Jews, race, color, and the limits of a justifiable outrage.

 Reflections following the, now forgotten, Briahna Joy Grey’s tweeter storm over the alleged whiteness of Jews.

Briahna Joy Grey, a left-wing activist and a former aide to Bernie Sanders, asked in one of her regular podcasts, if Jews are white. She didn’t just ask it. It was the title of her February 25^th podcast “The Debrief.” This may seem a simple matter to a non-Jew, but it is anything but. While Judaism as a way of life and a system of values has no interest in people’s skin color, Jews have complex relationships with the subject. Therefore, there is a lot of genuine discussion to be held here. However, asking if Jews are white is probably the worst way to open any discussion on the matter.

Briahna Joy Grey

When it comes to the physical, physiological, facts on the ground, melanin; Jews are shades. A range of different shades of skin color from black to white, mostly shades of brown. But at the social level things are complicated. Complicated by the different experiences Jews and other minorities, had in Europe and North America. While in both continents there were lengthy periods of intolerance and violence towards many of these minorities; there were still differences. Differences that are known, but not so easily understood.

Jews are one of many marginalized European and Middle Eastern communities that made it in the USA. An America that for the greater part of its existence, being white was one of the highest social statuses. Succeeding in such America was not a given. It was a tough struggle against intrench prejudices. Prejudices that originated in the world they left behind. A world that punished them, violently and brutally, whenever they tried to improv their situation. And even when they didn’t.

The America they came to was doing the same thing. Not to them. To African Americans, and to Native Americans. (As well as visiting this mistreatment on Hispanics and East Asians populations). On one hand the Jewish experience in North America did not include the systematic abuse perpetuated on African Americans and Native Americans. On the other hand, the ideas that justified this mistreatment were similar to those that justified the systematic abuse Jews have suffered from in Europe. And in this new home Jews were viewed in ways that were not far removed from those European perceptions. Those were, and are, the same European misperceptions. These are ideas that got them [us] killed in countless pogroms and persecutions. American Jews never lost sight of the fact that no matter how successful they are, those ideas are alive and well all around them. And occasionally produce murderous violence against them. This is why those differences are insignificant for Jews. Yes, murderous violence is not as recurring as on the “Pale of the Settlements.” At the same time, it is not that far behind.

However, for African Americans those differences are very significant. They saw the Jews take the white only sits on the bus, drink from the white only fountain, and enter the white only stores. And most importantly, Jews could vote, while African Americans were prevented from that. And of course, as mention previously, Jews in the USA did not have to worry from lynch mob as much as African Americans had to. From an African American pov Jews were on the white side of life, enjoying a degree of safety unavailable to most, if not all, African Americans. Europe, a continent on the other side of the ocean, was irrelevant. This does not dispute the fact the Jews were discriminated against in USA. Not to mention the confidence by which antisemite agitators such as Henry Ford, Charles Coughlin, and others, could spread their hatred. The difference is that the oppression of black people and Native Americans was official policy in both state and federal levels. That allowed private initiatives among white Americans to create lynch mobs, and other forms of murderous violence. This also inspired discrimination against Jews. But it was mostly a private initiative. In stores that decided not to allow Jews to enter, private clubs, etc.

These differences are why African Americans experienced Jews as white. The threat to their lives was, and is imminent. Any pause that could be given would be considered luxury. And in many ways, it is. This is why Briahna Joy Grey, found it so amazing that Americans don’t consider Barbara Streisand white. For her it was amazing. But for mainstream America, an openly Jewish person is not white; even without the traditional dress. Knowing that makes her amazement understandable. And to be clear, I don’t think all African Americans see the Jews that way. I’m sure many understand the complexities of the Jewish situation. At the same time, I’m sure Briahna Joy Grey views are not uncommon either. But they all share the same experiences, current and historic. And because of that the outrage, justifiable without a doubt, has to take a step back. And not just because of that.

What both sides need to know, and internalize is that the similarities between the oppression of Jews in Europe and Afro-Americans in the USA, does not always have a mutual healing effect. On the contrary, in many cases it hurts and enrages. And it even frightens. And that is probably the worst thing of all. Briahna Joy Grey’s podcast, and the tweeter storm that followed, is a good example. Because when Jewish identity is discussed by non-Jews troubles begin. And the rise in hate crimes against Jews demonstrates that; as it always did. Challenging the identity of Jews is done in two known ways. The first is challenging their loyalties to the countries they live in. Are they true Russians, Germans, Pols, Egyptians, Iraqis, Iranians, Americans, etc. or something else? With National Socialism challenging their very place in the human race. Each case was a precursor of atrocities. And in many instances, the engine of those atrocities. Asking if jews are white, intentionally, or unintentionally, challenges the current and historic roll Jews have in the cause of civil rights. Intentionally, or unintentionally, it challenges their loyalty to that caus. A cause their lives were and are dependent on. Therefore, the outrage Briahna Joy Grey received wasn’t just unavoidable. It was also an expression of survival instincts kicking in.

