine* entity as far as 1947, but conquered by the Syrian aggressors in 1948. The Western Golan (B) was given away, illegally, in 1923, against the League of Nations mandate, to the Syrians. The Eastern Golan (C) was won over by Israel in a defensive war, 42 years ago. So part A is clearly not disputed since a *naked* right of conquest reliquished once some other country conquers the territory. For example, Florida was originally conquered by Spain, but then taken over by the Americans. Part B would be theoretically disputed, if the British had the right to give away territory. Which they didn't. Part C is right of conquest in a defensive war - it has the same legal status as the Russian claim to the formerly German Eastern East-Prussia, which the Russians won in 1945. 2009-11-08T;03:12:00-05:00 Andy, there is no such thing as the 1967 border. There is a pre-1967 former cease fire line, but it has no contractual validity in international law. Israel doesn't occupy Yehuda and Shomron, because it didn't belong, legally, to any other state after the establishment of the League of Nations mandate. And according to the League of Nations mandate, Jewish settlement is welcome in the area of that mandate. 2009-11-08T;03:12:00-05:00 Historically, Jews voted Republican before WW1. The same was by the way also true for African Americans. The great reorientation took place in the 12 years before FDR, when successive Republican Presidents aggressively courted WASP aristocracy and slammed the door shut to Jewish immigration. Once FDR was elected, the Democrats successfully insinuated that Republicans were Anti-Jewish, and Republicans passively obliged out of thinking that there are more anti-Jewish, than Jewish votes to be had. Of course, when Obama continues doing what he's doing, at some point he will lose the Jewish vote - just like Republicans did after WWI. 2009-11-08T;03:12:00-05:00 Cheryl, we all know Biting Dawg dislikes real Jews, there is no value in talking to him. At least the Jews who spoke to the Nazis in the 40s had the reasonable expectation they will be the last to be sent to the gas chambers. But talking to Biting Dawg - complete waste of time. Yeah - like your comment on the GhettoStrassen U, exactly the Jstreet mentality, :-) "Please Herr Sturmbahnführer, don't put my kids on that transport, take someone else's" 2009-11-08T;03:12:00-05:00 So the Wise Bard is upholding the Kazar hypothesis? Very much hmmmm. Actually, it is on very thin ground - 70% of Ashkenasi Y-chromosome lineage are definitvely Mid-Eastern/Mesopotamic, not Eastern-European/Central Asian. However, there is one exception, and that is Ashkenasi Levi lineages. Not in the Cohen lineage which is extremely homogeonous, nor the Israel lineages which are 70% Mesopotamic. But in the Ashkenasi Levite - which themselves are relatively small segment - 2-3%, approx half seem to be of Eastern Slavonic background. It is possible that these are indeed the descendents of Khazari Kaggans that were slighlty "demoted", from Cohen to Levi. 2009-11-08T;03:12:00-05:00 Well, Reform and Conservative jews can't ask Catholics to believe in the eternal validity of the Covenant at Har Sinai, if they don't believe it either. It wouldn't be logical, right? As far as I know, those who DO believe in the eternal validity of the Covenant don't take part in the dialogue in the first place. Biting Dawg just spews his antisemitic venom. Thanks for the DNA tests we now actually know that A) Ashkenasi Jews in their overwhelming genomic majority have descended from Mesopotamia, just like the biblical records say. What those tests also show, B) is that the current muslim inhabitants of the area are new-comers from all the corners of the earth, but mainly from the Arabian Peninsula. And Melvyn - you are right, for some reason JTA does not monitor the comments to pull them out. 2009-11-08T;03:12:00-05:00 Agree with Blackie, KK is Judenrat 2009-11-08T;03:12:00-05:00 Michael Levin Yehuda and Shomron are not occupied territories in the first place, since they are the League of Nations Mandate where Jewish settlement is expressly welcome. They never belonged to Palestinians in the first place. Turks could put a claim to the land because of the Right of Conquest, but that expired in the 1st WW. Jordanians could also put a claim to the land because of the Right of Conquest, but that again expired in the 6 day war. So from the view of the international law, there isn't any superior claim to the Land from Turks or Jordanians, and the "palestinians" never conquered it in the first place. 2009-11-08T;03:12:00-05:00 Dear Jason yes, you are right, and unfortunately it is the same loony left that hates Jews, that hates Israel and that hates Republicans. So let's not forget that the Nazis were a loony left party - this is why they could harmonize so well with communists, and why communists rerecruited a lot of former Nazis into their party when they took over East Germany. 2009-11-08T;03:12:00-05:00 David Hicks and DR Evans have strong affinity to the political party in power in the 30-40s Germany. In fact, "Jedem das seine" was the slogan on the entry gates for most of the concentration camps. Their comments would fully justify the appalling actions. For some reason, JTA does not ban antisemitic trolls, but this is the unfortunate outcome. 2009-11-08T;03:12:00-05:00 Well, the Jewish community in South African Republic was always a bit split, on the one hand 'we' did provide lots of financial and manpower resources for the ANC before Apartheid went out. But once it went out, the Jewish efflux has accelerated. A good illustration that we Jews don't think primarily via our wallets. Rather via our fantasies. It's difficult to recommend what Zuma should do. Or if he actually wanted such advice. If South Africa were a company one would tag it as *mature*, it is definitely not an attractive investment. The viciously anti-Israel foreign policy stance definitely doesn't help. Still, Zuma is probably slightly better than Mbeki or Mandela. 2009-11-08T;03:12:00-05:00 The whole Palestine League of Nations mandate is legally a settlement area for Jews. So there is no problem with E Jerusalem. None. Some people could raise the issue that because Jordan conquered the area in 1948, it is theirs according to the right of conquest. However, Israel won that area in 1967, so by right of conquest, the area again belongs to Israel, And that the hotel was owned by Jews before 48 is well accepted anyway. 2009-11-08T;03:12:00-05:00 That comment, Mussa, is really not appropriate. Viral infections are strongly determined by hereditary factors, like presence of viral receptors, immune system regulatory elements etc. All of them are identical whether you personally live in Galut or in Israel. And at the moment, we have no idea about the number of Jewish H1N1 victims in NY etc 2009-11-08T;03:12:00-05:00 Cheryl, they could simply convert through orthodox channels, and then stay. Judaism IS a citizenship. We shouldn't close the eyes to the fact that coversion to Judaism itself is a citizenship and naturalization program. Yes, it may be difficult, but it is definitely not impossible. A lot of people from the reform side simply hate orthodox conversion, and so spread the slander that orthodox conversion is impossible. It is very well possible. And it would be even easier, if the posts for the government funded Dayanim would only be available to people who have served in combat. Yoshua Ben-Nun served in combat and was a Dayan. So what's wrong if current Dayanim have had combat experience, *smile*? 2009-11-08T;03:12:00-05:00 Roger Cohen isn't a liberal mugged by reality, he is simply silly. In essence, there are different ideologies, and if you have the wrong one, you are simply blind. This is how people earn money on the stock markets - those that have the right ideas earn the money, those that have the wrong ones lose it. Same thing all over, applies to opinion columnists too. In effect, it is a good thing that some opinion columnists are plain silly - this way we can easier see which ones earn money, so to speak, and which ones don't. So while I am full of pity for him, I don't like Roger Cohen to change. A wrong prognosticator is much more valuable than a wimp like Peggy Noonan, who is utterly useless. And as for Obama, it is of course much better, if for all his lighteweightness and puffery he simply fails in 2012, than suffer him bumbling along for another 4 years. 2009-11-08T;03:12:00-05:00 Ari, all morality is in one way or the other derived from sacred texts and traditions, there isn't any a priori secular source of morality. It's not just with us Jews, and those heretic religions that evolved out of Judaism, but with Hindus, Japanese, Polynesians or Inkas. So there is nothing wrong, with us Jews, if we hold on to the Torah. There are many religions that are worse. But even if one doesn't follow this, one set of legality is the right of conquest. This is why Dakota belongs to the US, and Italy to Italians. Right of conquest pure and simple. By the way, Torah sanctions right of conquest too. [In parentheses, the only territory for which according to the Torah, right of conquest doesn't apply is Haaretz, because it belongs to Hashem himself. But that is of course only a belief for those who believe in the Torah!] So what does it mean for the Arabs? Well, they had the Right of Conquest between 700-1500; then, the Turks came, and then the British, and the British transferred their right to the League of Nations mandate. And that League of Nations mandate granted us Jews the right to settle throughout Palestine. And in case someone doesn't know Geography, that "Palestine" encompassed Golan and Jordan too. So Israel, as a state of the Jewish community has the perfect right to allow Jews to settle in areas under its control. It's not even a recent right of conquest won in the 1967 war. It is a right it already inherited from the British through the League of Nations mandate, now more than 90 years old. So eat your heart out! 2009-11-08T;03:12:00-05:00 Ari H outposts don't challenge the democratic state, just as settlements before 1948 - after all, Tel Aviv is a settlement too - didn't change the democratic constitution of the Jewish community. And just to revert to another historic example, Anglo-American settlements in Texas prior to the US-Mexican war also did not challenge the democratic constitution of the US. Once you make the mental leap that no-one demands you to commit suicide and give citizenship to hostile civilians, you don't have any problem with a democratic state. 