Month: February 2010

“The story here is the dangerous devaluation of a real and ugly phenomenon i.e. anti-Semitism. Equally distressing, is the fact that Foxman, one of the nation’s leaders in the fight against anti-Semitism, also leads the process of its devaluation as either a meaningful term or a genuine challenge.

There is no question that Jew-hatred persists in this country along with other racial, ethnic and gender-based hatreds, and that both Foxman and the ADL have played important and even heroic roles in combating them. But with Jew-hatred on the decline in this country, and even more importantly, becoming almost exclusively the domain of the least educated and empowered segments of society; it often appears that Foxman is nothing more than a hammer in search of more nails,” – Rabbi Brad Hirschfield, president of the National Jewish Center for Learning and Leadership.

Mark Blumenthal provides a reality check:

[T]his event is extremely important with one small but very crucial audience: The members of the House and Senate and the news junkies that surround and advise them. For them this event probably serves as something of a demonstration project for how the health care debate might play out in their own elections later this fall: Will the substance of the discussion help change the tone of the debate or the coverage? Will health reform supporters gain an upper hand in selling whatever plan faces further votes in the House and Senate? As such, the very small live audience is important, I just wouldn't look for a big, overnight polling surge in either direction.

The NYT,  Sargent, Frum and TPM are live-blogging. Cohn and Ezra Klein are live-tweeting. White House live-stream after the jump (Or you can watch over at the Sunlight Foundation, which is displaying politicians' health care donations as they speak):

A reader writes:

I am Jewish and lived in Israel from 2008-2009, where I worked as a reporter during the elections and the Gaza war.  I have been to Hebron and visited the Cave of the Patriarchs.  I have also met with local Palestinian residents and what's left of the settler community there.  There's no question in my mind that the Hebron settlers are really nuts; I think they represent the furthest fringe of "greater Israel" ideology, which is really just advocacy for ethnic cleansing. 

(For more on this, you should take a look at the National Union party platform, which is popular among Hebron settlers. They have no seats in the Knesset right now but had a close shot, and they come very close to being disqualified for racist views. They are run by an American immigrant, which is interesting in its own right.)

All that said, even among Hebron settlers, I couldn't find anyone who would condone Baruch Goldstein's actions, at least in public (I have my own suspicions of their private views, but they are just suspicions.  And I certainly don't count Mr. Netanyahu's love of political expediency and kowtowing amongst these ideologues.)  This move is ideological only insofar as the Cave is located in Hebron — its significance in Judaism is beyond dispute, and from that perspective it makes sense that it should be listed as a historical site.  (This formulation holds for Rachel's tomb, as well.)

If you wanted to pick a fight on this point, it's worth noting that halachic Judaism (Jewish law) doesn't allow for the enshrining of "holy sites." 

Judaism is a portable religion for a people who spent many centuries in perpetual exile.  Although there are three "pilgrimage festivals" during which is was traditional for Jews to travel to Jerusalem, I don't know of any laws that would be broken for Jews who do not make the trip.  Certainly there is nothing in Jewish law that requires (or even recommends) special worship at places like Rachel's Tomb or the Cave, and I suspect (I'm not a rabbi so I won't go further) that there's probably a lot to discourage such habits, as they smack of idol worship.  Having been to the Cave myself (which is ornately decorated due to its long history as a prominent mosque), I feel this last point is especially relevant in discussions with Jews who believe Hebron's heritage is too valuable to give away.  One need only point out that Judaism does not enshrine the "holiness" of locations, with the exception of the Temple.

(On the other hand I also don't believe it's fair to attack Jews who do want to go through this enshrining process.  Judaism in its religious aspect has only had 60 years to deal with the idea of reencountering holy places that are thousands of years old.  It's understandable that there is religious and political confusion on this point, given the deep sentimental connection that Jewish people feel to places like the Cave.  In my opinion, it is worth giving away such places to ensure that Jews have a homeland in Israel.  But I understand the anxiety that others feel when we talk of giving away the place where the father of our entire people is said to be buried.  I think you understand this, too.

As far as Etzion and southern settlements go: I encourage you to take a look at a map of settlement activity from Ir Amim.  Ir Amim is a wonderful organization, and a great way for Jews and non-Jews alike to understand Jerusalem (where I lived while I was in Israel.)  I think you will find that settlements are too complex to lump entirely into the "bad column".  Some settlements are innocuous.  Some are heinously awful.  Ir Amim has done a great job of determining which is which, and I encourage you to make use of them when you talk about settlement activity.  I think it will provide you with more nuance when you approach this debate.

I know this is a long email and you might not read it, but I feel much better having written it.  Best to you.  Please remember that there are a lot of good Israelis who think as you do, who are waiting for a voice in their government.

I take all my reader's points and am grateful for the volume of email from knowledgeable Jewish and Israeli readers, exploring every facet of this question, without rancor or anger.

(Photo: Israeli settlers carry Torah scrolls past destroyed Palestinian homes to the Cave of the Patriarchs during Purim festivities March 27, 2005 in the West Bank town of Hebron. Hundreds of settlers paraded amidst tight security through the town where they live surrounded by more than 120,000 Palestinians as they brought two new Torah scrolls to the tomb of the biblical Patriarchs while celebrating the deliverance of the Jewish people from destruction planned against them in ancient Persia some 2,500 years ago. By David Silverman/Getty Images)

From Vancouver, the legacy of Brendan Burke lives on.

Lutherstadt, Germany, 2.45 pm

Goldblog seconds the Dish on substance:

I didn't think it was necessary for Bibi to do this, for any number of reasons: a) These are holy sites to Jews regardless of politics; b) I'm often a fan of the unspoken status quo, which is to say, Jews now have free access to these holy sites (something they didn't have when Jordan occupied the West Bank), so why mess with something that works? I'm all for negotiations about the permanent disposition of these sites, but this move seemed over-assertive and needless.

But really the main problem is UNESCO. This is nuance, I guess.

Yesterday, I noted Glenn Greenwald's righteous gasp at Newsweek's apparently craven view of how to use the term "terrorism". Kudos to Newsweek for airing their internal debate, and kudos for those in the email chain who stood up for intellectual clarity and consistency, rather than pandering to whatever trends now exist in the MSM. But re-reading the email chain, there is also obviously some meta-heavy irony going on as well, although emails don't always catch that kind of thing. So here's a simple question: is this view of the managing editor ironic or not? Is she mocking craven and inconsistent and obviously racist distinctions in the MSM or is she sincerely endorsing them? To tell you the truth, I can't tell. Maybe you can:

Here is my handy guide:

Lone wolfish American attacker who sees gov't as threat to personal freedom: bomber, tax protester, survivalist, separatist

Group of Americans bombing/kidnapping to protest U.S. policies on war/poverty/personal freedom/ – radical left-wing movement, right-wing separatists

All foreign groups or foreign individuals bombing/shooting to protest American gov't: terrorists

(Note that as recently as March 6, 2008, a group who burned three new homes in an environmentally sensitive area, killing not a soul, were called eco-terrorists. In Newsweek.)

Pole dancers make push to get into Olympics

Bainbridge counters Paul's support of the gold standard by quoting Milton Friedman:

I do believe that every individual should be free to own, buy, and sell gold. If under those circumstances a private gold standard emerged, fine—although I make a scientific prediction that it’s very unlikely. But I think those people who say they believe in a gold standard are fundamentally being very anti-libertarian because what they mean by a gold standard is a governmentally fixed price for gold.

Frum takes on Paul's opposition to central banks.