Off to the Trail

I will be backpacking for the next week, so there goes nay hope for me updating the blog.

Meanwhile I will leave some questions for people to ponder:

How should one view the "kiruv" of Jews to non-observant but involved Judaism, and why?

Which is more important: Kiruv Rechokim (bringing those who are far close to Judaism) or Kiruv Krovim (bringing those who are close into a real care and vibrancy about Judaism)

Why is Jewish sovereignty in the Land of Israel important (imagine in theory Jews could live in Israel peacefully under foreign rule)?

Does a Jewish democracy have din malchut, if not is a theocracy (more accurately a monarchy becuase the kohen kadol/ Av beit din) is the religious leader the ideal?

Is it a form of tzedakah to save the environment?

If your brother has a flu and your neighbor is getting a stroke, who do you deal with first? If a Jewish person has the flu and a non-Jew is getting a stroke who do you deal with first?

Should the a government be responsible for needs beyond basic necessities of life towards its citizens?

Should the Israeli government be a diffrent case becuase it is obligated to care for the Jewish people?

Is a representative democracy the same thing as the people?

If Am Yisrael is obligated to do something is the government obligated?

If you take in refugees to save lives, how do you draw the line at which you can't save more lives?

Is it better not to accept any refugees because you really can't help every single person in the world or is it better to set an arbitrary line?

How can you accept the 1000th person but not the 1001st?

If the lives were Jewish Lives would you act the same way? Is it ok if the answer to that was yes?

and a bonus:
What should be the place of Arab's in Israel (politically, socially etc)?

Is it (and if yes to what extent) is it ok to use psychological warfare in the occupation of the West Bank? If shooting at a blank wall in an Arab village will stop terrorists from shooting at nearby settlements for instance...or random arrests and detentions?

Is it ok for Jews to settle in the West Bank considering there are Arabs in Israel?

If the Palestinians view themselves as at war with Israel and some/most see it fit to resort to violence why is it wrong to play our side of the struggle and try to build on as much land(not that belongs to private Palestinians) as possible?

I am the top blog for search of IAJV ??

Top blog for search of IAJV
Originally uploaded by seraphya.

I am apparently the top blog people find when they search for the "IAJV" (Independent Australian Jewish Voices). It beats me how this happened. There are no links that are pointing people to this blog about the IAJV.

Considering that this is the case I should just make it very clear what the IAJV is. It is a trick being used by Self-hating Jews and anti-Zionists to divide the Jews of Australia and to make people think that the Jewish community of Australia is not run democratically. Its mission statement is misleading and is easy to agree with as I showed in earlier posts. It has worked into tricking very well intentioned people into supporting it. It does not stand for peace between Israel and a future Palestinian state as it claims, but for the destruction of Israel. If you want a real left-wing Zionist organization in Australia try Hashomer Hatzair, which accidentally signed it before realizing it was duped, or try 'Jewish Voices for a Just Peace'.

One post I recommend exposing the IAJV is THE BLANK PAGES OF THE AGE

Palestinians protest actions of Hamas

So they aren't protesting against terrorism? What you though they were?

No they are protesting the banning of a book of Palestinian folk tales by the Hamas government.

AbbaGav and many others are cynical about it.

I am just glad that the Palestinians are standing up to Hamas about anything. It shows how the Palestinians really do learn democratic values from "The Occupier".

I would say that it also possibly could be that Palestinians can't stand up against the destruction of Israel and terrorism vocally so they chose this instead. I will not say that because this was a book of "folk tales". An anthology that is trying to strengthen the myth that there is a unified Palestinian tradition and people that existed before Zionism. Still I am happy to see dissent going on in Palestinian politics and liberal values. We've got to start somewhere.

AbbaGav adds:

Maybe Israel's next peace offer should include some mild sexual innuendo in addition to the usual dangerous concessions. That might be enough to get the Palestinian people sufficiently interested to launch an outcry against their own leaders' violent response.

The Zionist Boycott - of Coca-Cola?

If fighting the Illegal Arab boycott and all the other anti-Israel boycotts weren't enough, enter the Zionist boycott of Soft Drinks. The ZOA decided to fight fire with fire and start its own boycott of Coca Cola.

Wait a second

Coke vs Pepsi. Did you know that from 1966, Coca Cola has been a firm supporter of commerce with Israel? Coca Cola has refused to follow the Arab boycott for decades. Pepsi followed the boycott and didn’t begin trade with Israel until 1992. Coca Cola not only sells its soda in Israel, it built and currently operates a plant there as well. The next time you are looking for a cool taste to simmer down the summer, remember – Coke is it! - http://www.25waystohelpisrael.com/pages/t1.asp?PID=3001

This also goes against the grain of most Jewish and Zionist organizations who are very hesitant to get involved in boycotts, even the very careful one about Darfur.

It seems like the ZOA have a point though

ZOA: "Don't Buy Coca-Cola"

New York — The Zionist Organization of America (ZOA) condemns the Coca-Cola Company ("Coca-Cola" or the "Company") for occupying and using certain property in Egypt, all the while knowing that the property was stolen by the Egyptian government from its Jewish owners, the Bigio family. This participation in anti-Semitic and immoral conduct is made even more egregious by how boldly and self-righteously Coca-Cola describes itself.

Now here is the thing. The ZOA is a Right Wing organization on the fringe of anything that people would call mainstream Zionism. They are not going to be listened to, we already know that from the UPZ controversy.

It seems they weren't content with simply using the strategy of the Arab Boycott, but they also got writing tips. Its fair enough that they want to stress how this property was stolen from the Jewish owners and they see the Palestinians making claims and getting listened to. The 1,000,000 Jews who fled Arab lands and lost everything could probably use some of the double speak that is used against Israel and instead use it for the truth.

But Come On! "occupying" isn't that a bit much?


anti-Semitic - I'll say the same old line: There is no such thing as Semitism, call it Antisemitism, not Anti-Semitism. This makes it clear that it is not a valid position; unlike Anti-abortion or Anti-Zionism, Antisemitism is not up for discussion. Also it will make it clear that it just refers to Jews, not other "Semites"



Having said that Coke has some explaining to do

For approximately 60 years beginning in the early 1900's, the Bigios owned land and factories near Cairo, Egypt. Coca-Cola leased a factory building from the Bigios for over 25 years, and the Bigios' factories provided bottle caps and other products to the Company.

In 1962, the Egyptian government forcibly stole the Bigios' property from them, without any compensation whatsoever, for one reason only: they were Jews. The Egyptian government's actions were part of a campaign of anti-Semitic discrimination and persecution that caused almost a million Jews in Arab/Islamic countries, like the Bigios, to lose their homes, properties, businesses and livelihoods.

In 1980, the Egyptian government ordered that the property be returned to the Bigios. But the occupier, a government-owned and operated entity, never returned the property.

In approximately 1993, the Egyptian government decided to privatize the entity that was occupying and using the Bigios' property. When the Bigios learned that Coca-Cola intended to bid for the entity, they contacted Coca-Cola to remind the Company of the family's right to the property. But top Coca-Cola officials cavalierly brushed aside and ignored the Bigios' legitimate pleas to be justly compensated for the loss of their property, and went ahead with the bid. Through subsidiaries, Coca-Cola purchased 42 percent of the entity occupying the Bigios' property, knowing full well of the immoral and anti-Semitic manner in which the property had been stolen from the Bigios by the Egyptian government. The Company then formed a joint venture known as the "Coca-Cola Bottling Companies of Egypt" that has been occupying, using and benefiting from the Bigios' stolen property since 1994.

The Bigios repeatedly requested that Coca-Cola compensate them for their loss, but Coca-Cola never offered them a penny. The family was thus left with no choice but to file a lawsuit to obtain justice. They sued in Egypt 12 times. All of their lawsuits were dismissed and not permitted to go forward, some in a matter of weeks. In 1997, the Bigios filed suit against Coca-Cola in a federal district court in New York. In the almost 10 years since the lawsuit was brought, Coca-Cola's lawyers have used every legal maneuver to avoid reaching the merits of the Bigios' case because the Company has no legal or moral defense for its conduct. - ZOA

Even the Left wing isn't fooled by IAJV - and a possible solution

Dissent debate: The rebuttal
Backlash against dissident petition

Hashomer Hatzair was issued with an urgent “please explain” from the Zionist Federation of Australia (ZFA), after the youth movement’s controversial decision to sign the IAJV petition.

Claiming a “grave misunderstanding”, the youth group later moved to distance itself from IAJV founder Antony Loewenstein and said it had “signed in agreement with only the sentiments expressed in the letter”.

“In no way is our statement intended to express support for Antony Loewenstein’s personal opinions nor any of the other signatories.”

ZFA president Philip Chester said while he disagreed with the IAJV campaign, Hashomer Hatzair was entitled to its view and wouldn’t be ostracised for signing the petition.

The youth group had “misunderstood” the political agenda behind the dissenting campaign, he said.

Now Hashomer Hatzair (Hashi) was formed in Melbourne for those who were too left-wing for Habonim Dror, and therefore are just about the most left you will get in the scale of Australian Zionists. Now I am not suprised they signed the petition. It was written in a away that anyone, even a right-wing person could sign. What was the trick? it was to make people think something was wrong with the way Jewish and Zionist groups conduct themselves. While there maybe be valid issues that need to be brought up, as I pointed out earlier, this is a scam. The IAJV is having people sign onto a petition whose meaning is not what it seems to be.

Just in case you really believed that the Zionist groups in Australia don't behave well, we have perfect proof that they do. The ZFA would let people publicly condemn it and remain members without penalty.


Maybe we should all take a page out of Hashi's book and sign the petition. Imagine if everyone on the Jewish Board of Deputies and the ZFA and every organization were to sign the statement of principles, which as pointed at earlier, they already agree with. What better way of showing the IAJV and the world that the IAJV is redundant or has an ulterior motive?

The German group is problematic

Selected Quotes and commentary on:

English translation of Schalom 5767 (Berliner Erklärung)
Shalom 5767 (Berlin Declaration)

The root of the problem is the continuing Israeli occupation of Palestinian territory since 1967. The Occupation humiliates and disenfranchises the Palestinians. It paralyzes their economic, political and social life. Moreover, this daily recurring experience of injustice prevents a peaceful resolution of the old injustice done to the Palestinians when they were forced to leave in 1948. All this further fuels the spiral of violence.

The root of the problem is clearly NOT the occupation. The problems and terrorism have been going on long before 1967. This paragraph puts all the blame on Israel, and there is no paragraph to be found in the document which puts any responsibility in the slightest on the Palestinians. This paragraph also solely blames Israel for the Palestinians leaving Israel in 1948, when the reality is much more complicated than that.

We call upon the German government, together with the European Union,
- to no longer tolerate the Israeli policy of occupation
- to promptly end the boycott of the Palestinian Authority
- to strive earnestly for the realization of a viable Palestinian state in the Gaza Strip and the entire West Bank that was occupied in 1967, including East Jerusalem, a state with full sovereignty and freedom of movement.

That is being blatantly Anti-Israel. Advocating that Germany somehow sanction Israel an no longer tolerate Israel's actions, rather than being helpful, increases hatred towards the State of Israel.
Ending the boycott of the Palestinian Authority would send a message that the destruction of the Israel is legitimate, the Quartet and Israel all realize that letting accepting Hamas as is means accepting the destruction of Israel. And this comes after saying that Israel should be "boycotted" for her actions?!
Why do they insist on the entire West Bank and Gaza? They seem to be more interested in Palestinian Nationalism than in Zionism. Because there are no Zionist statements in here, only Palestinian Nationalist ones.



I could add more, but its painfully obvious that this German group is not exactly an alternative Zionist voice, but merely a Palestinian voice. The other "Independent Voices" may be the same, but their declarations haven't made it clear

A close look at the IAJV Declaration

The Blue italics will be my comments

The Declaration

Statement of Principles: A Call for an Alternative View

We are Jews with diverse opinions on the Middle East who share a deep concern about the current crisis in the region.

How many affiliated Jews aren't deeply concerned about what is happening in Israel and the middle east?

We are committed to ensuring a just peace that recognizes the legitimate national aspirations of both Israelis and Palestinians with a solution that protects the human rights of all.

Most people shouldn't have a problem with this. However not everyone will agree that the Palestinian national aspirations are legitimate. Certainly Hamas's vision of a Palestine that destroys and conquers Israel is not legitimate, so it wouldn't be included. Now skeptics will point out that most national aspirations of the Palestinians, including Fatah's are illegitimate, and would be right. I think that being that this organization is set up against the mainstream it will have a very broad definition of what is legitimate, but this line doesn't necessarily imply that. Very few Zionists cling to a one Jewish state solution, so I don't think people can complain about this line

We condemn violence by all parties, whether state sanctioned or not. We believe that Israel’s right to exist must be recognized and that Palestinians’ right to a homeland must also be acknowledged.

Treading on dangerous ground of moral equivalence. Israel's right to exist is not exactly Zionism, but it certainly isn't Anti-Zionism. I don't know exactly why the Palestinians have a "right" to a homeland. Maybe it is necessary to give them one given the situation, but a "right" to a Palestinian homeland that isn't Jordan is already becoming left wing. But thats OK, no one claimed that they weren't left wing Zionists.

As Australians we are privileged to live in a democratic state that embodies the principles of tolerance and free speech. We feel there is an urgent need to hear alternative voices that should not be silenced by being labelled disloyal or “self-hating.”

Often those being labeled disloyal or "self-hating" are, but I know plenty of people who are mislabeled, as I argued in my last post, they have a point.

Uncritical allegiance to Israeli government policy does not necessarily serve Israel’s best interests. Our concern for justice and peace in the Middle East is a legitimate opinion and should be met by reasoned argument rather than vilification and intimidation. In particular, we are concerned that the Jewish establishment does not represent the full range of Jewish opinion. Contrary to widespread concerns, anti-Semitism is not fuelled by Jews who publicly disagree with actions of the Jewish State.

Well the Orange anti-disengagement people will agree with that first sentence. Its hard to be against Justice and Peace, I know many a right-winger who are for that just us much as anyone else. I think they are being a bit alarmist in saying that the Jewish establishment does not represent the full range of Jewish opinion. Sure there are politics, in the Jewish establishment, but the ones who are attacking these progressive voices are much extreme and far form the centre than these progressives. Rather than remove themselves from the establishment, maybe they should have protected their rightful place inside the establishment. However, removing themselves from the establishment instead of firing back at those who attack them can be commended. At the end of the day, they are doing a disservice to themselves by removing themselves from the debate; they are also doing a bigger disservice to the establishment by removing themselves from it.

On the last point they are just plain wrong. Neturei Karta and Extremely Left-Wing Jews are some of the biggest fuelers of Antisemitism. Many Left-Wing groups which "publicly disagree with actions of the Jewish State" and don't do a good enough job at separating themselves form anti-zionists and antisemites bring about both antisemitism and mar the Left-Wing.

Jews understand what it is to suffer racism and victimization and therefore we are not only concerned about anti-Semitism but also the demonisation of all other minorities.

Sorry, but that therefore doesn't work. While I am concerned about all discrimination, I don't think one neccasarily has to lead to the other. While I use a variant of this approach to support Jewish efforts for Darfur, I think this statement could be clearer. Nothing wrong with it though.

We call upon fellow Jews to join us in supporting free debate to further the prospects of peace, security and human rights in the Middle East.

Free debate sounds good. As long as we are not talking about Holocaust Denial, which we aren't.

So I got through all of it, and found nothing wrong. Well, just that anti-semitism should be spelled antisemitism, because there is no such thing as "semitism"

Independent Jewish Voices - necassary?

Lately there has been a move by those who are dissatisfied by the current Jewish organizations to set up "independent" organizations to make themselves heard.
These include
IJV
IAJV
Schalom5767


I won't deal with the question of: "Are these organizations Anti-Zionist?" except to say on paper they certainly aren't, and that they don't necessarily have to be.

The fact that these organizations have sprouted up is a possible cause for worry, but is also surprising. Most Jewish and Zionist organizations in the diaspora took a policy of staying away from political issues, even under the intense pressures of the disengagement. Certainly the Executive Groups, Coalitions and the Umbrella Organizations would not dare to take a strong political stand.

At this point it would seem that these "independents" are firebrands who want to stir trouble and are not being suppressed. Come on, we all know that there are fair elections in these organizations and no one is rigging the elections of the World Zionist Congress. If these "independents" can sign on the Jerusalem Program, then they are having their fair vote. If they can't, then well they aren't really Zionists then, so they should stop pretending to be.

But that is all on paper, maybe they are being suppressed in reality? boo-hoo stop whining! Well no, not exactly. When policies on paper, and systems of fairness are being abused, there should be an answer. Bnei Akiva in most of the diaspora is politically non-partisan, and they do any things to make sure they keep to that ideal. However, when certain Madrichim (counselors) teach the chanichim(kids) songs about hating Arabs, a line has been crossed, even if he claims that those are his/her "personal opinions." It damage control isn't taken on and apologies aren't made, something is wrong. Now why is this relevant?

Because the ZOA wants to kick the UPZ out of the ICC. lots of fun 3 letter acronyms!

Take the story
from: JewSchool , OurJerusalem , The Jewish Daily Forward


So there was some damage control


But at the end of the day, organizations on the right who are members of the Executive Groups, Coalitions and the Umbrella Organizations such as the ZOA criticize Israel with impunity, harm Israel's image, make extremely controversial even possibly racist statements, connect themselves either officially or unofficially with other hate groups and terrorist organizations. Meanwhile no one is suggesting that that the ZOA be kicked out. No one is saying that the ISM or other anti-zionist organizations should be let in, just left wing Zionist groups.

If Left-wing groups are made to feel uncomfortable in the establishment, let them do what they do best, rebel against the establishment.

Religious Zionism vs Modern Orthodoxy

What is the difference between the way the way the Religious-Zionists(RZ) look at the secular and the way the Modern Orthodox(MO) look at the secular?

Torah U’Madda, Torah V’Avodah, what’s the difference?

Let’s make it very clear that neither is Torah U’parnasa, the ideology that masquerades as part of the MO world. It’s so clear that people need to make a living, and in the past people made a living. Haredim also work. Not being in denial about the fact that you need to provide for yourself and your family is not some new idea, and it’s not much of an ideology either.

The followers of Ha’Rav (Kook) talk about bringing the secular and the holy together to reach a combination that is elevated above either one.

The followers of The Rav (Soloveitchik) talk about the secular that has a real truth which can bring one closer to knowledge of G-d, in a similar way as Torah does.

Don’t read too much into that, its just what I hear from people who claim to be the students of The Rav or Ha’Rav.

I was writing this up after hearing a shiur about Purim in which Rav Kook was used as a source many ties in discussing how Purim was a special holiday that represents the eventual eschatological era when the greatest connection to G-d will be attained through physical and spiritual means with no conflict between the two. After the shiur I was reading some Kol Dodi Dofek. This question of MO vs RZ has been on my mind for ages. It was emphasized at a Tish by Rabbi Yosef Blau of Yeshiva University (The model of Torah U’Madda) on divisions in the Jewish world; he mentioned that RZ in America and in Israel made dialogue between the two theoretically equivalent groups difficult, even without a language barrier.

As I was writing this in the front of the beit midrash, Rav Cherlow was giving a shiur on Orot Ha’Rav Kook. I wasn’t in the shiur because the shiur I was just in ended long after Rav Cherlow’s began. However suddenly I hear him talking about Rav Soloveitchik, and the difference between him and Rav Kook. Apperntly someone asked a question about it. I only caught the end of Rav Cherlow’s response, which would be interesting because people say he represents Israel’s version of the closest thing to Modern Orthodoxy. If I heard him correctly, he mentioned something about how The Rav viewed literature as inherently holy, while Rav Kook viewed it as something intresting and part of this world. I am not really sure what that really means, but make what you want of it.

Well that was a short little look into the matter, with no sources or anything passing for a real analysis. Just a sort of an intro to the subject to the hang of blogging.

Another subject I am thinking about a lot is State of Israel vs Land of Israel. Small issue? Nope, just about the biggest thing dividing the religious community, both Zionist and non-Zionist.