2009-11-08T;03:12:00-05:00 Agree, Bill they really do no screening, *smile*, Hicks, Haman (!) and Perotti are your usual selection of Anti-Zionists. I guess they are attracted to JTA because people like Kampeas can't bring it over themselves NOT to crticize Israel in every 3rd sentence. So they are attracted like flies to that mildly rotting fruit. If JTA were a little bit more pro-israel, the trolls would go somewhere else... You see the same phenomenon with other Israel-critical Jewish websites too. Most of the comments on Haaretz website are from Anti-Zionists too. By comparison, you don't see much of it on Arutz-Sheva. I guess, the trolls are afraid their world view could be subverted if they read Arutz-Sheva. Who knows maybe they will be suddenly overcome by an urge to convert and settle in Yehuda and Shomron, lol? 2009-11-08T;03:12:00-05:00 @Michael Hess Since when is the settlement of Jews in the territory of the League of Nations mandate illegal? Hey? Jews have both the biblical and the international law right to settle in Yehuda and Shomron. The only claim Arabs had to Yehuda and Shomron was the right of conquest. And this right, they lost in 1967 when Jordan attacked Israel, and lost Yehuda and Shomron in the following war. Most of the land (90% or so) in Yehuda and Shomron is state land, so there is no-one to steal from, if Jews settle on this land. 2009-11-08T;03:12:00-05:00 Hmmm OK, so what about "Reshit Chochmah Yirat Hashem"? it clearly says that the beginning of ALL wisdom is FEAR of G-d... If the Bible wants to say something disparaging about some nation or other, it says they didn't fear G-d. Like in "Amalek... did not fear G-d" It's a very clear statement. So in what way would we be better than Amalek, if we do not fear G-d? 2009-11-08T;03:12:00-05:00 Fred, Reform "Rabbis" can't stick to Religion, Hahaha, if they don't have it in the first place. As we all know, they don't really believe in the divinity of the Torah, that's why they make those silly pronouncements. 2009-11-08T;03:12:00-05:00 I see some people in our Shul in London use the Sacks Siddur, and others the Artscroll. Personally, I like ArtScroll better, but it's a pity it doesn't include "Avinu she ba Sshamaim, Tsur Israel ve Goalo..." and "Hu yivarech et Chayalei Tzvah Haganah L’Yisrael..." 2009-11-08T;03:12:00-05:00 Who on earth is Daniel Mackintosh? What's the purpose of concluding the article with a comment from someone who has no idea about the grown-up world? Why doesn't the journal ask him to put up money to back up his opinion if he changes his mind later and emigrates in the next couple of years 2009-11-08T;03:12:00-05:00 Machon Schechter is fighting a rear-guard action. I admire them for that. But in the long-run, conservative movement is running out of steam. A part is eager to merge with Reform. And the other will nolens volens gradually revert to Torah-true Halacha, and so join (and hopefully not subvert) modern orthodoxy 2009-11-08T;03:12:00-05:00 agree with Maurice, not with Nama. There are a lot of Jews that hate Jewish customs, and kosher meat is of course an important part of their hate. So it is not surprizing that Forward worked long and hard to destroy Rubashkin, it is not really about the alleged misconduct, but to price kosher meat out of the market, and to force observant Jews to eat non-kosher meat. It is not really so new. Back at the beginning of last century, there was a lot of opposition to the establishment of kosher food industry, because when it is not there, you simply have no choice but to buy from the Goyim, without bad conscience. But if it is there, you are always forced to make a decision either to buy unkosher and pay less or to buy kosher and pay more. And if you decided for the first, you will have frum people looking down at you, because of your choice. So the idea was to take away the choice... Not much different today. 2009-11-08T;03:12:00-05:00 I think it is intellectually dishonest to ask the Orthodox to abandon major tenets of our faith. If some people don't want to keep the commandments, they can always go to the Reform wing, whether it is conservative, reform, reconstruction or secular humanist. They may hate the lack of approbation from the other side, but it is their choice to make. The orthodox will always define themselves as those who keep the commandments given at Mt Sinai... 2009-11-08T;03:12:00-05:00