web analytics
August 30, 2014 / 4 Elul, 5774
At a Glance

Posts Tagged ‘Makor Rishon’

Is Sheldon Adelson Destroying Israel’s Newspapers?

Tuesday, August 14th, 2012

According to the Israeli financial website Globes, Sheldon Adelson is in advanced negotiations to purchase the Ha’aretz printing plant. The deal is believed to be in the order of $25 million dollars.

Over the past few months, Adelson’s free daily, Yisrael Hayom, has been searching for a new printing facility to replace the Ha’aretz plant where it currently prints its daily freesheet. Ha’aretz’s plant handles the printing for a number of different newspapers.

Adelson had recently been in negotiations with Nochi Dankner, a major shareholder and chairman of publicly traded IDB Group, Israel’s largest diversified business group with assets of more than $30 billion, to purchase Ma’ariv’s Levin Epstein Printing House. But that deal apparently fell through, striking a hard blow for Ma’ariv which is desperately strapped for cash. Ma’ariv has been looking to sell the printing plant and the land it sits on.

Many Israeli newspapers have been firing staff and “streamlining” these past few months. The right-wing Makor Rishon is one notable exception to the rule.

Globes reports that Ha’aretz announced it was firing 70 employees, some 32 from their own paper, and the rest from their financial daily, The Marker. Yediot Achronot will be firing dozens, many of them likely to be dropped from its website Ynet. Ma’ariv recently shut down its weekday print run, and fired 30 employees in June.

Yediot executives are blaming Adelson and Yisrael Hayom for destroying the Israeli newspaper industry, and more specifically, for destroying Ha’aretz and Yediot Achronot with the introduction of the free daily broadsheet.

Poll: Majority of Israelis Want Prayers on the Temple Mount, But No Temple

Friday, July 27th, 2012

According to a poll commissioned by Makor Rishon, the majority of Israelis want Jews to be permitted to pray on the Temple Mount.

Of the 512 Jewish Israeli adults who responded to the poll, 52% were for permitting Jewish Prayers on the Temple Mount, while 37% were against it.

22% of those polled said they are fasting on Tisha B’Av, the holiday that commemorates the destruction of the Temple.

 

The final question in the poll was, “Do we need to now begin rebuilding the Temple?

The response to that question was more disappointing.

Unfortunately, 61% of all those polled said no.

Among those who designated themselves as Chardali (Chareidi National-Religious) or Ultra-Orthodox 71% said yes.

While most disappointingly, among those who designated themselves as National-Religious only 43% said yes. Among Traditional, 43% said yes, and among the Secular 9% said yes.

 

Do we need to begin rebuilding the Temple?

Overall: No: 61%,  Yes:17%

Secular Traditional National-Religious Chardali/Chareidi
No

91%

66%

57%

29%

Yes

9%

34%

43%

71%

Should Jews be allowed to pray on the Temple Mount?

Overall: No: 37%,  Yes: 52% 

Secular Traditional National-Religious Chardali/Chareidi
No

61%

37%

5%

5%

Yes

39%

63%

95%

95%

What do you feel toward Tisha B’Av?

Overall: Nothing: 51%, Connected/not fasting: 22%, Fasting: 22% 

Secular Traditional National-Religious Chardali/Chareidi
Nothing

75%

36%

0%

0%

Connected but not fasting

22%

40%

10%

4%

Fasting

3%

24%

90%

96%

Conference on Annexing Judea and Samaria Draws Big Names, Big Turnout

Monday, July 16th, 2012

Hundreds of Israelis from across Israel gathered in Hebron last Thursday to participate in the Conference for the Application of Sovereignty over Judea and Samaria, and to hear a growing cadre of politicians, experts, and opinion-makers discuss their perspective on how to realize this goal.

The Conference, the second of its kind organized by Women in Green, saw a speaker list that appears to reflect a sense that annexation of Judea and Samaria is an increasingly viable option. Beyond the attendance of the expected nationalist politicians – like government minister and Chairman of Habayit Hayehudi Rabbi Prof. Daniel Hershkowitz, National Union MK Uri Ariel, and Likud MK Tzipi Hotovely – also appearing were Caroline Glick, a senior editor at the Jerusalem Post; Yoram Ettinger, former Israeli ambassador to Washington; and Eran Bar-Tal, the economic editor of the Makor Rishon newspaper, among many others.

Long dismissed as a revisionist fantasy of the extreme nationalist camp, the idea of annexation is gaining traction in mainstream society, as more and more Israelis question the wisdom and validity of the ‘two state solution’ paradigm. The commission and release of the Levy Report appears to be one such manifestation of this shift.

At the Conference, which was held in the hall adjoining the Machpelah Cave, each speaker offered their own perspectives on annexation. Minister Hershkovitz insisted on the application of Israeli sovereignty over all of Judea and Samaria and not only over the communities of Area C. In what appeared to be a jab at the annexation plan put forward by Naftali Bennett – who is running against Hershkowitz for chairmanship of Habayit Hayehudi – Hershkowitz said that the application of sovereignty over anything less than all of Judea and Samaria will be interpreted by the other side as an admission of surrender over certain parts of the area. Glick agreed with Hershkowitz, saying that “the cost will be the same cost, so it would be a shame to pay it for half the job….”

Bar-Tal, speaking from an economic perspective, dismissed the scare tactics of the left regarding the economic repercussions of annexation, and stated that in fact annexation would strengthen Israel’s economy.

Yitzhak Bam of the Legal Forum for the Land of Israel analyzed the legal reality in Judea and Samaria, and – in concurrence with the Levy Report – stated that the issue of the application of sovereignty is not a legal question, but purely political, since there is no other sovereign authority that demands the return of the territory to it, and, in practice, there is a sort of “sovereignty vacuum” in Judea and Samaria.

But perhaps most stirring was the video message by Israel Prize laureate and former MK Geulah Cohen, who told of her parliamentary struggle to annex east Jerusalem, which began as a private initiative, and -after her tireless efforts- was finally passed by the Knesset on July 30, 1980.

Nadia Matar, who along with Yehudit Katsover organized the Conference, said: “We were greatly inspired by Geula. She talked about the denunciations she endured during that process. At the time people mocked her, just like they’re mocking us now.

“‘The sky didn’t fall’ when the law was passed,’ ” Matar recounted Cohen saying, “despite the propaganda employed by those opposed to the annexation.”

Cohen related how Teddy Kollek, then-mayor of Jerusalem, warned her that there would be an avalanche of international condemnation and isolation. Yes, foreign governments moved their embassies out of Jerusalem, she said, but if that’s the cost of asserting sovereignty over the Land of Israel, its a worthwhile cost.

Katsover and Matar said that that they plan on capitalizing on the momentum by enlisting more public figures and citizens to bear on the Knesset to advance the law for sovereignty over Judea and Samaria.

“Just like we now express surprise that Israel did not have sovereignty over east jerusalem and the Golan Heights, so our children will express surprise that once we did not have sovereignty over Judea and Samaria,” Matar said.

 

Regards from Amman: The Tamimi Family and the Good Life

Wednesday, June 27th, 2012

Ahlam Tamimi was a newscaster on Palestinian television, on a channel assigned by Israel, broadcast from the tall antennas of Ramallah handed over by Israel to the PA in the Oslo Accords. On August 9, 2001, Tamimi started another career, and drove a suicide terrorist into Jerusalem. She equipped him with explosive belts, brought him to Cafe Sbarro, coached him on positioning himself among the dining families in that bustling venue, and asked that he give her fifteen minutes so that she could leave.

She quickly returned to Ramallah, seated herself in the television studio, and reported the awful terrorist attack that she herself had masterminded.

Tamimi never expressed any regret. When she first learned from a journalist who was interviewing her in jail that she had murdered eight children, not just three, she just smiled broadly and continued with the interview.

After receiving life sentences for the fifteen people she had killed, Tamimi went on to become a star in an Israeli film called The Security Prisoners (Habitchoniyim). The producer explained to us that he showed such sympathy for the terrorist in their interactions because the whole point of the film was to create a revolution in the image of terrorists, so that they would be released when peace came. He had no idea how fast she and another 1,026 terrorists would be freed in reality.

This month the story reached its happy ending, at least as far as Tamimi is concerned—and a sad ending for the families of those she helped murder. Most people don’t know it, but during the time terrorists are in jail, the big-hearted State of Israel sometimes permits them to marry. Ahlam Tamimi married another member of the murder organizations by the name of Nizan Tamimi, who had participated in the murder of Chaim Mizrahi of Bet El.

Mizrahi was murdered by people with whom he had regular business dealings. They were such buddies that when one of them asked to have his picture taken with Mizrahi’s gun, he just took out the magazine, gave him the gun, and took a picture of him. That was the last picture Mizrahi ever took. They grabbed him by the hands and feet and stabbed him to death.

Nizan also was released in the Schalit Deal. However, the authorities refused to allow him to follow his wife, who was expelled to Jordan. Still, this didn’t stop him from trying his luck with repeated requests for family reunification until he finally got his way.

This story didn’t get to you because news producers and editors ignored it. We tried to explain to them that this is a serious blow to the feelings of the bereaved families and to moral principles, not to mention a violation of the Victims’ Rights Law. We explained that the Ministry of Justice didn’t even inform the families and that Netanyahu’s office, which had been so sensitive to the feelings of the Schalit family and the media, didn’t respond to the letter sent by attorney Arnold Roth, whose daughter Malki was murdered at Sbarro.

So why did they ignore the story? One typical answer that we received: It’s true that they killed sixteen Israelis, who can’t ever be reunited with their own families, but what good will revenge do? Why should we begrudge them the opportunity to build a new life together after spending so long in prison? Besides, coming after the wholesale release of terrorists from jail, this is nothing.

Following that, we went to the security establishment to get answers. Why had they changed their minds and let Nizan go to Jordan? The answer we received is that in the present situation, it is preferable that he be in Jordan, as the criminal had taken steps to return to terrorism.

Then why don’t you put him back in jail? The release of terrorists in the Schalit Deal had conditions attached to it to let the authorities return recidivist terrorists to jail to serve the remainder of their original sentences!

The answer to that was even more informative.

You know how it is, our interlocutors said. We can’t reveal our sources and sometimes we can’t even reveal our evidence. The only option is to request administrative detention….

Mordechai Kedar: Tribalism in the Middle East – The Real Thing

Tuesday, February 28th, 2012

Many ideologies have passed over the Mediterranean Sea on their way to the Arab world, and each time a new ideology arrived, many thought that it would be the ideology, with a capital ‘I’ that would unite, organize, form and lead the Arab world into European-style modernity. The nationalism (loyalty of the individual to his ethnic group) that was awakened in Europe after the “Spring of Nations” (1848) was known as “Komiya” – patriotism, in the Arab world, which is expressed by connection and loyalty to the homeland. Pan-Slavism was transformed into pan-Arabism; European socialism was adopted by the Arab world under the name of “Ba’ath”; Communism was also imported and was known as “Shayoo’aya” and even Nazi ideas that arrived in the years of the thirties took hold among some modern Arab intellectuals. One example is Muhammad Anwar al-Sa’adat, who was head of the Egyptian Nazi movement, and was later to become the president of Egypt.

All of these ideas were buzzing in the public arena in the Middle East within the last hundred years, and observers from outside – mainly the officials of the colonial offices of the British Empire – thought that European modernity had arrived to the Middle East and had settled among its peoples through the modern ideologies that were imported in the mouths and in the pens of those enlightened Arabs who were educated in the Sorbonne, Oxford, Yale and Harvard. On the basis of these ideologies – so the British, French and Italian colonial officials hoped – nation-states would emerge, as happened in Europe, and these nation-states would supply a focal point for identity, social adhesion, and national consciousness for the masses in the Middle East (though nobody asked these people if they at all wished to adopt the social methods and ideologies of the European states).

But this didn’t happen. The masses of the Middle East, for the most part, remained loyal to their tribe, ethnic group, religious group, or sect and rejected all of the ideas that were imported from the West. The cornerstone of Middle Eastern culture was and remains tribal culture, that which Europeans thought it possible to eliminate by means of a few articles in the newspaper or speeches on the radio. Today we address our words to the loyalty of the peoples of the Middle East within their traditional frameworks.

Afghanistan

The source of this miserable country’s problems is the fact that the British included within it eleven different ethnic groups: Kyrgyz, Turkmen, Nuristani, Pamiri, Pashtun, Tajik, Hazara, Uzbek, Aimak, and Baloch. These groups share very little in common, because they have different languages, different world views, different customs, different leadership, different goals, and, in short – these peoples are so different from one another that they don’t even speak the same language. It’s also important to note that none of these groups is called “Afghani”. So is it really surprising that this state is a failed state, and that no one manages to stabilize it? Throughout this state’s history, foreigners have tried to bring these ethnic groups together into some kind of basic cooperation, but the experiments have all failed. It is a wonder to me that the world continues to resuscitate this dead political body, which should have been divided into its ethnic parts long ago.

Iraq

This unfortunate state is torn and divided along four axes:

The ethnic axis – In Iraq there are four ethnic groups: Arabs, Kurds, Turkmen, and Persians.

The Tribal Axis – The population in Iraq comprises approximately seventy tribes, each of which functions as if it were an ethnic group. The sons of these tribes do not marry the daughters of another tribe, because they don’t trust them, and therefore also tend not to open a business with another tribe. Each tribe has its own dialect, and in Iraq some of the tribes have their own flag and anthem, which are not connected to the flag and anthem of Iraq.

The Religious Axis – In Iraq there are a large number of religions: Muslim, Christian, a few dozen Jews, Tsavaaim, Mandaean, Zoroastrians, Bahai, Yazidi and more. The Muslims see the members of other religions as heretics.

The Sectarian Axis – The religions are divided: The Muslims are divided into Sunni, Shia, Salafi and Sufi; the Christians have about eight different sects.

Thus, Iraq is “blessed” with all of the four axes of division that are known in the Middle East. Is it a wonder that this state is hemorrhaging?

Libya:

Because Libya is entirely within the Sahara desert where there is almost no water at all, the population is divided into small tribes; in Libya there are about 140 different tribes. After they succeeded in overthrowing Qadafi, the tribes are now fighting one another.

Jordan:

In Jordan, about one quarter of the population is Bedouin, and three quarters are “Palestinian”, meaning farmers and city people who do not want to be Bedouins and cannot be Bedouins, and therefore they are now trying to split off from the regime, (which anyway is headed by a family that the Saudis threw out ninety years ago) and to establish for themselves an “alternative homeland”, that is, a different Palestine, in addition to that which they hope will arise between the sea and the Jordan River. This is the reason that Jordan’s King Abdullah comes to Washington each month: – primarily to urge President Obama to exert pressure on Israel to establish a Palestinian state in Gaza, Judea and Samaria. If a state such as this will arise, then the King will be able to say to his citizens: “The Palestinian State already exists” and the king will then be able to exile to that Palestinian state anyone in Jordan who speaks of an “alternative homeland”. In this way he hopes to survive on his throne.

Get The Settlers

Wednesday, January 11th, 2012

Note to readers: This column was translated into English from the Makor Rishon newspaper. The column was written after a recent Israeli government attempt to destroy the Ramat Gilad neighborhood and the violence that ensued.

It is wrong to throw rocks at IDF soldiers. We must do all that we can to uproot this phenomenon. But the mad witch-hunt that raged recently has nothing to do with concern for and loyalty to the IDF.

Every Friday for years, leftist demonstrators would gather near the Arab village of Bil’in. They would routinely throw rocks at the soldiers there. One border policeman lost his eye as a result. Other soldiers were seriously injured. But it did not interest the media. Nobody stuck a microphone into the face of Amos Oz or any other leftist “high priest” to ask how those weeds had grown up in their garden. The wife of the border policeman who lost his eye didn’t get any air time, the general did not pontificate about hatred (the likes of which he had never seen), the chief of staff did not give interviews, nobody declared that the anarchists are a terror organization, and the prime minister did not convene an emergency Knesset committee meeting. None of that happened.

Why not? Because the protesters in Bil’in come from the same social and ideological milieu as the media. Why create a scandal against themselves? Why make people feel disgust for your own ideology?

In other words, the mad witch-hunt raging now in Israel has nothing to do with honesty. The hands holding the microphones are truly not clean, and those who have rushed to condemn the rock throwing at IDF soldiers played into the media’s hands and fanned the flames. We are experiencing untamed political incitement under the guise of patriotism. I am willing to bet that the settlers have a much higher percentage of sons in the army than Israel’s broadcasters, and they surely are as concerned for their welfare as are the talking heads.

It would be easy to stop the “price tag operations” if we would really want to face the truth: The youth of Judea, Samaria and Gaza have grown up into a reality in which the state and the army persecute them and destroy their homes. In other words, the state and the army have effectively turned themselves into the enemy. These youths have grown up into a reality in which they have no human rights, a reality in which Peace Now, the state’s attorney and the High Court urge the IDF and the police to attack them, a reality in which the media insult and abuse them and the rabbis condemn them, a reality that pushes them far into a corner where they can try to defend themselves. This is the reality of our 14-year-olds. What is Israeli society so surprised about?

We must keep in mind that the rock attack on the soldiers took place in the backdrop of the bulldozers on their way to destroy Ramat Gilad, a neighborhood built on private Jewish property, and authorized by former prime minister Ariel Sharon as part of a master plan to build 185 housing units there. The agricultural lands in the neighborhood have been worked for 29 years. No Arab has ever challenged Jewish ownership of the lands. According to the Ottoman law, which still applies today in Judea and Samaria, everything about the neighborhood is strictly kosher. Nevertheless, new bylaws have been put into place, relevant only to Jews to make the neighborhood “illegal.” Defense Minister Ehud Barak wasted no time to send in the bulldozers.

It is a crime to throw rocks at soldiers. But it is even worse to destroy Jewish homes in the Land of Israel, to drive families out of their homes, and to decimate synagogues. A smalltime criminal works against the law. But a big-time criminal works within the law. Usually, he wears a uniform. The government can quickly enact the legislation necessary to legalize the outposts and restore the political commissars of the “justice system” to their natural size. If no major crimes will be perpetrated in the name of the law, there won’t be any small crimes either, and peace and truth will reign once more.

More Dangerous Than A Nuclear Bomb

Thursday, November 17th, 2011

Is Israel preparing to attack Iran? According to media reports, Prime Minister Netanyahu is trying to convince his ministers to go on the offensive. If that is true, Netanyahu will go down in history as the prime minister who saved the State of Israel from destruction – not necessarily nuclear.

There is no doubt that an attack on Iran’s nuclear facilities will bring swift retaliation on Israel, the results of which are unforeseeable. On the surface, as long as there is a chance to neutralize Iran’s nuclear capabilities via other methods; diplomatic, electronic, economic and the like, it is not logical to prefer the military option. Presumably, the ministers who oppose the attack are considering the question through this very keyhole: Can we stop Iran in some other way or is the military option the only route available?

Clearly, the non-military options are like a finger in the dike. As long as the Muslim motivation continues to rise on the other side of the wall, it is just a matter of time until the dike breaks. Further, as time goes by, the mission becomes more difficult and complex. The reactor in Bushehr is already hot.  Until about two years ago, it could have been destroyed without much environmental damage. That is no longer the case.

The difference between now and two years ago is that Netanyahu’s public approval rating is better now than it was then. And when it comes to a prime minister from the right, a political window of opportunity is just as necessary as an operational window of opportunity. If the social protest movement had managed to curtail Netanyahu’s popularity, there may not have been any government deliberations about attacking Iran. If we are in a political and operational window of opportunity right now, we must give the prime minister all the support that he needs on this existential issue.

Considering the attack strictly through the keyhole of cost and gain does not portray a true picture of the dismal reality. Nuclear weapons are not the greatest danger to the existence of the State of Israel. One third of our nation was destroyed in Europe without them. The Germans’ main weapon was the delegitimization of our right to exist. Strategically, delegitimization is much more dangerous than any nuclear weapon, for its practical application is only a matter of time – with or without nuclear capabilities.

When the Iranian leader declared his intent to destroy us, the world stood collectively held its breath in anticipation of Israel’s retaliation. When that did not happen, the historical question mark that hangs over the right of the Jews to breathe the air on this planet reappeared.

Whether the Jews have a right to a state or whether they have a right to exist at all was not asked in important Western universities until the world realized that we are willing to live with Iran’s intention to destroy us. The Iranian Amalek and the German Amalek work the same way as the Biblical Amalek. They declare an existential war against us, are willing to pay a price and negate our legitimacy in the eyes of the nations. The Holocaust did not begin with the outbreak of war but, rather, in Hitler’s hate-filled speeches and in the Der Sturmer propaganda.

The ministers who oppose an attack do not understand that the results of the attack are not what matters. Israel must attack Iran in order to restore the legitimacy of its very existence. Israel must restore the equation that says that whoever plans to destroy us automatically becomes a legitimate target for destruction. Bushehr is not the only target, but every plane, car and building in which the heads of Iran’s regime are to be found.

Printed from: http://www.jewishpress.com/indepth/columns/moshe-feiglin/more-dangerous-than-a-nuclear-bomb/2011/11/17/

Scan this QR code to visit this page online: