Comments on: Shavua Tov: This Week’s Jewish News http://tcjewfolk.com/shavua-tov-11-7-2009/ Twin Cities Jewfolk: the hub for hip Jewish stuff in Minneapolis and St. Paul Fri, 12 Mar 2010 04:11:09 -0600 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2 hourly 1 By: Yehoshua http://tcjewfolk.com/shavua-tov-11-7-2009/comment-page-1/#comment-656 Yehoshua Mon, 09 Nov 2009 14:46:17 +0000 http://tcjewfolk.com/?p=2470#comment-656 If being a Zionist and having concern for both the Jewish and Arab people is called bigotry, then label me what you like. If Jeremy Ben-Ami wants to become the Herzl of Palestine then let J Street also drop the name pro-peace because you will have neither peace nor Israel in the long run. If being a Zionist and having concern for both the Jewish and Arab people is called bigotry, then label me what you like. If Jeremy Ben-Ami wants to become the Herzl of Palestine then let J Street also drop the name pro-peace because you will have neither peace nor Israel in the long run.

]]> By: ML http://tcjewfolk.com/shavua-tov-11-7-2009/comment-page-1/#comment-643 ML Mon, 09 Nov 2009 03:17:00 +0000 http://tcjewfolk.com/?p=2470#comment-643 Leora asked, "Why would an admittedly pro-Israel organization decide to drop the “pro-Israel” from the name of their college campus branch?" I don't know. I've seen mixed reports about this. Stripped of context it's puzzling. It's a good question though. "Why would they have raised over $100,000 so far this year from Muslim and Arab donors?" Is there something inherently wrong with being Muslim? Or Arab? Is it possible that some Muslims, Arabs, Jews and Israelis share some common goals? I think J Street supports those goals. AIPAC takes money from people who's sole motivation to support Israel is related to their end-of-time eschatology. However, I wouldn't through the baby out with the bath water regarding AIPAC either. Yehoshua, your long rant hardly answers any of the questions I posed, nor the criticisms I leveled. Your bigotry is fascinating and illustrative nonetheless. Leora asked, “Why would an admittedly pro-Israel organization decide to drop the “pro-Israel” from the name of their college campus branch?” I don’t know. I’ve seen mixed reports about this. Stripped of context it’s puzzling. It’s a good question though.
“Why would they have raised over $100,000 so far this year from Muslim and Arab donors?” Is there something inherently wrong with being Muslim? Or Arab? Is it possible that some Muslims, Arabs, Jews and Israelis share some common goals? I think J Street supports those goals. AIPAC takes money from people who’s sole motivation to support Israel is related to their end-of-time eschatology. However, I wouldn’t through the baby out with the bath water regarding AIPAC either.

Yehoshua, your long rant hardly answers any of the questions I posed, nor the criticisms I leveled. Your bigotry is fascinating and illustrative nonetheless.

]]> By: Yehoshua http://tcjewfolk.com/shavua-tov-11-7-2009/comment-page-1/#comment-640 Yehoshua Sun, 08 Nov 2009 19:11:23 +0000 http://tcjewfolk.com/?p=2470#comment-640 When groups such as this adopt slogan words such as “peace” often the assumption is made that somehow other groups that disagree with their particular stance aren’t for peace. It’s not an issue of “Pro-Israel” or “Pro-Peace” but of what path will ultimately lead to peace. As history has shown, the path to peace isn’t always through compromise and negotiation. We see how well that’s working in Iran. Too many hopelessly idealistic people here in America want Israelis to gamble for peace, and if Israel should lose that gamble, people in Israel will suffer, and not people on J Street or in St. Louis Park. In any negotiations Israel should be very careful and cognisant of history. The Arabs learned a great lesson from the 1979 Egypt-Israel Peace Treaty. You attack Israel, you lose lands, you negotiate with Israel, they throw lands at you. Israel really has no obligation to give back one inch. Arabs turned down a Palestinian State in 1948 and tried to take the entire land. Israel gained those lands fighting against multiple wars of extermination. Let’s just be honest about the situation from a wide angle. The Arabs truly believe that Israel is only a temporary intrusion and that gaining crippling compromises from an Israel today will lead ultimately towards its destruction tomorrow. I’ve never understood this obsession with throwing away the Liberated Lands of 1967. How is Tel Aviv, only built in the early 20th Century so legitimate but not Hebron whose Jewish connection goes back thousands of years? If the Palestinians want to create a homeland (and not a Gaza #2 sitting just a short missile range away from major population centers) then let them create one in Jordan. When we talk about occupations let’s not forget about Jordan which was created by ripping off 80% of Mandate Palestine which was previously promised by the Balfour Declaration to be given to as a Jewish National Home. Let the Hashemites go back to Saudi Arabia and resettle their ancestral homeland and give Jordan to the Palestinians. That’s compromise. When groups such as this adopt slogan words such as “peace” often the assumption is made that somehow other groups that disagree with their particular stance aren’t for peace. It’s not an issue of “Pro-Israel” or “Pro-Peace” but of what path will ultimately lead to peace. As history has shown, the path to peace isn’t always through compromise and negotiation. We see how well that’s working in Iran. Too many hopelessly idealistic people here in America want Israelis to gamble for peace, and if Israel should lose that gamble, people in Israel will suffer, and not people on J Street or in St. Louis Park. In any negotiations Israel should be very careful and cognisant of history. The Arabs learned a great lesson from the 1979 Egypt-Israel Peace Treaty. You attack Israel, you lose lands, you negotiate with Israel, they throw lands at you. Israel really has no obligation to give back one inch. Arabs turned down a Palestinian State in 1948 and tried to take the entire land. Israel gained those lands fighting against multiple wars of extermination. Let’s just be honest about the situation from a wide angle. The Arabs truly believe that Israel is only a temporary intrusion and that gaining crippling compromises from an Israel today will lead ultimately towards its destruction tomorrow. I’ve never understood this obsession with throwing away the Liberated Lands of 1967. How is Tel Aviv, only built in the early 20th Century so legitimate but not Hebron whose Jewish connection goes back thousands of years? If the Palestinians want to create a homeland (and not a Gaza #2 sitting just a short missile range away from major population centers) then let them create one in Jordan. When we talk about occupations let’s not forget about Jordan which was created by ripping off 80% of Mandate Palestine which was previously promised by the Balfour Declaration to be given to as a Jewish National Home. Let the Hashemites go back to Saudi Arabia and resettle their ancestral homeland and give Jordan to the Palestinians. That’s compromise.

]]> By: Leora Maccabee http://tcjewfolk.com/shavua-tov-11-7-2009/comment-page-1/#comment-639 Leora Maccabee Sun, 08 Nov 2009 16:57:39 +0000 http://tcjewfolk.com/?p=2470#comment-639 ML - J Street is odd to me, I have to admit. Why would an admittedly pro-Israel organization decide to drop the "pro-Israel" from the name of their college campus branch? Why would they have raised over $100,000 so far this year from Muslim and Arab donors? I don't know necessarily that J Street is out of the Jewish mainstream, but controversial it is. I think we'll have to do a lot of wait-and-seeing to understand this organization, its priorities, and its impact on the American-Israel relationship. ML – J Street is odd to me, I have to admit. Why would an admittedly pro-Israel organization decide to drop the “pro-Israel” from the name of their college campus branch? Why would they have raised over $100,000 so far this year from Muslim and Arab donors? I don’t know necessarily that J Street is out of the Jewish mainstream, but controversial it is. I think we’ll have to do a lot of wait-and-seeing to understand this organization, its priorities, and its impact on the American-Israel relationship.

]]> By: ML http://tcjewfolk.com/shavua-tov-11-7-2009/comment-page-1/#comment-637 ML Sun, 08 Nov 2009 08:08:19 +0000 http://tcjewfolk.com/?p=2470#comment-637 Why the continued insistence that J Street is somehow controversial or out of the mainstream? Over a thousand activists, politicians and elected officials and Jewish leaders attended J Street's very successful first conference. Tzipi Livni, among other Israelis, also criticized Oren for declining the invitation to attend. I think McCollum is right on the mark here. Why the continued insistence that J Street is somehow controversial or out of the mainstream? Over a thousand activists, politicians and elected officials and Jewish leaders attended J Street’s very successful first conference. Tzipi Livni, among other Israelis, also criticized Oren for declining the invitation to attend. I think McCollum is right on the mark here.

]]>