And just as the harsh Jewish experience created survival instinct among Jews. So did the African American experience. An outrage like this, justified or not, can kick start their survival instincts just the same. And what good would that do? Creating a shouting match between two communities that have no interest in oppressing each other? Both are deeply wounded. Those wounds need healing. Rage, no matter how justified, does not heal.  

Briahna Joy Grey may not have intended to challenge Jewish identity, but she internalized and used the language and tools of oppression. And we, as Jews, must never rule out the possibility that we have done the same. I’ll be surprised if we hadn’t.

The second constant feature of hatred of Jews was labeling them with whatever is considered the worse possible evil of the period. This is what Batya Ungur-Sargon tried to explain to her in the preceding discussion in her other podcast “Bad-Faith”. In Medieval Europe Jews were falsely accused of being Christ killers that drunk the blood of Christian children for Passover. In Nazi era Germany, we were labeled a sub-human race bent on conquering the world. (Who in their right minds would want the headache of managing the entire world?). In Soviet Russia, Zionists, a euphemism for Jews, were capitalists, the most corrupt element of any society according to Marxist ideology. In the western world, rightwing antisemites see the Jews as Bolsheviks. Today we are considered nonwhites by white supremacists, and whites by far left (supposedly) anti racists that see whiteness as the evilest thing there is. So, when she later asked if Jews are white, people got mad. But we can do the same kind of mistake. And like it or not, we have internalized some of the ideas of white supremacy. As most of the world did.

This is a living historical legacy that does not get its due attention. Today the ideas of white supremacy are recognized as evil, stupid, and oppressive. They were like that all the time. But so much was invested in spreading them, in arguing for them, and in living by them that they were internalized by people world over. It took centuries for the ideas of tolerance and mutual acceptance, to gain the resources needed for spreading all over the world. This made it possible for them to challenge, and expose, the corrupt, immoral and evil nature of white supremacy. There is still a lot of work to be done on this in order to undo that evil. And it cannot be done adequately while ignoring that antisemitism was spread and internalized in the very same manner. And the same goes for the fight against antisemitism. This is why we, as Jews, must cleans ourselves from this poison. We must do so for our own best interest. And not just as a result of a concern for our own image. The two struggles are still connected like conjoined tweens. Just, not identical conjoined tweens. And that is another reason to take a step back. And we have internalized some of those ideas. Just as many African Americans internalized the ideas of Antisemitism and Jew hatred.

Internalizing ideas of white supremacy does not mean that Jews want to be white. This insensitive equation/ slash accusation, is a part of the package of misperceptions when the issue of Jews, race, and color, is raised. Jews don’t want to be persecuted and discriminated against. That means been accepted by the general society. And for many decades this meant, unofficially, be seen as white. Today it means having non-Jews stop defining Jewish identity. But the result of the previous condition was that Jews have internalized, to a degree, ideas and perceptions that came from white supremacy. As did a lot of other societies that lived under the shadow of the globally dominated white Christian European culture. There were other contributing factors. The desire of individuals to imitate elements from any successful culture. And the lack of any counter ideology, active among those ethnicities and religions that could challenge the evil of white supremacy. Such ideologies rose to prominence, only in the last 100 years. Jews in this regard are no different than many others. For non-Jews to focus only Jews, that is not just hypocrisy; it is antisemitism. It creates the false impression that Jews had a more significant contribution for slavery and racism in North America than others. And that is a demonizing blood libel that exonerates the main perpetrators. That said, again, we did internalize the tools of oppression of African Americans, and black people in general. In cleansing ourselves from this evil, we take a major step in defining our identity, our fate. This is another way of keeping non-Jews from defining our Jewish identity. And that is another reason for the rage to take a step back. Jews, like many others, had lived for centuries under the shadow of the white, European Christian culture. A global culture that believed and practiced the ideas of white supremacy and antisemitism. Today that shadow is substantially diminished. It gives us, Jews, the opportunity to let our own true self to shine. In order to that we need to find it. Rage is not exactly useful for that purpose.  

Another reason to take a step back is humbleness and humility. Yes, the question of whether Jews are white shouldn’t have been asked. But it comes from an insensitivity we are equally able to practice. And most likely do. And despite the wounding effects of the differences between the two repressive experiences; the struggle against the ideologies that motivates them is the same struggle, because these are the same ideologies.  We all need to understand that a part of the internalization of tolerance is giving the benefit of doubt to those that outrage us. Unless negative stereotypes were deliberately, and constantly, defended and advocated, the rage had to subside quickly. As I hope it did; though that may never be known, since the events in the Ukraine have taken center stage, and pushed everything else to the sidelines.

We, as Jews, must understand that when it comes to conversations about race, we can make the same misjudgment. Frankly, I’ll be surprised if we don’t. The benefit of doubt gives everybody the room to discuss both racism and antisemitism. And that discussion is necessary, especially if it wounds. As it clearly does.

Finally, any outrage is self-consuming. And when it is justified, we are less aware of it. And even the most justifiable outrage does not justify a shutting off of opportunities for constructive communication. No matter how narrow they are.

P.S

As I was writing this piece, this forgotten episode made a comeback. Following the twitter storm, Briahna Joy Grey gave an interview on that experience to Coleman Hughes. I didn’t get to see it, because I was working on this. And because I’m a bit of a technophobe. But the add to that interview includes an incomprehensible quote, probably from her.

Related links:

Bad faithon youtube 

The Debriefpodcast.

    

Adam Holland: Repair Richard Silverstein's World

Adam Holland: Repair Richard Silverstein's World

The Great Plunder of Safed, 15 of June - 17 of July 1834

Translator's Prologue:

On May 22, 1934, when the massacre of the Jewish community in Hebron in 1929 was still fresh in memory, the Hebrew daily newspaper Haaretz reminded its readers that pogroms took place in the land of Israel before 1920. The author, Eliezer Rivlin, chose as an example the event known as “The Great Looting of Safed,” which took place 100 years earlier. It began at June 15, 1834. The day was 8 Sivan on the Hebrew calendar. Translating this story was not simple, because of the biblical Hebrew of the author and the brutalities described. A choice had to be made between maintaining the style of the original and keeping the English understandable. I believe I was able to do so, but the English will appear odd, just as the Hebrew will be to a present-day Israeli.

The Great Plunder of Safed/ Eliezer Rivlin, Jerusalem

What has been said repeatedly in journals and books-- that until 1920 there were no pogroms against the Jews of the land of Israel -- is a mistake. For there have been such as these decades and centuries ago, even before the English conquered the land. The Jews have called it “looting” or “plunder” (in Arabic “nahib”).

In the chronicles of the Jewish community, the “plunder” and the earthquake of 1837 are the most shocking events.

The earthquake and the plunder were always a matter of conversation for the old men and women of the land of Israel, and they told it many times to their children and grandchildren.

The plunder erupted in Safed along with the revolt of the Arabs of the land of Israel against Muhammad Ali, the governor of Egypt, who took the land from the Turks and the government of Kushta (Istanbul) in 1834. He imposed mandatory military duty on all Muslim inhabitants of the land of Israel. This was something that they were fiercely against.

The first to call for a revolt were the people of Nablus, by the command of their minister Kassam Lakhama. They were joined by fellahin from the nearby villages, and rose upon Jerusalem to conquer it and take it out of the hands of the governor of Egypt.

On 22 Iyyar, (May 31), the rebels occupied Jerusalem and took control of the city. The fear among the Jews was great, for, according to Arab tradition, plunder is allowed during rebellion. And those breaking in already began looting and plundering. But to their rescue came the head of the rebels, who declared in the streets of Jerusalem that, “the Arabs, the Jews and the Christians are brothers and the one who touches any of them shall be put to death.“ This severe command was helpful in saving the lives and properties of the Jews and Christians in the Jerusalem. And after a week, on 28 Iyyar (June 3), came Ibrahim Pasha, the general of Muhammad Ali, to Jerusalem, and a large force with him, and the rebels fled the city.

Very bad was the fate of Safed, which had the largest Hebrew community in the land. All other communities in the land, including the one in Jerusalem, were its subordinates. (There were about 2,000 Jews then in Safed.)

The governor of the city of Safed aided the rebels, and the Jews of Safed bore the brunt of the guilt of Muhammad Ali and his government. The Jews became the target for rebels from within the city of Safed and from the surrounding villages and towns.

The rebellion in Safed was declared on 8 of Sivan (June 15, 1834). From all the nearby towns and villages Arabs and Bedouins came to the city drunk from revolt and began delivering havoc on the Jews. With large and small shields, lances and rifles, the first thing they did was to attack the Jews. They stripped the clothing from men and women, tore pillows and featherbeds, and spread the feathers around, tore Bible books, raped a man and a woman, destroyed houses and synagogues, and murdered many people from Israel.

“Gentiles came to the domain of the Lord, in the little holiness of our temples and synagogues, and defiled the chamber of our holiness and threw all our cherished books of the Torah to the ground. They tortured righteous women upon them, and all holiness of our homes, phylacteries (tefilin) and doorpost (mezuzah) looted and plundered and thrown. And they took from the Bible books to make straps for their horses and shoes for their feet… they destroyed our homes, beating the Jews blows of death and loss. And many of them became blind and invalids, and from among them, several souls died strange deaths.”

Many of the Jews fled immediately to the near and the faraway fields and mountains, outside the city, many among them naked and barefoot. Others ran to the synagogues to die a holy death there. “In the house of learning (beit midrash) of the Pharisees many gathered with their Rabbi, Rabbi Israel, author of Pe’at Shulhan –- and among them many were already wounded and injured – and they where blowing in the shofar.” And many found cover in neighbors’ yards, with Arab acquaintances and in basements.

The eruption of the rebellion came suddenly and caused much panic. Home dwellers fled in many directions, the husband ran to the field outside the city, the infant stayed lying in the cradle, and the mother in her hideout -– and the cries of the miserable -– oi father! Oi my son – tore the heavens.

At the head of the community of Safed stood then the Rabbis: the gaon (wise man) Rabbi Israel of Shklov, author of “Takalin Haditin” and “Pe’at Shulhan, student of the Vilna Gaon (Ha’gaon Rabbi Eliyahu), head of the school of Pharisees, the gaon Rabbi Margalit of Skalit, and the gaon Avraham Ba’ar from Ovruch, heads of the Hassidic schools. These three eyes of the community stood at the head of the defense and rescue of the Jews of Safed, even in time of peril, and every one of them helped his community and surroundings with great devotion.

Rabbi Gershon Margalit used the school money to bribe the qadi of Safed (chief of the religious judges) and they gathered at the qadi’s court, the rabbi and about a thousand of his parishioners.

Rabbi Avraham Ba’ar from Ovruch and with him several hundreds of his people fled immediately to the top of one of the mountains and entered a large ruin with iron gates and two wells.

Rabbi Israel of Shklov entered first with hundreds of his men from the Pharisees to the house of learning (Beit Hamidrash) of the Pharisees and blew the shofarot (ram's horns) and cried to the Lord. But the rioters came in after them to the synagogue, and beat them and robbed them. Rabbi Israel they wanted to kill, because they knew he had money from the school of the Pharisees. They said he hid it in the ground at his home. He cried and begged for his life and paid them seven reds of gold.

Then Rabbi Israel and his people fled outside the city into the vineyard field by the ancient cemetery, except the old and the frail that could not run. They remained in the synagogue and in the city streets were thrown to the ground, trampled down by the rebel rioters.

In one cave at the cemetery Rabbi Nathan Neta, son of Rabbi Menahem Mendel of Shklov and others of the Ashkenazi Jews had found refuge. But even there they were not left alone, because the rioters came after them, searching specifically for Rabbi Israel of Shklov, determined to kill him for the school money he had. They caught Rabbi Nathan Neta in the cave and they gouged out his eye. The Jews were forced to leave the vineyard and run to the great ruin on the mountain where Rabbi Avraham Ba’ar and six hundred of his people were already inside. And the ruin could not contain all the refugees, and there too they were afraid for the life of Rabbi Israel, whom the rioters chased in order to kill. Three of the Pharisees -- Rabbi Moshe Khishis, and his son in law Rabbi Shmuel Shalom of Pinsk, and Rabbi Reuben Cohen –- went to the village of Ein Zeitim, and pleaded there with the heads of the village for a large sum of money, and they were permitted to bring Rabbi Israel and some of the Pharisees, and they were there in Ein Zeitim until the order in the city had been restored.

The rebellion continued for thirty-three days, and all that time the Jews were persecuted inside and outside the city, and they were not allowed to come out of their hideouts. The exceptions were those individuals, who by acquaintances and friendship, or by giving large amounts of money, found refuge for themselves and their family members in the homes of Ishmaelites (Arabs) and in the homes of Christians. The refugees who were outside the city, and in the fields under the open sky, suffered greatly from the great cold in the mountains of Safed, and the harsh dew in this part of the country. And their hearts dropped from fear at the sound of the rebels' cries and debauchery.

And the many that hid at first with Rabbi Gershon at the qadi court had no rest either, for “their number was large” in the eyes of the qadi, and after a few days he chased out from his court the greater part of them, and they were forced to flee to the fields and mountains outside the city.

Holy and heroic Jews, heroes of strength and courage of heart, gave their lives for the sanctity of the Lord and the duty of the city and community and did not leave the city nor ask for hideouts, and the outlaw murdering bandits trampled them down. Among them many famous righteous rabbis, “the Rabbi Ha’magid from the holy congregation of Satanov, and the rabbi from Piotrkow,” had the strength to hold against the bandits and to be remembered in the list of the author of “Korot Ha’Etim” (‘The history of the times’ or the ‘Chronicles’): “ The rabbi Mo’har Ya’acov Hirsh from Mohilov, and with him a Sephardi scholar, who prepared self-defense, closed the opening to their yard and piled a large number of stones on the roofs of their homes to throw at all those coming closer to their yard. This made their assailants angry and they opened fire at them. The Sephardi scholar died instantly and rabbi Ya’acov Hirsh was severely wounded. Later the attackers entered the yard looted and plundered”.

Beseechers and public activists were found, who gave their lives helping their brothers who were in great distress. And they pleaded in every way they could to ease the misery and to end the situation. They fed the hungry, returned babies to the bosoms of their mothers, buried the dead, dressed the wounded, bribed the Gentiles, and pleaded by way of messengers and letters to the consuls and authorities in Acre and Beirut. They even gathered and hid the remnants of the books and phylacteries and doorposts, which the savages desecrated.

Rabbi Lieb Cohen and Rabbi Shalom Hayat and Rabbi Mendel of Kamnitz went from street to street, from hideout to hideout, and returned little children to the bosoms of their mothers, buried the dead, and rescued those who were robbed by the rebels. These three excel in courage of spirit, and in their specialty in understanding the ways and manners of the Arabs. They were close to the Arabs and used gifts, prayer and war. According to the testimony of Rabbi Mendel of Kamnitz, “Rabbi Lieb Cohen wrestled with the bandits that attacked him, and yet did not stop from looking after the hiding persecuted Jews and rescue them.” And Rabbi Shalom Hayat was the acquaintance of many Muslims, whose clothes he used to tailor. “…and once, in the days of mayhem, when Rabbi Shalom and Rabbi Mendel walked together, a soldier caught them and put his sword on the neck of Rabbi Shalom in order to kill him, but Rabbi Shalom did not panic and with pleasant talk and pleading told the bandit, 'remember our old love, when I tailored your clothes, but know that I do not fear from my death, because my kind sir, I am old, but please let me die on my bed.”

After the initial days of panic passed, a rescuer and a savior came to the Jews of Safed. This was Rabbi Israel of Shklov, who, from his hideout at Ein Zeitim, with sums of money and gaining the heart of the sheik of the village, was able to get into his service fellahin who went to the city and mounted on their donkeys the sick and wounded that lay out in the streets. And with the fellahin coming into the city, came in also Jews dressed as fellahin and they took out money that they hid before leaving the city.

In each day that passes the rebels who conquered the city were afraid that the army of Ibrahim Pasha will come, take vengeance on them and put an end to their misdeeds. They were also concerned about attacks from savage Bedouins and other villagers from nearby who demanded from them a share in the loot they took from the Jews. And this fear did not give them the strength to unleash all their fury on the Jews. And in one of the days of riots the rebels gathered to a public meeting and there were found among them some who wanted to benefit the Jews, and they sent messengers to the markets and streets declaring “taman,” meaning the riots are over. And the Jews were about to return to the town, but very quickly they had found out that it was not the opinion of the majority of the rebels. And they attacked the Jews again on the road, forcing them to return to their hideouts and lie in the vineyard and in the ruins.

There were also many deceivers among the Ishmaelites, from among those who made their living from the Jews, and among them a known slave who promised to take the Jews from the vineyard and the ruins to the qadi’s court in exchange for a large sum of money, and he led them under his protection to the edge of the city. There he told his brothers to attack them and rip their clothes off.

During the thirty-three days of the riots the Jewish community was dwindled and ruined. Many were beaten to death and fell in the open streets, many were severely wounded, their eyes blinded, men and women were tortured. Thirteen synagogues the Jews had in Safed, and in them five hundred books of the Torah, and all were destroyed then, the precious books of Rabbi Isaac Abuhab were lost, the synagogue of the Ha’ari Ha’kadosh (The holy lion, Rabbi Isaac Lurya), and the book of the Torah at the synagogue of Rabbi Shimon Bar Yochai at Meron. The homes of the Jews were emptied, and many were destroyed down to their foundations, because the bandits searched them for treasures of gold and silver. Many houses were burned. The printing press of Rabbi Israel Beck, which was in those days the only printing press in the entire land of Israel, with all its publication, the five books of the Pentateuch, and other books were destroyed and burned, and Rabbi Israel Beck was bitten many times, and he was sick in his legs for the rest of his life. Most of the Jews were left without a robe to cover their skin.

With great efforts Rabbi Israel of Shklov sent from his hideout letters to the consuls of foreign states in Beirut and informed them of the details of the troubles that befell the Jews, many of whom were the subjects of foreign states. The consuls encouraged Ibrahim Pasha to come to Safed, repress the rebellion and save the Jews from eradication. Ibrahim Pasha sent the emir of the Druze, Emir Bashir, from the Lebanon to the Galilee, and on 10 Tamuz (July 17) the emir came to the gates of Safed with a large force and repressed the revolt. Most of the rebels fled, and their leaders were caught and put to death in the open streets. And the Jews of Safed had a relief; they returned to their homes and gathered their few remaining belongings. The consuls tried to raise sums of money as compensation for their subjects and made lists of the damages, but the victims received only seven percent of the value of the damage.

In the month of Tevet (January 1,) 1837 there came upon Safed the great quake, and in Tamuz 1838 came a second plunder, and these three blows destroyed the Jewish community in Safed. But not many days later and the Jews renewed the settlement of Safed with hope, that “God shall build the Galilee.”



Epilogue: brief historical notes.
According to the English traveler Alexander William Kinglake, the plunder had begun by a local Islamic clergyman named Muhamad Damoor, who incited the Moslems to attack the Jews. In sermons that he preached at the market of Safed, he gave a date for the attack and called upon them to take the treasures of the Jews, since they were thought to be very rich. Source: History of Safed/ Nathan Schur, Dvir & Am Oved publishing, Israel 1983. - Hebrew.


This tragedy is a forgotten historical event, and even in Israel few know about it. Those who do know about it mistakenly attribute it to the Druse. The attack on the Jewish community of Safed by a contingent of Druse mercenaries was in 1838, and it was a part of a quarrel they had with Ibrahim Pasha. They too thought the Jews had hidden treasures, and were encouraged to do so by local Moslems, who afterwards forced the Jews to give them a written oath that they had protected them.


This second plunder had nearly ended the existence of the community even though it was shorter, lasted only three days, and with no fatalities. After two deadly blows, the first plunder of 1834 and the earthquake of 1837, it was simply one blow too many. Thanks to the effort of the famed Jewish philanthropist Sir Moses Haim Montefiore, the community recovered. Source – Nathan Schur, p. 192 – 193.

The EDL and their like as a forest fire

There is a wildfire going on right now. It is above and beneath the surface of a great forest and exquisite flora. It is called Jihadism, Islamism, or simply, Islamic religious fanaticism. And it is consuming vast tracks of the great Islamic and Arab civilization that guided the world in science, literature, and philosophy, centuries ago.

Its flames of hatred scorch nearby forests and civilizations forcing them to take drastic measures to defend themselves. Like park rangers who burn a patch of land so the wildfire will have nothing to cling to, defenders of democracy find themselves limiting some of its rights and liberties. But like those controlled burns these measures must be strictly supervised or else it will turn into a wildfire in it’s own right. Devastating democracy and western civilization in a way no different than that aspired by Jihadism.

But this uncontrolled forest fire is what the EDL, the English Defense League, and like-minded organizations and individuals desire. Whether they vandalize a mosque in protest against the peace process or burn the Koran in the name free speech. Hate is hate, and as it burns books and the ideas they contain it will burn the people who believe in those ideas. No matter what belief system the hate filled person subscribes to.

In an EDL demonstration in England Rabbi Nahum Shifren of California, was a guest speaker. In his speech he attacks the Israeli consulate, the liberal media, and everything else he considers liberal and tolerant. According to him, he has no problem with Al Qaeda and those advocating Sharia law, “they’re just doing their job,” he shouts. And calls the EDL to do theirs. The very same job: attacking the values of the democratic world they live in.

When two forest fires conjoin, a ten thousand-fold hell unleashes at a lightning speed, with no way of telling one fire from the other. Leaving behind nothing but smoke and ashes. For us caught in between the work is twice as difficult. But someone has got to take on the duties a park ranger, whether as law enforcement agent, an educator, or a mere spoken voice of sanity. Or else the ashes will be us.

Palestinian incitement, the getaway excuse

The left in Israel, not necessarily the anti Zionists ones, has a holy then god truth that says, “we are no different.” Facts and evidences are not important, if the Palestinians own words and actions testify to their guilt, they’ll argue that Israel is no different, and their own self-confirming rhetoric will be their confirmation.

Palestinians call Jews “Our dogs” – From ElderofZion YouTube Channel

Found on  Elder of Zion YouTube Channel






Short and to the point; credit is due were credit is most certainly due, and this one deserves a lot of credit.

Defending Muslims’ civil rights, between Switzerland and Kfar-Yasuf.

These days Israel is at war, declared on it by people speaking in the name of Islam. This while very few people or any, who also speak in the name of that religion, stand up against them.

This does not mean that every Muslim is an enemy of Israel, or at war with it. Or, that I, as a Jew, an Israeli and a Zionist, should stand aside when the rights of Muslims are violated. It does mean I should be careful, because there is a dilemma here, and it is not a simple one.

Championing the civil rights and human rights of strangers and enemies is elementary survival for everyone. If someone else’s fundamental rights are violated, and we stand by the sidelines, uninvolved, sooner or later one of us will be violated the same way. It’s maybe an old liberal cliché, but it is still correct and accurate, and the recent event in Moldova demonstrates that to the letter.

But what if the ones whose rights we are defending are hell-bent on violating our civil rights and human rights?

The fact of the matter is, that whenever Arab or Islamist terrorists violate the human rights of Israelis, when they are attacking Israeli civilians, acts that are war crimes and crimes against humanity, Muslims communities in the west support those crimes in droves.

For Israelis like myself it is an “either way we lose” situation. Added to it is the well-known fact that the biggest oppressors of Muslims in the world today are Muslim rulers, yet no major Muslim community in the west had ever went against them.

Which means that if we want to improve the human rights of Muslims on universal level and out of a universal concern, as a part of an effort to make the whole world a better place, our efforts will be useless, because we cannot improve the human rights of Muslims without Muslims taking major part in such an effort. Indeed the commitment to human rights cannot be sporadic or conditional; it needs to be complete, separated from politics and ideology. But that is precisely the case today, it had reach an absurd condition that for an Israeli to champion human rights becomes just as risky as abandoning it, and with it the effectiveness of campaigning fades.

A critic from the dogmatic left is likely to come to me and say I’m putting conditions behind my support on this issue, such critic will be right. I want this to work, and I want the rights of my people to be included. I’m not referring to the rights the settlers claim in face of the freeze imposed on them by the Israeli government, I am referring to the elementary rights for life and physical well being of my fellow Israelis in face of terrorism and the incitement that leads to it.

On the other hand, when it comes to the criminal and cowardly act of burning the mosque in Kfar - Yasuf by right wing extremists, there is no dilemma; this was a crime, a contemptible crime of hate - a hate crime!

No healthy society can tolerate hate crimes. By their definition they represent intolerance. Those who burned that mosque did it because they did not like its worshipers and their faith, not because they’ve done anything to them. The perpetrators call themselves ‘price tag’, demanding retribution from Palestinian civilians not over terrorism, which is also unjustified, but over an attempt to reach peace.

There is no question that the price the settlers are asked to pay in order to push the peace process forwards is heavy, both materialistically and emotionally, on a personal level as well as that of the community, and that while implementing something that contradicts their core convictions. Their resentment should not be ridiculed rather respected, but it does not justify violence, not against law enforcers, and certainly not against civilians and their property. The only threat to my own survival, and that of Israel, comes from the likes of those arsonists; their values are corrupt, their intolerance will not be preserved to non-Jews, but it will be delivered upon Jews they disapprove of, as it happened so many times in the recent past. Therefore I whole-heartedly hope that the police will do its job in the very best of ways, and find them with all the evidence needed to convict them and sentence to jail for the full length of time determine by the law.

Related link, from Ray Cook

Max Blumenthal & Yoav Shamir, cruising for hate in Jerusalem and elsewhere

Max Blumenthal went to Jerusalem in search of hate, a specific kind of hate,
Max came to Jerusalem shopping for racial hatred and followed the booze,
The easy way, not the most reliable way,
When the booze talk, sometimes the heart talks, sometimes stupidity talks.
If people have something strong to say about president Obama Cairo speech on the eve that speech, that usually suggests stupidity.
Stupidity is no excuse, but did anyone even tried to listen or the title and the slurs were enough?
“I’m a tea bag,” said the first one between the slurs and the insults and the alcoholic mist, “President Obama is going to take way my gun”, he said.
Now, what was it? Tea bag? ‘Take away my gun’?
These are all American things, right wing American issues.
He may be Jewish but the anger he expressed has nothing to do with Israel or with anything Jewish, rather with domestic American matters. The ‘tea bags’ is a right wing American movement that opposes president Obama domestic policies. In Israel those issues are mostly unknown, because domestic American issues, such as the gun debate, important though they are, they also have the good fortune of not affecting the world’s oil supply, thus remaining internal for Americans to solve among themselves. So this particular drunk in Jerusalem, expressed anger over concerns other Americans share, though in a more civil and sober manner. Most of them by the way are not Jewish.
Whether his conduct represents all the American right and all the ‘Tea bags’ I don’t know, but did the 9-11 conspiracy fruitcakes represent the entire American left? No they did not, and the things they were saying about their president at the time, were far worse, and without the help of alcohol.
The second star of the clip said that he worked in the Obama campaign, and remembered his grandmother’s tattooed number from Auschwitz.
From the few coherent sentences this young drunk spat, it was clear he felt betrayed by his idol, president Barack Obama, that is an ugly fleeing, but not the racial hatred Max Blumenthal prepped the viewers to expect. If the surrounding political environment were different, no doubt these two drunks would have been at each other throat.
There was a third star on that clip, an ultra orthodox looking American Jew who admitted without the help of alcohol for not voting for Obama and for not liking president Obama. What a shock, someone who did not vote for president Obama.
Max Blumenthal tried to paint the whole Israeli society as racist in its hatred to the US president, by using a few intoxicated non Israeli Americans that had no common theme of complaint among them, other then alcohol and bad language. It was an act of deception that had clearly worked, as all the ugly offshoots on YouTube show.

It may not be useful to cry over spilled milk, except this has a sequel so to speak. Yoav Shamir is a known Israeli documentary filmmaker whose politics are closer to that of Blumenthal’s. In his latest film ‘Defamation’ he went touring the world in search of anti-Semitism in order NOT TO FIND IT. Early in the movie he came upon an incident at a mixed NYC neighborhood where Afro American and ultra orthodox Jewish live together. In that incident an Afro American youth throw a stone at a bus with 3 years old Jewish children inside. Shamir followed that story to the streets of that neighborhood, were he asked 4 randomly encountered young Afro American residents for their version of the story. The 3 men and one woman he interviewed knew nothing about that incident but they knew Jews very well, “Jews always complain”, “Jews always the first to get welfare”, “Jews have a lot of influence”, “the Protocols of the Elders of Zion tells you how Jews control things”. If they were white, even Yoav Shamir would have to agree they are anti-Semites. And they were not drunk, they weren’t stoned, they did not slur, but they had strong coherent yet despicable views on Jews.
So what am I, an Israeli Jew who lives miles away from NYC, should conclude about Afro Americans from that scene?
Should I follow Max Blumental example and generalize, or should I also remind myself that Stephen T. Johns, the guard that was killed at Holocaust museum shooting in Washington DC was also an Afro American?

There is no doubt that racial hatred is a bad and evil thing, when it is there, and alcohol is no defense, nor does stupidity. But when expressed without the help of alcohol, it is far worse. And when someone acts upon it, as Max Blumenthal did, creating a lie, and generalizing it on an entire population in order to agitate between nations, that is far worse.

As for black and Jews relationships, we can all choose which path to take.

The Daily Show With Jon Stewart	Mon - Thurs 11p / 10c
Blacks and Jews
thedailyshow.com
Daily Show Full Episodes Political Humor Jason Jones in Iran

Something for Shavuot: Ancient Judaism and physical (racial) differences

Today is the holiday of Shavuot, the Jewish festival of the first harvest also called Bikurim, first harvest in Hebrew. It is also the commemoration of the day when the law of the Torah was given to people of Israel on Mount Sinai. Such a day is as good as any to bring some of that ancient Jewish wisdom to view and see how wise it truly is or not. This particular episode is more relevant to our times then to Shavuot.
In the Mishna, the precursor of the Talmud, at treatise Bekhorot (firstborn), chapter 45, section 72, Reish Lakish (also written Resh Lekesh in English), a rabbi from the late second centaury AD, says:
“A tall man shall not marry a tall woman or they might bring a mast, a dwarf man shall not marry a dwarf woman or they might bring a pinky. A white man shall not marry a white woman or they might bring a bohak (an ancient word for albino), a black man shall not marry a black woman or they might bring a tapiakh (a supposed opposite condition to albino).

Now what did the rabbi mean?
It is clear from his words that the physical differences we refer today, as racial differences did not exist 1900 years ago, but why should interracial couplings be favored over same race couplings?
Here are some possible answers, none of which are offered by mainstream Judaism since this story is largely forgotten.

1) He was a fool, there is no such thing as an opposite condition to albino, and there are black people that are albinos.

2) “Brown skin rules”, since the dominate shade of skin in the ancient civilized was brown and that’s a fact of history, maybe he was a brown supremacist, even though no such movement or philosophy is known.

3) He was an incurable romantic who truly and whole-heartedly believed in opposites attract.

4) There really is a Jewish conspiracy to have black man mate with white daughters and Reish Lakish is behind it all.

5) Good business and good politics, here is another historic fact, back then what we call today interracial marriage was good business and good politics, since tribes on both sides of the Mediterranean had accesses to resources and or various skills. This was the background to the rise of the Severan dynasty in Roman Empire, an Afro Phoenician Italian dynasty of emperors from the same time frame.

6) Metaphors, marriage as a metaphor for thinking differently, outside the box, outside ones own tribe. This is possible for several reasons; first, metaphors were vastly used by the rabbis of the era. Second, the rabbi’s nickname Reish Lakish indicates that his specialty was in challenging his pupils and listeners to think. Reish means head or top of.., Lakish is the one who presents a kushia, kushia is Aramaic for question, a question that challenge people to think even if they do not intend to answer, therefore Reish Lakish, was the top man of his era in challenging people to think. Forth, this is not a commandment or a verdict, god isn’t mention, and there are no references to verses from the bible or to verdict of previous rabbis, all mandatory in passing Jewish religious legislation then and now. Therefore the albino and its opposite condition are metaphors just like the mast and the pinky, metaphors for something silly; something silly that people become when they close their mind. Fifth his own biography shows that he was the kind of person who would know what it is like to “step out of the box” out of one life style and into another. Before been a rabbi he was a ruffian, maybe even a bandit, who made his living as a gladiator. The tragedy of his story is that he fell prey into the kind boxed thinking he advised against. While debating the issue of purity of weapons with his close friend and brother in law, Rabbi Yochanan, his friend burst at him saying “You would know” a familiar expression of intolerance and prejudice from our own era. Having something like this coming out of his best friend mouth, and may be even heart, broke his heart, and he fell ill and died.

Now, putting aside this tragic turn, each can choose his or hers idea of what is the more likely interpretation, I of course go for the last 2 options. There is always room for other ideas, on the comic side as well as the serious side. I just hope like Reish Lakish, it will challenge us to think.
And though Shavuot is nearing its end Happy Shavuot Everybody.