EVERY SIGNATURE MATTERS - THIS BILL MUST PASS!

EVERY SIGNATURE MATTERS - THIS BILL MUST PASS!
CLICK - GOAL - 100,000 NEW SIGNATURES! 75,000 SIGNATURES HAVE ALREADY BEEN SUBMITTED TO GOVERNOR CUOMO!

EFF Urges Court to Block Dragnet Subpoenas Targeting Online Commenters

EFF Urges Court to Block Dragnet Subpoenas Targeting Online Commenters
CLICK! For the full motion to quash: http://www.eff.org/files/filenode/hersh_v_cohen/UOJ-motiontoquashmemo.pdf

Friday, April 12, 2024

No moral option' to continue blanket IDF exemption for "Bench Kvetchers", haredi minister says

 

1947 - AGUDATH ISRAEL KOL KOREH - PUBLIC NOTICE

Arbel added that there were 1,500 men in every haredi age-group who could be drafted immediately, and "who must be part of those carrying the burden."


Hardei's join to protest draft in Jerusalem, April 11 2024 (photo credit: MARC ISRAEL SELLEM)
Hardei's join to protest draft in Jerusalem, April 11 2024

The haredi public must internalize that they will need to begin committing national service, Interior Minister Moshe Arbel (Shas) said in a podcast that was published on Thursday.

The comment was rare, as haredi leaders have largely refrained from taking the side of increasing haredi service since a crisis over the issue broke out in February, when the defense ministry revealed that it was planning on overcoming a lack of manpower by increasing mandatory and reserve duty, and not by drafting thousands of haredi men, who enjoyed a blanket exemption.

The legal foundation for this exemption expired on March 31, and according to a Supreme Court temporary directive on March 28, the state is now required to draft haredi men and must provide by April a progress report on the matter. The court will hear the case of whether to make the directive permanent on June 2.

"The reality after October 7 is that the haredi public must understand and internalize that there is no moral option to continue this way," Arbel said on a podcast by an organization called "Hariv'on Herivi'i" [Hebrew for "Fourth Quarter"] that was recorded weeks ago but published on Thursday.

Hardei men must start "carrying the burden"

Arbel added that there were 1,500 men in every haredi age-group who could be drafted immediately, and "who must be part of those carrying the burden."

Hardei's join to protest draft in Jerusalem, April 11 2024 (credit: MARC ISRAEL SELLEM)
Hardei's join to protest draft in Jerusalem, April 11 2024 
 

"In addition, there are more than a few institutions defined as being for at-risk youth. All of these institutions – there is no justification in the world that those for whom Torah is not their vocation will not be a part of the army," Arbel said.

Arbel made similar comments during an interview with the Jerusalem Post that will be published in the Magazine section on the first Passover holiday (April 22).

According to its website, "Hariv'on Herivi'i" is an "all-Israeli civil mass movement, working for the transition of Israeli democracy from a politics of submission and victories to a 'politics of hospitality' and solutions."

Shas, which represented Sephardic Israelis, put out a statement on Thursday, apparently in response to Arbel's comment:

"The topic of the conscription law and the status of the holy yeshiva students is bestowed only in the hands of … Moetzet Chachmei HaTorah [Hebrew for "Council of Torah Sages"] … and is managed by the movement's chairman Rabbi Aryeh Deri and his representative in the negotiations Rabbi Ariel Atias. The movement's representatives were instructed not to speak at all on the topic. Shas's stance is expressed only by the Shas movement's official organs."

Arbel's comments came after a number of conflicting public statements by rabbis affiliated with the Shas in the past week. 

These included a letter signed by some of its leading rabbis calling for no conscription whatsoever, but also a statement by Rabbi Moshe Maya, a former Knesset member for Shas and current member of the Council of Torah Sages, in favor of the ongoing negotiations on the matter.

Thursday included additional developments regarding haredi conscription on a number of fronts.

On the legal front, the Attorney General's Office revealed in a letter to the government that it has yet to receive for legal examination a plan for conscription that reflects the current legal situation. 

The letter was a response to a letter from Government Secretary Yossi Fuchs to the AG demanding independent representation in the pending court case on the situation. 

The AG is the government's statutory legal counsel before the Supreme Court. Still, Fuchs claimed that there was an "essential gap" between the government and the AG's positions that was "unbridgeable." The AG's answer was that the government has yet to put forward any position whatsoever that had "real content" or was based on "fundamental professional basis," and therefore could not examine whether or not the positions were compatible.

The letter did reveal, however, that talks were being held "at a number of levels" in the defense establishment to come up with a government-proposed bill. The AG's office stressed that until such a bill passes, continuing the blanket exemption was illegal, and the government was required by law to draft haredi men of the appropriate age.

On the negotiation front, Kikar Hashabat's Yishai Cohen reported that the current number being discussed is 25% of every haredi age group. 

There are approximately 12,000 men in every age group, and this would mean 3,000 every year – far more than the current numbers. 

According to Cohen, there would also be closer oversight of yeshivot by the authorities, and sanctions if these numbers are not met.  

 

https://www.jpost.com/israel-news/article-796584?

Thursday, April 11, 2024

How does one lose a war? This is how!

 



How to lose a war

 


A nation can lose when it halts the battle when it has momentum and then informs its enemy where it is next attacking, so the enemy can regroup, rebuild, replenish, and re-strategize. And read below to see what defeat looks like.

For most of history, nations went to war, frequently and usually at the caprice of one man, but never without a strategy for victory. It was clear what victory entailed: conquest of the enemy’s territory and subjugation of its population.

In ancient times defeat was often accompanied by the coerced renunciation of gods of the defeated enemy and its embrace of the victor’s culture. In more modern wars, the objective of World War II was the “unconditional surrender” of the Axis forces, Germany, Italy, and Japan. Many Allied soldiers died, and far more enemy civilians were ruthlessly killed, in order to achieve that goal of “unconditional surrender” rather than accept various offers of cease fires that would have left the Nazi regime in place and Japan’s emperor as ultimate authority.

Israel has never enjoyed such victories, firstly because its strategic goals have been more limited – and usually focused on survival.

The War of Independence was successful because nascent Israel repelled numerous Arab invaders, retained most of the territory granted it under the UN’s Partition Resolution and even expanded beyond it.

The Six Day War was arguably an unambiguous victory as well, given that another Arab invasion was successfully resisted, the biblical homeland of Israel was liberated, the Arab nations that invaded were sufficiently cowed at least for a few years – but mainly because Israel had no designs on Egyptian, Syrian, or Jordanian territory outside the boundaries of Israel. The notion of “unconditional surrender” had no relevance, as Israel was content to allow all Arab countries to exist as long as they allowed us to exist.

Wars that do not have the goal of “unconditional surrender” are almost by definition “limited” wars, and all subsequent conflicts have been such limited wars. Enemies attack, we defend. Enemies encroach on our land and commit acts of terror, we respond. Enemies fire rockets and missiles at our cities and we “mow the lawn,” deflate their military capabilities, and wait for the next round.

We play this macabre game and never win.

There is a second reason why victory in any form eludes us. It is because the “international community,” which includes the United States, the United Nations, and most countries across the world, impose cease fires on Israel whenever victory is close – not even the success of “unconditional surrender” but even to save our enemies and allow them to fight another day.

This is unprecedented, and uniquely applied to Jews.

Thus, the Yom Kippur War was halted with Israel on the march to Damascus, with a stronghold in Egypt west of the Suez Canal, and with the Egyptian Third Army surrounded in Sinai. Israel, under pressure, withdrew from Egypt and Syria, allowed the Third Army to escape, and wound up retreating from Sinai. Israel abandoned its positions in Egypt, while Egypt was not forced to vacate its captured land in Sinai.

This was not just a stunning diplomatic defeat; it also enabled Egypt to claim victory in the war, which otherwise would have abruptly ended in a colossal failure.

Similarly, the various incursions into Lebanon from the 1970’s through 2008, always ended with cease fires that left the PLO intact, Arafat still functioning, terror just moments away from recurring, and Hezbollah ascendant and gloating.

*The Ehud Barak-led flight from Lebanon in 2000 catapulted Hezbollah to dominance in Lebanon; Barak’s brazenness in remaining in the public eye, aggressively and abusively, his craving to be taken seriously as a commentator and social agitator, are unusually impertinent illustrations of chutzpah.

*The Olmert-Halutz catastrophic handling of the 2008 Lebanon War – including the unconscionable deaths of Jewish soldiers fighting for territory that would be abandoned the very next day as part of the cease fire – would be disqualifications for either person to be taken seriously but for the utter shamelessness that today pervades public life.

Israel’s historical handling of Gaza has been just as ineffective. For decades, there was never any intention to prevail, to subdue the enemy, and to conquer its territory. All the skirmishes, culminating in the current war, have ended inconclusively, with forced ceasefires. The obvious consequences of this policy are before our eyes: Gaza and Lebanon are powder kegs waiting to explode – and Israel is on the verge of succumbing yet again to a global demand for a cease fire that will yet again save its enemies.

How does one lose a war? This is how:

- A nation states its military objectives – such as defeat of Hamas and its liquidation as a military and political force – and then gradually abandons them under pressure.

- A nation makes pronouncements – “no food or fuel in Gaza until the hostages are release” or “no aid through Ashdod or Erez” – and then under pressure allows food and fuel to resupply our enemies, and then accepts it as its responsibility to resupply its enemy.

- A nation can lose when on its own accord it halts the battle when it has momentum and then informs its enemy in advance where it is next attacking, which gives the enemy time to regroup, rebuild, replenish, and re-strategize.

- A nation can lose when it suddenly adopts the bizarre notion that the fate of enemy civilians is the “top priority” in war – and especially when such risible ideas emanate from diplomats who care not a whit about Israeli civilians in captivity, Israeli civilians who were brutalized in their homes, and Israeli civilians who have spent months dispossessed of their homes.

- A nation allows another country with similar but not identical interests (like the United States) to micromanage the war in terms of goals, tactics, location, timing, and weaponry.

- A nation worries more about the welfare of enemy civilians than about the lives of its own soldiers.

- A nation, shocked by the appalling invasion, murder, abuse, kidnapping, and humiliation of its citizens, allows its righteous anger to dissipate, and instead begins to listen to intellectuals and novelists about how a cease fire will improve its international image.

- A nation’s media gives prominence to those voices that insist that “total victory” is impossible.

- A nation allows the defeated hostile population to remain, which enables them to prepare an insurgency campaign that will cost the lives of its soldiers and sap the spirit and will of the people.

- A nation allows disgruntled supporters of opposition parties to riot, protest, threaten, and intimidate, which encourages the enemy to believe that Israel’s society is at war with itself, collapsing from within, and cannot possibly prevail in this conflict.

And this is what defeat looks like:

- Six months after the start of the war, there are still enemy rockets and missiles falling on Ashkelon, the communities around Gaza, and in the north.

- Tens of thousands of Israelis cannot return to their homes.

- A “cease fire,” which leaves Hamas in power, a return to the status quo ante, and preparation for the next wave of missile attacks, terrorism, and response.

- The release of terrorist murderers in return for freedom for innocent hostages, which only precipitates the next round of kidnappings – for which the enemy laughs at us and pays no price.

- Israel, despite its efforts to avoid collateral damage to enemy civilians, is becoming a world pariah, whose elected government is reviled and whose internal politics are considered appropriate for world intrusion, intervention, and meddling.

- The enemies who attacked us have the world’s sympathy, and we are the world’s villain.

- The enemy leaders gloat at their successes and are considered worthy interlocutors by diplomats and other hypocrites.

I still remember when Israel was the envy of the world because of our steadfast claim that “Israel never negotiates with terrorists” and surrenders to their blackmail. Wow, that was a long time ago, for now most of what we do diplomatically is surrender to terrorists and their blackmail.

Victory is going to require more than slogans that “together we will win.” The anarchists who have been allowed to take over our streets and highways in the last year in violation of the law, and who have resumed their violent demonstrations, would rather see Israel defeated or stalemated, and certainly if a victory helps the Prime Minister remain in office.

It is time we realize what victory does look like and try to achieve it. The world hates us anyway, will not have greater love for us if a cease fire is imposed tomorrow, and, in any event, has more respect for winners than for losers.

It is not too late to achieve victory but our goals must be clear. The cardinal sin was succumbing to the obsession with the welfare of the enemy civilians – yes, those who supported, participated in, and rejoiced over the rapes, murders, and abductions of October 7.

Pursuant to (the farce known as) international law, the Gazan civilians had a legal right to “safe passage” out of a war zone. They were denied that right, not only by Egypt but also by the world community that sees Gazans as an indispensable entity for the continued war against Israel.

*We should be advocating for that right to free passage – and doing it in every television interview and every diplomatic exchange.

*We should prioritize the release of our hostages and tie it directly to the provision of humanitarian aid.

*We should reject with contempt the hypocrisy of nations who wage war, kill civilians, and see no need to apologize for it (see United States, Kabul, August 28, 2021, 10 civilians killed including 7 children, with denials that continued for weeks, and with a Biden apology to the world yet to be offered).

And then we should finish the job.

Victory entails full control over the conquered territory which can never again be used as a launching pad for terror against Israel, an enemy population that leaves because it wants to leave, sees no future for itself in that land, or is encouraged to leave because its opposition to the Jewish national idea is implacable.

We need to remind ourselves of the fundamentals of Jewish destiny that should determine our statecraft. We have returned to the land that G-d granted our forefathers after we forfeited it due to our misconduct.

Our generation was blessed to be the beneficiaries of the prophecy of ultimate return. For thousands of years until today, we have been accused by our enemies of being “robbers,” stealing other nations’ land (Rashi, Breisheet 1:1). That has not changed, and we should not expect it to change anytime soon; but it also requires us not to internalize that false indictment and pretend there is some way we can persuasively defend against it. That charge is built into the history of the world and of the Jewish people, a ubiquitous reminder that we must be worthy of this land, permeate it with holiness, sanctify it with mitzvot, and defend it for the honor of G-d and two millennia of Jews who could not defend themselves and suffered the predations of the precursors of all our enemies today.

Even in these difficult and perilous times, we should count our blessings, among which are the knowledge we have of how wars are lost – but also how wars are won, and how victory in this conflict will have positive ramifications in many spheres, and for years to come.

 

Rabbi Steven Pruzansky, Esq. was a pulpit rabbi and attorney in the United States and now lives in Israel where he teaches Torah in Modiin and serves as the Israel Region Vice-President of the Coalition for Jewish Values and the Senior Research Associate for the Jerusalem Center for Applied Policy.

 

http://www.israelnationalnews.com/news/388121?utm_source=activetrail&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=nl

Wednesday, April 10, 2024

The Science of a Solar Eclipse -- Forget the Superstitious Foolishness....

 




 

The (Second) Great American Eclipse

 

The rabbis wrestled with the celestial event, but there is still an appropriate religious way to mark it

 


Once again, and to the delight of millions, the shadow of the moon will race across North America on Monday afternoon. Those lucky enough to be under its path will see the sun’s disk totally covered by the moon, and the day turn to night, at least for a few minutes. For many (including yours truly), this will be the second time they will see a total solar eclipse. Seven years ago I was on the beach in Charleston, South Carolina. On Monday, I’ll be at the Indianapolis Zoo. I am excited. I just bought a T-shirt that says “Twice in a Lifetime.”

For most, the event is a celebration of a glorious natural event, caused by the random fact that the sun and the moon appear to us to be the same size in the sky, allowing the former to be covered by the latter. But, perhaps rather surprisingly, traditional Jewish teaching about a solar eclipse raises several profound religious questions, as the rabbis wondered what, exactly, caused it.

The classic Talmudic source on the cause of a solar eclipse is found in Tractate Sukkah 29a:

Our rabbis taught: A solar eclipse occurs on account of four things: Because the Chief of the Rabbinic Court died and was not properly eulogized, because a betrothed woman was raped in a city and none came to rescue her, because of homosexuality, and because of two brothers who were murdered together.

If you are struggling to find a common thread to these disparate events, you are not alone. Rashi (d. 1105), the greatest of the medieval Jewish commentators, despaired of doing so: “I do not know of an explanation for this,” he wrote.

But of course, we have known for centuries that a solar eclipse occurs when the moon lies between the sun and the Earth (and is on the same plane as them). If we know that a solar eclipse is a regular celestial event whose timing is predictable and precise, how then are we to understand Tractate Sukkah, which suggests that it is a divine response to human conduct? We have already noted that Rashi was unable to explain the passage, but this did not prevent others from trying to do so. The famous Maharal of Prague (d. 1609) has a lengthy explanation in his work Be’er Hagolah. He acknowledged that an eclipse is a mechanical and predictable event, but he further suggested that if there was no sin, there would indeed never be a solar eclipse. God would have designed the universe differently, and this hypothetical sin-free universe would have been created without the possibility for a solar eclipse.

Perhaps surprisingly, traditional Jewish teaching about a solar eclipse raises several religious questions, as the rabbis wondered what, exactly, caused it.

But if we extend this 16th-century thought experiment we must ask where, precisely, in a sin-free universe, would the moon be? The only way for there to be no solar eclipses in the Maharal’s imaginary universe would be for the moon to orbit the Earth at 90 degrees to the sun-Earth axis. Then it would never come between the sun and the Earth, and there could never be a solar eclipse. But this would lead to another problem. In such an orbit the moon would always be visible, and so there could never be a Rosh Chodesh, the waxing moon that signifies the beginning of a new Jewish month. The Maharal’s thought experiment provides more complications than it does solutions.

Another attempt to explain the Talmud was offered by Jonathan Eybeschutz (d. 1764). In 1751, Eybeschutz was elected as chief rabbi of the Three Communities (Altona, Hamburg, and Wandsbek), although he was later accused of being (and probably was) a secret follower of the false messiah Sabbatai Zevi. In January 1751, Eybeschutz gave a sermon in which he addressed the very same problem that the Maharal had noted: If a solar eclipse is a predictable event, how can it be in response to human conduct? His answer was novel, and certainly very creative. The Talmud in Tractate Sukkah is not actually addressing the phenomenon that we call a solar eclipse. According to Eybeschutz, the phrase in Tractate Sukkah “when a solar eclipse occurs” actually means—“when there are sunspots.”

Inventive though this is, there are two problems with this suggestion. In the first place, sunspots were almost impossible to see before the invention of the telescope. The first published description of them in Western literature was in 1611 by the largely overlooked Johannes Fabricius, and later by a contemporary of Galileo named Christoph Scheiner (though Galileo quickly claimed that he, not Scheiner was the first to correctly interpret what they were). Because sunspots are so difficult to see with the naked eye it seems very unlikely that this is what the rabbis in the Talmud were describing. But there is a second problem with this sunspot interpretation. According to Eybeschutz, sunspots “have no known cause, and have no fixed period to their appearance.” However, and even by the science of his day, this claim was not correct. In fact, both Scheiner and Galileo knew—and wrote—that sunspots were permanent (at least for a while) and moved slowly across the face of the sun in a predictable way. The suggestion that these spots are a response to human activity is therefore difficult to sustain. Furthermore, while a total solar eclipse is strikingly visible to those who are in its shadow, sunspots are, as we have noted, incredibly difficult to see with the naked eye. It would therefore make little sense that these invisible sunspots are to serve as a warning to humanity. And finally, the Talmud describes a solar eclipse as visible in only some places on Earth. While this is a correct description of a solar eclipse, sunspot activity would be visible from any place on Earth, a situation that is clearly not the one described in the Talmud.

A different suggestion was offered by the Italian R. David Pardo (d. 1792) in his work Chasdei David, posthumously published by his family in 1796. R. Pardo acknowledged that most solar eclipses are indeed predictable events, but suggested that there are other kinds of eclipses that cannot in fact be predicted, and it is these kinds of eclipses to which the Talmud is referring. Unfortunately, this suggestion has no factual basis. There are no such phenomena as an unpredictable lunar or solar eclipse, and R. Pardo’s suggestion is untenable.

More recently, the late Lubavitcher Rebbe, Rabbi Menachem Mendel Schneerson (d. 1994), wrote that while a solar eclipse was predictable, the local weather was most certainly not. On a clear day the solar eclipse would be visible, but on a cloudy day the sun’s disk would be harder to see. It was this aspect—the weather—that was under divine control, and presumably God could change it in response to the local actions of people. Elegant as this might be, this suggestion, too, has considerable problems. In the first place the weather is indeed predictable, although of course the accuracy of a weather forecast is relatively limited when compared to the accuracy of an eclipse, which can be forecast centuries ahead to the accuracy of a second. But more problematic is the fact that a total solar eclipse will be completely visible whether or not there are clouds. A cloudy day will prevent viewers on the ground from witnessing the moment of conjunction as the moon covers the disc of the sun, and also prevent them from seeing the stars. However, the other effect of a total solar eclipse—darkness as though it were night—will be just as visible.

Putting aside its causes, how might traditional Jews respond when witnessing a solar eclipse? To be specific, might we recite a blessing? There are indeed precedents for reciting a blessing when seeing an awe-inspiring event. For example, we are to make a blessing on seeing the Mediterranean Sea, or a rainbow, on hearing thunder and seeing lightning, and even on seeing an exceptional beautiful or wise person. It is perfectly understandable, therefore, when witnessing one of the greatest of nature’s spectacles, to wish to mark the event with a blessing. However, there appear to be no halachic authorities who would allow a blessing to be recited. Perhaps the first to tackle this question was the Lubavitcher Rebbe. In 1957, he was asked if it was permitted to say a brachah (blessing) on seeing a solar or lunar eclipse, and his reply was unequivocal:

There is a well-established principle that it is forbidden to institute a blessing that is not mentioned in the Talmud. And some say that the reason that no blessing was instituted is because the eclipse is a bad omen. To the contrary, it is important to pray for an omen to be annulled, and to cry out without a brachah.

Here, Rabbi Schneerson combined a halachic justification for not reciting a brachah with the classic Talmudic teaching that a solar eclipse occurs as a result of human sin. However, there are two questions with R. Schneerson’s ruling. First, it is normative Jewish practice to recite a brachah on hearing bad news like the death of a person, and second, the Talmud does not describe a solar eclipse as an omen of forthcoming disaster. It is a sign of sin, not of punishment.

R. Chaim Dovid Halevi (d. 1998) who served as the head of the Rabbinic Court of Tel Aviv and Yaffo, also ruled that we are forbidden to create new berachot, although he understood the urge to do so:

Our rabbis instituted blessings over acts of creation and powerful natural events, like lightning and thunder and so on. However, they did not do so for a lunar or solar eclipse. And if only today we could institute a blessing when we are aware that an eclipse is indeed an incredible natural event. But we cannot, for a person is forbidden to make a blessing up. If a person still wants to make some form of a blessing he should recite the verses “And David blessed … blessed are you, God, the Lord of our father Israel, who performs acts of creation.”

Finally, we should note the opinion of R. David Lau, then the chief rabbi of Modi’in and currently the Ashkenazi chief rabbi of Israel. A young man wrote to R. Lau about his experiences of observing the (partial) solar eclipse of 2001 that could be seen in Israel. He had been left wanting to make a blessing for what was, for him, an awe-inspiring cosmic occurrence. R. Lau empathized with these feelings, but noted that since the rabbis of the Talmud had not prescribed a blessing over an eclipse, it was not possible to institute such a blessing today. R. Lau noted that his own religious response to witnessing the eclipse had been to say Psalm 19, “The Heavens tell of God’s glory” and Psalm 104, “My soul will bless God.”

Monday’s total solar eclipse over North America will allow millions to witness a memorable celestial event. Even if traditional Jews will not make a blessing, there are, as we have noted, other suggestions for an appropriate religious response. On Monday at 3:06 p.m. Central Time, I shall be reciting a verse from the Book of Isaiah (40:26):

“Lift up your eyes on high, and see who has created these things, who brings out their host by number; He calls them all by name, by the greatness of His might and the strength of His power; not one of them is missing.”

Jeremy Brown is a physician and historian of science and medicine and works at the National Institutes of Health in Bethesda, Maryland. He is the author, most recently, of The Eleventh Plague: Jews and Pandemics from the Bible to COVID-19 (Oxford University Press), which won a 2024 National Jewish Book Award.

https://www.tabletmag.com/sections/news/articles/second-great-american-eclipse
 
 
 
תּוֹרַת ה' תְּמִימָה, מְשִׁיבַת נָפֶשׁ; עֵדוּת ה' נֶאֱמָנָה, מַחְכִּימַת פֶּתִי.

 
THE RAMBAM ON SUPERSTITIONS: Superstition was just folly, and nothing more; it was therefore forbidden by the Torah, which aimed at making men perfectly wise.
 

Tuesday, April 09, 2024

The Lies And Hyperbole Of The Ultra-Orthodox Rabbis From The USA To Israel --- The rabbis’ letter stated that pressures to increase Haredi participation are part of a “malicious plan” to “gather under their control” the Haredi public — the text does not explain whose control — and “reduce the number of those who observe” the commandments of the Torah.

 

40% of officers training graduates defined themselves as religiously observant so daily joint prayers are held in nearly every medium to large base. PM  

***The Lies And Hyperbole Of The Ultra-Orthodox Rabbis From The USA To Israel*** 

 

The rabbis’ letter stated that pressures to increase Haredi participation are part of a “malicious plan” to “gather under their control” the Haredi public — the text does not explain whose control — and “reduce the number of those who observe” the commandments of the Torah.


Eighteen prominent rabbis associated with the Shas party and the ultra-Orthodox Sephardi movement signed onto a document rejecting any compromise on the conscription of Haredi Jews – including those who are not studying in yeshivas.


Shas rabbis spurn compromise on Haredi draft following High Court ruling

 

As Netanyahu pursues deal with parties, letter by prominent figures with ties to Shas contradicts apparent flexibility that set Sephardi faction apart from Ashkenazi counterpart


Israelis protest outside the home of Shas leader Aryeh Deri, calling for equal conscription laws to be implemented, April 1, 2024. (Chaim Goldberg/Flash90)
Israelis protest outside the home of Shas leader Aryeh Deri, calling for equal conscription laws to be implemented
 

Eighteen prominent rabbis associated with the Shas party and the ultra-Orthodox Sephardi movement signed onto a document rejecting any compromise on the conscription of Haredi Jews – including those who are not studying in yeshivas.

The letter, published Sunday, was undersigned by yeshiva heads and influential rabbis, including Ovadia Yosef — the son of the Chief Sephardi Rabbi Yitzhak Yosef, who is named for his grandfather, the late leader of the Shas movement and party. The document conveyed a position similar to that of the leaders of Ashkenazi Haredi society, who have rejected any compromise on the issue of military conscription of ultra-Orthodox Jews.

Secular and religious pundits criticized the letter’s message, which they said constitutes a step toward radicalization that does not reflect the wishes of most Shas voters.

“Compromise will lead to ruination,” stated the document, adding that “we will not be deterred from going to prison” and “give our souls bravely and courageously to observe our holy Torah.”

Many promoters of greater participation by Haredim in carrying the burden of national service hope for greater flexibility on the issue in Sephardi society, which is seen as less insular than its Ashkenazi counterpart. Yanki Deri, the son of Aryeh Deri, the leader of the Shas faction in the Knesset, enlisted to serve in the Israel Defense Forces in November, weeks after the outbreak of war with Hamas on October 7.

The document, titled “Clear Instructions in the Face of Rulings on Conscription,” was published as Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu met in Jerusalem with representatives of United Torah Judaism, the Ashkenazi Haredi party, to work out an agreement on last month’s ruling by the High Court of Justice that effectively ended the transfer of subsidies for nearly 50,000 full-time Talmud students.

The state is currently formulating its legal reaction to the ruling, which barred the government from providing funds to ultra-Orthodox yeshivas for students eligible for IDF enlistment.

The rabbis’ letter stated that pressures to increase Haredi participation are part of a “malicious plan” to “gather under their control” the Haredi public — the text does not explain whose control — and “reduce the number of those who observe” the commandments of the Torah.

The document implicitly rejected a compromise offer by Welfare Minister Yaakov Mergi of Shas from February, who proposed in an interview to honor the legally required conscription of Haredi young men who are not studying in yeshivas in exchange for enshrining the controversial exemption of those who are.

This aspect of the letter triggered considerable criticism on Sunday, including by the Movement for Quality Government, which said in a statement that the letter belies the effectiveness and genuineness of negotiations with Haredi leaders on conscription.

Spokespeople for the Shas party told Ynet that the letter surprised them. But some critics, including Shilo Freid, a reporter for the religious Zionist-linked Makor Rishon newspaper, suggested this was part of a doublespeak strategy.

“Unlike the spokespeople, the rabbis from Shas put it on the table. No ‘adapted framework’ and no conscription for those who aren’t studying Torah. These are phrases to placate non-Haredim. In reality, even those who aren’t studying shouldn’t enlist as far as they’re concerned,” Freid wrote on X.

But others suggested that the undersigned rabbis – including Moshe Maya, a senior member of the Shas Council of Torah Sages, the ultimate authority of the movement represented by the party and its Knesset faction, and fellow Council member Reuven Elbaz – are “disconnected” from their movement’s rank and file, as Yediot Aharonot columnist Chen Artzi Sror phrased it.

“Unlike Litvak and Hassidic Haredi Jews who live in a bubble, every Shasnik knows soldiers from very close up and personal. Most have family in the army. They know exactly what the worried mothers look like and pray daily for their cousin or neighbor serving in the Israel Defense Forces. That’s why the rabbis’ position is so outrageous,” she wrote, adding: “This public deserves better leaders.”

Menashe Anzi, a lecturer at Ben Gurion University on the history of Jews in the Muslim world, opined that the letter exposes an internal division within Shas.

“This is the Haredi Sephardi nucleus that was Haredi long before Shas [existed],” he wrote. “The families of Haredi rabbis, like Musafi and Ben Shimon, have been in the Haredi sphere for decades, even longer. Their audiences are Haredi Sephardi. They don’t think of the traditional Jew from Petah Tikva, but of the Haredi from Beit Yisrael,” he added, naming a Haredi neighborhood in Jerusalem.

The letter follows legal action on the conscription of Haredim, which has attracted renewed scrutiny as Israeli society grapples with the burden of the war against Hamas in Gaza and the conflict with Hezbollah in Lebanon. The army called up hundreds of thousands of reservists, most of whom have since been discharged, following the October 7 Hamas onslaught and the ensuing war in Gaza.

In their letter, the rabbis addressed the issue of state funding for yeshivas, urging philanthropists to fill the vacuum left by the High Court’s decision to order the state to freeze its funding for those institutions.

“In this fateful time, part of the measures are to deprive the livelihood of
Torah students to harm them and force them to leave to world of the Torah,” the rabbis wrote. “We call on the donors of our people to fund the yeshivas with all their might.”

https://www.timesofisrael.com/shas-rabbis-spurn-compromise-on-haredi-draft-following-high-court-ruling/?utm_source=The+Daily+Edition&utm_campaign=daily-edition-2024-04-08&utm_medium=email


Monday, April 08, 2024

Gazans just engaged in the most brutal deliberate attacks on Israeli civilians, and Hamas, the instigator of those attacks, is widely supported by the civilians there. Hamas has indicated great joy at Biden’s remarks, continues to state it will not relent on attacking Israel, and, in fact, after Biden’s remarks, resumed missile attacks on Israel from Gaza.

 


Moral Midgets Cook Up a War Crime


Just days ago, NSC spokesman John Kirby assured the world of the administration’s “unwavering support” for Israel in its fight for survival. President Biden authorized an arms transfer to Israel, including 1,800 MK-84 2,000-pound bombs, 500 MK-82 500-pound bombs, and 25 F-35A fighter jets. Days later, following tragic drone strikes in which seven World Central Kitchen ("WCK") workers perished, the president 

...made clear the need for Israel to announce and implement a series of specific, concrete, and measurable steps to address civilian harm, humanitarian suffering, and the safety of aid workers," according to a White House readout of the call. "He made clear that U.S. policy with respect to Gaza will be determined by our assessment of Israel's immediate action on these steps. 

Citing fake casualty reports generated by Hamas and lies about restricted aid into Gaza, Nancy Pelosi and 37 leftist Democrat Congress members signed a letter to the president and Secretary of State Antony Blinken stating, “we believe it is unjustifiable to approve these weapon transfers until the investigation into the airstrike is concluded … And we again urge you to ensure that any future military assistance to Israel, including already authorized transfers, is subject to conditions to ensure it is used in compliance with U.S. and international law.” 

All this is pretext by an administration that has released billions to Iran, the country that funds the proxy war from Gaza, Lebanon, and Yemen against Israel, and which has done everything it can to hamstring Israeli forces from responding. 

The unfortunate death of the WCK team is hardly rare. The Israeli government responded more quickly and completely than we have during similar incidents, and it doesn’t take a genius to see the Democrats playing to that significant portion of their base, which has revealed itself as deeply antisemitic.

War is Hell

The investigation of the incident revealed that a gunman was seen atop a WCK vehicle earlier, and another was suspected nearby. (It appears that this is normal going with Hamas-posted gunmen at food depot drops.) The logos on the WCK vans were invisible by night to infrared monitoring, and the officers in charge did not follow procedures, procedures set by a military that successfully has done everything possible to minimize incidental civilian casualties in circumstances where the enemy’s cynical plan is to use those civilians as shields. 

Khaled H. Zakariah, a native Egyptian with 14 years of experience in national security and counter-terrorism, points out a significant number of accidental killings of civilians by militaries, including ours, and notes that, if the U.K. and U.S. stopped selling arms to countries responsible, “we would stop manufacturing or buying arms for OUR OWN military, which has repeatedly killed civilians by mistake in Iraq, Afghanistan, Somalia and elsewhere.”

Here’s his list of similar war zone accidents:

  • Khair Khana wedding Afghanistan, 2008 – 47 civilians, including women and children
  • Al-Adaala Camp Bombing Sudan 1998 -- (number of civilians killed unknown)
  • Al-Majalah Airstrike, Yemen 2009 -- 41 civilians, including women and children
  • Bola Boluk Airstrike, Afghanistan 2009 -- 27 civilians
  • Sanaa Funeral Hall Strike, Yemen 2016 -- at least 140 people were killed and more than 500 injured
  • Mansoura Airstrike, Syria 2017 -- deaths of at least 150 civilians, 
  • Amran Airstrike, Yemen 2015 -- at least 30 civilians killed
  • Ghaziabad, Afghanistan, 2008 -- deaths of at least 90 civilians

Most recently, under the Biden administration, in 2021, a U.S. drone strike in Kabul killed as many as 10 civilians, including seven children. The U.S. responded that it was a “tragic mistake” and no one responsible was punished.

By contrast, Israel has achieved the lowest ratio of civilian casualties in the history of urban warfare. Israeli Defense Force chief Herzi Halevi reprimanded the head of IDF Southern Command, the Division 162 commander, and the Nahal Brigade commander. He also fired the Nahal Brigade commander’s chief of staff. 

Martha MacCallum asked John Kirby why the U.S. was treating the WCK incident so much differently than it did the Kabul casualties and got back the response of a professional weasel:

Kirby answered, “Well, look, these are events that happened three years apart, two different geographic locations, two different countries, two different sets of circumstances, two different types of threat[s] that were being evaluated, and [two completely] different militaries that were involved, with two different chains of command. So, I think we’ve got to be careful comparing both events too closely. We, too, had an independent investigation, Martha, of that incident, and that independent investigator found that there was no need for personal accountability to be had, but did find that the U.S. military needed to make some systemic changes, procedural changes in how we looked at intelligence and acted on that intelligence. The Israelis, similarly, have said the same thing about this event this week with the WCK strike, that they’re going to make some systemic changes. Now, we’re glad to hear that and we’re going to be watching to see what those changes are and how they can put them into effect. But these are two different events.”

MacCallum then cut in to say, “They’re not that different though, John… This was a trigger moment, it appears, for the White House, because, obviously, the momentum has been building to take a harder line against Israel and their tactics, but this was the event that really pushed things over the edge. And so, why is it so different, in terms of what Israel carried out, in the midst of war -- and these aid workers, and my heart breaks for them, as it does for the seven children who were with this man underneath this Hellfire missile -- but the aid workers know that they are in a war zone and that they are taking a tremendous risk, at risk of their own safety.”

Kirby responded, “Yeah, well, first, again, two different incidents. I understand that there [are] similarities here. But it would be, I think, imprudent to try to compare two things that happened three years apart in two different conflicts. That said, the Israelis have said that they made a mistake here. They have come clean about what happened, and we’re going to be looking at their report to see what we think of it as well. And they said that they’re going to improve. They need to improve the de-confliction processes with the aid workers, and that’s going to be important going forward.”

Here are some differences Kirby missed -- Kabul is thousands of miles away from us; Gaza is next door to Israel. Gazans just engaged in the most brutal deliberate attacks on Israeli civilians, and Hamas, the instigator of those attacks, is widely supported by the civilians there. Hamas has indicated great joy at Biden’s remarks, continues to state it will not relent on attacking Israel, and, in fact, after Biden’s remarks, resumed missile attacks on Israel from Gaza.

After the administration’s untoward criticism and the Democrat congressional letter, Hamas turned down yet another Israeli ceasefire offer, and Israel found and retrieved yet another Hamas hostage who had been killed while in captivity.

Words are insufficient to convey my utter disgust at Biden, Kirby, Pelosi, the Squad, and those media that publish Hamas propaganda -- moral midgets all.

 

https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2024/04/moral_midgets_cook_up_a_war_crime.html

Sunday, April 07, 2024

More than 50 former students of the Yeshiva University High School for Boys allege they were sexually abused by the former principal, Rabbi George Finkelstein, and other staff at the prestigious high school from 1971 through 1992.


Judge rules sex abuse lawsuits against Yeshiva University can proceed 

 

New York Supreme Court Judge Alexander M. Tisch rejected Yeshiva University’s motion to dismiss two lawsuits related to the allegations, opening the way for trial. 

 

The Yeshiva University Wilf Campus in Manhattan. (Photo courtesy of Google Maps)

NEW YORK (RNS) — For decades, students and their parents at a prominent Jewish high school on Manhattan’s Upper West Side have been seeking accountability from Yeshiva University, which runs the school, for allegations of sexual abuse by a former school administrator and other staff.

On Tuesday (April 2), their case received a boost from a New York state court.

In the April 2 ruling, New York Supreme Court Judge Alexander M. Tisch rejected Yeshiva University’s motion to dismiss two lawsuits related to the allegations, opening the way for trial.

More than 50 former students of the Yeshiva University High School for Boys allege they were sexually abused by the former principal, Rabbi George Finkelstein, and other staff at the prestigious high school from 1971 through 1992. They allege that more than 20 students and parents alerted the school to the abuse but that no action was taken to safeguard the students studying there.

The plaintiffs want Yeshiva University to share thousands of pages of documents in order to learn “the identity of individuals at Yeshiva University who had knowledge of sexual abuse, individuals who received reports of sexual abuse, individuals identified as perpetrators, along with names of administrators made aware of abuse, and individual school officials and administrators who failed to protect students or did not respond to abuse allegations,” a statement said.

The child sexual abuse case is one of several brought by Jews against Jewish leaders and institutions during the past couple of decades. The subject, once considered taboo, was first broached by Jewish community newspapers.

In 2000, an investigation by the New York Jewish Week alleged that Baruch Lanner, an Orthodox rabbi and educator, had physically, sexually and emotionally abused young people when he worked as the principal of Hillel Yeshiva High School in New Jersey, a Jewish school, and later as a regional director of the National Conference of Synagogue Youth.

Two years later, Lanner was sentenced to seven years in prison. An official in the Orthodox Union, NCSY’s parent organization, resigned, and the case spurred a reckoning within the wider Jewish community.

An analysis by the Jewish Telegraphic Agency found that at least 150 child sex abuse lawsuits were filed against Jewish institutions in New York from 2019 to 2021, due to the state temporarily abolishing the statute of limitations for sexual abuse claims. It was in this window that the Yeshiva lawsuits were revived, having been previously dismissed on statute of limitations grounds.

The Yeshiva University High School for Boys, also known as the Marsha Stern Talmudical Academy or MTA, was founded in 1916 by the then-president of the Yeshiva University (under a different name at the time) and was the first academic Jewish high school in America. An Orthodox Jewish day school in the Washington Heights neighborhood of Manhattan, it operates as a prep school for Yeshiva University, whose buildings surround its campus.
A 2018 study found that childhood sexual abuse in the Jewish community occurs “across the spectrum of Jewish religious affiliation and greater prevalence among formerly Orthodox individuals. Furthermore, history of childhood sexual abuse was associated with greater risk for psychiatric distress and less religious involvement, however spiritual/religious engagement and belief appeared to facilitate resilience in the context of abuse.”

Mordechai Twersky, the original lead plaintiff who attended the high school in the early 1980s, told Religion News Service that he and the other plaintiffs, some of them with grandchildren of their own, are gratified by the judge’s ruling, but also weary. He first filed suit more than a decade ago.

“We victims, tormented and tired, with some of us quite ill, see a ray of hope in this ruling that justice will be served. The road is still long — perhaps years long — but we will prevail.”

Friday, April 05, 2024

JUST IMAGINE --- if the Torah contained multiple passages promising Heaven to any rabbi who raped a child. And then imagine that in the aftermath of an endless series of child rapes within the synagogue & yeshiva, more or less every politician, and Jewish & secular academic denied that they had anything whatsoever to do with the “true” teachings of Judaism. That is the uncanny situation we find ourselves in with respect to Islam.

 


The Bright Line between Good and Evil

Sam Harris


This article was adapted from a transcript of the November 7, 2023, episode of the author’s podcast, Making Sense. Needless to say, but I'll say it anyway, I have differences of opinion on many views of Sam's; on Religion of Judaism in Toto, and on Israel's right to settle the entire land. But I respect him as a brilliant scientist, thinker and philosopher. PM


We have witnessed extreme moral confusion since Hamas attacked Israel on October 7, 2023, killing approximately 1,200 people and taking over 200 hostages. Some of it has been just frank anti-Semitism, but much is actual confusion. Most people in the West still don’t understand the problem of jihadism. We often speak about “terrorism” and “violent extremism” generically. And we are told that any link between these evils and the doctrine of Islam is spurious and nothing more than an expression of “Islamophobia.” Incidentally, the term Islamophobia was invented in the 1970s by Iranian theocrats to do just this: prevent any criticism of Islam and to cast secularism itself as a form of bigotry. Islam is a system of ideas, subscribed to by people of every race and ethnicity. It’s just like Christianity in that regard. Unlike Judaism, Christianity and Islam are both aggressively missionary faiths, and they win converts from everywhere. People criticize the doctrines of Christianity all the time and worry about their political and social influences—but no one confuses this for bigotry against Christians as people, much less racism. There’s no such thing as “Christophobia.” As someone once said (it was not Christopher Hitchens, but it sure sounds like him): “Islamophobia is a term created by fascists, and used by cowards, to manipulate morons.”

In any case, fundamentalist Christians and Orthodox Jews don’t tend to be confused about the problem of jihadism because they understand the power of religious beliefs, however secular people generally are. We imagine that people everywhere, at bottom, want the same things: They want to live safe and prosperous lives. They want clean drinking water and good schools for their kids. And we imagine that if whole groups of people start behaving in extraordinarily destructive ways—practicing suicidal terrorism against noncombatants, for instance—they must have been pushed into extremis by others. What could turn ordinary human beings into suicide bombers, and what could get vast numbers of their neighbors to celebrate them as martyrs, other than their entire society being oppressed and humiliated to the point of madness by some malign power? So, in the case of Israel, many people imagine that the ghoulish history Palestinian terrorism simply indicates how profound the injustice has been on the Israeli side.

Now, there are many things to be said in criticism of Israel, particularly its expansion of settlements on contested land. But Israel’s behavior is not what explains the suicidal and genocidal inclinations of a group like Hamas. The Islamic doctrines of martyrdom and jihad do.

These are religious beliefs, sincerely held. They are beliefs about the moral structure of the universe. And they explain how normal people—even good ones—can commit horrific acts of violence against innocent civilians on purpose, not as collateral damage, and still consider themselves good. When you believe that life in this world has no value, apart from deciding who goes to Hell and who goes to Paradise, it becomes possible to feel perfectly at ease killing noncombatants, or even using your own women and children as human shields, because you know that any Muslims who get killed will go to Paradise for eternity.

If you don’t understand that jihadists sincerely believe these things, you don’t understand the problem Israel faces. The problem isn’t merely Palestinian nationalism, resource competition, or any other normal terrestrial grievance. In fact, the problem isn’t even hatred, though there is enough of that to go around. The problem is religious certainty.

It really is possible to be critical of Israel, and to be committed to the political rights of the Palestinian people, without being confused about the reality of Islamic religious fanaticism—or the threat that it poses not just to Israel but to open societies everywhere. My friend Christopher Hitchens was extremely critical of Israel and openly supportive of Palestinian statehood. But he wasn’t even slightly confused about the problem of jihad.

There have been nearly 50,000 acts of Islamic terrorism in the past forty years—and the French group that maintains a database of these attacks considers that an undercount.1 Ninety percent of them have occurred in Muslim countries. Most have nothing to do with Israel or the Jews. There have been eighty-two attacks in France and over 2,000 in Pakistan during this period. Want France to be more like Pakistan? You just need more jihadists. You just need more people susceptible to becoming jihadists, which is a transformation that can happen very quickly—just as quickly as new beliefs can take root in a person’s mind. You just need a wider Muslim community that doesn’t condemn jihadism but tacitly admits the theology that inspires it will be true and perfect until the end of the world. You just need millions of people who will protest Israel for defending itself, or call for the deaths of cartoonists for depicting the prophet Muhammad, and yet not make a peep about the jihadist atrocities that occur daily, all over the world, in the name of their religion.

In the West, there is now a large industry of apology and obfuscation designed to protect Muslims from having to grapple with these facts. The humanities and social science departments of every university are filled with scholars and pseudo-scholars—deemed experts in terrorism, religion, Islamic jurisprudence, anthropology, political science, and other fields—who claim that Muslim extremism is never what it seems. These experts insist that we can never take jihadists at their word and that none of their declarations about God, Paradise, martyrdom, and the evils of apostasy have anything to do with their real motivations.

When one asks what the motivations of jihadists actually are, one encounters a tsunami of liberal delusion. Needless to say, the West is to blame for all the mayhem we see in Muslim societies. After all, how would we feel if outside powers and their mapmakers had divided our lands and stolen our oil? These beleaguered people just want what everyone else wants out of life. They want economic and political security. They want to be free to flourish in ways that would be fully compatible with a global civil society, if only they were given the chance. Secular liberals imagine that jihadists are acting as anyone else would given a similar history of unhappy encounters with the West. And they totally discount the role that religious beliefs play in inspiring groups such as Hamas and al-Qaeda, or even the Islamic State—to the point where it would be impossible for a jihadist to prove he was doing anything for religious reasons.

Apparently, it’s not enough for an educated person with economic opportunities to devote himself to the most extreme and austere version of Islam, to articulate his religious reasons for doing so ad nauseam, and even to go so far as to confess his certainty about martyrdom on video before blowing himself up in a crowd. Such demonstrations of religious fanaticism are somehow considered rhetorically insufficient to prove that he really believed what he said he believed. Of course, if a white supremacist goes on a killing spree in a Black church and says he did this because he hates Black people and thinks the White race is under attack, this motive is accepted at face value without the slightest hesitation. This double standard is guaranteed to exonerate Islam every time. The game is rigged.

Do not mistake what I’m saying now for anti-Muslim bigotry. I’m talking about the consequences of ideas, not the ethnic origins of people. Not a word I’ve said, or will ever say on this topic, has anything to do with race. And the truth is, I’m not remotely xenophobic. I’m a xenophile. The Middle East has produced some of my favorite parts of culture—some of my favorite foods, music, and architecture. Despite my better judgment, I absolutely love the sound of the Muslim call to prayer. Everything I’m saying about the problem of jihadism is about the problem of jihadism—the triumphal belief by some percentage of the world’s Muslims that they must conquer the world for the one true faith through force and that Paradise awaits anyone who would sacrifice his or her life to that end.

Of course, many religions produce a fair amount of needless suffering. Consider the pedophile-priest scandal in the Catholic Church, which is something I’ve written and spoken about before, I hope with sufficient outrage. One can certainly argue, as I have, that Catholic teaching is partly to blame for these crimes against children. By making contraception and abortion taboo, the Church ensured there would be many out-of-wedlock births among its faithful; by stigmatizing unwed mothers, it further guaranteed that many children would be abandoned to Church-run orphanages, where they could be preyed upon by sexually unhealthy men. I don’t think any of this was consciously planned; it’s just a grotesque consequence of some very bad ideas. And yet the truth is that there is no direct link between Christian scripture and child rape. However, imagine if there were. Just imagine if the New Testament contained multiple passages promising Heaven to any priest who raped a child. And then imagine that in the aftermath of an endless series of child rapes within the Church, more or less every journalist, politician, and academic denied that they had anything whatsoever to do with the “true” teachings of Catholicism. That is the uncanny situation we find ourselves in with respect to Islam.

 

READ ALL OF IT: 

https://secularhumanism.org/2024/03/the-bright-line-between-good-and-evil/?emci=ab583f8b-c0f1-ee11-aaf2-002248223353&emdi=f2180ca7-c1f2-ee11-aaf0-7c1e52017038&ceid=682868

Thursday, April 04, 2024

Speak softly and carry a big nuclear arsenal: Israel must enhance military self-reliance - In an era marked by shifting global alliances and uncertainties, expanding and augmenting Israel’s nuclear arsenal is crucial for safeguarding its future.

 

" Deterrence theory refers to the scholarship and practice of how threats or limited force by one party can convince another party to refrain from initiating some other course of action. The topic gained increased prominence as a military strategy during the Cold War with regard to the use of nuclear weapons and is related to but distinct from the concept of mutual assured destruction, according to which a full-scale nuclear attack on a power with second-strike capability would devastate both parties. The central problem of deterrence revolves around how to credibly threaten military action or nuclear punishment on the adversary despite its costs to the deterrer.[1] Deterrence is one strategy to achieve peace and avoid conflict escalation in peace and conflict studies. "

 

Israel’s nuclear capabilities, though never officially confirmed, are widely recognized as part of its national defense strategy.



US SECRETARY of State Antony Blinken arrives for the Summit for Democracy, in South Korea this week. The gradual shift in the historic US-Israel alliance has been partly influenced by a greater influence given to the State Department under Blinken, the writer maintains.  (photo credit: EVELYN HOCKSTEIN/REUTERS)
US SECRETARY of State Antony Blinken arrives for the Summit for Democracy, in South Korea this week. The gradual shift in the historic US-Israel alliance has been partly influenced by a greater influence given to the State Department under Blinken, the writer maintains. 
 
 





The alliance between the United States and Israel, established shortly after Israel’s founding in 1948, is a cornerstone of their foreign policies. Rooted in shared democratic values, strategic interests, and a dedication to Middle Eastern security, this partnership has been instrumental in ensuring Israel’s security through military aid, diplomatic support, and collaborative efforts in military exercises, intelligence sharing, and technology. This relationship underscores a mutual commitment to regional peace and stability.

Israel’s nuclear capabilities, though never officially confirmed, are widely recognized as part of its national defense strategy. It is generally understood that Israel possesses a sophisticated arsenal, including nuclear warheads, which serve as a cornerstone of its deterrence policy. Despite the policy of ambiguity, or “nuclear opacity,” this unconfirmed arsenal is a critical element of the Middle Eastern security landscape. It underscores the strategic depth Israel maintains in defense of its sovereignty and security interests in a volatile region.

Shifts in US-Israel ties

However, during the administrations of President Joe Biden and his predecessor Barack Obama, we have witnessed a gradual shift in this historic alliance, diverging from the longstanding support that Israel has traditionally received.

This shift is influenced by evolving demographics and opinions within the Democratic Party and the greater influence afforded to the State Department under Secretary Antony Blinken. A series of recent actions and statements by the Biden administration during the October 7 War underscores this concerning trend.

These include providing Iran with a $10 billion sanctions waiver, imposing sanctions on Israeli Jews, pushing aggressively for a ceasefire, suggesting that Israel’s top priority should be aiding Gazans rather than winning the war, limiting the supply of weapons and munitions, and Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer’s unprecedented call for the ouster of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. Such actions are proactively undermining Israel’s security and sovereignty and signal a potential shift in the foundational support from its most significant ally.

 

View of the nuclear reactor in Dimona, Southern Israel. August 13, 2016. (credit: MOSHE SHAI/FLASH90)
View of the nuclear reactor in Dimona, Southern Israel. 
 

In light of these concerning developments, Israel must swiftly enhance its strategic defense capabilities to solidify its military self-reliance. This necessitates dramatically increasing the number of nuclear warheads in Israel’s arsenal and advancing and diversifying their delivery systems. Such expansion would ensure a robust, multifaceted deterrent capable of securing Israel’s sovereignty and protecting its citizens in an increasingly uncertain geopolitical landscape.

Simultaneously, Israel must strive to maintain and strengthen its alliance with the United States, leveraging diplomatic avenues to revitalize this essential relationship. Enhancing Israel’s defense capabilities and its international alliances are complementary strategies that safeguard its national security interests.

In an era marked by shifting global alliances and uncertainties, expanding and augmenting Israel’s nuclear arsenal is crucial for safeguarding its future. This strategic imperative would ensure that Israel remains a significant power in the Middle East, capable of defending its interests and ensuring the security of its citizens, regardless of the changing geopolitical dynamics.

https://www.jpost.com/opinion/article-792593?

Wednesday, April 03, 2024

Using tired anti-Zionist mantras to prop up an indefensible objection to military service may make Bench Kvetchers feel good, but it is nothing more than a hollow farce exploited to shore up an ideology that makes absolutely no sense.

 

From one Haredi man to another 

 

Like it or not, Haredim who live in Israel are as Zionist as any secular Tel Aviv Jew -- they are integral to the Zionist project 
 
Ultra-Orthodox Jews block a road and clash with police during a protest against the drafting of Ultra orthodox jews to the Israeli army, on road number 4, outside the city of Bnei Brak, April 1, 2024. (Chaim Goldberg/Flash90)
Ultra-Orthodox Jews block a road and clash with police during a protest against the drafting of Ultra orthodox jews to the Israeli army, on road number 4, outside the city of Bnei Brak, April 1
 
 

In his op-ed, titled “One Haredi man’s view on drafting yeshiva boys,” Dovid Kornreich claims to articulate a perspective that is deeply rooted in the ideological and religious convictions of the Haredi community, which he says holds a principled opposition to their conscription into the Israeli Defense Forces (IDF). Kornreich’s argument pivots on the premise that Haredi non-Zionism dismisses the notion of any significance in Jewish territorial sovereignty over the Land of Israel, and therefore prioritizes the preservation of Jewish life above the nationalist ambitions of the Israeli state.

While Kornreich does acknowledge the benefits derived from the state by the Haredi community, he nonetheless critiques the moral and historical underpinnings of Zionism, suggesting it has imperiled Jews globally, and of course in Israel. And although he recognizes that there are existential threats facing Israel, he contends that the refusal of Haredi men to serve in the military is not based on a disregard for national security but in a steadfast adherence to religious ideals and ethical principles.

Kornreich also insists that Haredi reluctance to formally engage with the state’s institutions or to participate in any state-related activities is based on a deeply held view that to do so would be to endorse Zionist ideology and the premise of a Jewish national home in pre-Messianic times. Instead, says Kornreich, if Haredi Israelis are to be a part of Israeli society, they must be allowed to interact with the state strictly on their own terms, without compromising their fundamental beliefs.

I have never met Dovid Kornreich, nor had I ever heard of him before encountering his op-ed. But as one Haredi man to another – albeit as a Haredi who resides outside Israel – I feel compelled to express my profound disagreement with the views he has articulated. Rarely have I encountered arguments in favor of a point-of-view as deeply problematic and as misguided as the ones presented by Kornreich. If I were to be unkind, I would merely dismiss his article as a meaningless “word salad” – but that would underestimate the serious implications of his stance, and the many readers who might take it seriously.

Although, to be perfectly clear: Kornreich’s article is a “word salad” – nothing more, nothing less. The confusion and lack of constructive direction in his arguments is beyond obvious, while the high-handed conviction of their accuracy only makes it worse. His perspective, while claiming to represent a principled stand ingrained in Haredi ideology, is first-and-foremost remarkably self-serving. But what makes it far worse is that it is detached from the complex realities faced by Israel in particular, and the Jewish world as a whole.

Let’s begin with Kornreich’s assertion that “Haredim are not Zionists.” Really? Can one truly argue that disengagement from national symbols, such as not knowing the national anthem or participating in national observances, equates to a complete detachment from the identity of your country? If you vote, hold a passport, speak the language, engage in business, and eagerly avail yourself of the country’s amenities, does this not indicate a form of affiliation?

Like the proverbial ostrich burying its head in the sand as it attempts to convince itself that danger doesn’t exist, Kornreich’s claim that “Haredim are not Zionists” is a facile but ultimately transparent attempt to ignore the perhaps unpalatable requirement for societal participation and obligations that is no less true for Haredim than it is for every Israeli citizen. Bottom line: Haredim who live in Israel are as Zionist as any secular Tel Aviv Jew – because, like it or not, they are an integral part of the Zionist project that has produced a country and society made up of Jews of all stripes and colors.

Indeed, the Haredi community’s deep engagement with Israeli life suggests a form of Zionism rooted not in political ideology but in a shared commitment to the welfare and future of the Jewish people in their homeland. This engagement is evident in areas ranging from healthcare, where Haredi professionals play key roles, to education and social services, highlighting a broader definition of national contribution.

Then there is Kornreich’s argument that the Zionist movement and the establishment of the State of Israel have escalated the risk to Jewish lives and spurred the greatest source in anti-Jewish violence since WWII. This argument is equally one-dimensional because it simply overlooks the broad spectrum of antisemitism’s long and painful history. It also fails to account for the persistent nature of Jew-hatred, which has continually adapted over centuries, always finding new pretexts for old prejudices.

The implication that Jews seeking to return to, and assert sovereignty over, their ancestral homeland constituted and continues to be the primary provocation for modern antisemitism, neglects the broader context of historical reality. Moreover, to suggest that this somehow excuses Haredim from serving in the military – because they were less enthusiastic or even opposed to Jewish nationalist aspirations before the creation of Israel – is jaw-dropping in its self-serving navel-gazing superficiality.

Jews – both Zionist and non-Zionist – did not merely return to their historical homeland after 1945, which they were fully entitled to do whether they were nationalists or not. They returned to their historical homeland after a serious attempt had been made to exterminate Jews forever, and they sought a safe refuge where they could freely practice their religion and affirm their identity without the shadow of subjugation or discrimination or genocidal intent that had darkened our history for thousands of years. And Haredim were as much a part of this mass migration as every other type of Jew. To now claim that Haredim have no part to play in or obligation towards the country that emerged out of this phenomenon is simply ridiculous.

Kornreich also claims that Zionist Israelis and non-Zionist Israelis are divided over the value of a Jewish state, and he suggests that the non-Zionist Haredi community living in Israel has a dismissive attitude towards the sacrifices that were made historically to establish the State of Israel, and also towards the sacrifices that are made now to maintain Israel’s sovereignty. But this claim is highly misleading, not least because it smacks of raw self-interest. Kornreich seems to be implying that because Haredim don’t value the existence of Israel or the military efforts to secure Israel’s security, they will certainly have no interest in serving in the army.

But the facts are quite different. Haredim, on the whole, are very satisfied with life in Israel and are very eager for the Israel they know to remain as it is. Indeed, the Haredim have never had it so good. Their communities are flourishing in every respect: every aspect of their lives is supported by an array of services and professionals, religious life is rich and vibrant, Haredi numbers are growing exponentially, and Haredi institutions are thriving.

The biggest proof that life is good for Haredim in Israel is that none of them are leaving, even if they have foreign citizenship or can obtain it easily. Kornreich suggests that Haredim, due to their “galut” mindset, do not require statehood for self-worth or dignity. But this overlooks the facts on the ground – Haredim love Zionist Israel, and given the choice of living there or anywhere else, the vast majority of these Israeli “non-Zionists” readily choose Israel as their home.

The idea, therefore, that more than 75 years of statehood hasn’t shifted the Haredi disposition towards Jewish nationalism minimizes the deep connections many Haredim have with the country as it is today, including their own contributions to its society and cultural milieu. It also neglects the fact that the State of Israel represents more than just political sovereignty; it symbolizes a collective endeavor of Jewish revival and resilience that the Haredim are a part of as much as anyone else, even if they conveniently deny that when the topic of military conscription becomes an issue. In which case, for Kornreich to argue that Israel isn’t worth “any significant sacrifice” opportunistically fails to admit the robust presence and success of the Haredi community at the heart of the Zionist project.

Using tired anti-Zionist mantras to prop up an indefensible objection to military service may make Dovid Kornreich feel good, but it is nothing more than a hollow farce exploited to shore up an ideology that makes absolutely no sense. And while it is true that Haredim do not identify with Zionist nationalism in its political form, many if not most of them still deeply value the security, community, and religious freedoms the State of Israel provides, and see themselves as equal citizens of the state along with all their co-citizens.

Kornreich cites historical conflicts and moral dilemmas as a basis for Haredi non-participation in national defense by presenting a selective reading of history that overlooks the inherent responsibilities that come with being a part of a nation-state. Just as I am obliged to fulfill my civic duties as an American citizen, despite any discomfort I might feel regarding historical injustices against Native Americans, so too Israeli Haredim must engage in their civic responsibilities. Their objections to historical aspects of Zionism – whether with reference to the Zionist treatment of fellow Jews, or of Arabs – do not exempt them from the obligations that come with Israeli citizenship.

Moreover, Kornreich’s argument relies on a narrow interpretation of conscientious objection that seems to apply selectively when convenient. If Haredim, as he suggests, are entirely disengaged from the Zionist project, how does one reconcile this with their participation in and benefit from the state’s provisions—be it benefiting from social services and state provided medical services, visiting holy sites under the protection of the IDF, enjoying the security and civic amenities provided by the state, or indeed, the very act of residing within its borders without seeking alternatives.

To claim a principled stance against military service on the basis of historical grievances against Zionism, while simultaneously partaking in the benefits and protections the State of Israel affords, is to engage in a profound contradiction. True conscientious objection, in the strictest sense, would necessitate a total withdrawal from all aspects of society that are safeguarded or enhanced by the actions one morally opposes. Yet, the reality is quite different. Haredim, like any other group in Israel, are deeply intertwined with the state’s fabric—economically, socially, and religiously.

Kornreich’s stance does not fully confront the complexity of these relationships, nor does it account for the shared destiny that binds all Israeli citizens together, regardless of their ideological differences. The challenges faced by the State of Israel are collective challenges, and the defense of the nation is not merely a question of endorsing Zionism but of ensuring the safety and continuity of the Jewish people in their homeland. And if Haredim don’t believe that the Jewish people should live in their homeland under Jewish sovereignty, let them take a principled stand, depart for diaspora shores, and make their lives there.

Ultimately, the refusal to participate in Israel’s national defense, based on historical grievances and ideological differences, overlooks the potential for a more inclusive and multifaceted understanding of Jewish identity and the reality of Jews having sovereign control of Israel—one that transcends political disagreements and religious objections, and recognizes the mutual interdependence of all segments of Israeli society.

The conversation should not be about absolving oneself from shared responsibilities, but about finding ways to contribute to the collective well-being of the nation in a manner that respects diverse convictions while upholding a commitment to the common good. Almost 76 years after the creation of the sovereign Jewish state, the discussion should no longer be about Zionism, but about the future of Jewish life in Israel with the participation and involvement of every segment of the Jewish population. Biting that bullet couldn’t be more critical, and the sooner it happens, the better.


Rabbi Pini Dunner is the Senior Rabbi at Beverly Hills Synagogue, a member of the Young Israel family of synagogues. He lives with his family in Beverly Hills, California.