The Left’s New Spin, Unity Coalition, and Small Parties

The Left’s New Spin

As it already became clear Thursday that Netanyahu will almost certainly be the next Prime Minister, the left already started to look for a way to spin his victory into a loss. Tzipi Livni and the media, although they could no longer tell the public that the left won, realized that at least they could say that Bibi lost.

Ynet in its leading article said, “While the President is making a decision, it is becoming clear that it will be difficult for Likud to make a wide and stable government.” The article goes on to quote Kadima MK Roni Bar-On, who said Kadima should go to the opposition. “Kadima is the only alternative to Netanyahu’s extreme government,” he said. He also went on to predict that the “government that will be formed will last for the shortest amount of time in the history of Israel.”

Meaning the new claim on the left: a majority government isn’t “stable.” 65 members of the Knesset have agreed that Netanyahu should be Prime Minister. Has anyone forgotten how many are left wing? Only 44. So in the left’s new arithmetic, 65 versus 44 isn’t good enough. According to them, 60 percent of the public is not fit to rule.

A National Unity Government?

Netanyahu has said numerous times in the past few weeks that he wants a unity government including Kadima. Why? Mainly because the more MKs Netanyahu has in his government, the more power he gains at the expense of the individual parties. In Israel, 60 MKs are needed to govern. That means that if Netanyahu only has a coalition of 65 MKs, any one of the parties can pull out and take down the government. If Kadima would agree to join, no one party would have that veto power.

Voting for Smaller Parties

This short lesson in Israeli politics shows why people who voted for smaller parties at the expense of voting for the Likud made the right choice. If a 65 MK coalition does indeed form, Netanyahu cannot risk making a policy decision which would cause any of the parties to pull out. He cannot make a decision against the religious parties, because they have 20 MKs. He cannot make a decision against Lieberman’s interests, because he has 15 MKs. And finally he cannot even make a decision against the national religious parties’ interests, because they have 7 MKs.

In short, we can hope that in opposition to the left’s claim, if Netanyahu succeeds in forming a 65 MK government it can be both stable and reflect the wishes of the majority of Israelis. In addition, there is reason to hope that it will be a government which will be right-wing, pro-religion, and pro-the Land of Israel.

A German-American who stood up

Here's a nice article about how to deal with anti-Semitism.

By RAFAEL MEDOFF

The recent wave of anti-Semitic outbursts in various countries raises important questions about how to respond effectively to such assaults. A little-known episode that took place 65 years ago last week, involving a German-American high school principal, may provide some guidance.

A photo provided by police shows the letters "SS" (standing for Schutzstaffel, the security and paramilitary organization of the Nazi Party) smeared on a gravestone at a Jewish cemetery in Czestochowa, Poland.

The latest outrages have included the planting of a bomb at the Lutzk Progressive Jewish Congregation, in the Ukrainian city of Kiev; the mob attack on the Tiferet Israel Synagogue in Caracas, Venezuela; an eightfold increase in anti-Semitic attacks in England; and shouts of "Hamas! Hamas! Jews to the gas!" at a rally in Amsterdam.

In the United States, incidents have ranged from celebrity outbursts such as rock singer Courtney Love accusing "Jew loan officers and Jew private banks" of stealing from her, to sixth graders in St. Louis staging a "Hit a Jew Day" in their school. Curiously, their principal, Linda Lelonek, decided that the students' action was not anti-Semitic, on the grounds that "you've got remorse, you've got tears, you've got embarrassment. Not anti-Semitic behavior at all."

Sixty-five years ago last week, a German-American high-school principal in New York was confronted with anti-Semitism and responded very differently. In February 1944, five students from Andrew Jackson High School in Queens were caught painting anti-Semitic slogans in the nearby town of Queens Village.

Principal Ralph Haller faced a dilemma. Technically, he had no jurisdiction over what students did outside school grounds. But he understood the moral importance of going beyond the letter of the law to find a way to punish the attackers and send a message to potential anti-Semitic vandals everywhere.

Where there was a will, there was a way. Searching the rule books, Haller found he was permitted to prevent a student from graduating if he or she demonstrated "poor American citizenship." At a meeting of parents on February 12, 1944, the principal declared: "I consider such [anti-Semitic] activities totally in contradiction to everything that the America of today or the America which we hope to have tomorrow stands for." Therefore, he announced, his new policy would be to consider anti-Semitism by definition as un-American, and he would block the graduation of any student involved in anti-Semitic acts.

Haller noted that he had "counseled with many non-Jewish principals" as well as assistant superintendent of schools William Hamm, and found them all in agreement with his choice of punishment. Haller emphasized that as a Protestant and a German-American, "I feel that I have the right and duty to speak out on this issue."

Haller's action is all the more impressive when one recalls the extent of anti-Semitism and pro-Nazi sentiment among his fellow German-Americans. Just five years earlier, more than 20,000 Bund supporters had filled Madison Square Garden for a pro-Hitler rally. And in nearby Suffolk County in the late 1930s, tens of thousands of German-Americans each weekend flocked to Camp Siegfried, a pro-Hitler summer retreat, for Nazi-style parades, propaganda sessions and rounds of the "Horst Wessel Song" ("When Jewish blood drips from the knife/Then will the German people prosper").

But Ralph Haller was cut from a different cloth. He stood apart from the crowd - and stood up for justice by thinking outside the box.

Today, too, creative and courageous thinking is needed to combat the rising tide of anti-Semitism.

School principals need to respond swiftly and forcefully to anti-Semitic eruptions. The "Hit a Jew Day" students in St. Louis deserved more than brief suspensions. And it was wrong for the principal to refrain from penalizing other students who verbally taunted Jewish children and encouraged the "hitters."
Principals should not make excuses for violent, bigoted students.

Celebrity anti-Semitism should not be laughed off. We all chuckle at the foibles of public figures. But when their unorthodox behavior crosses the line into expressions of bigotry, it is no longer harmless fun. The culprits need to be ostracized.

World leaders need to speak out. The European Union Parliament, which has been meeting in Strasbourg, has so far refrained from explicitly condemning the recent wave of anti-Semitism. The EU's voice needs to be heard, loud and clear.

Economic leverage should be used to combat anti-Semitism. Some regimes that the US and Europe regard as friendly, such as Egypt and Saudi Arabia, permit the inclusion of anti-Semitic material in their government-controlled media and school textbooks. Western economic aid to such regimes should be used to exert pressure against anti-Semitism - just as international pressure forced the United Arab Emirates in 2004 to shut down the Zayed Center, which promoted anti-Semitism and Holocaust-denial.

Anti-Semitism can never be completely eliminated. But leaders who make an extra effort to penalize offenders can help create an environment in which hatred is regarded as unacceptable and haters are confined to the furthest margins of society.

That's what Ralph Haller was trying to do in 1944. Let's learn from his example.

The writer is director of the David S. Wyman Institute for Holocaust Studies, which focuses on issues related to America's response to the Holocaust.

The article above appeared in the Jerusalem Post, on February 15, 2009 and is reprinted by permission of the author.

Quotes and Notes Corner: At War With Islam? - Part II

In reviewing the question of whether or not Islam is in a "clash of civilizations" with Israel, another key source is Sirat Rasoul-Allah, a biography of Muhammad collated by Ibn Ishaq (early 700s CE) which is also treated as supremely authoritative for an understanding of Islam and its founder.

In that account of Muhammad's campaign against the Jews, the story of Safiya:

"The apostle occupied the Jewish forts one after the other, taking prisoners as he went. Among these were Safiya, the wife of Kinana, the Khaybar chief, and two female cousins; the apostle chose Safiya for himself. The other prisoners were distributed among the Muslims.

What became of Kinana, Safiya's groom?

"Kinana, the husband of Safiya, had been guardian of the tribe's treasures, and he was brought before the apostle, who asked where they were hidden. But Kinana refused to disclose the place. Then a Jew came who said, 'I have seen Kinana walk around a certain ruin every morning.' The apostle asked Kinana, 'Art thou prepared to die if we find thou knewest where the treasure was?' And he replied, 'Yes.' So the apostle ordered the ruin to be dug up, and some of the treasure was found. After that Kinana was asked again about the remainder, but he still refused to tell. The apostle of Allah handed him over to al‑Zubayr, saying, 'Torture him until he tells what he knows', and al‑Zubayr kindled a fire on his chest so that he almost expired; then the apostle gave him to Muhammad b. Maslama, who struck off his head."

After that, it is probably of little surprise when Ibn Ishaq tells us:

"When the people of Fadak, a Jewish town nearby, heard what was taking place they sent emissaries to the apostle to ask him to spare them and they would abandon to him all their property. He agreed.

This little arrangement, Ibn Ishaq describes by saying "The people of Fadak made peace with [Muhammad]..." In this version of "peace" the property of the people of Fadak "belonged to the apostle of Allah, because he had conquered it without the aid of cavalry or camels."

Another "Jewish tribe asked that the apostle of Allah should not shed their blood, but permit them to carry away as much of their property as their camels could bear. He consented and they loaded as many of their possessions as they could on their camels, even demolishing their houses that they might take away the thresholds. Then they left, with their wives, children, and household goods, and accompanied by their drums, flutes and singers. The rest they left to the apostle of Allah."
Some of the treasure was found. After that Kinana was asked again about the remainder, but he still refused to tell. The apostle of Allah handed him over to al‑Zubayr, saying, 'Torture him until he tells what he knows'.

While much of the Ibn Ishaq account of a Jewish tribe's discussion when besieged by Muhammad and his posse is plainly aimed at confirming Islamic beliefs, there is one or two sentences that ring true. Reacting to the suggestion they accept Islam, the Jews of the Banu Qurayza tribe supposedly said: "We shall never abandon the commandments of the Torah, nor substitute any others for them." Secondly, when contemplating the fate of their children should they fail to defeat the Muslims, the leader suggested killing them themselves, saying, "If we perish, we shall perish without leaving orphans who might suffer evil."

Their discussions didn't help, for according to Ibn Ishaq, the decision - made "....according to the will of Allah, above the seven firmaments," in Muhammad's words - was death even after they surrendered.

"The apostle of Allah imprisoned the Qurayza in Medina while trenches were dug in the marketplace. Then he sent for the men and had their heads struck off so that they fell in the trenches. They were brought out in groups, and among them was Kab, the chief of the tribe. In number, they amounted to six or seven hundred, although some state it to have been eight or nine hundred. All were executed. One man turned to his people and said, 'It matters not! By God's will, the children of Israel were destined for this massacre!’ Then he seated himself and his head was struck off."

Only one Jewish woman was murdered, instead of being taken as a slave. And she was reported by Muhammad's wife Aisha as "talking and laughing" with "good humor". Perhaps it was better to die than to become a slave to the Muslims, or perhaps the woman was laughing because, as Ibn Ishaq wrote, "She was the woman who threw a millstone down from the Qurayza fort and killed a Believer."

Either way, was that heroic Jewish woman at war with Islam? Or was perhaps Islam at war with her even before Muhammad and his gang arrived at the Qurayza fort?

And now a little theology from Hadith, Sahih Muslim Book 041, Number 6985 - to round out the picture:

"Abu Huraira reported Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) as saying: The last hour would not come unless the Muslims will fight against the Jews and the Muslims would kill them until the Jews would hide themselves behind a stone or a tree and a stone or a tree would say: Muslim, or the servant of Allah, there is a Jew behind me; come and kill him; but the tree Gharqad would not say, for it is the tree of the Jews."

In case someone will still try and reject all of the foregoing as irrelevant to the modern struggle of Israel with its Muslim neighbors, let's point out that that last Hadith appears in the Hamas covenant as a guiding principle.

So, again, is Israel at war with Islam? Well, I don't know, but Israel had better be prepared to defend itself against it.

And finally, one more Islamic tale of another Jewish woman from Safiya's tribe who fell into Muhammad's clutches, Zaynab. She tried to poison "the apostle of Allah" and was discovered. When asked why she did it, Zaynab replied: "It is no secret to you what my people feel towards you."

Researched, compiled and presented by Nissan Ratzlav-Katz