web analytics
December 7, 2016 / 7 Kislev, 5777

Posts Tagged ‘act’

Emerging Amona Deal: Compensation for Arab Claimants, Regulations Act Preserved, Evacuation On

Monday, December 5th, 2016

A deal has been struck between Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu (Likud) and Habayit Hayehudi Chairman Nftali Bennett regarding the proposed Arrangements Act on Jewish settlements in Judea and Samaria, Walla reported Monday morning. The bill will be submitted for a preliminary vote by the Knesset plenum without a retroactive application to include Amona, a community in Samaria slated for demolition by the Supreme Court come December 25. In return for this concession on the part of the settlements movement, the government will defend the new law once it is approved in a third plenum vote, even if AG Avichai Mandelblit persists in his refusal to do it.

That part, about government insisting on defending a law against an appeal at the Supreme Court even when the AG (whose function also include being government’s legal counsel), is considered almost revolutionary by rightwing politicians, who view the AG and the individual legal counsels appointed to every government ministry as tyrannical extensions of the largely leftwing judicial civil service.

Last week, Mandelblit approved a short-term solution – moving the Amona residents to nearby vacant land which can be declared as belonging to absentee landlords and therefore may be appropriated by the state. The new deal requires finding proper relocation for all of the 42 families of Amona. To do that, the government intends to petition the Supreme Court once more for a postponement of the evictions, this time for 30 days – after the court has already denied its appeal for a 7-month postponement.

The new deal reportedly also includes a legal solution for the residents of the Netiv Ha’avot neighborhood in Gush Etzion as well as nine homes in Ofra, next door to Amona, which the Supreme Court has also slated for demolition and eviction. The state will be obligated to assign them substitute lands and homes.

Some in the settlement enterprise have suggested that moving the Amona residents to newly obtained state land is still an improvement over the idea of removing them from the area altogether, because the Mountain will not be deserted of Jews, with Ofra and Amona II maintaining their Jewish presence there.

Should the new bill be submitted this week, possibly even on Monday, without the retroactive application to Amona, the Habayit Hayehudi politicians will be expected to prevent clashes between the residents and security forces.


An Act That Echoes Through Time

Friday, November 18th, 2016

“And Avraham awoke in the morning, hitched his donkey, and took his two lads, and Yitzchak with him. He split wood for the sacrifice and went to the place that Hashem had commanded him to.” – Bereishis 22:3


Avraham Avinu was given a supreme test, and one of the greatest challenges ever presented to man: “Take your son, your only son, the son that you love…

One has the right to ask, “What was so great about this act?” Even today we witness people who are willing to slaughter themselves – or their children – in the name of their beliefs, and we certainly don’t consider them great. Why is this act considered one of the ultimate accomplishments of man?

The answer to this question lies in understanding not so much what Avraham did, but how he did it.

Avraham lived to serve Hashem. His every waking moment was devoted to spreading Hashem’s name and bringing others to recognize their Creator. However, he knew that only through a distinct and separate people could the name of Hashem be brought to its glory. His destiny and ultimate aspiration was to be the father of the Jewish nation.

Yet for many years that dream didn’t come true.

Avraham was 100 years old when he had Yitzchak. He waited month after month, year after year, begging, beseeching, and imploring Hashem for this son – but to no avail. Finally, in a most miraculous manner, at an age when both he and his wife couldn’t possibly parent a child, the angels told him the news: “Your greatest single ambition, to be the father of the Klal Yisrael, will come true through this child Yitzchak.”

Avraham’s Relationship With His Son

From the moment Yitzchak was born, he was the perfect child. Not only was he nearly identical to Avraham in look and in nature, from the moment he came to the age of understanding, he went in the ways of his father. Avraham had many students, but there was only one who was truly devoted to knowing and understanding the ways of his teacher. That was Yitzchak.

The bond of love and devotion Avraham felt toward his son is hard to imagine. The nature of a tzdaddik is to be kindly, compassionate, and giving. When a tzaddik connects to an almost equally perfect tzaddik, the bond of love and devotion between them is extremely powerful. For years, this relationship grew.

Avraham wasn’t asked to kill his child; he was asked to bring him as an olah, to perform all of the details that are done to a sacrifice in the Beis HaMikdash. Many a person has difficulty learning the particulars of bringing a korban when it is done to a sheep or a goat, but this wasn’t an animal. This was his son.

This refined, caring, loving tzaddik was asked to slaughter and then prepare his most beloved child and talmid as a sacrifice – not to sit by and allow it, not to witness it, but to do it with his own hands.

You would imagine that if such a person could actually muster the self-mastery to do this, it would be with a bitter and heavy heart.

Yet that isn’t how the Torah describes the events.

And Avraham got up early in the morning, hitched up his donkey,” and set off on his journey.

Rashi quotes the Midrash that explains this was out of character. Avraham was an extremely wealthy and honored individual. He had hundreds of loyal students, and many, many slaves. Hitching up his donkey was not something he normally did. It was done for him by a servant. Yet this time was different because “love blinds.” Avraham was so enraptured with this great act that he got carried away and did something he never would have done himself. He hitched up his own donkey.

The Crescendo

With a calm demeanor and joy in his heart, Avraham set out on a three-day expedition to accomplish this great mitzvah. Along the way, Yitzchak discovered he was to be the sacrifice. He said to his father, “Please bind me so that I don’t twitch and spoil the sacrifice. A korban must be slaughtered in a particular manner. Any deviation and the sacrifice is invalid. Yitzchak was afraid he might inadvertently move and spoil the process. Therefore he said, “Please bind me.” (Hence the term “akeidas Yitzchak,” the binding of Yitzchak.)

Avraham did just that. He tied Yitzchak’s arms and legs behind him, put him on the mizbeach, and raised up the knife to kill his son.

The Midrash tells us that Avraham stood over Yitzchak “with tears in his eyes and great joy in his heart.” The tears in his eyes were the tears of a father parting with his most beloved son, but there was joy in his heart because of the fantastic opportunity to show Hashem that nothing, not even his most beloved son, was more precious to him than serving his Creator.

The question becomes: how is it possible for a man to make the ultimate sacrifice in a manner that seems to transcend every emotional limitation?

Akeidas Yitzchak was a singular event that actualized the years of extraordinary perfection that represented Avraham Avinus life. Because he lived in this world, he felt real love for his child, but even that love was something he harnessed to show his greater love of Hashem – the perfect balance of a man in complete control.

Rabbi Ben Tzion Shafier

Knesset Approves Arrangements Act in Preliminary Vote 58 – 50

Wednesday, November 16th, 2016

The effort to save the Jewish community of Amona from demolition and eviction has overcome its first big hurdle Wednesday afternoon, as the Knesset plenum passed the Arrangements Act by a vote of 58 to 50 with no abstention. The latest version of the bill, which now goes to deliberations in committee, lets the Arab claimants against Jewish settlements in Judea and Samaria to hold their title to the land while receiving market value compensation for it. The new law applies strictly to lands impounded by the Israeli government and not disputes over land that was settled without government sanction.

Finance Minister and Chairman of Kulanu Moshe Kahlon was reportedly uncertain whether his party should support the coalition bill, despite the fact that they were bound by “coalition discipline.” Kahlon was, and continues to be anxious about the possibility of a clash between the government and Israel’s Supreme Court, which is invested in seeing Amona, alongside the rightwing coalition, being brought down to their knees come December 25, the day decreed by the court.

Habayit Hayehudi Chairman and Education Minister Naftali Bennett, as well as Justice Minister Ayelet Shaked and the entire national religious faction refused to negotiate either the wording or the timing of the new legislation, which had been approved by the government on Sunday.

A spokesman for Habayit Hayehudi told Srugim, “Interestingly, what the prime Minster hasn’t been able to do for an entire year we suddenly managed to do in three days.”

However, both Minister Kahlon and Coalition Chairman David Bitan (Likud) warned that the bill would be suspended should it meet resistance from the Supreme Court.


Bennett, Netanyahu, Clash over Amona, Regulations Act

Sunday, November 13th, 2016

Sunday’s cabinet meeting witnessed an escalation of the conflict between Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu (Likud) and Education Minister and Habayit Hayehudi Chairman Naftali Bennett, over the fate of a Jewish settlement named Amona in Samaria. The clock is ticking on the demolition of Amona and the evacuation of between 40 and 50 families, as decreed by the Supreme Court — no later than December 25, 2016. Bennett proposed the cabinet debate the proposed Arrangements Act, which compels Arab claimants to accept market value compensation for their land. Netanyahu attacked the idea, calling it “childish and irresponsible,” suggesting it might earn a moment’s relief, while his AG is trying to get a seven-month postponement from the court.

A whopping 25 out of Netanyahu’s 30 Knesset Members have signed a commitment to pass the Arrangements Act, which would force a war between the government and the high court. In 2014, the high court struck down a lower court’s judgement awarding $85,700 to 6 (anonymous) Arab plaintiffs who claimed they had been affected by the Amona settlement on their land.

Things went wild at the meeting when Minister Miri Regev (Likud) stated that “the Prime Minister has never said that he opposes the Arrangements Act.” Netanyahu turned to her and said, “I don’t need to be defended from the spins, both of politicians and the media.” At which point Regev continued, saying “it’s a shame Habayit Hayehudi are making it look as if only they support the arrangements and the Likud doesn’t.” So Bennett confronted the PM, asking if he really did support the proposed bill, and Regev exclaimed, “Of course he supports the Arrangements Act.” So Netanyahu turned on her, saying, “I don’t need your defense, Miri, we won’t waste our time on bloggers here.” And Bennett pressed in response, “Excellent, let’s vote on the bill,” so Netanyahu called him childish.

Habayit Hayehudi has been adamant on their plan to introduce the bill for approval by the Ministerial Legislative Committee, chaired by their own Justice Minister Ayelet Shaked, despite vociferous objections from AG Avichai Mandelblit. Netanyahu declared that introducing the bill now would harm his own petition that the Supreme Court postpone by seven months its decree against Amona.

Last week, Coalition Chairman David Bitan (Likud) was quoted as saying “there’s plenty of time to pass the Arrangements Act should the Supreme Court reject the state’s petition to postpone the evacuation.”

Bennett, who last week declared that Trump’s election meant the end of the Palestinian State, urged the Netanyahu government to take advantage of the change in Washington to push pro-settlement legislation. “It’s time to stop treating as second class citizens the tens of thousands of residents in Judea and Samaria who serve in the Army Reserves and pay taxes,” Bennett declared.

Habayit Hayehudi MKs Bezalel Smotrich and Shuli Mualem, who authored the Regulations Act, sent Netanyahu a letter urging him to “act in the window of opportunity that was created” and pass the bill. “The election results in the US have ended a complex relationship with the current administration and [made possible] the creation of a different relationship with the new administration,” the two MKs wrote, suggesting that “a combination of a new spirit in the White House and the fact that the US is in a period of transition in government have created a historic opportunity to confirm the Jewish settlement enterprise in Judea and Samaria.”


Right Won’t Budge as AG Rejects ‘Softer’ Regulations Act

Friday, November 4th, 2016

The Regulation Act, aimed at stopping the hateful phenomenon by which anti-Zionist NGOs haul into court Arabs who claim ownership of Judea and Samaria land where Jewish communities have lived for decades—followed by the court’s decision to raze said communities out of existence—is in its final stages before being submitted for a first reading in the Knesset plenum. The new law will compel the claimants who proves his case in court to accept the same outcome any claimant does over on the 1949 side of the green line, namely, market value compensation, possibly accompanied by a fine if malice was involved.

However, in preparation for the vote on the Regulation Act, authored by MK Bezalel Smotrich (Habayit Hayehudi), the law was modified, softened, if you will, to include an option whereby should the claimant be unhappy with the offered compensation, they are allowed to sue in Israeli court.

Several MKs involved in the new legislation have told Makor Rishon that its chances to pass are high. But that does not seem to alter AG Avihai Mandelblit’s objection to the very idea of a Regulation Act, which, as he told Justice Minister Ayelet Shaked, would constitute a violation of international law.

A decision to take the bill to a vote would forever alter the relationship between the Netanyahu government and its legal counselors, who so far have been used to riding roughshod over proposed legislation, getting elected ministers to kill bills based strictly on their recommendations, warnings and, occasionally, threats.

“Gone are the days when the politicians were guests and the jurists owned the house,” Likud and Habayit Hayehudi MKs told Makor Rishon this week. Indeed, Amona appears to be merely the excuse for this new confrontation between rightwing legislators and the Supreme Court. The real cause célèbre here is the curbing of Supreme Court powers, something a majority of Israelis appear to crave.


A Supreme Act Of Love Revisited

Thursday, November 3rd, 2016

Nineteen years ago, in the December 12, 1997 issue, The Jewish Press published in “Lessons in Emunah” a text I wrote entitled “A Supreme Act of Love.”

It was about the story of a young boy, during WWII, in Nazi Occupied France, who was learning for his upcoming bar mitzvah in 1944 in the Shul of Brive-la-Gaillarde (Corrèze) in France.

My Father, Harav David Feuerwerker, zt”l, was the rabbi of the city and in charge of three French Departments (Corrèze, Creuse and Lot).

I had heard the story many times from my mother but I had no idea who this young boy was.

He was arrested in the Shul together with several other Jews, including my aunt, Rose Warfman (Rose Gluck at the time), by the Gestapo. All those arrested were put on a flat open truck and taken away. Then, someone pointed to the young boy’s mother walking on the street. Amazingly, the young boy didn’t call out to his mother. By doing so, I wrote, he saved, at that very moment, her life.

Who was this young boy? What happened to his mother?

A while ago, I came upon handwritten notes from my father. There in a list of people from Brive (Brive-la-Gaillarde is often called more simply Brive), I saw a name, unknown to me, which I researched: Najberg. I looked up in the book The Memorial of the Deportation of Jews from France by the French Nazi hunter, Serge Klarsfeld, published in 1978, which I possess, and found that there was a Robert Najberg, born on June 29, 1931, in Lens.

It had to be the young boy, the age corresponding to 12!

I searched further on the Internet and found that Robert Najberg was born in Lens, Pas-de-Calais, France, in a Jewish family of Polish origin. Another name I found in the handwritten notes of my father was Bindefeld. I searched for information about him. He was Nathan (Nachman) Bindefeld, the Hazzan, who was teaching Robert Najberg for his bar mitzvah. I found in Klarsfeld’s book that Nachman Bindefeld was born on June 25, 1906, in Frankfurt-am-Main, in Germany. I found out about the fate of both the teacher and his student.

Nachman Bindefeld was deported from the Drancy internment camp (next to Paris) to either Kaunas (Lithuania) or Tallinn (Estonia) by the Convoy No. 73, of May 15, 1944, where he was killed. He was 38 years old.

Robert Najman was deported from Drancy internment camp to Auschwitz concentration camp, by the next convoy, Convoy No. 74, of May 20, 1944, and killed upon his arrival, on May 25, 1944. He was 12 years old, soon to become bar mitzvah.

My aunt, Rose Gluck, a nurse and member of the French Resistance, was deported from Drancy internment camp to Auschwitz concentration camp, on an earlier convoy, Convoy No. 72, of April 29, 1944. She survived both Auschwitz and Gross-Rosen concentration camps. Her story is known around the world.

Recently, she has seen one account published as a chapter of the book by Renée Worch: Holocaust Heroines. Four Teenagers’ Stories of Courage and Miraculous Survival (Feldheim).

Rose Warfman passed away this year on Shabbat Parashat Ki Teitzei (14 Elul /September 17), in Manchester, England, a few days short of reaching the age of 100.

On the train taking Nachman Bindefeld to Eastern Europe to be killed was my uncle, Dr. Salomon Gluck, a physician and member of the French Resistance, who was also killed. He was 29 years old.

What happened to Robert Najberg’s mother? I have no clue; I can’t find any information.

The 1978 edition of Klarsfeld’s book gives the lists of deportees convoy after convoy. You have to go through one after another to find the names.

In 2012, Serge Klarsfeld published an updated version of his work, with corrections and additional information with one great improvement, according to me: all the names are listed alphabetically, which makes it easier to consult. It is a huge and heavy folio. There are only 1000 copies printed of that work, and Klarsfeld was kind enough to give me a copy.

There is only one other Najberg listed in the deportees from France. Mordko Najberg, born on April 23, 1899, in Bialoczow, who was living in Malemort (Corrèze), next to Brive.

He was detained in a camp in Marseille. He was then deported to Drancy internment camp and from there to Majdanek concentration camp by Convoy 51, of March 6, 1943. He was 44 years old.

In passing, I just saw news published about Bialoczow, a village in the district of Opoczno, by the Jewish Telegraphic Agency (JTA), dated April 1, 1929: “Purim Play Leads to Anti-Semitic Disturbance in Polish Village.” Did this event push Mordko Najberg to leave Poland for France? I can’t answer that question.

It seems that Mordko Najberg was the father of Robert Najberg. If so, it means that only his mother was still free at the time.

The fact that Robert Najberg’s mother is not listed among the deportees from France, can be interpreted, until proven wrong, that she was not deported.

Who was she? What happened to her? I have no answers.

It seems that she survived and that her son, 12 years old, saved her life. A supreme act of love.

Dr. Elie Feuerwerker

Emergency Likud Meeting on Amona Arrangements Act

Thursday, November 3rd, 2016

The Likud Knesset faction announced an emergency meeting at 4 PM Israel time (10 AM NY Time) Thursday to debate the proposed Arrangements Act compelling Arab claimants to accept market value for their land where a Jewish community has already been established. The new law, if passed, would undoubtedly be struck down by the Supreme Court, which is insisting that claimed land, such as in the case of the Amona community in Samaria, must be returned to its Arab claimant in its original state, with all the hints of Jewish life erased.

The meeting will also discuss the status of the Attorney General, who is both the government’s legal counsel and the head of Israel’s law enforcement agencies. The meeting will discuss what to do in cases when the AG announces his refusal to represent the state before the Supreme Court on legislation which he believes doesn’t stand a chance to be approved by the justices. In other words, as the organizers have phrased it: “Who is the sovereign — the legal counselor or the legislator?”

According to News 0404, 18 heads of municipalities will also attend the meeting. Leaders of the settlement enterprise in Judea and Samaria have expressed fears that a victory for anti-Zionist groups like Peace Now would only embolden them to go after thousands more homes in Judea and Samaria, using the open door policy of the Supreme Court where—unlike every other appeals court in the Western world—a plaintiff need not show personal cause for petitioning the justices.

David Israel

Printed from: http://www.jewishpress.com/news/breaking-news/emergency-likud-meeting-on-amona-arrangements-act/2016/11/03/

Scan this QR code to visit this page online: