web analytics
August 26, 2016 / 22 Av, 5776

Posts Tagged ‘Times’

A Soldier’s Mother: The Marketplace of the Left: Times of Israel Censors a Soldier’s Mother

Wednesday, July 6th, 2016

Wow…cowards…OMG…WOW…

I posted a comment to the Times of Israel right now on an article attacking a blogger for explaining why he is no longer comfortable blogging at the Times of Israel…

Within about a minute, my comment was removed. Marketplace of Ideas? Yeah, not…

Anyone who wants to borrow my comment and post it…please do – I think everyone should copy and paste this…until they either allow freedom of speech or they change their slogan to “the marketplace of the left” and their name to the Times of Palestine.

The article attacking the blogger is here: Looking for a Fight in All the Wrong Places and attacks a fellow journalist for his outrage and his decision to leave the Times of Israel after writing well over 100 posts for them.

Against my better judgment, I’ll ask that you go to that article and consider posting my comment in your name. The Times of Israel is wrong, and so is the author of this article.

My comment (the one that was deleted…did I mention that they are cowards?) is here:

Actually, if you read the post made by the Times of Israel (referenced in my article: The Friggin Times of Israel) you’ll note that the complaint is even stronger than in the article you cite. It is interesting that in their coverage of the Tel Aviv terror attack, Tel Aviv as a noun (a city) was only referenced once; other times, as adjectives to explain which police force, which hospital, whatever. In the article on Hallel’s murder, the terror attack was referenced as a “stabbing attack” while the Tel Aviv attack wasn’t called a “shooting attack” but a “terror attack. And more – Hallel “died’ but the victims in the Tel Aviv attack were all “killed”…they didn’t die…they were killed (actually, to be honest, they were murdered).

And reference to Kiryat Arba as a settlement appears something like three or four times in that short article – it’s a settlement, a settlement, a settlement. Yeah we got that…given that Tel Aviv, where four people were murdered is only referenced once, isn’t it interesting that it was imperative to mention FOUR times, that Kiryat Arba is a settlement

As others have pointed out, using the term “West Bank” is clearly political and without question, the Times of Israel considers it “occupied” even if we were lucky enough this time to avoid that. But when used in relation to the bedroom in which Hallel was murdered, that is most definitely intentional and quite despicable and I commend “the author” for announcing publicly his disgust at yet another outrageous article attempting to blur lines and hide the truth.

I stopped writing for the Times of Israel several months ago after I was accused of “threatening” and “endangering” a writer/journalist/blogger simply by quoting the very outrageous words and clear incitement she used against an IDF soldier.

The fact is, I can name no less than five right-wing bloggers who have decided to give TOI a pass rather than put up with any more abuse.

How many different ways do you need it proven to you that the “West Bank” was definitely inserted in there to sway opinions? Hallel wasn’t murdere; she died. It wasn’t a terror attack; it was a “stabbing attack”. and, of course, it wasn’t just a bedroom where a child was brutally murdered…it was a “West Bank bedroom”. I’m a bit surprised, given that you live in the “West Bank” that you are not angered by this attempt, yet again, to separate this poor child from other Israelis.

I think criticizing someone’s post like this, attempting to censor someone’s opinion, is sadly typical of the Times of Israel. The original author has the right to his very correct opinion that feeds into the overall anti-Israel bias against Israel all over the world. When our own bloggers and journalists and media outlets can’t report and discuss such a horrible act using the correct words, what chance is there that others will get it right?

Hallel was murdered. In a terror attack. In her bedroom. Get it right; or don’t write it at all.

Paula Stern

A Soldier’s Mother: The ‘Times of Israel’

Thursday, June 30th, 2016

In general, I have never found that four letter words are more effective than…let’s say five letter words or six or seven. It’s always been how you use them, what meaning you create with them and yet, I wouldn’t be surprised to find that the Times of Israel’s best recorded hits will go to those that use four letter words. It seems to be a measure of their journalistic talents…or perhaps a failure of it.

I met a friend in the supermarket today. We spoke of the tragedy in Kiryat Arba today. There are no good attacks, but there are sometimes particularly bad ones. It happened the day after you were in one place, the very day you planned to be there until something changed. You have a child the same age, or with the same name. Somehow, there are attacks that make us bleed more deeply, cry from the depths of pain.

This morning, I heard the first announcements. A terrorist jumped the fence into the Harsina neighborhood in Kiryat Arba and stabbed a girl – aged 16, they reported (she was only thirteen and a half…she’ll never get to be 16). “Oh God, oh God, oh God,” I said aloud in my empty car. I started to cry…I have to call Aliza.

Aliza is my youngest daughter. She is 16 years old. She studies in Kiryat Arba. I wasn’t worried about her. She was safe at home, in bed. My hands were already shaking as I pressed the numbers. By then, I knew the girls name, Hallel Yaffa, daughter of Rena. Aliza told me she was at least a year younger and not in her grade; I told her she was badly wounded. “Her mother is asking people to pray for her. She doesn’t have a pulse,” Aliza told me when she called back after speaking to her friends.

“I’ll pray for her,” Aliza said, “and I’ll pray for you.” Through tears and a broken voice, I told her I was fine and she didn’t have to pray for me. I had to go to a meeting. I had to pull myself together enough to smile and pretend. “I want to pray for you,” she answered, assuring me that she was fine. She knows me, my beautiful daughter and her calm voice helped me in more ways that I could ever write.

After the meeting, I drove to do a quick shopping and there my friend told me about the obscene headlines in the Times of Israel. Why was I surprised by their f*****g apathy to a young Jewish child who was murdered in cold blood in her bedroom?

Ah, her bedroom. You see, according to the Times of Israel, it’s really important to tell you where that bedroom is because, naturally, you can calm down. It only happened in a West Bank bedroom.

And she died. Did you know that? Apparently writing that she was murdered took up too much space. Or worse, it might get you to feel the tragedy more. She died. And anyway, she was in a West Bank bedroom, so really, she probably deserved it, right David Horovitz? Right, Sarah Tuttle-Singer? Right, Miriam Hershlag?

In one stinking article, to make sure you really understand where this terror attack took place…no, I’m sorry, it wasn’t a terror attack, it was a “stabbing attack”, these are the words they use:

  • West Bank settlement home
  • into the settlement
  • her bedroom in the West Bank settlement

And, if that isn’t enough, the Times of Israel wants to add some perspective. There have been 34 Israelis murdered since October 1. And then, wait for it, lest they be thrown out of the left-wing media consortium, they rush to point out, that “Over 200 Palestinians have also been killed over that same time frame, the majority of them while carrying out terror attacks, according to Israeli authorities.”

Well, I’m happy the Israeli authorities took the time to point out that a [VAST] majority of those 200 Palestinian were terrorists. Of course, if there were some that were not terrorists, it is interesting that the Times of Israel doesn’t bother to explain the important detail that the vast majority of those few who were not involved in terror attacks were in close proximity to an attack, but never mind. Integrity and fact have little presence on the webpages of the Times of Israel.

You know, there are days that the anger chokes you. Well, to the Times of Israel Staff, congratulations. I can only pray and hope that Hallel’s parents are smart enough not to waste their time reading the Times of Israel.

Times of Israel? Israel? You know, now that I think about it, you really should consider changing your name. You have no right to use “Israel” – you do not represent this country; you do not speak for it. You don’t even report about it.

A child was murdered today. In her bedroom. In a place she should have been safe. She was murdered by a 17 year old Palestinian. The news was wrong. She wasn’t my daughter’s age, but the murderer was. This morning, Hallel was murdered once by Muhammad Nasser Tarayrah and then she was casually dismissed by the “Times of Israel Staff” who wanted to make sure that you know that had Hallel been in Tel Aviv, Afula, Beersheva, Beit Shemesh, Raanana, and all the other cities and places that were hit by terror in the last few months, they’d care a bit more.

But she was a settler, Hallel Yaffa, daughter of Rena, who will be buried in a few hours. It is rare that I feel physically sick from reading the Times of Israel. It happens often when I read BBC, The Guardian, Reuters, etc. And I bet the Times of “Israel” would just love that because in their self-centered world they probably dream of being that big. But really, a body without a soul is worthless and a media outlet without truth isn’t much better.

The friggin’ Times of Israel deserves all the four letter words it can think to use. And most should be used today, for the staff of the Times of Israel.

As for the real Israel, today we mourn a beautiful girl who was murdered – not because she was in Kiryat Arba, but because she was Jewish. Where her bedroom was is not relevant; that she was in her bedroom, a place where she should have been save, is what matters.

Today, a Jewish girl of only 13 years was brutally murdered in her bed, in her room, in her home. The nation of Israel and those who speak for us, those who report what is happening here, mourn for the loss of Hallel Yaffa and pray that her memory will be blessed.

{ The author’s opinion does not necessarily reflect the opinion of The Jewish Press}

 

Paula Stern

A Tribute to Irving Yitzchak Moskowitz z”l

Sunday, June 19th, 2016

נפלה עטרת ראשינו

A crown has fallen from our heads….. these words were said when the great Chassidic leader Menachem Mendl from Vitebsk passed away in Tiveria in 1788. And i say these words today, with the passing to the next world, of Irving Moskowitz.

There are many Jews who know from where they came. They have history, heritage and roots, but they may not have a sense of the now – of the greatness of the hour for the Jewish People. Irving Moskowitz had both. He knew from where he came, and he knew where he was going.

His felt the energy of the returning and emerging Jewish People in her homeland and he felt as one with both the land, and her people.

Although referred to, by many as האיש של ירושלים – the man of Jerusalem, together with his loving and every so-caring wife Cherna, he was involved in Chevron, Beit El, Yesha in general, Gush Katif, Gush Etzion, educating politicians from the USA about Israel, and was even involved in ‘Operation Torah Shield’ at the outset of the Iraq war, bringing hundreds of students to Israel, to show the ultimate solidarity.

כל ישראל ערבים זה לזה – All Jews are guarantors for one another, this wasn’t just a nice concept for Irving. It was real and part of his makeup.

