Great article by Gideon Levy. But I think he's preaching in the desert. In the 1980s, hundreds of thousands took to the streets in Tel Aviv and elsewhere protesting against Israel's dirty war in Lebanon. Since then, it's been a downhill slide to oblivion for the so-called "left". While I feel for the valiant few that struggle on against racism, housing demolitions, the occupation, military service, war crimes, etc., there's a fundamental problem that isn't being addressed - and that problem is Israel itself. Founded on a lie and a crime, it persists by magnifying both. It cannot do otherwise. For the sake of the Jewish people, the Palestinian people, and all the people of the world, something new is needed. Otherwise, tragedy will repeat itself over and over again.
The National Post and Canadian Jewish Congress attack Independent Jewish Voices (again)
Here is the statement on CJC and IJV dfrom the United Church
http://www.united-church.ca/communications/news/general/100201b
The United Church has many trends within it. This statement is written by the arrogant and cowardly trend, which responds to blackmail by capitulation. Listen to this garbage:
More specifically, the United Church acknowledged its long-standing and historical relationship with Canadian Jewish Congress as the place for dialogue and consultation with the Jewish community of Canada.
How dare these characters arrogate to themselves the power to decide who represents the Jewish community of Canada?
Perhaps next, they will say that the "place for dialogue and consultation" with the world Jewish community is in Israel?
Where should we go for dialogue and consultation with the Christian community of Canada? Rome? How about Christians voting on who represents them?
The United Church should stick to its own affairs if it is intellectually or morally incapable of understanding others.
Of course Unionist
This is the United Church of Giuliano and Gregersen - the leadership which has made its bed with the Zionists and which shamelessly connects Jews with Zionism, as analyzed at length in [url=http://www.rabble.ca/babble/national-news/united-church-plan-attacked-an... series of threads last year[/url]:
"The Canadian Jewish Congress has consistently argued that language that seeks to undermine the existence of the state of Israel is anti-Semitic. And we would agree with that," Rev. Gregersen said. [...]"In 2003, the Church said that we affirm the right of Israel to exist as a Jewish state. And that's a significant commitment. What is means is that we are strongly supportive of the existence of Israel for the sake of the Jewish people in the world."
With "friends" like these, the Jews need no enemies. Yet, throughout the United Church, there are progressive and democratic-minded people and activists in a variety of causes who need support to oppose scumbags like Gregersen and his ilk. The CJC and the National Post are well aware of that progressive trend within the congregations, and it scares the hell out of them.
For the first year or so of IJV's existence the CJC tried to ignore it. That didn't work so they've moved on to a campaign of vilification and attempted isoloation. One should ask why the CJC is so obsessed with IJV that they are making relations between IJV and UCC a major focus of their own discussions with UCC.Goldstone is certainly part of it and there is, similarly, an international campaign of vilification aimed at the South African jurist and self-described Zionist. Related is the "new antisemitism" campaign which has recently been revived and attempts to smear virtually all criticism of Israel as anti-Semitic.
Doesn't the "New Anti-Semitism" go back to the 1970s?
That being said, there definitely an upsurge in the hysteria in the offical Jewish community about any criticism of Israel being either treasonous and/or anti-Semitic. I think we are seeing the beginning of a Jewish break with Zionism, slowly and surely, especially among the youth. It's not a complete break - certainly the Goldstone Report wasn't popular among so-called "mainstream Jews" - but they're certainly very worried about it. On the university campuses the Hillels and other Jewish student groups are usually dominated by the 10-15% of Jewish students who are fanatics. York in particular seems to attract a lot of these people.
ETA: A related point, Jews are far less to reluctant to criticize Israel publicly than they used to be. Certainly in the last 10 years there has been a seachange.
See also this blog entry and the following delightful example of propaganda:
.
I'm not sure I understand what they're doing with that graphic. Are they saying associating with the New Israel Fund makes people turn into unicorns?
I know Professor Rabkin having had some contact with him in Montreal. Don't you think he should have indicated that he is a member of the "Independent Jewish Voices"?
I hardly ever see letter writers identify their organizational affiliation unless they are actually authorized to speak on behalf of the organization. I sign myself as being with this or that organization when I'm writing in an official capacity and do not do so when I'm just speaking for myself and while there may be an expectation that an officer or employee of an organization identify themselves as such when writing a letter to the editor about their organization I don't think there's any such expectation for rank and file members. If there were then then the complexion of every letters to the editor page would be quite different. I frequently see letters about Canadian politics by people I know to be a member of this NDP riding association or that Liberal or Tory riding association who do not declare their party membership in their correspondence (unless they are actually members of a party executive - and even then...)
Or are you suggesting that rank and file or even mid-level members of CJC, Bnai Brith etc who write to newspapers always identify themselves as such? I'm pretty sure we can find examples of that not being the case without much trouble.
Anyway, if posters who were affiliated or even employed by the CJC identified themselves as such when they post to babble then you might have a point. (Not suggesting that you are - just that others have been)
And no sooner do I write the above than a letter appears in the National Post from one Marilyn Shapiro assailing Rabkin for not mentioning his "deep connection" to IJV.
Shapiro defends the CJC as "mainstream", attacks IJV and hammers home her point about Rabkin (and Assaly) saying:
Why did both these individuals not disclose their obvious associations with these anti-Zionist groups? I guess they must be ashamed of their associations. Or do they have something else to hide?
So what's wrong with that?
Well...
...on the far left is Marilyn Shaprio. To her right are Wendy Lampert, CJC Director of Community Relations; Len Rudner, CJC Ontario Regional Director; Ontario Premier Dalton McGuinty; Igor Ellyn, CJC Board of Directors; David Katz, Chair CJC Charities Committee. The picture is from a reception the CJC held at Queen's Park last year. Why was Shapiro in that picture? It could be because she was the CJC's delegate to the most recent World Jewish Congress (see page 12 of the January 2009 CJC newsletter)
Anyway, as I was saying Martha, CJC operatives often write letters to the editor without identifying their affilations so I don't see the problem with Rabkin, who holds no position in IJV and is not a paid staffer, doing the same. Of course, I didn't expect my point to be proven so spectacularly and hypocritically by Marilyn Shapiro. Please give her my thanks.
Nicely sleuthed, Mycroft.
Anyway, I think Martha and Marilyn have a point. In future, when I write letters to the editor, in the interests of full disclosure, I will identify myself as "Caucasian", "Jew", "Heterosexual", and member of a Trade Union - that way, readers can decide in context whether my views have any merit.
Good work, Mycroft.
How dare these characters arrogate to themselves the power to decide who represents the Jewish community of Canada?
Perhaps next, they will say that the "place for dialogue and consultation" with the world Jewish community is in Israel?
Where should we go for dialogue and consultation with the Christian community of Canada? Rome? How about Christians voting on who represents them?
The United Church should stick to its own affairs if it is intellectually or morally incapable of understanding others.
Gee, those were exactly my thoughts when I read Farber arrogating to himself the power to give paternalistic advice and guidance to the UCC.
Farber is clearly clueless about presbyterian organization, and I suspect intellectually and morally resistant to understanding them. Unfortunately, he appears to have succeeded temporarily in intimidating some national council gasbags into placating him, a state of affairs that will in no sense be settled in the church as a whole by this statement, which they will no doubt find out at the next conference, if they aren't already hearing it, as I should think they would be.
In other news, Ezra Levant has followed up on his last taunting of Irwin Cotler by calling Cotler an Uncle Tom and the Liberal Party's "porch Jew," and gossiping about the "court Jews" in the party in general. I believe the original taunt was "house Jew." I don't think I should link to Levant's site here, but if anyone can't find this by googling, send me a PM.
That's what I meant, though, by the ramping up. Even for Ezra, isn't that 'way over the top?
Ha, Mycroft, awesome. :D
What do you have to say to that, Martha B? :D
“We get that the United Church is a decentralized body, but it is incumbent on the national leadership to issue guidance.”
And Mr Farber, apparently, feels it is incumbent upon him to issue guidance to an organization that is formed of presbyteries what is incumbent upon them.
Head ... desk ... Bernie Farber owes me a keyboard.
Wow. Where does one get that sense of entitlement?
Farber likes organizing everything. He even told the Toronto Pride how to organize a pride parade. Pride was meant to be non-political in his opinion. Maybe Bernie should have a reality TV show where he can go to different organizations and families and teach them how to organize different events and activties.
"Dear Fatah Party of eastern Israel:"
"I'll tell you how to negotiate. You must lay down all weapons, recognize Iarael, accept Israel's terms of surrender, and then negotiate in Egypt with an Egyptian mediator. Don't try for mediation through a European. Certainly don't call for a boycott in Europe of Israeli products and services. You'll only make things worse for yourself. Israel is like your bigger brother who grabs your arm and then says, 'Don't hit yourself. Don't hit yourself.'"
When I think about Bernie, we could use a good man like him to help us organize our anti-prorogation movement. Maybe he could suggest that we should just send letters to our local MPs via Bernie's office. He can then send them express via Garbageolator courier.
Marylin Shapiro was at a WJC conclave and a Queens Park event honoring CJC? So what? I understand that all Canadian Jews who support the positions of CJC and give to their local UJA can be part of CJC. I know some people who were at the Q!ueens Park event as well but are not members of any committee of CJC or on its Board. If in fact like Rabkin Shapiro sits on a CJC Board or committee then that should have been stated, Otherwise unlike Rabkin she is a member of the Canadian jewish community free to come to plenaries and conclaves as is any Jew who meets the criteria. Heck as I recall Ebie Wiesfeld attended the CJC plenary as did Diane Ralph.
Gus, the point isn't that she's a member of CJC (and yes, she's a member and a quite senior one, otherwise she wouldn't have been a CJC delegate to the WJC) , it's that she's a member of CJC but didn't mention that in her letter in which she also assailed Yakov Rabkin for not having said he's in IJV. Simply put, she's a hypocrite.
Actually Mycroft there seems to have been many who went to Israel for the WJC conclave. In order to attend their conclaves you do not have to be a mamber of CJC . In fact many Jewish groups from around the world bring jewish delehgates to the WJC conclave. These people are not necessarily Board members or committee members, just committed Jews who want to participate.
Unless you have proof that Shapiro is a Board member or sits on any official committees of CJC the analogy simply doesn't hold. The problem for you Akamycroft, is that you don't get the fact that the vast majority of Jews , literally thousands, affiliate in some waay with UJA or CJC. They give money to UJA are they members? They attend CJC sponsored events, are they members? All synagogues are under the CJC unbrella, are all these synagogue members also "members" of CJC? Of course not. Continue to play this any way you want but it doeant fly
Gus, you have twice now admitted that Shapiro is "affiliated" with the CJC. At the very least she is "deeply involved" which is exactly what she says of Rabkin and Reverend Assalay (who is not a member of IJV but who Shapiro assails for not stating his supposed involvement with IJV in his letter). Rabkin, by the way, is not a member of any IJV board or committee either so he has no greater status in IJV than what you are claiming for Shapiro in regards to CJC. In other words, any way you slice it, and regardless of how you try to spin it, her letter is hypocritical.
The point remains she cannot assail Rabkin and Assalay for not stating that they are "involved" with IJV (even without being a member as in Assalay's case) while failing to state her own involvement with CJC.
Is that so akamycroft? Well perhaps you haven't seen this from the IJV website.. Its actually an article written by Yacov Rabkin where he describes himself as a member of IJV
"The author is Professor of History at the University of Montreal, a member of Independent Jewish Voices Montreal, currently Visiting Scholar at La Trobe University. His recent book is A Threat from Within: A Century of Jewish Opposition to Zionism. These comments were made at the State Library of Victoria, Melbourne, after the play was performed there on May 18.
http://ijvcanada.org/ijv-activities-vji-nos-activites/seven-jewish-child...
Incidentally Gus, the CJC Newsletter I was referring to also has a lead article titled "Record Canadian Representation at WJC Plenary" which states:
a record 20 Canadian Jewish Congress delegates participated, the largest Canadian contingent ever
(emphasis added)
So yes, she was a Canadian Jewish Congress delegate. If you want to argue that this isn't proof she's also a CJC member go ahead but I think any reasonable person would see your claim as making a distinction without a difference.
Is that so akamycroft? Well perhaps you haven't seen this from the IJV website.. Its actually an article written by Yacov Rabkin where he describes himself as a member of IJV
Um Gus, I didn't say Rabkin isn't a member of IJV, I said he "is not a member of any IJV board or committee" in the same way you said Shapiro doesn't belong to a CJC board or committee. I did, however, say Reverend Assalay, who Shapiro also attacked for not identifying his "involvement" with IJV, is not a member of the group.
Now please stop, you're embarassing yourself.
The most important point is this:
Rabkin and Assaly both write about the issue.
Shapiro responds to nothing in their content - just attacks them personally (and, of course, groundlessly, as Mycroft has ably shown).
By the way, Shapiro's use of the tired and repetitive lying adjective "mainstream" indelibly outs her as an agent of the CJC. It's the word they use to try to carve themselves a "centre" niche between the nutjobs of the BB and the real enemy - the Jews with a conscience.
But it doesn't matter who Shapiro is. What matters is that she has nothing to say, except character assassination. And that's a good thing.
This is all too funny and is really a good example of how folks on the peripherary of the Canadian Jewish community simply don't understand how the community functions.
CJC is not a "membership" organization. Any Canadian Jew who supports the mandate of CJC and gives to their local uja campaign is eligible to participate in its events, plenaries, meetings etc. That is why 20 Canadian Jews can go to a World Jewish Congress event in Israel as part of a CJC delegation. It a way to involve Canadian Jews in their community.
For the same reason CJC plenaries attract thousands as do other CJC events like Darfur Shabbat, and the struggle for Soviet and Syrian Jewry in which tens of nthousands of Canadian Jews participated under the auspices of CJC. They were not members; they were part of the Jewish community of which thousands are "affiliated either through their temple or hadassah or many other groups or just as individuals to CJC.
I went to the last WJC conclave in 2004 . I went under the auspices of CJC with 14 others. Absolutely none of us ever had any connection to CJC in the past. None of us belonged to any of the myriad of Boards and committees the CJC operates. We were, like Marylin Shapiro, Canadian Jews supportive of the CJC and UJA work. That's it.
So I guess you can continue to flog this horse mycroft but in fact you are flogging a dead horse. Time to stop,.
In other news, Ezra Levant has followed up on his last taunting of Irwin Cotler by calling Cotler an Uncle Tom and the Liberal Party's "porch Jew," and gossiping about the "court Jews" in the party in general. I believe the original taunt was "house Jew." I don't think I should link to Levant's site here, but if anyone can't find this by googling, send me a PM.
We should ask Ezra Levant how many Jewish Conservative MPs there are.
One way for the Conservatives not to make inroads in the Jewish community is by continuing to attack Cotler in this manner. He is highly respected in the Jewish community.
CJC is not a "membership" organization.
I think what you mean to say is that the CJC is not a democratic organization.
We should ask Ezra Levant how many Jewish Conservative MPs there are.
Rabbi Ezra has made them all honourary Jews. LIke John Duncan, conservative MP from BC (and "spy"), who sent me 10%er lecturing me about Jewish values by castigating the liberals as an anti-semitic organization.
Anyone watch The National last night? Canada as the stupidest most pro-Israel nation on earth?
With Frank Dimant praising Harper saying "he's not an honest broker and doesn't try to listen to both sides"!
Just how stupid is Dimant? He must be in his own little echo chamber if he thinks those words actually make Harper look good.
Here's something to pull out the next time someone says using the word apartheid is "hate speech":
Barak: make peace with Palestinians or face apartheid
"As long as in this territory west of the Jordan river there is only one political entity called Israel it is going to be either non-Jewish, or non-democratic," Barak said. "If this bloc of millions of Palestinians cannot vote, that will be an apartheid state."
The CBC National report can be watched [url=http://www.cbc.ca/video/#/News/TV%20Shows/The%20National/ID=1404263966]h... - start at about the 22 min. mark.
I expect last night's comments will be dissected by tonight's regular Thursday At Issue panel. I can hardly wait.
Here's something to pull out the next time someone says using the word apartheid is "hate speech":
Good quote, Mycroft - although I confess I don't understand exactly what Barak is saying. The story continues:
He described Israel and the Palestinian territories as the historic "land of Israel" to which Israelis had a right.
"We have to demarcate a border within the land of Israel," he said.
"We have a linkage, we have a right, but the reality of standing on the stage of history in realistic terms requires us to pay attention to international constraints."
Sounds as if he's calling for a Bantustan compromise, not even quite a two-state solution - i.e., apartheid in a slightly different package.
We have gone very much off topic here seems to me.
We have gone very much off topic here seems to me.
Your comment is totally off topic. In fact, you're the only person in this thread who has not yet commented on the topic. But thanks for the observation.
I am an avid reader of this site. I dont post often and after your response I may not respond when you are in the thread. Your admonition was ill-advised and certainly unecessary.
In the end you are wrong. The title of this thread is: The National Post and Canadian Jewish Congress attack independent Jewish voices again. How are the latest posts on topic?
See Mycroft, when one form of diversion fails, they try another.
It is absolutely essential IMO that we not engage them in these provocations. I would love to see IJV simply issuing statements and organizing activities in the name of the Jewish community as a whole. The fanatics and the Zionists should never be allowed to get away with their "mainstream" thesis. It's very cleverly packaged. Jews of conscience will only be marginalized if we see ourselves that way and allow ourselves to be marginalized. [i]We are the mainstream[/i] - the representatives of the enlightened and progressive trend of Judaism throughout the centuries. Let the Dimants and Farbers of this world attack all they like. They can't change that historical truth.
That nonsense last night on the CBC was gag worthy, at best, and I lost complete respect for Wendy M, not that I had much left anyway.
Maybe her or Peter are going for the next round of Senate appointees?
As for him stating that Harper was not an honest broker and basically infering that he and other Jewish people love it that he is so..or at least 65% of Jewish people in Canacda do, I was gob smacked.
Re: United Church meeting with CJC and United Church statement following meeting.
The tone of the United Church website statement is, to say the least, uncomfortable. In true 'liberal' fashion, the church has backed away from confrontation, accepted brow-beating and intimidation from the CJC, and sold Independent Jewish Voices down the drain. I am sure, somewhere in the back of the church participants' minds, some nagging questions remain -
such as:
Have we chosen "power and principalities" over truth and justice?
Will we be as amenable to criticism from Muslim lobbyists as we have been from the Jewish lobby?
And what was Judas's problem, anyway?
Perhaps some 'discernment' is in order...
Thank you ying yang for not succumbing to Unionist's bullying and gettin back on topic. The UCC had already distanced itself from IJV (needlessly I believe) so I wonder why this had to be re-done. As for CJC, complain about it all you want but it knows how to advocate.
Cookiebehbeh no one's bullying, so stop being provocative.
Within Israel the attacks on even the Zionist left is intensifying.
Attack on NIF and Israeli Human Rights Groups
Dear Friends and Supporters,
In light of the smear campaign being run by a group called "Im Tirtzu," it should be clear to all that we are engaged in a struggle for Israeli democracy. That is not an exaggeration. This is also a not to be missed opportunity, because many people are waking up and realizing the just how dangerous the situation has become. Please find below a description of the situation, a list of things that every one of us must do that was developed in an emergency meeting with the New Israel Fund and fellow Israeli human rights organizations on Monday, and helpful links. Many of the links in the body of this message are to Hebrew websites, but there are English language links below.
To paraphrase Mattathias the Macabee, "Everyone who is for democracy with us."
Many of you know that the de-legitimization campaign being waged against Israeli human rights organizations was taken to another level on Friday when Ben Caspitattacked the New Israel Fund (NIF) and many Israel NGO's (Including RHR) in the newspaper Ma'ariv and on the NRG news website. The attack was based on the vicious and inciteful report issued by the extreme right wing organization, "Im Tirtzu," claiming that most of the information in the Goldstone Report incriminating Israel was supplied by Israeli NGO's supported by the NIF. A second Ma'ariv/NRG journalist, Ben Dror Yemini, added an additional article in Maariv on Monday. On Wednesday the chair of the Knesset Constitutional Committee MK David Rotem threatened to set up a sub committee to investigate funding from abroad, and, during a special Knesset debate on the Im Tirtzu report, MK Otniel Schneller called for a Parliamentary Committee to look into what Israeli NGO's passed on to the Goldstone Committee. On Channel B radio this morning (Thursday) MK Yisrael Hasson went so far as to say that he intends to check whether Israeli HR organizations are receiving money from enemies, and that if he were Hamas he would be setting up three organizations to do what Israeli HR organizations do.
The smear campaign has included expensive banners on the YNET and NRG websites (the banners are still on the NRG website), a full page ad in the Jerusalem Post, and who knows where and what else. The various statements in the ads, banners and on the Im Tirtzu website include an ugly caricatureof former MK Naomi Chazan (currently NIF chairperson) with a large demonic horn with "NIF" written on it is growing out of her forehead (In Hebrew, "keren" is both "fund" and "horn."). This caricature sends shivers up my spine as I recall the pictures of Yitzhak Rabin z"l dressed in an S.S. uniform at that infamous demonstration in Zion Square in Jerusalem not so long before he was murdered. A sampling of the texts accompanying the caricature include:
"Now it is a fact: Naomi's fund endangers the State."
"We love Naomi Chazan and hate the IDF" (Signs at an Im Tirzu demonstration outside her house dressed as Hamasniks with keffiyas.)
"Fact: the NIF headed by Naomi Chazan is behind the Goldstone reports defamation of the IDF"
"In the past three years Naomi Chazan's fund granted 8 million dollars to 16 anti-Zionist organizations that gave the ammunition to charge Israel with war crimes."
"Naomi Goldstone Chazan"
True, it is difficult to know where to draw the line between harsh but legitimate criticism, and incitement. However, Im Tirtzu has clearly crossed red lines, lied and mislead. I find it very disturbing that YNET sold banner space to Im Tirtzu, but in December refused to run a "B'Tselem ad campaign on Gaza, saying that they did not want to defend the public.I have only quickly read through the section on RHR in the Im Tirtzu report, but the "proof" that we are anti-Zionist and are responsible for the Goldstone report was the fact that the report mentions items the letter we send to the Israeli attorney general calling for an independent and transparent Israeli investigation, the petition we published in HaAretz and on the mini-website we set up for our Gaza campaign and our High Court appeals and other activities on behalf of Palestinian human rights.
Nothing in our activities, those of the NIF, or in the activities of the other targeted organizations justifies Im Tirtzu's vicious and dangerous campaign. The Im Tirtzu campaign crosses so many red lines that even the controversial Christian Zionist Reverend Hagee is repudiating it. As I write, there are initial reports that Reverent Hagee has now announced that he will stop funding Im Tirtzu.
I could be content to simply issue a call to defend democracy and claim Lashon HaRa (slander). We could minimize our connection to Goldstone and disassociate ourselves from the NGO's who contributed information to the committee. However, that would be wrong. The struggle of RHR and our partners is just and essential for the future of Israel. Our struggle is a just and Zionist struggle. It is the struggle over "Who are we" and who we want to be. It is a painful struggle, and we pray that an independent investigation will prove that all of our suspicions were wrong. And yes, our struggle is faithful to what we and our partners have said consistently from the outset, "Citizens must not be targets - not Israelis in Sderot and not Palestinians in Gaza." We care about every human being because, by virtue of being human, we are all created in God's Image. I am proud of all that we and our partners have done and are doing here in Israel to achieve an independent and transparent Israeli investigation. I only wish that we were doing more.
The de-legitimization did not begin on Friday. As always in these matters, evil grows when good people prefer not to know. At our Gaza conference in May, Im Tirtzu demonstrated outside with "Matza dipped in blood." We of course invited them in to be a part of the conversation. (A few came in, asked one question, and then left.)
Im Tirtzu's report cites Gerald Steinberg's "NGO Monitor," an organization which for years has smeared any NGO which Professor Steinberg defines as "anti-Israel" or "extremist," without ever giving the public a definition of these terms which they throw around. This is but one example of how The Monitor pretends to be holding NGO's to standards of reliability, but consistently violates these very same standards. I once asked Professor Steinberg how it is that they advertise themselves as an organization holding all Middle East NGO's to standards, but in practice only reports on NGO's that deal with Israeli HR violations. He answered that Israel is in a battle for her survival and that the real goal of his organization was to be a part of the PR battle. The Monitor has been working in the Knesset and abroad to dry up funding sources for Human Rights organizations, as well as left wing organizations.
We must take action along two lines:
1. All those who value Israel's democracy, especially those who do not agree with us regarding Gaza, must say as one, "Sharp public debate yes - Incitement no!"
2. We can not expect the entire public to defend our position calling for an Israeli independent and transparent inquiry into the Gaza War. However, we can not accept a situation in which all that is said publicly after this attack is "Well, you are right that what HR organizations did was controversial and we don't agree with everything either, but that is democracy." We must say loudly and clearly:
a. The positions taken by Im Tirtzu, NGO Monitor, Ben Caspit and Ben-Dror Yemini endanger the State and abandon our children.
b. A moral army is not handed to us on a silver platter, but is achieved through constant vigilance, willingness to investigate, ask questions, and educate in ways that make it clear that we do more than pay lip service to our declared values.
c. If former attorney Mani Mazuz had not waited until the day after he stepped down to support an independent investigation, but had ordered one a year ago when Israeli HR organizations first wrote to him, there might never have been a Goldstone Commission. If today the Government would not allow Defense Minister Ehud Barak (Perhaps the person with the most to lose if an investigation would sadly find that there had been systematic violations of international law and Jewish values.) to block an Israeli independent transparent investigation, we might yet avoid an international investigation.
d. We are Israeli patriots and Zionists who believe with all our heart that what we are demanding is not only the just and Jewish thing to do, but is what is best for our country.
The Talmud tells of Nahum Ish Gam Zo, who whatever ill befell him would say "Gam zo l'tova," (This is also for the good.) There is no pleasure to be gained from this threat to our democracy and the danger both to our society and to targeted individuals should in no way be dismissed. However, for too long, too many have been unaware of what is happening in our society. If history will record that this was the moment in which supporters of Israeli democracy and human rights united to defend those values they held most dear, then Gam zo l'tova.B'Vrakha (In Blessing)
Rabbi Arik W. Ascherman
Executive Director Rabbis for Human Rights
Cookiebehbeh, if you want to post here you gotta develop a thick skin. Hell that was Unionist just being uinonist 
And more on NIF http://www.forward.com/articles/124920/
Cookiebehbeh, if you want to post here you gotta develop a thick skin. Hell that was Unionist just being uinonist
Jaku maybe you didn't get where I asked Cookiebehbeh not to be provocative. How 'bout not being Jaku for a bit.
Apologies OG it was honestly meant as an attempt at humour...
Good for Caplan! Could he be "one of the few Jews in the world opposed to Israel as a Jewish homeland", in the carefully scripted words of Thornhill resident [url=http://www.nationalpost.com/opinion/story.html?id=2515787]Marilyn Shapiro[/url]?
Every time a Jew of conscience speaks out, it is another blow against the "anti-Israel = anti-Jewish" Harper-Dimant-Farber "mainstream". This conscience is awakening around the world.
I expect last night's comments will be dissected by tonight's regular Thursday At Issue panel. I can hardly wait.
Mansbridge had Gerald Caplan give the response. Caplan said it was wrong for the Conservatives to treat Israel as Canada's best friend in the whole wide world, instead of holding Israel to account.
You mean Harper-Ignatieff-Layton-Dimant=Farber to be sure...
[URL=http://yahyaottawa.blogspot.com/2010/02/rebuttal-to-national-post-and-cj... Ralph[/URL] of IJV answers Jonathan Kay's (and others') attacks on her in the National Post.
From above link:
Richard Falk, the U.N. Special Rapporteur on Palestinian Human Rights, calls this strategy the “politics of deflection, the tendency by Israel to attack the messenger in order to avoid the message.”
For proof, check out this thread.
Thanks for this, skdadl. The struggle continues.
You mean Harper-Ignatieff-Layton-Dimant=Farber to be sure...
Didn't Iggy once say that the shelling of Qana was a war crime?