Yesterday's NY Times news article sums up in its conclusion as follows:
I value the Meretz, Tikkun and other columns and blogs you share with me and others. I don’t always agree with you. I usually agree with significant parts of what you write, and am grateful for your humane, peace-seeking motives. For what it’s worth, this is my reaction to your blog post about Silverstein:
Yossi Melman, a veteran security and intelligence reporter for Haaretz argues that Silverstein "spreads rumors without checking them" and "is an ideologue, not a journalist." He adds, "[Silverstein] is speculative. It is like at the casino: Sometimes he gets it right, and sometimes he doesn’t." Nonetheless, Melman writes that "Silverstein’s blog is important because he exposes the security services and the courts in all their nakedness. They use the instruments of the 20th century to protect secrets which aren’t really secrets in the age of 21st century technology."As for Silverstein's view of Israel, this Wikipedia article continues:
... he believes Israel is a Jewish homeland, that he hopes to see equal rights provided for Jewish and Arab citizens in the country and though he is "agnostic" toward the two-state solution would ultimately prefer that outcome.I remember Silverstein from the first J Street conference; he was a leading organizer of an unofficial session of bloggers there, which J Street graciously facilitated by providing them with a room and a free lunch. The only participant I recall being really positive about J Street on that bloggers' panel was the Palestinian-American Ray Hanania.
.... Mohammed Merah, a 24-year-old French national of Algerian descent ... claims ties to al-Qaida.... Rabbi Jonathan Sandler, 30, and his two young sons, as well as the 7-year-old daughter of the school's principal, were killed in the attack. Thousands attended the funeral of the victims on Wednesday morning at Jerusalem's Givat Shaul cemetery. ...The linking of victims of Israeli attacks, which are meant to target Palestinian rocket teams and terrorist groups but often hit non-combatants, with the deliberate murder of innocents, remains a source of controversy and debate. This is from a news article in today's NY Times:
|M.J. Rosenberg captured on YouTube.|
... I haven’t always agreed with him. He’s moved from left to right and back a few times and said lots of things I wouldn’t say. But he’s always fought for the Jewish cause as he understood it. And nobody’s ever called him a moral coward.To my surprise, I found a very nice online comment from Rosenberg on my Tikkun review article of "In Darkness," a searing Holocaust drama on a true-life Polish rescuer of a small group of Jews, who acted heroically despite his antisemitic prejudice:
This is from a blog called "The Magnes Zionist" by Jeremiah Haber (not his real name). I am told he is an Orthodox person; by calling himself a Magnes Zionist, it tells me he is for moral behavior (perhaps a bi-national state) and a humanist. I am intrigued with him, and am sending the piece below for all those reasons.-- Lilly
It has been my custom to reproduce this Purim post every year, with some modifications. This year I do it a day after Prime Minister Netanyahu gave a megillah/Scroll of Esther to President Obama. The scroll, read twice on the holiday of Purim, relates the victory of the Jews over Haman the Agagite, his sons, and a whole bunch of people inside and outside the Persian capital of Shushan who had it in for the Jews. Jeffrey Goldberg explains the point of Bibi’s gift:
The prime minister of Israel is many things, but subtle is not one of them. The message of Purim is: When the Jews see a murderous conspiracy forming against them, they will act to disrupt the plot. A further refinement of the message is: When the Jews see a plot forming against them in Persia, they will act to disrupt the plot, even if Barack Obama wishes that they would wait for permission.Goldberg reads Bibi right, but Bibi reads the megillah wrong.
Speaking to AIPAC, Netanyahu virtually waved his finger in Obama's face. "Diplomacy … hasn't worked," he said; neither have sanctions, nor will deterrence. ...Netanyahu equated hesitation before attacking Iran to America's refusal to bomb Auschwitz in 1944. As additional support for his case, Netanyahu cited the biblical Book of Esther.... He described Haman, the villain of that ancient story, as "a Persian anti-Semite [who] tried to annihilate the Jewish people." In Jewish legend, I should note, Haman is understood to be from the tribe of Amalek, which tried to destroy the Israelites when they left Egypt and endlessly keeps trying. The reasoning of Netanyahu's speech, if "reasoning" can be used in this context, is that Amalek, Haman, Hitler and the current leaders of Teheran are all the same.
|Justice Joubran (Haaretz photo by Tomer Appelbaum)|
Netanyahu's border proposal: Israel to annex settlement blocs, but not Jordan Valley
The proposal that came up during the Israeli-Palestinian talks in Amman effectively means a withdrawal from 90% of the West Bank, and is very similar to the one proposed by Tzipi Livni [during 2008].