His unique blend of Jewish pride, emunah (faith), passion, drive, dedication, chessed and huge generosity, made him stand alone on the highest Jewish pedestal in both  Israel and abroad. He stood side by side, shoulder to shoulder, and heart to heart with  Am Yisrael at every step, in this unfolding redemption process.

From the time Irving Moskowitz walked the alleyways of the Old City with Mati Dan, nearly 40 years ago, till recently – when his soul-neshama departed to the Heavens, Irving Moskowitz had a “beautiful and pure love affair” with Jerusalem. With Jerusalem flowing thru his veins, Irving was part of the woven fabric of Jerusalem, feeling the pulse of the city, even from afar in both California and Florida. His body may have been generally in the exile, but his essence, his heart and his soul were all in Jerusalem.

Libi BaMizrach (My Heart is in the East) wasn’t just a phrase for Irving. His yearnings and dreams of Jewish life returning to Jerusalem were realized and actualized, by his own drive, committment and finances.

Beyond his own personal Jerusalem home in Yemin Moshe, Irving z”l and Cherna (May she live healthily till 120) really had many homes. Beyond his own 8 wonderful children, Irving z”l and Cherna had many many children.

Those homes and children were and are the families and students living in the heart of Jerusalem.

The hundreds of families of the Old City, the old Yemenite Village of Shiloach, Ir David, Maaleh HaZeitim, Shimon HaTzaddik, Kidmat Zion, Abu Tor, Beit Orot and the future families of Ganei Yitzchak, are all “his families and homes”.

Irving Moskowitz has redeemed and reclaimed Jerusalem for the Jewish People, and has thus ensured that a united Jerusalem stays in Jewish hands, for generations. He has been at the pioneering forefront of the unfolding realization of the redemption process and the Zionist dream in Jerusalem. A modest and humble man of peace, who believed that Jews had the natural, moral and historical right, to buy and live in any neighborhood of Jerusalem, especially in an area, from where they were evicted. He also believed, that the only way to achieve basic peace and coexistence, with our Arab neighbors, was for Jews and Arabs to live together, under Jewish and Israeli sovereignty.

He felt the pain of the Holocaust with members of his own greater family perishing in Nazi Europe, and he knew first-hand, the concept of Judenrein. (Free of Jews).

Irving Moskowitz was not going to allow that to happen in Jerusalem – where Jews should be barred or forbidden to buy and live in peace anywhere in Jerusalem.

‘Judenrein’ would not apply in united Jerusalem for Irving and Cherna Moskowitz.

So, he purchased and purchased more, he built Jewish neighborhoods, he added Jewish life to the Holy Basin and thus easily stepped into the enormous shoes of Rothschild and Montefiore.

From his first “cheque” helping to purchase or redeem Yeshivat Chayei Olam (today Yeshivat Bratslav Shuvu Banim), till the unfolding building project of the Shefer Hotel (Ganei Yitzchak) near Mt Scopus and the Shimon HaTzaddik neighbourhood, Irving z”l and Cherna have been involved in nearly every significant building project in the eastern sectors of Jerusalem. The Moskowitz name is associated with nearly everything, from buildings like Beit Wittenberg, Beit Volero-Dolgin and Beit Knesset Ohel Yitzchak in the Old City…..Yeshivot – Ateret Yerushalayim, Shuvu Banim, Beit Orot and the Mechina in Beit Zion…neighbourhoods like Kidmat Zion and the old Yemenite Village of Shiloach and the “jewel in the crown” neighborhood of Maaleh HaZeitim.

The world would say no to Maaleh HaZeitim. The Arab League, UN, EU and even pressure from both US and Israeli authorities, would all try to stop Moskowitz. (“Stop Moskowitz Now” was their official call).

But Hashem had His own road map, and Moskowitz together with Ateret Cohanim –  was Hashem’s partner.

Maaleh HaZeitim was built and today, over 100 Jewish families live on the slopes of the Mount of Olives.

On a very personal level, it is a tragic and sad day primarily for Cherna, their eight children, many grandchildren and the wider Moskowitz family.

But also on a national level, it is day of mixed emotions. On one hand, we mourn and are greatly saddened by Irving’s passing from this world. Ateret Cohanim has lost a true friend, and a unique partner. Jerusalem has lost its pillar and builder. Am Yisrael has lost a unique idealistic individual who is referred to as Boneh Yerushalayim.

But on the other hand, one can only be inspired, stand in pride and salute a giant, who has changed the face of Jerusalem and whose achievements for the Holy City, are second to none.

We also know, that Cherna (May she live to 120 years) and the Moskowitz family, who have totally supported Irving for all these years, will continue to walk proudly in Irving’s footsteps.

If the stones of Jerusalem could speak, they would say toda raba Dr. Moskowitz. They would speak of being dusty, dirty and lonely for 2000 years, until Irving z”l and Cherna came and walked the alleyways of Jerusalem.

If the stones of Jerusalem could speak, they would say – we mourn for the Master Builder and Craftsman of Jerusalem.

Yes – today, i mourn and cry for the “loss” of Irving, but I also wryly smile to the Heavens, for i’m in awe and admiration, of what Irving z”l achieved for Jerusalem, in his lifetime of 88 years, and i truly believe that G-d, is now welcoming “His Builder of United Jerusalem” with open arms, to help with the building “Jerusalem of the Heavens”, (Yerushalayim Shel Maalah).

Thank you Irving.

Chazak U’Baruch and long life Cherna.

 

In conclusion – it will be said to the mourning Moskowitz  family – throughout the Shiva “המקום ינחם אתכם בתוך שאר אבלי ציון וירושלים

May you be comforted by HaMakom along with the other mourners of Zion and Yerushalayim.

The standard understanding is that HaMakom – G-d, who is in every place, will give you comfort. Or, as was told to me when my father z”l sadly passed away last year – the knowledge of his soul-neshama going to Gan Eden-HaMakom, that will give comfort.

I think that in Irving’s case – we all have a third meaning of this comfort. HaMakom- as referred to in the Torah – is also Jerusalem. And so – when we look around anywhere in Jerusalem, we will see Irving Moskowitz. The knowledge and sight of Irvings contributions and achievements in Jerusalem. His redeeming and building the eternal united city – that too will give all of us, and hopefully the Moskowitz Family a lot of comfort.

יהי זכרו ברוך

Daniel


LIBI BAMIZRACH was the phrase of Rav Yehuda HaLevi zt’l, regarding our yearnings for Jerusalem, from the exile, throughout the centuries.

Dr Irving Moskowitz’s heart was always facing “east” towards Jerusalem, and he too had yearnings and dreams.

But Irving was able to actualize those yearnings and dreams, for his body, soul and essence was in Jerusalem.

G-d had a partner in building Jerusalem in this world. Dr Irving Moskowitz was that blessed partner, who built the walls, homes, centres of Torah learning, communities and ‘palaces’ of Jerusalem.

Now G-d has a beautiful, graceful, humble, experienced and fully committed partner to build Yerushalayim Shel Maaleh. (Jerusalem of the Heavens)

Thank you Irving.

From the “stones” of Jerusalem, who wish to cry, mourn and also speak on this sad day.

Daniel Luria

An Odor Of Intolerance At The Times

Monday, June 13th, 2016

In February, The New York Times ran a feature highlighting successful efforts to integrate Muslim immigrants into Canadian society. The thinly-disguised editorial agenda of the piece was to rebuke those Americans who were then raising questions about calls from liberals for the acceptance of large numbers of Syrian refugees despite the government’s stated inability to adequately investigate how many were members of ISIS, as some who have moved to Europe have proved to be.

Leaving aside the politics, the piece was a bright and cheery rhapsody to the virtues of welcoming and accommodating a population whose customs might differ from those of some of their neighbors in Toronto. Among the most memorable images from the piece was its paean to a decision by the municipal pool in the Regent Park neighborhood to set up hours where it would be open only to women, which gave Muslims a chance to enjoy the facility without violating their concerns about modesty.

But flash forward a few months to a different venue closer to home, and it turns out that the Times doesn’t think that accommodating the needs of religious believers with their own ideas about men and women bathing together is such a hot idea.

Last week the Times published a scathing editorial titled “Everybody into the Pool” which blasted the decision of a New York City municipal pool on Bedford Avenue in Brooklyn to set aside hours for women-only bathing. The practice, which locals say dates back to sometime in the 1990s, was initiated in order to allow Orthodox Jews, who make up a considerable percentage of those who live in the area, to enjoy the facility.

In a different place involving a different religious group, the Times clearly thought there was nothing wrong with such a practice, but when it comes to Jews in New York the newspaper of record in the city with the largest population in the world considered the accommodation for Orthodox women to represent “a strong odor of religious intrusion into a public space.”

As far as the Times is concerned, if Orthodox Jewish women want to swim without men looking at them, they can just build their own pool.

Let’s concede that if a government-owned institution were to adopt practices that excluded a particular faith or non-believers, that would be troubling. But that is not what happened on Bedford Avenue. Rather, it was a constitutionally protected practice to allow a reasonable accommodation to a not inconsiderable portion of the population. Just as public schools close on some religious holidays if enough students and teachers would be absent (a custom that now affords protections to Muslims in New York as well as to Jews and Christians), letting members of a community use a pool for a few hours a week they might otherwise not be able to enjoy is no hardship to anyone else. Nor does it constitute an illegal establishment of religion.

What then is the problem with the Metropolitan Recreation Center creating an opportunity for women to swim without men being around, especially since the Times doesn’t think segregating swimming in Toronto is so terrible?

The issue here seems to be the “odor” emanating from New York’s Jewish community. The women-only hours at the pool were restored via intervention from a Jewish member of the State Assembly after it had been halted when the city’s Commission Human Rights received an “anonymous complaint.” According to the Times, that intervention wasn’t in the best interests of the “diverse community” of Brooklyn. Which means that when it comes to accommodations for different faiths or communities, some forms of diversity are less equal than others.

The debate over how far the state may go to accommodate diversity, especially when it comes to faith, is increasingly controversial in our time. The rights of gay Americans are not only to be protected, they can also be allowed to supersede the religious freedom of other Americans, even to the point of compelling them to participate in ceremonies that violate their beliefs. In that case as well, diversity is in the eye of the beholder.

That’s an issue over which honest people may differ, but does the Times really expect us to take seriously their argument that men who want to swim during the few hours set aside for women only are having their rights violated?

It also cannot be overlooked that the Times’s choice of language in condemning the desire of Orthodox Jewish women to bathe without men was redolent of anti-Semitic smears. It is impossible to believe their editors would have allowed such a broadside against a different religious minority. Nor is it imaginable that they would have allowed a reference to odor when it came to Muslims or any other minority. Again, the contrast to their praise of accommodating Muslims at a Toronto pool cannot be ignored.

To speak of “the odor” of Jewish influence in New York was at best insensitive by the Times’s own standards of sensitivity when it comes to speaking about minorities. At worst, it was, as liberals like to say, a dog whistle for intolerance against a specific group.

Whatever one may think about where the line should be drawn when it comes to a public accommodation of a minority faith, the idea of “smelly Jews” is one that is a staple of anti-Semitic invective. In an era when, as the State Department has noted that “a rising tide of anti-Semitism” is spreading around the globe, it ill behooves The New York Times use that kind of language when virulently attacking one part of what they normally like to refer to as the rich mosaic of a diverse New York.

Jonathan S. Tobin

The Times Detects A ‘Strong Odor’ In Williamsburg Controversy

Wednesday, June 8th, 2016

We find it ironic that the controversy over separate women’s swimming time in a Williamsburg, Brooklyn public pool broke even as Americans are grappling with the issue of transgender rights.

In large part, much of the media insist that gender is a state of mind rather than a function of genitalia – to the point that a transgender person must be allowed to use a bathroom appropriate to the gender he/she identifies with rather than one appropriate to the genitalia he/she was born with.

But some of those same folks – in this case the editorial board of The New York Times – find it off-putting and unconstitutional for a municipal authority to provide a far lesser accommodation to Orthodox Jewish women seeking to observe traditional notions of modesty when swimming.

In a March 25 editorial titled “Transgender Law Makes North Carolina Pioneer in Bigotry,” the Times condemned North Carolina for “passing an appalling, unconstitutional bill that bars transgender people from using public restrooms that match their gender identity….”

A few weeks later, in its April 18 issue, the Times, in an editorial titled “Transgender Bathroom Hysteria, Cont’d.,” described reaction to the North Carolina statute:

 

After the withering backlash against North Carolina for passing a discriminatory law…it would stand to reason that lawmakers and governors in other states would think twice before peddling bills that dictate which restrooms transgender people can use.

And yet, state legislators in Tennessee, Kansas, South Carolina, and Minnesota are pushing similar absurd measures….

Laws to address non-issues [like the need to restrict transgenders] can have serious repercussions. The hastily passed bill in North Carolina, which said people must use public bathrooms based on the gender on their birth certificate and prohibited local governments from passing non-discrimination ordinances, has been roundly condemned by corporate leaders, civil rights groups, and religious leaders….

If lawmakers who might want to follow North Carolina’s example aren’t moved by appeals to equality and human rights, they should ponder this reality: The price of bigotry is becoming quite steep.

 

Fast forward five weeks. In late May the New York City Parks Department announced it was going to end a policy of setting aside several hours a week for “women’s swim” at a public pool in Williamsburg. The sessions were instituted about 20 years ago, without much fanfare or incident, as an accommodation to Orthodox Jewish women who, due to their religious beliefs, would not swim together with men.

But someone apparently filed a complaint with the New York City Commission on Human Rights claiming men were being discriminated against. The commission notified the Parks Department that the swimming arrangement was in violation of anti-discrimination laws and had to be ended. The Parks Department agreed, but after New York State Assemblyman Dov Hikind intervened the department withdrew a statement announcing the end of the program and said the future of the women’s swim program would be reviewed.

This, in a June 1 editorial, is what the great advocates of transgender choice on the Times editorial board had to say concerning the Parks Department’s about-face on the Williamsburg pool controversy:

 

Four times a week this summer – Mondays, Wednesdays, and Fridays from 9:15 to 11 a.m., and Sunday afternoons from 2:45 to 4:45 – a public swimming pool on Bedford Avenue in Brooklyn will be temporarily unmoored from the laws of New York City and the Constitution, and commonly held principles of fairness and equal access.

The pool will instead answer to the religious convictions of one neighborhood group…. Orthodox Jewish beliefs demand modesty in dress, and a strict separation of the sexes, and those are the beliefs to which the taxpayer-owned-and-operated Metropolitan Recreation Center will yield…. The city’s human rights law is quite clear that public accommodation like a swimming pool cannot exclude people based on sex. It allows for exemptions “based on bon fide considerations of public policy,” but this case –with its strong odor of religious intrusion into a secular place – does not seem bona fide at all. [Italics added]

 

Tellingly, the Times did not cite a single one legal authority supporting its legal conclusions.

And although no one seems to have protested the women’s swim time for some 20 years, the Times followed up on its offensive allusion – one “redolent of anti-Semitic smears,” as our op-ed contributor Jonathan Tobin puts it on page 8 of this week’s issue – with this dripping bit of angry sarcasm:

 

[T]he summer sun shines equally on the Orthodox and the non-Orthodox, and that plus the New York City humidity make everybody uncomfortable and hot under the collar…. There is no just way to tell a sweaty Brooklynite on a Sunday afternoon that he should be ejected onto Bedford Avenue because one religious group doesn’t want him in the pool…. Let those who cannot abide public, secular rules at a public, secular pool find their own private place to swim when and with whom they see fit.

 

And all of this says nothing about a glaring omission in the Times’s take on the matter: Although there are many examples around the country of Muslim women being provided with the same accommodation in public pools as the Orthodox women of Williamsburg, the Times completely ignored that in its denunciation of the Williamsburg program.

To be sure, the Times in 2008 reported on a controversy at Harvard over its having set separate gym hours for Muslim women. But it did not editorialize about it.

Nor did it editorialize about the city of Toronto’s various accommodations of Muslim women – but it did carry a giddily positive news report about that program, headlined “In Toronto, a Neighborhood in Despair Transforms Into a Model of Inclusion.” Times reporter Dan Levin wrote:

 

Her face framed by a yellow hijab, Idil Hassan watched her young daughter splash with other children at the Regent Park Aquatic Center, an architectural jewel of glass, wood and chlorine in the middle of Canada’s largest housing project.

The center has given Ms. Hassan, a 34-year-old nurse, the ability to do something more than just watch her child: she, too, can join in.

On Saturday evenings, mechanized screens shroud the center’s expansive glass walls to create a session that allows only women and girls to relax in the hot tub, swim laps or careen down the water slide, a rare bit of “me” time treasured by many of the neighborhood’s Muslim residents.

“I wouldn’t come before because my religion doesn’t allow women to be seen uncovered by men,” said Ms. Hassan, a Somali immigrant. “It’s really helpful to have that day to be ourselves. I even learned to swim.”

 

As far as we can tell, only the Orthodox Jewish women of Williamsburg have been targeted by the Times’s editorial writers over this sort of thing.

What is it with the Times and Orthodox Jews?

Editorial Board

NY Times Blows Winds of Putsch for Israel & How President Truman Got Rid of an Insubordinate War Hero General

Wednesday, June 8th, 2016

The New York Times has long been the mouthpiece of the US foreign policy Establishment. That the NYT is so hostile to Israel up to the point of crude lies demonstrates the deep rancor towards Israel of that Establishment.

We all know that the US and the other major WW2 allies were of little help to the victimized Jews during the Shoah, that is, during WW2. Whereas US warplanes bombed military targets near Auschwitz (Oswiecim) by 1944 –but not the gas chambers at Auschwitz nor the railroad tracks leading there– the United Kingdom prevented Jews from finding refuge in the internationally designated Jewish National Home, the Land of Israel.

During the 1967 Six Day War, the intelligence ship, USS Liberty, spied electronically on Israeli military moves and sent the information to Jordan and Egypt. A US army signal corps truck-mounted electronic intelligence station did the same on a smaller scale from the Jordanian-controlled “West Bank.” The truck had to pull back across the Jordan River with Jordan’s Arab Legion when Israel took the “West Bank.”

Now, the Establishment mouthpiece, the NYT, fans the flames of putsch, of a possible coup d’etat in Israel, publishing an article praising insubordinate Israeli senior army and intelligence officers for being “pro-peace” and “pro-human rights.” The author, Ronen Bergman, has excellent sources in Israeli intel, according to his own writings, and the NYT describes him as “a contributing writer for The New York Times Magazine.” He is not a free-lancer but “a contributing writer.” That is a more permanent arrangement. Here are some putschist samples:

IN most countries, the political class supervises the defense establishment and restrains its leaders from violating human rights or pursuing dangerous, aggressive policies. In Israel, the opposite is happening. Here, politicians blatantly trample the state’s values and laws and seek belligerent solutions, while the chiefs of the Israel Defense Forces and the heads of the intelligence agencies try to calm and restrain them. [NYT 21 May 2016]

Now right here we have what would be seen in the USA as justification for a putsch against the democratically elected government of PM Netanyahu. The politicians violate “human rights.” See that buzz term, human rights? Now to another gem:

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s offer last week of the post of defense minister to Avigdor Lieberman, a pugnacious ultranationalist politician, is the latest act in the war between Mr. Netanyahu and the military and intelligence leaders, a conflict that has no end in sight but could further erode the rule of law and human rights, or lead to a dangerous, superfluous military campaign.

Lieberman is a pugnacious ultra-nationalist. Obama is not a pugnacious ultra-nationalist. He only wants to give The Bomb to a pugnacious religiously fanatic regime in Iran that believes that it has the right to The Bomb, despite Iran being a signatory to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation treaty. And we are warned of the further erosion of “the rule of law and human rights” as well as being threatened with “superfluous war.” Obama incidentally seems to be moving closer to sending ground troops to Syria on the pretext of fighting ISIL which Obama has tried hard not to interfere with over the past two years. Of course, for Bergman, the generals and intelligence honchos who have made mistake after mistake, especially starting with Oslo, are the good guys, whereas PM Netanyahu and his government are the bad guys.

An I.D.F. general told me that the top brass saw the telephone call [by Netanyahu to the father of a soldier who had violated army rules and was being investigated and charged, which treatment Netanyahu did not cancel] as a gross defiance of the military’s authority. The deputy chief of staff, Maj. Gen. Yair Golan, chose one of the most sensitive dates on the Israeli calendar, Holocaust Memorial Eve, to react: He suggested that Israel today in some ways resembles Germany in the 1930s.

So the army has legitimate authority which the prime minister lacks, indeed its authority is superior to that of the elected leaders. Apparently the military is not supposed to be subordinate to the civilian government. And Israeli supposedly resembles Nazi Germany in some ways. I would say that Israel is more in the position of France in the 1930s pre-Vichyite period when “peace movements” in France and Britain were calling on their governments to make peace with Hitler, giving him what he wanted which also conformed to the principle of “self-determination”, some said, especially Communists.

Caroline Glick is one of the few to have seen this coming:

Defense Minister Moshe Yaalon is openly supporting the growing insubordination of IDF generals. In a speech last night, he urged senior officers to publicly air their opposition to government policies. In so doing, he brought Israeli democracy into an unprecedented crisis.. . .  a regime where civilians are free to act in accordance with their conscience even when doing so places them in opposition to the government is a democracy.
A regime where military commanders are free to act in accordance with their conscience even when doing so places them in opposition of the government is a military dictatorship. [Caroline’s facebook page, 16 May 2016]

Also see her as follows:

For the Obama administration, Israel’s security brass is an alternative government. . . . , for the [US] administration, “Israeli democracy” means the Left is in charge [link here]

In other words, the Obama administration might not be averse to a military coup d’etat taking place in Israel, provided that the ensuing military government will follow Obama’s demands on Israel for concessions to the Nazi-like “Palestinian Authority.” Mahmoud Abbas is obviously, in the NY Times lexicon, not a pugnacious nationalist.
Defense Minister Yaalon’s public statements over the past year have too often been dishonest, if hesitant, attempts to smear Jewish inhabitants of Judea-Samaria and the Jewish public in general for crimes against Arabs, for violations of human rights, and so on. This appears to be a coordinated effort, what with the deputy chief of staff Yair Golan comparing Israel with Germany in the 1930s and other lies, totally overlooking the often Nazi nature of the content of Palestine Authority TV and radio programming, mosque preaching, newspaper articles, and so on. DM Yaalon’s first dishonest and improper transgression was to accuse Jews of firebombing last summer an Arab home in the village of Duma near the Shiloh and `Eli settlements in which three Dawabsha family members died. Certainly, this was a terrible act but it is hardly certain who did it and the evidence for Jewish participation is weak, just some Hebrew grafitti. But Arabs too can write Hebrew and even do Hebrew grafitti. The more likely explanation of the crime is that it was part of a family feud or clan vendetta, a common enough event in Arab society. Indeed, houses were attacked with firebombs in that village both before and after the  one that killed three persons.
Another one of Yaalon’s offenses was to intervene in the case of a soldier who killed an already disabled terrorist in Hebron. This was a violation of army rules for opening fire. However, it should be handled by the military justice system. It would have been one thing for Yaalon to say that such events are regrettable and against orders and the case must be investigated and prosecuted. However, it was wrong of Yaalon to accuse the soldier of murder. There is such a thing as due process, even in the army. 

Deputy Chief of General Staff Maj.-Gen. Yair Golan compared Israeli society  to the Nazis on Holocaust Remembrance Day. This was a direct assault on the government’s policy of fighting, rather than joining, Israel-bashers who deny the right of the Jewish state to exist. And his comrades in the General Staff and in the Left praised him for his appalling behavior. [Caroline Glick, here]

Then there is the late Maj.-Gen. Meir Dagan, the retired director of the Mossad. Last Thursday Channel 2’s investigative news program Uvda broadcast an interview with Dagan, conducted shortly before his death. Dagan told the host Ilana Dayan that in 2010, he committed espionage. Dagan revealed that in 2010, he went behind Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s back and informed then-CIA director Leon Panetta that Netanyahu

and then-defense minister Ehud Barak were about to order the security services to attack Iran’s nuclear installations. [Caroline Glick, here]

The US of course does not tolerate insubordination by high ranking officers. We will take up the case of war hero General Douglas MacArthur below. Now back to the NYT’s taste for a putsch in Israel, Ronen Bergman fills out the picture:

In some conversations I’ve had recently with high-ranking officers about Mr. Lieberman’s appointment as defense minister, the possibility of a military coup has been raised — but only with a smile. It remains unlikely.

So Bergman tells the NYT and its readers that the subject of a possible coup has been raised. But it is “unlikely.” It’s cute that the ever so democratic NYT is so interested in hearing about a possible coup in Israel that they publish a piece that transparently and implicitly justifies just that, if not going so far as to advocate a coup. But why is the NYT  pushing a putsch in Israel? The motive is obvious. They want Israel to bend to Washington’s dictates, which under Obama are more blatantly anti-Jewish than under previous presidents. That means Israel surrendering territory to fanatically hate ridden pan-Arabist and Islamist Arabs, obsessed with hatred for the Jews who have stepped out of the humiliated place of the dhimmi as decreed by Islamic law.

The NY Times continues with its buttering up of the army to the detriment of the elected civilian government. A piece by Isabel Kershner [NYT, 29 May 2016] makes ex-Defense Minister Ya`alon look good, democratic, whereas Netanyahu and Lieberman look bigoted and narrow, etc: “the generals . . . have spoken out against manifestations of extremism in the ranks and in broader society,” “shrill segment of the public,” “an aggressive segment of the public.”  The people who are fed up with murder and mass murder efforts are “aggressive,” “shrill,” “extremist,” etc. On the other hand, “Other Israelis want the military to remain a moderating force and a bulwark against extremism.” Are these “Other Israelis” the supposedly good folk who would welcome a military coup against “extremism”?

General Yair Golan, deputy chief of staff, sanctimoniously declaimed on the eve of Holocaust Remembrance Day:

“if there is one thing that is scary in remembering the Holocaust, it is noticing horrific processes which developed in Europe – particularly in Germany – 70, 80, and 90 years ago, and finding remnants of that here among us in the year 2016.” [here]

This is a Judeophobic accusation. An implicit assertion that the Israeli people are Nazi-like. That is another justification for a coup. After all, he is saying that the people are immoral. Their elected government is perforce immoral. No comment from Golan about the profound Nazi-like hatred of Jews and Israel fostered by the Palestinian Authority, by Hamas, by the press in various Arab countries, and in Western lands where the media habitually misrepresent what happens in Israel as well athe relevant history of Arab-Jewish relations.
The prime minister perceived the threat in Golan’s remarks: “Mr. Netanyahu rebuked General Golan, criticizing his remarks as outrageous, and said, “The I.D.F. is the people’s army and must remain out of political debates.”” [here]
On the other hand:

“While the controversial comments drew fire from many within the nationalist camp, Defense Minister Moshe Yaalon defended Golan, arguing that criticism aimed at him was part of a larger “campaign to harm the IDF and its officers politically.”“The responsibilities of an army officer, especially a senior commander, are not limited to leading soldiers out to war, but also include charting out a path and ethical standards with the help of [his] moral compass,” said Yaalon.” [here]

Yaalon is speaking out of what he claims is higher morality. But since Golan’s comparison to Germany in the 1930s was false and ignorant at best, Ya`alon’s defense was also out of place. And the implicit support in his words for insubordination and possibly a putsch was obviously wrong.
Netanyahu properly rebuked Ya`alon:

Netanyahu reportedly called Yaalon, sharply criticizing him for defending Golan’s comments [here]

Looking back to 20th century history, we can see that the USA, both before and after WW2, rather often supported generals who overthrew legitimate governments abroad. In some cases this was justified as opposition to corrupt and tyrannical regimes, as in Egypt in 1952 and Iran/Persia in 1979. The problem is that corrupt and tyrannical regimes have often enough been replaced by regimes that were even worse by every measure. As in Egypt and Iran (Persia). Ask yourself if the present Islamic fanatic Khomeini regime of the ayatollahs in Iran now is any better than the Shah’s regime that it replaced, with the aid of the Carter Administration. Or is it even worse?

In any event, the powers that be in the United States do not like insubordinate generals who dispute the civilian leadership openly.

Douglas MacArthur was a hero in both world wars, I & II. He was the commander of American forces in the Korean War, starting in 1950. His brilliant Inchon landing behind North Korean Communist troops opened the way for American and allied forces to reach the Yalu River between North Korea and China. After China entered the war in late 1950, MacArthur

“wished to bomb Chinese bases in Manchuria and was prepared to risk a full-scale war with communist China. President Truman sought to hold him in check but MacArthur made public his advocacy of carrying the war into China. This defiance of official government policy led the President peremptorily to relieve him of his commands on 11 April 1952.” [Alan Palmer, The Penguin Dictionary of Twentieth Century History (New York: Penguin 1979), p242]

“When President Truman would not agree to his plan for an attack upon  Communist China, MacArthur made his opinions public and Truman responded by relieving the General of his command. . . . his action represented a challenge to civilian authority which the President did not hesitate to meet.” [Walter Laqueur et al., A Dictionary of Politics (rev ed; New York: The Free Press 1974), p307]

So we see that MacArthur openly defied the president of the time and his policy. He was insubordinate and was dismissed. The US government does not tolerate defiance of its policy by its own generals. But somehow such insubordination is OK when practiced against other governments and may even be encouraged by US government mouthpieces like the New York Times.

Eliyahu mTsiyon

Beyond The Matrix – Making It Through Tough Times Through Torah [audio]

Sunday, May 22nd, 2016

Rod and Ira examine how to deal with the obstacles and difficulties in your life according to the principles of Torah.

Beyond The Matrix 17May2016 – PODCAST

Israel News Talk Radio

Printed from: http://www.jewishpress.com/multimedia/israel-news-talk-radio/beyond-the-matrix/beyond-the-matrix-making-it-through-tough-times-through-torah/2016/05/22/

Scan this QR code to visit this page online: