web analytics
September 24, 2016 / 21 Elul, 5776

Posts Tagged ‘danger’

The Danger Zone – 9/11 With Rabbi Aryel Nachman [audio]

Thursday, September 15th, 2016

This episode of the Danger Zone was recorded on the 15th anniversary of 9/11 and we had the honor of having Rabbi Aryel Nachman Ben Chaim join us for an interview. Rabbi Nachman is the co-creator and artist of the Jewish comic strip, 4 Corners. He is also the author of “Zeyde and the Hidden Mine” which was nominated for the Pulitzer Prize. He founded the world’s first interactive online synagogue, http://sevenbeggars.com/ and sat down for a candid discussion about terrorism, antisemitism and the world around us.

 

Israel News Talk Radio

The DANGER Zone – What is Jihad? [audio]

Tuesday, September 6th, 2016

On this episode of the Danger Zone we will ask and answer the question, What is Jihad? We also have a special guest on today’s program, our very own Ari Fuld from the INTR show “BULLETPROOF” who joins Gadi for an in depth discussion about Jihad and the threats that we are facing today.

DANGER ZONE 05Sept2016 – PODCAST

Israel News Talk Radio

A Soldier’s Mother: The Danger of a Politician with a Big Mouth

Wednesday, June 22nd, 2016

The danger of a politician with a big mouth and a larger ego is that he will place himself and his opinion above the needs of the country. Rather than serve the country, this type of person tends to inflate his own self worth and take advantage of the privileges of office. Worse, he endangers lives and security by offering options that really are not on the negotiating table – most likely because there isn’t actually a table on which we are negotiating and there’s currently only one chair in the room. The chair is marked with the only people willing to be there unconditionally – and that would be Israel.

It has always been recognized that only the standing government has a mandate to determine the future of its people, especially in a democracy. This has been true throughout the centuries; it is true today in Israel. Yitzhak Herzog is a very dangerous man because he believes he is entitled. His entitlement comes through his blood, he will tell you. He is, after all, the son of Chaim Herzog, a general and former president of Israel. He is the grandson of the first Chief Rabbi of Ireland who then became the first Chief Rabbi of Israel. He is, the grandson and son, a rather pathetic and pale shadow of these great men, ever seeking stardom and importance.

To be a thriving democracy, which Israel most definitely is, you must have a strong opposition, unafraid to challenge the path the government chooses to take. What you cannot have, is one that seeks to subvert, undermine, weaken the government, and therefore the country itself. This and much more, Yitzhak Herzog has done in the past and yet again more recently when he took it upon himself to enter negotiations with Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas.

Who is Yitzhak Herzog to reach an agreement that Israel would surrender land and our capital? He has decided that Israel will pay financial compensation to the descendants of Arabs who chose to run away so that their brothers from five nations could invade the tiny and vulnerable new entity called Israel?

Will he also pay, perhaps out of his own miserable pockets, the hundreds of thousands of Jews who were robbed and expelled by numerous Arab nations? These are the Jewish refugees that came to Israel with practically nothing and we clothed them, fed them, housed them until they were able to pull themselves up and become active, vital, thriving, inseparable parts of our society today. Will Herzog compensate them?

I would expect such idiocies from Barack Obama but I think even he would be surprised at the absurdity of a standing member of the Knesset having the nerve to attempt to negotiate without any power behind him.

Forever ready to twist facts, Herzog doesn’t deny that he circumvented the legally elected government but haughtily declares, “In my contacts with the Palestinian Authority president during 2014, I made efforts whose goal was to reach understandings that would have prevented the wave of terror whose arrival I foresaw, just like I’m making efforts now so that this extreme right wing government’s abandonment of the initiative for a regional conference won’t bring the next war down upon us.”

Really, Herzog? You foresaw a new wave of terror? Gee, after so many previous waves I guess that makes you practically a prophet, huh? Who would have thought that without an agreement of utter capitulation from Israel, the Palestinians would revert to violence again. You’d think after 1948, 1956, 1967, 1973, 1982…2001, 2008, 2012, 2014, 2016, they’ve have learned, right?

And if you think Bibi Netanyahu’s government is “extreme right wing”, you ain’t seen nothin’ yet. If the violence continues despite all our efforts to achieve peace, believe me, Israel WILL turn to the right.

Abandonment of the initiative for a regional conference, are you serious? What initiative? What regional conference? The one that is regularly held without Israel? The ones that have been consistently rejected by Palestinians?

There will be another war, on that Herzog is correct. But it will not be brought on by the actions of the Israeli government but rather by the unwillingness of the Palestinian leaders to truly accept that only through negotiations will there be compromise.

But perhaps the best response to Herzog’s inept attempt to thrust his opinion on the people of Israel can be found in the Palestinians’ response to Herzog’s pathetic efforts, “We didn’t treat it as if it’s something that can be implemented, since obviously the one who makes the decision ultimately is the Israeli prime minister.”

Roger that, Yitzhak. You’ve been defeated again.

Paula Stern

Yesh Atid Blocks Israel’s ’No Early Release for Terrorists’ Bill

Tuesday, May 13th, 2014

Yesh Atid minister Yaakov Perry appealed a new law preventing the premature release of terrorist inmates from prison on Monday night, effectively blocking the measure.

The bill amends one of the Basic Laws of Israel, formulated in the 1960s, that allows the president to pardon terrorists under certain conditions. It was passed Sunday by the Ministerial Legislative Committee – but the move by the Science and Technology Minister stops the law from going to the Knesset plenum for its first reading.

Instead, it will go to the full Cabinet for a vote on Sunday.

Jailed terrorists — particularly the ones who are serving life sentences for multiple murders of Israeli citizens in terror attacks — are often used as bargaining chips by Arab nations and terror groups in talks with the State of Israel.

IDF soldier Gilad Shalit, kidnapped in a cross-border raid near the Gaza border by three Hamas-affiliated terrorist groups in 2006, was held hostage by Hamas in Gaza. His freedom and safe return was purchased after more than five years only at the cost of releasing more than a thousand Arab terrorist inmates from Israeli prisons — many of whom immediately resumed their activities against the Jewish State.

There are many who believe that if the option of early release for terrorist prisoners — “prisoner swaps” — was not available, terror groups with whom Israel deals would no longer find benefit in kidnapping Israeli hostages, and therefore would cease such activities.

Perry’s move was immediately condemned by lawmakers from the Bayit Yehudi (Jewish Home) party, one of the two sponsors of the bill.

Bayit Yehudi MK Ayelet Shaked, who proposed the measure together with MK David Tzur – against the objections of his own Hatnua party’s chairperson, Justice Minister Tzipi Livni – expressed outrage over Perry’s appeal.

“Tonight the truth was revealed that small politics are stronger than the blood of Israeli citizens,” Shaked told media.

“Minister Perry in the past expressed his support for the law, both to me and to my partner MK David Tzur, so his appeal is puzzling… How can the former head of the Shin Bet support releasing murderers?”

Economics Minister and Bayit Yehudi chairperson Naftali Bennett slammed the move, calling it a “mark of disgrace” on the entire Yesh Atid political party.

“Every day that this law is delayed human life is in danger,” Bennett underlined. “We will use all the tools at our disposal, including burying laws proposed by Yesh Atid, until this law is passed.

“I do not have, nor will I have any tolerance and patience for political games at the expense of laws that are essential for the security of Israeli citizens.”

Hana Levi Julian

Guardian’s Cartoon of Powerful Jews Manipulating Western Leaders

Wednesday, November 13th, 2013

Last November we posted about a political cartoon at the Guardian by Steve Bell depicting British foreign minister William Hague and Tony Blair as puppets being controlled by Binyamin Netanyahu, in the context of expressions of support by these leaders during the war in Gaza.  Bell’s image evoked the canard of powerful Jews controlling western politicians for their own nefarious purposes and was hauntingly similar to more explicitly antisemitic cartoons routinely found in Arab and Islamist world.

The Guardian’s readers’ editor, Chris Elliott, addressed the row a couple of weeks later, and actually rebuked Bell for ‘unintentionally’ using the visual language of antisemitic stereotypes.

While such cartoons often have more of an immediate impact in reinforcing negative stereotypes about Jews than lengthy essays, the damage done by such toxic ideas regarding ‘Jewish control’, in any form, should be taken seriously.  The Guardian narrative of the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict, in news reports and commentaries, often includes passages with the unmistakable  suggestion that Israel (and the pro-Israeli lobby) wields enormous power over ineffectual Western leaders – a theme present in a report by Harriet Sherwood and Julian Borger titled ‘Iran nuclear programme deal in danger of unravelling’, Nov. 11.  The story centered on nuclear talks between Iran and the P5+1 (the permanent members of the UN Security Council and Germany) which ultimately unraveled largely due to concerns that the agreement would have eased sanctions on Iran without requiring that it cease enriching uranium.

The report by Sherwood and Borger included the following:

In a bid to contain the danger, the lead US negotiator, Wendy Sherman, flew straight from the talks in Geneva to Israel to reassure Binyamin Netanyahu’s government that the intended deal would not harm his country’s national interests.

The hastily arranged trip represented an acknowledgement of Netanyahu’s power to block a deal through his influence in the US Congress and in Europe. Egged on by the Israelis, the US Senate is poised to pass new sanctions that threaten to derail the talks before they get to their planned next round in 10 days’ time.

More immediately, Netanyahu demonstrated over the weekend that he could sway the Geneva talks from the inside through his relationship with Paris.

These passages of course strongly suggest that US congressional leaders take their marching orders from Jerusalem and that the French government’s position was not motivated by what it saw as its own national interests but, rather, as a result of the influence of the Israeli prime minister.

However, the deal was fatally flawed, according to many experts, due in part because it would have fallen short of the requirements in six resolutions adopted by the UN Security Council over the years which called on Iran to suspend ALL uranium enrichment – resolutions passed under Chapter VII of the UN Charter, rendering them binding under international law.

As Adam Chandler observed in an essay published at Tablet about the superficial analysis by Sherwood and Borger:

[Their argument] smacks of that paranoid, evergreen charge that all wars and international campaigns are waged on behalf of Israel, a claim that devolves from Israel into “the Jews” as it goes through portal after conspiratorial portal.

You don’t even need to believe that antisemitism is at play to nonetheless be contemptuous of the extraordinary myopia displayed in the Guardian report.  As Walter Russell Mead observed recently about the broader intellectual dynamic which unites antisemitism with anti-Zionism:

Weak minds…are easily seduced by attractive but empty generalizations. The comment attributed to August Bebel that anti-Semitism is the socialism of fools can be extended to many other kinds of cheap and superficial errors that people make. The baffled, frustrated and the bewildered seek a grand, simplifying hypothesis that can bring some kind of ordered explanation to a confusing world.

Guardian “journalists” may fancy themselves sophisticated, erudite and worldly, but their frequent ‘Zionist root cause’ explanations betray both their ideological bias and the extraordinarily facile nature of their reasoning.

Visit CIFWatch.

Adam Levick

YCT, Heterodoxy, and Agudah

Wednesday, October 2nd, 2013

Agudath Israel has come out with a new statement about Yeshivat Chovevei Torah (YCT). They are ‘deeply troubled’ that YCT is hosting a group of 4 non-Orthodox rabbis at the installation of their new president, Rabbi Asher Lopatin. They will be involved in a roundtable discussion entitled “Training New Rabbis for a New Generation”.

I have mixed emotions about this. But I am in fact pleased that Agudah has responded to it – even if in a negative way. This shows that they must recognize YCT as an Orthodox institution. Which it is, in my view. I don’t for example believe they would be criticizing the Conservative Movement if they invited Reform rabbis to a roundtable of their own.

My feelings about this issue are mixed for the following reasons.

On the one hand – there is the rather well known decision by the Gedolei HaDor of the previous generation to forbid any interaction with non Orthodox movements. The fear was that by doing so, it would tacitly imply recognizing their legitimacy. Orthodoxy rejects heterodox movements and considers them illegitimate.

It is also rather well known that Rav Joseph B. Soloveitchik made a distinction between interacting with them on any theological matters – which he also forbade; and interacting with them on non theological matters that impacted on the welfare of all of Jewry – which he permitted.

I agree with Rav Soloveitchik’s perspective. The question is whether this round table falls into the category of theological discussion or not. I’m not sure – but if I had to peg it, I would lean toward putting such a roundtable on the theological side of the argument and thus forbid it.

That said, I wonder if that would be true if matters of actual theology were expressly left out of the discussion. And the round table was limited to a discussion of practical non-theological rabbinics. Like psychological counseling or how to go about giving advice to congregants. The truth is that heterodox rabbis probably have a lot to offer in the realm of practical non theological rabbinics. As would say a mental health professional or even a priest or minister for that matter.

On the other hand, since this is a Yeshiva hosting heterodox rabbis I would be hard pressed to say that there would be no theological aspect to it. It is a virtual impossibility to completely leave out theology in such a discussion. Which is why I would be opposed to it.

There is, however, another thing to consider. What is extant today was not extant when the Gedolei HaDor forbade such interactions. Times have changed in ways which make me wonder if we should re-examine our positions. Let me hasten to add that I do not advocate the policies of Open Orthodoxy that YCT represents. They have rejected the prohibition of interacting with non-Orthodox rabbis and now freely advocate full engagement with them at all levels – including theological ones.

But I think it is fair to evaluate the reasons they have done it. Times have indeed changed. When the prohibition was made, it was a time that Reform and Conservative movements were on the ascendancy. They were a real threat to Orthodox Judaism. Orthodoxy in America was in relative infancy then. To wit – Rav Aharon Kotler who was the driving force behind the prohibition headed a Yeshiva of about 300 students when he died. Today there are over 6000 students there and they are growing exponentially. There are also now many smaller Yeshivos like Lakewood that are now thriving. They did not exist at that time.

There is no question that the small group of Orthodox Jews at the time were seen by most non Orthodox observers as a dying relic of an ancient past. While Heterodox movements were flourishing and growing by leaps and bounds. It is very understandable that the Gedolei HaDor did not want to give any semblance of recognition to them. Their ‘David’ was fighting a very large Goliath.

But today – the tables have turned. We are the ones growing. They are either shrinking (Conservative) or redefining Jewishness to include non Halachic Jews (Reform).

It is therefore a fact that heterodoxy is no longer the threat to Orthodoxy it once was – if at all. It is now apathy and indifference that is the enemy. Jews are leaving Judaism in droves. They do not see any denomination as relevant to their lives. They see themselves as secular human beings in the brotherhood of man – without the slightest connection to Judaism. One might even say that Conservative and even Reform Judaism today is at least trying to get them to retain their Jewish identity if nothing else.

In the light of all this, perhaps this is a Hora’as Shah – time to act and change the paradigm. Maybe YCT is not so terribly wrong headed in partnering up with these movements. I do not see legitimizing them as a danger anymore. The danger is in the growing numbers of unaffiliated Jews who have no problem with intermarriage and tend to buy into the ‘Apartheid’ narrative about Israel found in the secular liberal/leftist environment in which they live.

This is not to say that I agree with YCT. I don’t. I am not qualified to make judgments about Hora’as Shah. I am just thinking out loud. For example one might argue that giving them legitimacy in any setting, no less a Yeshiva, is forbidden in principal – having nothing to do with whether doing so is some sort of existential danger to Orthodoxy. I can just as easily see this argument as I can YCT’s argument.

Perhaps the fact that there is another aspect to this now that did not exist before is why Agudah has not thrown YCT out of Orthodoxy – as publications like the Yated have advocated. They must realize that they are Orthodox in that they follow Halacha… and that their intentions with respect to heterodoxy are good – even if badly mistaken for the reasons stated. And for that, I applaud them.

Visit Emes Ve-Emunah .

Harry Maryles

Running in Jerusalem

Sunday, March 3rd, 2013

A few months ago, not even three, people in and around Jerusalem were running for their lives. A siren had broken the moments before the Sabbath came in late on a Friday afternoon. A siren…an air-raid siren…going up and going down…not planned. Incoming missile.

It’s going to take me a long time, perhaps a lifetime to forget those choking minutes of terror as we moved into the bomb shelter, my mind consumed with who wasn’t with us. Aliza, my baby, was outside somewhere. Yes, at 12 years old, she was still my baby. My grandson, not even two, was outside somewhere. Yes, he was with his father, but that knowledge did nothing to calm the terror my daughter was feeling. Shmulik and Naama – probably downstairs, probably safe. Lauren, Elie’s wife, .she was in their apartment fighting back her own feelings as she searched for things Elie would need. He’d just been called to the army, potentially to war.

On Friday, people were running in Jerusalem again, but this time – for a marathon and it isn’t all of Jerusalem – but 20,000 people! I went to the local supermarket to buy a few things and as I always do, I had the radio turned to the news channel. They were talking about the traffic nightmare that was already being caused by the closed streets as the marathon was just getting started.

“It isn’t fun being a Jerusalemite this morning,” said one newscaster, as the second continued to report on closed roads.

And then the second mentioned that there were 20,000 runners.

“Not a small marathan,” responded the first.

And then, the most amazing response of all, the second newscast just said, “Jerusalem.”

Jerusalem. I wish words could easily show tone, expression. In that one word, so much was said. Of course there are so many, of course it is a large marathon – we are talking about Jerusalem.

I can hear him saying the word over and over again, in love, in awe – Jerusalem.

Visit A Soldier’s Mother.

Paula R. Stern

Printed from: http://www.jewishpress.com/blogs/a-soldiers-mother/running-in-jerusalem/2013/03/03/

Scan this QR code to visit this page online: