Contempt of Court

A former deputy attorney general recently prepared a report listing several cases in which the powers that be - either Israel's government and its agencies or local authorities - have ignored the rulings of the supreme court and lower courts. I'd say it is time for the judges to send people to jail for contempt of court. I don't know if the law allows jailing in such cases, but it certainly should.

Eli Reifman, a businessman, has been repeatedly sent to jail this last year for contempt of court when he refused to transfer his shares in a high-tech company, Emblaze, to a court-appointed special manager. Just like private citizens get fined or jailed when they defy the judges, so should public officials. Start by fining mayors and officials in the government ministries responsible for the lack of implementation of judicial orders. Then, if that doesn't work, start giving out jail time.

Perhaps Jerusalem Mayor Nir Barkat would be the first public official to be sent to jail for contempt of court. He seems determined not to comply with supreme court decisions, and he's too rich to be hurt by heavy fines.

Finding Roots on Television

My previous post was about a new NBC show, "Parenthood", which reminded me of another new show about to debut on that much-maligned network on Friday, March 5. Every episode of "Who Do You Think You Are", a documentary series based on a British show of the same name, takes a different celebrity on a journey to find their roots and uncover unknown facts about their ancestors. Several international versions of this show have been produced in different countries, including in Israel.

I've been fascinated with the Israeli version, where every episode and every celebrity's story and reactions have been very different, even in cases when there were similar family histories (two stories included ancestors serving in the Hungarian Labor Battalions, and in all four episodes that have aired so far, the story of at least one side of the family involved the Holocaust). The episode with comedian Tal Friedman was laugh-out-loud funny, while other celebrities were more somber. Friedman retraced his mother's steps as a young child running across the French-Swiss border alone, only with an even younger boy by her side. Actor Ohad Knoler discovered that one of the scenes in "Munich", a film he appeared in, was filmed in a building designed by his own great-uncle and once owned by his family. Journalist Gabby Gazit discovered the horrible conditions both his parents lived through during the Holocaust. Writer Shifra Horn discovered she was descended from the Moroccan rabbi who re-awakened the Jewish community in Buchara, Uzbekistan. Each one of these celebrities discovered much more information about their families.

Two episodes are left. The promo for Thursday's episode promises actress and TV presenter Michal Yanay will discover a horrible secret. Then a week later, TV psychoanalyst Yoram Yuval, will explore his own roots as well.

The celebrities on the American version will be Lisa Kudrow, who also serves as producer, Sarah Jessica Parker, Susan Sarandon, Spike Lee, Matthew Broderick, Brooke Shields and Emmitt Smith.

Asperger's and Autism on TV

"Parenthood", a new NBC show based on the 1989 Steve Martin film, will feature a child with Asperger's Syndrome. The pilot episode will depict the child being diagnosed and how his parents deal with this. I'm curious to see how well the show portrays Asperger's. Alan Sepinwall, TV critic for the New Jersey Star-Ledger, has an interesting article about Aspie characters on TV.

It seems to me that of all the autism spectrum disorders, Asperger's Syndrome is way over-represented. When it comes to high-functioning autism, there is nothing but AS on television and in films these days, at least among those with autistic traits who are declared as autistic and not just hinted as such. Even clearly non-Asperger characters such as the heart surgeon on "Grey's Anatomy" and the lawyer from Boston Legal, both mentioned in Sepinwall's article, are called Aspies. The surgeon seems like she has a different kind of autism, but the lawyer seems to have an assortment of mental problems that don't have much to do with autism, including David E. Kelly's favorite whacky disorder, Tourette's Syndrome.

Autism and the Environment

Toxins in the environment are much more dangerous than mercury in vaccines, and pollution is much more likely to be one of the causes of autism than the shots babies get. I've been saying so for years. Now, New York Times columnist Nicholas Kristof backs up my argument that "it's the environment, stupid!", based on a new article published in the journal Courant Opinion in Pediatrics, "What causes autism? Exploring the environmental contribution" by Philip J. Landrigan (unless your institution purchased access to the journal, you'll have to pay to read it online).

Protecting our environment is a public health issue. Pollution is not just a threat to our flora and fauna, it's a threat to us and to the next generations. I also think that the prominence of anti-global warming advocates has shifted the focus away from pollutants that have nothing to do with carbon emissions. Don't get me wrong - global warming is a serious, pressing problem, but it is far from being the only serious, pressing environmental issue we face.

Jerusalem, City of... Love?

Yesterday was Valentine's Day, a perfect day for romantic movies. I'm sure many couples went out to see "New York, I Love You", the second installment in the "Cities of Love" series, or rented a DVD of the first installment, 2006's "Paris, je t'aime". Each film is an anthology of several love stories from different neighborhoods of the city in the title.

I have not seen either film, nor do I intend to do so. The only reason I'm interested in this series is the odd news that one of the next films will be "Jerusalem, I Love You", with segments directed by American, Israeli and international directors. Jerusalem? Really?

Paris made sense as the first city in the series. After all, it is the City of Love, and considered the most romantic city in the world. New York is also the location of many a love story. Rio, one of the future installments is quite exotic. But Jerusalem?

I do not associate Jerusalem with romance. The only famous Jerusalem love story I can think of is David and Bathsheba - you know, the one with the cheating, the murder of the cheated husband and the death of the bastard baby. Israel has much more romantic cities, like Tel-Aviv, Eilat or even Haifa. These are cities with beaches and quite a night life. In Haifa, there's also romantic natural scenery.

The only love I associate with Jerusalem is the love of God. The excessive love of God, that is. Fanatics spilling the blood of those who are of different religions or are their co-religionists but not devout enough in their own minds.

Oh, well. The creators of the short films about Jerusalemite romance will find something to write about. Romance happens in Jerusalem all the time, just like in any other city. And the movie has one good thing going for it: I'm sure Natalie Portman will appear in it, and maybe even direct a segment. After all, she directed a segment of "New York, I Love You", appeared in both the New York and Paris installments and was born in Jerusalem.

Oh, and one more thing in Jerusalem's defense: Another future installment in the series will be about Shanghai, a city I associate with romance even less than Jerusalem.

Shutting Up Opposing Views

Israeli Ambassador to the United States Michael Oren and Deputy Foreign Minister Danny Ayalon were heckled by pro-Palestinian protesters during recent appearances at respected universities. Oren was treated to a series of shout downs at the University of California, Irvine (see Youtube video below), while Ayalon was heckled during a speech at Oxford. The protesters chose not to ask difficult questions during the Q&A, but rather to try to shut the Israeli speakers up by shouting all kinds of slogans. It seemed to be pre-organized, but not in a very smart way. The UC-Irvine protesters (and maybe the ones in Oxford, too, but I haven't seen a video of them) had written their slogans on little notes beforehand, and shouted them out one person at a time, with no connection between what Amb. Oren was saying at that point and what they were shouting.

There is no difference between what these protesters did and what the right-wing organization "Im Tirtzu" is trying to do to the New Israel Fund and left wing organizations. Both groups are fighting to shut up their own opposition while claiming that what they themselves are doing is an exercise in free speech. How can an attempt to silence free speech be itself protected by free speech?

You might say that there is a difference between NGOs like the New Israel Fund and government officials like the deputy foreign minister and a diplomat. You might try to claim that the protesters were speaking truth to power. That isn't the case. People in the audience only heard slogans. They didn't really hear in depth arguments in favor of the Palestinian cause, which the Arab protesters could have made during the Q&A. Audience members didn't hear a debate that would make them understand the situation better. Instead, they got fragments of the Israeli view and even smaller fragments of the pro-Palestinian view, but no interaction between the two. The hecklers turned the event into a disgrace unworthy of an academic venue.

UC-Irvine video after the jump.

L-less Lesbians

Once upon a time in a country far far away there was a young maiden named Jane. Everybody adored her. Boys wanted to date her, but for some reason she was not interested. Even when Brad Pitt came into town, she found her eye wandering to his wife. She did not understand what she was, or perhaps refused to say it in front of others.



One day, she became infatuated with a woman named Marcia and the two had sex. "This was just a one time thing," Jane said. "I am not a... Not a..."



"You can't even say the damn word," said Marcia. "You are what I am. A..."



"No, don't say it," Jane interrupted, anxious of what might happen if she heard the word.



"Give me a ring when you come out. Before then, I don't want to have anything to do with you," announced Marcia. She got dressed and started opening the door, then gave Jane another chance. "Come on. Your window won't be open much more."



Jane said nothing. Marcia went out the door and never turned her head back. Jane regretted her decision the moment she made it, but did not have the courage to change it.



The End.



And that, my friends, was a story about lesbians not only without the L-Word, but also without the L-Letter.

Absentee Voting In Israel

First, a few disclaimers. I am a dual citizen of the United States and Israel. I vote in US elections (as a "Special Federal Voter" - ain't that a cool title?) despite the fact that I haven't lived there in over twenty years. I might move to the States temporarily for a few years, but I plan to return to Israel after that.

Alright, what was all that about? Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman have proposed to allow Israelis living abroad to vote in Knesset elections. Not all citizens living abroad will be allowed to vote. The exact formula hasn't been finalized yet: Lieberman's proposal says that anyone who has had an Israeli passport for at least 10 years will be eligible to vote absentee, while the Likud proposes that this right will be given to citizens who left Israel less than six years before the election, and spent no less than 40 days in the country during that period. It should be noted that currently, every citizen may vote as long as he's in Israel on election day, regardless of whether or not he lives in Israel.

I don't like the current proposals. Lieberman's proposal is too broad and is simply meant to reduce the percentage of Arab voters. Someone who spent very little time in Israel can vote absentee ten years after becoming a citizen, even if he left the day he got his Israeli citizenship. Netanyahu's proposal is also ridiculous. If I understand it correctly, 40 days in Israel are enough to restart the six-year countdown.

People who have permanently left Israel should not be allowed to vote by absentee ballot. They have no moral right to do so. They will not have to live with the consequences of their vote. What's the difference between Israel and the US, you ask? Not much difference. As someone who does not live in the States, I don't have a moral right to vote in US elections. I have a legal right, which I implement. If Israelis who left the country years ago are allowed to vote, I won't blame those who take advantage of this right. I'll blame the lawmakers who gave it to them.

But there still is a difference between Israel and the United States - the proportion of Americans abroad is miniscule. The proportion of Israelis abroad is quite large. I don't have much impact on US elections, except for cases of very close elections. With the large number of Israelis living abroad and the proportional representation system, absentee voters will have a huge impact on elections, even when one party or bloc has a clear lead.

Israelis who are abroad temporarily - one week, one month, or even a few years while studying or working - should be allowed to vote. The best way to differentiate between those who have left the country for good and those who are abroad temporarily is to set a real limit: let's say that someone must have lived in Israel for at least four out of the last eight years in order to qualify for an absentee ballot.

It seems like Labor and Shas are going to kill absentee voting. Too bad. While I'm glad what Lieberman and Netanyahu are proposing won't become law, I'm sorry no solutions for the temporary absentees will be reached.

Asperger's No More (No PDD, Either)

The American Psychiatric Association is working on the new Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, DSM-V, which would replace the current version, DSM-IV. As part of the revision process, the APA is considering a new approach to Autistic Spectrum Disorders, where all the disorders will be given the same diagnosis, without categorizing them into autism, Asperger's Syndrome, Pervasive Developmental Disorder - Not Otherwise Specified (PDD-NOS) or any other category. Autistics will still get the treatments they need, and might even get better care, because it will be custom tailored to each one's needs, rather to the label they got.

This is a very smart move. The lines between the different autistic categories are quite blurry, and a person can fit one category at a certain age and then move to another as he grows older. My nephew, for instance, who has an autism diagnosis, is now almost like a non-autistic kid. Is he an Aspie? Does he fit the description of PDD-NOS? He doesn't fit perfectly into either one. He's an extremely high functioning autistic kid. That's it.

The DSM-V is also going to have revised criteria for an autism diagnosis. I'm not sure I'm crazy about what is being proposed, but I'm not an expert either. For more information, you should check out a New York Times op-ed on the matter and Sullivan's post at Left Brain/Right Brain.

Ahmadinejad and the West: Haaretz Cartoon

Amos Biderman, Ha'aretz

Gay Soldiers in International Forces

The "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy that bans openly gay men and women from serving in the United States military should be repealed immediately. Many countries, including Israel, allow gays to serve openly in their armed forces and no harm is done.

The main argument made by supporters of the current policy is that changing the regulations would hurt unit cohesion. In other words, homophobic soldiers won't feel comfortable around homosexuals who are out of the closet. Well, it's easy to check if American soldiers are less open-minded than Canadian and European soldiers. Many Americans already serve with openly gay foreign soldiers, as part of NATO and other international forces. How are the relationships between American soldiers and their gay counterparts? It wouldn't take too long to conduct such a study.

Obviously, there will be problems here and there with homophobic incidents, but on the whole, acceptance of gays will probably go smoothly.

Rahm Emanuel, the R-Word and Sarah Palin

The Wall Street Journal revealed that Rahm Emanuel, Barack Obama's White House chief of staff, used the phrase "fucking retarded" during a strategy session last summer. Mr. Emanuel shouldn't have said that, and he rightly apologized.

That is not enough for Sarah Palin, who is using the fact that she has a son with Down Syndrome to demand that Obama fire Emanuel over the remarks (to be fair, I'm using the fact I have an autistic nephew and a few relatives with different kinds of mental disabilities as proof of my right to voice an opinion on the matter). Well, okay, it's Sarah Palin, looking for a chance to hit the Democratic administration whenever she can. What surprises and even worries me is the fact that a lot of people, even liberals, agree with her.

Rahm Emanuel is a jackass for using the R-word, but it isn't a reason to fire him. He apologized, and that's it. Does using the word "retarded" mean that he has policies that would harm people with disabilities or that he has negative feelings toward the mentally disabled? No. It just means he's foul-mouthed. This isn't like racial epithets.

"Retarded" has become a word that should not be used, ever. It didn't start that way. It was a statement of fact. Retardation means delay. Mental retardation means exactly the same thing as delayed mental development. It was the use of the word "retarded" as an insult that turned the word into one that should not be used, because it has a negative connotation. The new words and phrases that replaced the term should be used when referring to people with cognitive disabilites, but shouldn't be used as curse words. "You're so mentally disabled" is no better than "you're so retarded".

The word "retarded" doesn't need to be banished from the world completely, if it is used satirically. Attention to it (or to "retard") started when it was used in "Tropic Thunder". In the film, the term didn't laugh at disabled people. It laughed at, and criticized, supposedly liberal actors who play disabled people to win awards, not to open up the audience's minds to the difficulties of life with such conditions.

When I think about it, the Hebrew words Mefager (retarded) and Pigoor (retardation) are used all the time, even by myself. I'd never use the English word, but the word in Hebrew is just so pervasive in the language and the culture. Every time I say it, I think to myself "damn, I shouldn't have said it. That was the last time." But then again, the word isn't the exact translation. It's used way more often in Hebrew to mean "delay" than it does in English ("Israel's train system is Mefageret behind Europe's"), so that might explain why it is considered less offensive. Either that, or just Israelis or more ignorant about the issue than Americans.

Ajami, Oscar Nominee

For the third time in a row, an Israeli film has been nominated for an Academy Award for Best Foreign Film. Unlike "Beaufort" and "Waltz With Bashir", this film has nothing to do with the First Lebanon War, though it does touch on Jewish-Arab relations. "Ajami", which I have not yet seen, tells the story of  people who live in Ajami, a mostly-Arab neighborhood in Jaffa. It has an 86% favorable rating on Rotten Tomatoes, based on seven critics' reviews [Update: As of Feb. 15, it has a 95% favorable rating among all critics, with 19 positive and just one negative review. Among Top Critics it has a 100% positive rating, based on six reviews].

"Ajami" is competing against “El Secreto de Sus Ojos” (Argentina), “The Milk of Sorrow” (Peru), “Un Prophète” (France) and “The White Ribbon” (Germany). I haven't seen any of these, either, but I understand that the French and German films are very good and are very tough competition. Then again, these last few years this category has provided surprises. Last year, there were two favorites to win, including "Waltz With Bashir", and neither of the two won. Maybe "Ajami" will be this year's dark horse.

Update (Feb. 15, 2010): I watched the film and loved it. It is very powerful, and the acting is excellent. Surpisingly, all the actors are amateurs, but it doesn't show. The movie might be a bit confusing at times, but that doesn't hurt the film. It is similar to the movie "Precious" in how cruel and relentless the protagonists' lives are and how little hope there is for the future.

Im Tirtzu's Attack on the New Israel Fund

Im Tirtzu, a right-wing student organization who for some reason insists on calling itself a centrist movement, has started a campaign against the New Israel Fund and its chairwoman, former MK Prof. Naomi Chazan. In ads in newspapers and online, Im Tirtzu claims that 92 percent of the negative claims against Israel and the IDF in the Goldstone Report whose source is Israeli, came from organizations funded by the NIF. They invite people to read a report they prepared, and I assume they hope people won't actually read the report. I read it, and checked out some of their refrences to the Goldstone Report.

They're careful to say it is 92% of negatives claims against Israel made by Israeli organizations, but most people who read it would think it is a whopping 92% of all claims, which isn't the case. Remember, that NIF sources are less than 14% of the whole sources of the Goldstone Report. The Palestinians' claims would still be there even if it weren't for NIF-funded organizations.

Now, how did they get to the exact 92% figure. They took 191 references to NIF sources (including "New Profile", which Naomi Chazan has already said is not affiliated with the NIF), plus 56 references to non-NIF Israeli organizations. At this stage, the NIF is responsible for only 77% of the references. That isn't bad enough, so Im Tirtzu needed to increase the percentage. What did they do? They split the 56 non-NIF references to those who are either supportive of Israel or neutral (40) and those who criticize it (16). So those critical of Israel are now 191 NIF sources (92%) and 16 non-NIF sources (8%). But wait, why didn't they perform a similar split between NIF sources criticizing Israel and those supporting it? I noticed that at least a few of the NIF sources they listed actually talk about life under the threat of the Qassams. If I had the time to go over all the references, I'm sure I'd be able to find more NIF sources in the Goldstone Report that are either supportive of Israel or neutral.

I have to say that I'm not too thrilled with the organizations that did give the Goldstone Commission certain one-sided information, but it's their right to give the Commission information as they see it. This McCarthyist campaign by Im Tirtzu is disgusting.

The New Israel Fund has many great programs in Israel, most of them not related to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. I would hate to see them lose contributions because of this slanted report.

More on the Binationalism Debate

Haaretz's opinion section has two articles today that discuss the idea of binationalism. They both respond to an essay by Meron Benvenisti (here in Hebrew or English) who says that binationalism is a fact already today and that there is no other solution.

One article, by Elia Leibowitz (in Hebrew, not yet available in English), only slightly touches on Benvenisti's assertions, arguing that actions such as the recognition of Ariel College as a university, the concensus among Israelis about Ariel remaining part of Israel and the left-wing belief in binationalism - all these share a fatalistic view, that there are things that cannot be undone; that Israel can't do a thing to change the future. Leibowitz calls upon Israel to start building other kinds of facts on the ground, such as a massive highway that will connect Gaza to the West Bank.

The second article, by Alexander Yakobson (Hebrew and English), is entirely a rebuttal of Benvenisti. I agree with it completely.

A binational state? Here?
By Alexander Yakobson

Since the division of the land into two viable states is no longer possible, there is no choice - for anyone who believes in equality - but to support a democratic binational state from the Mediterranean Sea to the Jordan River, claims Meron Benvenisti (Haaretz, January 22).

In my opinion, exactly the opposite is true: Since it is clear that the state Benvenisti recommends instead of Israel will not be a binational democracy, anyone who believes in equality (as opposed to someone who believes in the need to surrender to Arab nationalism) must adhere to the principle of two states for two peoples. This solution is definitely possible if both sides really want it. Yes, the Palestinian side too, whose contribution to the present situation Benvenisti is careful to not examine.

Goodbye, Holden Caulfield

Coincidentally, the news of J.D Salinger's death came just a few days after I started reading his short story collection, "Nine Stories" (a.k.a. "For Esme with Love and Squalor"). At the end of every single story I just said "wow". His writing skills were amazing, and I believe he was the best author I have ever read.

I read "The Catcher in the Rye" when I was in high-school and absolutely loved it. Even though I wasn't much of a rebel and didn't particularly think of adults as phony, I completely identified with Holden Caulfield. Every time I heard a reference to the book as the crazy assassin's bible, I was pissed as hell. There was nothing in the novel that promoted murder. So what if Mark David Chapman, John Lennon's killer, and John Hinckley Jr., who tried to assassinate President Ronald Reagan, were fans of the book? So was Reagan's VP, former President George H. W. Bush!

I'm thinking of re-reading "Catcher". I'm sure it would be a totally different experience from the original reading, not just because it would be the second time around, but mostly because I'm in a different place in my life now. A teenager reading about a teenager is not the same as someone in his late twenties reading about a character who is a decade younger than him. I have no doubt I'll still love the book, and I'll discover new things I didn't notice in high-school.

I'll also probably get around to reading Salinger's other works sometime.

Burkas and Binationalism

In accordance with the findings of a French parliamentary committee, President Nikolas Sarkozy plans to ban the use of burkas and any other clothing that covers people's faces when in public. I strongly oppose this idea. Some women choose to wear burkas, and the ones who don't will not be helped by such a ban. If they will be forced to dress in a way they see as immodest when in public, they won't be in public at all. They will be trapped inside their homes by their husbands and families.

Women should be required to show their faces when taking pictures for IDs and passports, and other instances where they need to prove their identity, such as when they go to vote. But when just walking in the street, attending university or sitting in a library there is no reason not to allow them to cover their faces.

Avirama Golan writes in today's Haaretz (Hebrew and English) that French-Muslim women are being abused by two opposing political factions. She also makes a very good point about what French national values can teach us about the idea of a one-state solution in Israel:

The case of France, a secular republic whose president, based upon its constitution, can make such statements as "the burka is contrary to our values," is conspicuous, but it has implications for other countries as well, especially Israel.

Forget about the burka and the veil and the hat and the sheitel worn by Jewish religious women, and all the other bright ideas that men have invented and that women have had to suffer or have tried to transform from a sign of weakness into a sign of strength. Take note of the official statement by French President Nicolas Sarkozy, opposing isolationism and promoting nationalism in the name of the state.

This is in contrast to Israel, where nationalism has, for increasing numbers of groups, become a dirty word. Both the right and the left are coming up with a new invention: a binational or multinational state.

The right wants to erase the border and annex the territories, while elements on the left seek to give up Israeli nationalism which is offensive in their view and which they say is an abomination in the eyes of the progressive international community. Both are convinced that there is no prospect and no need for "two states for two peoples." From now on, the settler shall dwell with the Palestinian and the ultra-Orthodox with the atheist. They will all show respect for each other and their kind and the hijab and the tefillin will be jumbled all together.

But maybe just wait a minute. Maybe first we should see if Europe fulfills the post-nationalist dream and if leaders such as German Chancellor Angela Merkel, Sarkozy and others, together with all of the citizens who weep while singing the national anthem and on national days of remembrance, give up nationalism in favor of the multi-communal dream. According to all indications, including the French parliamentary report on the burka, we can ensure that for the time being that it absolutely does not happen.

1 Million Shekels Over a Gardener?

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his wife Sarah are suing Ma'ariv for libel. They are seeking one million shekels (about $270,000) in damages from the newspaper for reporting that an elderly gardener in the Prime Minister's Residence was fired by the Netanyahus when they moved in last year. Ma'ariv described the gardener as a bereaved father who performed basic gardening tasks for less than minimum wage. The Netanyahus claim in their suit that the report is not true and the gardener is still working at the official residence. Ma'ariv, the newspaper with the second largest circulation in Israel, has not responded to the suit yet.

Even if Ma'ariv published a bogus report, why sue them? Why not just complain to the Israeli Press Council, as Netanyahu did regarding Yediot Ahronot and its report about Lillian Peretz's lawsuit against Sarah Netanyahu?

When the prime minister sues a newspaper it stinks. When he sues a newspaper over such an unimportant issue as whether or not a damn gardener was fired - it stinks even more. It looks like Netanyahu is trying to intimidate the press so it stops reporting on his wife's and his own conduct. I hope this suit is thrown out by the courts.

Muhammad al-Dura: Dead or Alive?

Reuven Pedatzur, by no means a right-wing nut, writes in today's Haaretz that there is strong evidence that Mohammed al-Dura never died. Al-Dura became a symbol of Palestinian resistance when his death, while huddled with his father behind a concrete barrier, was caught on tape by a Palestinian freelancer on the second day of the second Intifada. I'm not convinced that the incident was completely staged and that al-Dura wasn't killed, but I do believe there is solid evidence that shows he wasn't killed by Israeli soldiers.

Anyway, judge for yourselves (English version taken from here, or read the original Hebrew article):

Mohammed al-Dura - Israel's greatest PR failure
By Reuven Pedatzur

The photograph of Mohammed and Jamal al-Dura crouching behind a cement-filled barrel in a fruitless effort to avoid being hit by the bullets of Israeli soldiers became a symbol of the cruelty and brutality of Israel. It established the image of the Israel Defense Forces as a bloodthirsty army, operating on the basis of unacceptable norms. At the end of the 55-second footage aired by the France 2 television station, reporter Charles Enderlin declared that "Mohammed is dead," opening "the floodgates to a torrent of vengeance," as Amos Harel and Avi Issacharoff wrote in their book "The Seventh War."

Mohammed al-Dura became a martyr, a symbol of the struggle of the Palestinian people against a ruthless occupier. Postage stamps bearing an image of the father and son were issued throughout the Arab world, and streets were named after the boy.

The story of Mohammed al-Dura was a tremendous propaganda victory for the Palestinians. But it was also Israel's biggest public relations failure, and it is unclear why. There is plenty of evidence showing that the story about the boy's death was a show skillfully orchestrated by the Palestinians.

What is troubling in this affair is that official Israel ignored the testimonies and investigations that began piling up immediately after the incident. The documentary by the German journalist Esther Shapira, and the investigation by French businessman Philippe Karsenty, raise suspicions that Palestinian cameraman Talal Abu Rahma who shot the footage that was delivered to France 2 meddled with the story. And many others were party to this effort.

The cameraman's testimony is full of contradictions. He says that "the soldiers shot the two in cold blood for 45 minutes." However, if the IDF soldiers wanted to hit Mohammed and his father in "cold blood" they could have killed them in less than a minute. Regarding the question of how many bullets were fired toward the two, Abu Rahma said "at least 400." The wall at the site of the incident clearly shows eight holes.

Karsenty managed to acquire the raw footage of Abu Rahma, including the 10 seconds of film after Enderlin declares that "Mohammed is dead," which shows the child raising his hand and peering toward the camera. Nowhere in the footage are bullets seen hitting the bodies of father and son, even though the father claims he was hit by 12 bullets and his son by three. No blood was found at the site of the incident.

Mohammed al-Dura was buried in a funeral attended by masses. However, the child who was buried was brought to Shifa Hospital in the Gaza Strip at 10 A.M., according to the testimony of a doctor who admitted him. The shots at the Netzarim junction began only at 2 P.M., and Mohammed was taken away from the site at 3 P.M. In the photographs shown by a Gaza pathologist, a child who had been hit by bullets is seen, but his injuries are not the sort that Jamal spoke of. While the father says that Mohammed was hit in his right leg, the boy at Shifa was hit in his left leg. A biometric identification expert compared the photograph of the child who was buried and the child at the Netzarim junction, and found that they are different.

The father, Jamal, claims that 12 bullets hit his body, and he proudly shows off the scars on his arms. However, Shapira found Dr. Yehuda David, who says that he operated on him six years before the incident and that the scars are the result of knife wounds.

Nonetheless, official Israel is silent. A golden opportunity to challenge the credibility of the Palestinian version on one of the most formative events in the history of the conflict is being missed, and it is hard to understand why. The IDF, more than once, has sinned in the excessive use of military force, which leads to the death of innocents. But when it turns out that in the Dura affair IDF soldiers did not hit a child and his father, those responsible for public relations at the IDF are silent, as is the Foreign Ministry. Thus Israel relinquishes the media front to the Palestinians, who are taking advantage of it with sophistication while using television stations that sympathize with their cause such as France 2.

My First Year As Prime Minister

Finally, a Plinky prompt that has something to do with politics!

Here are two things I'd definitely achieve within my first year as prime minister of Israel. After all, this is a fantasy and in my fantasy my party, the Real Achievements Party, has 80 seats in the Knesset, so I have no problem passing all of my initiatives.

Opening up the media market
Until now, Israeli TV has been based on the public service concession model, where only a certain number of companies have the right to have television channels. I passed a law making television channels license-based, meaning that anyone who is financially capable of establishing a channel now can get one.

Civil Marriage
Marriage in Israel is no longer exclusively in the hands of the Orthodox Rabbinate for Jews and other religious authorities for members of other religions. From now on, you can be married by judges and other public officials. Also, Reform, Conservative and other non-Orthodox rabbis can perform weddings.

The Status of Ariel

After years of pressure, especially from Avigdor Lieberman's Yisrael Beitenu, Defense Minister Ehud Barak has decided to recognize Ariel College's status as a university. Since it is in the West Bank, this is under his authority, rather than that of the Minister of Education. The college has been calling itself the Ariel University Center of Samaria for years. Some say that the decision has few practical implications, but that doesn't matter. Moves like this are against the best interests of the State of Israel. This is the kind of "facts on the ground" stuff that does nothing but anger Palestinians and the international community.

Usually when Israelis talk about land swaps, Ariel is mentioned as one of the settlement blocs that will become part of Israel. Until I saw a map of former Prime Minister Ehud Olmert's proposal for final borders, I never realized how deep inside the West Bank Ariel is. It would require annexing a lot of Palestinian territory, and giving up a lot of pre-1967 Israeli territory in exchange. That's bad. Ariel should become part of Palestine.

Blame Israel for the Weather

The Middle East has seen record rainfall in the last few days. Israel and its immediate neighbors have gotten the brunt of it. First, there was flooding in southern Israel, which killed one Israeli whose hobby was "flood watching". Sorry if I'm insensitive, but the guy deserves a Darwin Award. Now today, the flooding has migrated to Northern Israel. Here's a sample picture from the City of Nahariyah:

More pictures are available at Haaretz's website.

Gaza has experienced severe flooding as well. 400 Palestinians have lost their homes. Farm animals have been swept away. At least nobody was killed. This is a perfect opportunity to blame Israel. The Palestinians claim Israel opened a dam (or several dams, depending on which report you read) which made the floods even worse. One report said the dam opened was one deep inside Gaza, where Israeli troops aren't even stationed. Another report said the dam was on the border. Israel denies opening any dams.

Yourish.com has an entertaining response to the damn dam accusation.

Our Glorious Diplomats

Last week, Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman announced a new policy of national pride, instead of what he saw as groveling by Israeli diplomats around the world. His deputy, fellow Israel Beitenu member Danny Ayalon, implemented the new policy this week by seating the Turkish ambassador on a low couch while he sat on a high seat, and told reporters in Hebrew that the whole point is that the ambassador will see that Israel is up and Turkey is down.

Lieberman and Ayalon confuse pride and steadfastness with rudeness. In a normal country, Ayalon and Lieberman would have been fired after such a fiasco. Then again, in a normal country the two wouldn't be our top diplomats in the first place. Prime Minister Netanyahu was totally inept and passive. He should have made Ayalon apologize immediately.

Why the hell isn't the Labor Party demanding Ayalon's head?

"Freedom for Gaza" Has Another Meaning

Amira Hass has an interesting piece about an unsuccessful march organized by a coalition of leftist groups, unrelated to George Galloway's Viva Palestina. You can read it either in Hebrew or English.

Some of the parts I found most interesting:

"One large group set up under the United Nations Development Program's offices. "In our presence here, we are saying that we are not casting the blame on Egypt. The responsibility for the shameless and obscene Israeli siege on Gaza rests squarely with our own countries," explained one of the organizers.


This sounded like an answer to an accusation voiced mostly by supporters of Fatah and the Palestinian Authority in Ramallah: With Hamas encouragement, international especially Arab popular pressure is being directed at the wrong address - Egypt, rather than Israel. Some of the organizers said they were indeed under the impression that Hamas was not at all interested in demonstrating at the Erez crossing into Israel, which is almost sealed, but rather at the Rafah crossing into Egypt."

[...]

"On Monday evening, the demonstrators learned that, at the request of the president's wife, Suzanne Mubarak, 100 people would be allowed to enter the Gaza Strip. Many saw this as a way of breaking the demonstrators' solidarity and lessening the pressure on Egypt. In the end, on December 30, about 80 people set out on buses, including several journalists who were not affected by the dilemma.


At midnight, about 12 hours after leaving Cairo, we arrived at a hotel in Gaza. There the first surprise awaited us: A Hamas security official in civilian dress swooped down on a friend who had come to pick me up for a visit, announcing that guests could not stay in private homes.

The story gradually became clear. The international organizers of the march coordinated it with civil society, various non-governmental organizations, which were also supposed to involve the Popular Committee to Break the Siege, a semi-official organization affiliated with Hamas. Many European activists have long-standing connections with left-wing organizations in the Gaza Strip. Those organizations, especially the relatively large Popular Front, had organized lodging for several hundred guests in private homes. When the Hamas government heard this, it prohibited the move. "For security reasons." What else?

Also "for security reasons," apparently, on Thursday morning, the activists discovered a cordon of stern-faced, tough Hamas security men blocking them from leaving the hotel (which is owned by Hamas). The security officials accompanied the activists as they visited homes and organizations.

During the march itself, when Gazans watching from the sidelines tried to speak with the visitors, the stern-faced security men blocked them. "They didn't want us to speak to ordinary people," one woman concluded."

[...]

"In meetings without the security men, several activists got the impression that non-Hamas residents live in fear, and are afraid to speak or identify themselves by name. "Now I understand that the call for 'Freedom for Gaza' has another meaning," one young man told me."

 

Utopia 2010

Here are a few things I hope will happen this year, some realistic, some not:

1. Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman will be indicted for corruption. Yisrael Beitenu is nothing without Lieberman, and it will break up into different factions following his resignation. This will lead to Netanyahu's government losing the parliamentary majority, which would either lead to Kadima joining the government and forcing Netanyahu to reach a peace deal, or it would lead to Tzippi Livni becoming prime minister, with the Likud and Labor as her coalition partners. Another option is new elections, but I don't want that to happen just yet, considering the fact that the 19th Knesset might end up being worse than the current one.
2. Reformist protests will overthrow the Iranian Ayatollahs. An angry mob will lynch Mahmoud Ahmadinejad (sorry, too hateful?). A new democratic form of government will be instituted, the nuclear weapons program will be brought to an end, and so will aid to terrorist groups like Hamas and Hizbullah.
3. A peace accord will be reached between Israel and the Palestinians. The Palestinian State will constitute Gaza and the West Bank, with slight deviations from the green line. Most of East Jerusalem will become the Palestinian capital, while Jewish areas and the Western Wall will remain part of Israel's capital. No refugees will be allowed to return, but they will be compensated. Hamas will see there's no use in fighting anymore, will agree to the accord reached by Israel and Fatah, and will disarm and recognize Israel.
4. I'll finally figure out how to get to where I want to be professionally in the future.

Description of the Decade: Shitty

2009 was a shitty year. In some respects in was even shittier than 2008, in others, it was better. In both my countries, the United States and Israel, one shitty chief executive was replaced by another shitty chief executive. Barack Obama is far less shitty than George W. Bush ever was, but this year he has proven what I thought about him last year, that he is ill-equipped for the job of president. In Israel, I'm having a hard time deciding who the hell is shittier, Benjamin Shitinyahu or Ehud Ol-merde (read as in French).

The whole decade was shitty. First, the Second Intifadah started. Then Dubya was elected  president. Then 9/11 and then you know all the shit that followed. I supported the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, but now I think that Iraq shouldn't have been touched, and that Al-Qaeda and the Taliban should have been bombed without an invasion. Airline and border security are the best ways to maintain our safety.

I'd like to say that the shittiness ends tonight, that 2010 and the rest of the Twenty Teens will be much better. Unfortunately, the shittiness is going to spill into the next decade. I don't see any peace deals, or even negotiations, between Israel and the Palestinians or any other Arab neighbors any time soon. The US is still knee deep in Iraq and Afghanistan. Whatever happens with Iran, it won't be good (seems like the two main options there are either a war or them obtaining nukes, and I don't see the protesters prevailing). The economy is still shitty, even if it's better than before.

I must say the year and decade were shitty politically, but they were pretty good to me personally. The beginning of the decade wasn't that great, especially the boredom of my military service and when my nephew was diagnosed as autistic. But as the decade ends, my nephew is doing great, I'm a graduate student enjoying my life, and my family and friends are all happy.

Kadima, Stay Out!

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has offered Tzippi Livni, the head of the opposition and chairwoman of the Kadima Party, to join his government. She hasn't ruled it out. I think it is very important that Kadima stays in the opposition. Hopefully, the threat of many Kadima MKs to change parties and Shaul Mofaz's demand for new elections for the chairmanship of Kadima won't lead Livni to the wrong decision.

Netanyahu is one of the worst prime ministers Israel has ever had. Despite this, there is no real opposition against him other than radical settlers. The parties in the parliamentary opposition are too diverse to form a cohesive counterbalance to the government, and even Kadima is oddly silent on its failings. What needs to be done is for Kadima to be united somehow and for more criticism to be lodged against the government, not to join it.

Israelis Don't Hate Obama

According to popular wisdom, Israelis are very hostile towards Barack Obama. I have to admit that I bought into that notion myself. Most of my friends have a positive attitude towards Obama, or mixed feelings, but I had a feeling that the social circle I belong to isn't very representative of Israeli society. And indeed, whenever I talked to other people, let's call them non-academic types, they tended to hate Obama, or at the very least, they were suspicious of him. This seemed to be supported by a now discredited poll that claimed only 4% of Israelis support Obama.

A new poll shows I was wrong. Obama's approval ratings in Israel are quite similar to his approval ratings at home. When compared to Rasmussen's Dec. 11 poll, Obama's approval rating in Israel is just six percentage points lower than his approval rating in the States, but even more interesting is the fact that a higher percentage of Americans disapprove of his performance than Israelis: 51% compared to just 37%.

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - U.S. President Barack Obama has a higher approval rating among Israelis than is widely believed, undercutting arguments he has lost Israeli public support for new peace efforts, a poll said on Thursday.

The poll by the Washington-based New America Foundation found that 41 percent of Israelis had a favorable rating of Obama against 37 percent who rated him unfavorably.

Despite this, 55 percent of Israelis polled said they thought Obama did not support Israel against 42 percent who said he did -- a reflection of the "complexity of views" about the U.S. leader as he presses both Israel and the Palestinians to resume stalled peace talks.

"They genuinely admire and like him ... but at the same time they also want to feel that he is in their corner, and they have concerns over this," pollster Jim Gerstein said in an email message.

Gerstein said that, in contrast to widespread media reports of low Israeli public support for Obama, the poll of 1,000 Israelis showed more support and solid backing for a possible future U.S.-brokered peace deal with the Palestinians.

"Israelis believe peace is necessary, but they currently do not feel a sense of urgency to reach a final status agreement with the Palestinians," Gerstein said in his report, adding that Obama had a chance now to persuade Israelis it was time to reach an agreement.

"There are real opportunities for the president and his team to speak directly and convincingly to the Israeli people," the report said.

Predicting Time's Person of the Year 2009

Time Magazine likes putting President Barack Obama on its cover, but I think it is safe to say that he won't be Time's Person of the Year for a second year in row. Despite winning the Nobel Peace Prize, he hasn't done enough to merit the title. He deserves to be first runner-up, at the most.

Will it be Angela Merkel, who won re-election as Germany's chancellor this year and has become one of the most influential European leaders?  It's very possible.

Will it be Benjamin Netanyahu, who returned to the Israeli Prime Minister's office after 10 years and has already managed to anger the Palestinians, settlers, the Israeli left and the Obama administration? No, it won't be him.

Will it be Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke, who is credited by many as the person responsible for curbing the financial crisis? I think he's the top candidate. The economy has been the number one issue worldwide this year, so someone who has something to do with it is likely to be named POY. It could also be that the companies that got bailout money will be chosen, if Time Magazine decides to go with something other than a person.

Ahmadinejad: "US Trying to Prevent the Mahdi's Return"

Yossi Melman reports in today's Haaretz (in Hebrew, no English version) that Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad told families who lost loved ones in the Iran-Iraq War that the main purpose of the American invasion of Iraq was to prevent the return of the Mahdi, the Shi'ite messiah. He quotes Iranian news agency Tabnak, which reported Ahmadinijad said the following:

"It is true that the forces of arrogance (the Americans) have their eyes on the [Iraqi] nation's oil and other treasures, but behind all this there is a hidden reasoning and they are working in accordance with it, although they would never admit to it in public. However, we have obtained documents of theirs. They came up with this plan (the invasion and occupation of Iraq) to prevent the coming of the hidden imam, and they also know that the Iranian nation is preparing for this event and will be his ally when he appears." (Note: I'm translating from Hebrew, which itself is a translation, and probably a translation of a translation).

Melman points out that Ahmedinijad is a follower of Masbah Yazdi, who believes Muslims must pave the way for the Mahdi's return. This is a view the Iranian Ayatollahs see as heresy.

Some experts believe that Ahmedinijad's belief in the return of the Mahdi is the main reason he wants to have nuclear weapons. Messianic Shi'ites believe that when he returns there will be a bloody war between the Shi'ites and their enemies. Sounds pretty much like the Christian Armageddon.

Scary stuff.

Jews and the Kingdom

I don't know anything about being Jewish in Great Britain. I've never lived there, or even visited. I know quite a few British Jews, mostly those who moved to Israel, but we've never discussed the topic of how it is to be Jewish in the United Kingdom. Two interesting opinion pieces were published recently about just that. David Newman of the Jerusalem Post and Roger Cohen of the New York Times write from different perspectives, about different aspects of "Anglo-Judaism", and are each prompted to write about the issue for very different reasons.

You can go to the links above or read the articles below.

Tom Friedman: The Narrative

America vs. The Narrative by Thomas L. Friedman, NY Times

What should we make of Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan, who apparently killed 13 innocent people at Fort Hood?

Here’s my take: Major Hasan may have been mentally unbalanced — I assume anyone who shoots up innocent people is. But the more you read about his support for Muslim suicide bombers, about how he showed up at a public-health seminar with a PowerPoint presentation titled “Why the War on Terror Is a War on Islam,” and about his contacts with Anwar al-Awlaki, a Yemeni cleric famous for using the Web to support jihadist violence against America — the more it seems that Major Hasan was just another angry jihadist spurred to action by “The Narrative.”

What is scary is that even though he was born, raised and educated in America, The Narrative still got to him.

The Narrative is the cocktail of half-truths, propaganda and outright lies about America that have taken hold in the Arab-Muslim world since 9/11. Propagated by jihadist Web sites, mosque preachers, Arab intellectuals, satellite news stations and books — and tacitly endorsed by some Arab regimes — this narrative posits that America has declared war on Islam, as part of a grand “American-Crusader-Zionist conspiracy” to keep Muslims down.

Yes, after two decades in which U.S. foreign policy has been largely dedicated to rescuing Muslims or trying to help free them from tyranny — in Bosnia, Darfur, Kuwait, Somalia, Lebanon, Kurdistan, post-earthquake Pakistan, post-tsunami Indonesia, Iraq and Afghanistan — a narrative that says America is dedicated to keeping Muslims down is thriving.

Although most of the Muslims being killed today are being killed by jihadist suicide bombers in Pakistan, Iraq, Afghanistan and Indonesia, you’d never know it from listening to their world. The dominant narrative there is that 9/11 was a kind of fraud: America’s unprovoked onslaught on Islam is the real story, and the Muslims are the real victims — of U.S. perfidy.

Have no doubt: we punched a fist into the Arab/Muslim world after 9/11, partly to send a message of deterrence, but primarily to destroy two tyrannical regimes — the Taliban and the Baathists — and to work with Afghans and Iraqis to build a different kind of politics. In the process, we did some stupid and bad things. But for every Abu Ghraib, our soldiers and diplomats perpetrated a million acts of kindness aimed at giving Arabs and Muslims a better chance to succeed with modernity and to elect their own leaders.

The Narrative was concocted by jihadists to obscure that.

It’s working. As a Jordanian-born counterterrorism expert, who asked to remain anonymous, said to me: “This narrative is now omnipresent in Arab and Muslim communities in the region and in migrant communities around the world. These communities are bombarded with this narrative in huge doses and on a daily basis. [It says] the West, and right now mostly the U.S. and Israel, is single-handedly and completely responsible for all the grievances of the Arab and the Muslim worlds. Ironically, the vast majority of the media outlets targeting these communities are Arab-government owned — mostly from the Gulf.”

This narrative suits Arab governments. It allows them to deflect onto America all of their people’s grievances over why their countries are falling behind. And it suits Al Qaeda, which doesn’t need much organization anymore — just push out The Narrative over the Web and satellite TV, let it heat up humiliated, frustrated or socially alienated Muslim males, and one or two will open fire on their own. See: Major Hasan.

“Liberal Arabs like me are as angry as a terrorist and as determined to change the status quo,” said my Jordanian friend. The only difference “is that while we choose education, knowledge and success to bring about change, a terrorist, having bought into the narrative, has a sense of powerlessness and helplessness, which are inculcated in us from childhood, that lead him to believe that there is only one way, and that is violence.”

What to do? Many Arab Muslims know that what ails their societies is more than the West, and that The Narrative is just an escape from looking honestly at themselves. But none of their leaders dare or care to open that discussion. In his Cairo speech last June, President Obama effectively built a connection with the Muslim mainstream. Maybe he could spark the debate by asking that same audience this question:

“Whenever something like Fort Hood happens you say, ‘This is not Islam.’ I believe that. But you keep telling us what Islam isn’t. You need to tell us what it is and show us how its positive interpretations are being promoted in your schools and mosques. If this is not Islam, then why is it that a million Muslims will pour into the streets to protest Danish cartoons of the Prophet Muhammad, but not one will take to the streets to protest Muslim suicide bombers who blow up other Muslims, real people, created in the image of God? You need to explain that to us — and to yourselves.”

The Supposed Situation, In a False Nutshell

Mondoweiss has this picture of Anna Baltzer and Haithem El-Zabri under the erroneous title "The situation, in a nutshell".

The sign Baltzer is holding is pretty accurate, except for the assertion that Israel is situated on El-Zabri's land. El-Zabri's sign, on the other hand, is just untruthful.

A Google search brought me to the discovery that he was born in the States. That means he's from the United States, not Palestine. His parents are from Palestine. There's a difference. So to recap, both people in this picture are from Austin, Texas, not just Baltzer.

The next two lines of El-Zabri's sign state "I cannot return to my land". Now, that's not true. This picture was taken in your land, Goddammit. If you'll leave the United States you'll certainly be able to return. You are an American citizen, after all. El-Zabri is saying that what is now Israel is his land. It isn't. Just like Poland isn't my land, even though my mother spent her early childhood there, and just like Ireland or Italy aren't the lands of second- and third-generation Irish-Americans and Italian-Americans. When the State of Palestine is established, if they decide to give El-Zabri the right of return and citizenship, then Palestine will be his land.

The Law of Return for Jews is an internal matter. It is an immigration policy. Most countries, if not all, have discriminatory immigration policies, and each country may choose which groups to prefer and confer the political right of immigration upon.

So-called "peace activists" promoting the Palestinian Right of Return will achieve neither peace nor justice. Insisting on this will only push peace beyond reach (and it is a distant prospect as it is).  Israelis would never, in their right minds, decide to become a minority in their own country. The only solution is the two-state solution, which can achieve both peace and the greatest degree of justice possible for both sides.

A New Book By an Autistic Kid's Mother

Yediot Aharonot's "7 Days" section has an interesting interview this weekend with Galit Distel Etebaryan, who wrote a novel based on her experiences as the mother of an autistic kid. Unfortunately, I couldn't find it on-line in either Hebrew or English, but here's a review of her book from Ha'aretz in Hebrew and in English.

In the interview, Etebaryan calls her son "formerly autistic", although he still has some problems. I'd say this is misleading. He's still autistic, but very high functioning.

It's interesting that the European psychiatrist who told her that her son is autistic blamed her for his condition. Apparently not everybody has parted with the notion of refrigerator mothers. I'd like to hope that had her son been diagnosed in Israel, that wouldn't have happened (she was in Europe - Greece in the novel, I don't know if it was Greece in real life, too - because her husband was working there at the time).

She also says honestly that she isn't glad she has a child with special needs. She says that hearing other parents saying their special kids made them better people makes her laugh. I can understand her feelings. Most people would rather have normal children, though I do think having children with special needs makes their parents (and other relatives) more sensitive and more understanding.

One last observation: the book review says the child in the novel never spoke a word before he was diagnosed, while Etebaryan says in her interview that her son spoke fluently until he started regressing at the age of two, although she also describes him as rejecting her and avoiding physical contact as a little baby, which would suggest he was autistic from the beginning. I find this interesting, because I always wondered if kids really did regress, or maybe the parents were in denial. Anyway, it's perfectly possible that there are different forms of autism, some with regression, some without.

Israeli SC: No to Private Prisons

The Israeli Supreme Court struck down the Private Prisons Act yesterday, in an 8-1 decision. The justices in the majority said that it is unconstitional to transfer the right to use force against prisoners from the state to private companies. They said this would violate the Human Dignity and Liberty Basic Law. This is an international precedent. I wonder if it will encourage people in other countries to fight the privatization of prisons, especially in the States.

This is the right decision. There are certain government services that should not be privatized, especially those where the use of force is part of the package. I'm glad this ruling came down before the prison had any inmates in it.

Freedom of Religion in Israel

Shahar Ilan has an interesting blog post (in Hebrew) he wrote after the release of the latest report by the US State Department's Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights and Labor (you can read about it in Hebrew and in English). Ilan writes that not only is the treatment of religious minorities troubling, the treatment of secular Jews, which just might be the largest group in the country, is absurd. He mentions the fact that Israelis who want to marry in Israel have to go through the Orthodox Rabbinate, where grooms will be told that women are like clay that must be molded by their husbands and that women who aren't flattered are like fish out of water. If you don't want to go through this and would rather go the Reform, Conservative or civil marriage way, you better get married abroad.

Ilan says that, unfortunately, things will just get worse. Demographically, the illiberal sections of Israeli society, mostly the ultra-orthodox, are only growing. If we don't act now, he says, it will be too late to undo the discrimination against non-Jews, women and secular people. I agree with him.

Michael Moore's Sicko

I recently watched Michael Moore's 2007 documentary, "Sicko", about the health-care system in the United States and other countries. It's a very entertaining film, but not a very good source of information.

I totally agree with Moore when it comes to the American health-care system: it's broken and has to be fixed. I support government-funded universal healthcare. Moore's health insurance horror stories, though, were not very surprising. The media has shown such cases numerous times. Of course, I don't live in the States, but I'm quite sure the source of most reports I've seen on the subject is the US mainstream media.

My main problem with the film is the rosy depiction of other health-care systems. As someone who lives in a country with socialized medicine, I know that the system we have here is better than the market-based system in the States, but that our system, too, has problems. There are a lot of problems with the systems in Canada, Britain and France. I've seen quite a few reports on BBC World and Sky News about calls to reform the National Health Service.

The scenes in France were particularly annoying. Moore focuses at length on the many social benefits the French government bestows upon citizens and residents, much of it excessive, and asks how the French aren't drowning in taxes. How does he prove that they aren't? He goes to one (yes, that is one [1]) family and shows that they're living the good life. Other than a mortgage, they aren't in any debt! They fly off to some other place in the world once every year! So what? That doesn't really prove much, other than the fact that I'd like to punch that couple in their faces. You can find people like that in pretty much every Western country, under any health-care and tax system.

The most problematic part of the documentary, of course, is when Moore takes a group of 9/11 rescue workers and other under-insured sick people to Cuba. At first, he claims he only wants to go to Guantanamo Bay, where detainees get free health insurance (a scene that might have inspired a similar scene in an Israeli docu-activist show, where journalists Orly Vilnai and Guy Meroz visit an Israeli prison where prisoners get free dental care, which isn't covered by Israel's national health insurance). Then, Moore takes his group to a Cuban hospital. Everything is presented as wonderful. Everything is free. It's first-class medicine. Does everybody get this kind of treatment in Castro's Cuba, or just the wealthy and the camera-wielding? We don't really know. Besides, even if Cuban healthcare is truly open to all citizens, would you rather live in Cuba or the States?

Post-Abu-Mazen

Mahmoud Abbas has declared he won't run for re-election as president of the Palestinian Authority in January. This could be a very good thing, or a very bad thing. Abbas is a horrible leader for Palestinians, and prospects for peace under his leadership are very dim. He just wants to sit on his ass and wait for the world to impose his preferred solution on Israel.

If whoever replaces Abu-Mazen is someone who is truly willing to negotiate and reach a deal, things will be better. Yes, Netanyahu doesn't seem like he'd actually sign any treaties with the Palestinians, but if he is pushed to the corner and forced to prove that his support for the two state solution is not just lip service, he might budge. Alternatively, if Israelis see someone on the Palestinian side who is a real partner for peace, and they see Netanyahu is the stubborn one, they just might vote for someone more willing to sign peace deals when the next election comes around.

If whoever replaces Abu-Mazen is more of a hard-liner, like any Hamasnik or Marwan Barghouti, the Middle East will be in trouble. Both Israelis and Palestinians will be screwed.

I'd be happy to see someone like Sari Nusseibeh or Mustafa Barghouti get elected, but I have no idea what their chances are.

The Bereaved Mother and Her Son's Killer

In September, Haaretz published an article (available in English and in Hebrew) about Robi Damelin, a member of the Israeli-Palestinian Bereaved Families for Peace organization. Her son David was killed by a Palestinian sniper seven years ago. The sniper, Ta'er Hamad, is now in an Israeli jail, and Damelin decided to publicly forgive him. She wrote him and his family the following letter:

"This for me is one of the most difficult letters I will ever have to write. My name is Robi Damelin, I am the mother of David who was killed by your son. I know he did not kill David because he was David, if he had known him he could never have done such a thing. David was 28 years old, he was a student at Tel Aviv University doing his masters in the philosophy of education. David was part of the peace movement and did not want to serve in the occupied territories. He had compassion for all people and understood the suffering of the Palestinians. He treated all around him with dignity. David was part of the movement of the officers who did not want to serve in the occupied territories, but nevertheless for many reasons he went to serve when he was called up for reserve duty.


What makes our children do what they do, they do not understand the pain they are causing your son by now having to be in jail for many years and mine who I will never be able to hold or see again or see him married, or have a grandchild from. I cannot describe to you the pain I feel since his death and the pain of his brother and girlfriend, and all who knew and loved him.

I understand that your son is considered a hero by many within the Palestinian people. He is considered to be a freedom fighter, fighting for justice and for an independent, viable Palestinian state, but I also feel that if he understood that taking the life of another is not the way and that if he understood the consequences of his act, he could see that a nonviolent solution is the only way for both nations to live together in peace... Our lives as two nations are so intertwined, each of us will have to give up on our dreams for the future of the children who are our responsibility... I do not know what your reaction will be, it is a risk for me, but I believe that you will understand, as it comes from the most honest place within me. I hope that you will show the letter to your son, and that maybe in the future we can meet."

Hamad recently responded to this letter in a very negative and militant manner, saying that violence is the only way to end the occupation and that he will continue on this path until Palestine is liberated. He refused to address Damelin directly, and of course, refused to meet her, because he "cannot meet our land's occupier on the same land". You can read the response in Hebrew here. The Ma'an News Agency probably has the original letter in Arabic. I couldn't find an English version.

Well, at least one good thing came out of all this: we now know Ta'er Hamad shouldn't be included in any prisoner swap deals, since he hasn't changed his mind about violence.

No Negotiations, No Solution

An American diplomat is quoted in today's Yediot Ahronot as saying that the difference between Benjamin Netanyahu and Mahmoud Abbas is that the Israeli prime minister wants negotiations without a solution to the conflict, while the Palestinian president wants a solution without negotiations. Sounds like an accurate assessment to me.

Now we have the negative half of each one of the leaders' wishes: no negotiations and no solution. Isn't that just great? Both leaders are unwilling to copromise. Netanyahu wants talks that will lead nowhere and to no concessions on Israel's part. Abbas just wants the world community to adopt the Palestinians' favored solution (all of East Jerusalem, including the Wailing Wall, as Palestine's capital; return exactly to the 1967 borders; and the right of return for Palestinian refugees) and to impose it on Israel.

With leaders like these, things will go downhill very quickly.

The Origins of Stupidity

After the jump is a YouTube video in response to a video starring Kirk Cameron of Growing Pains fame. Cameron's video was an ad for a special edition of The Origins of Species with a 50-page anti-evolution introduction.

Nobel Committe Wrong, Obama Right

Yesterday, I wrote here that President Barack Obama should not have won the Nobel Peace Prize. I still think so, but I liked Obama's speech reacting to the award. He said himself that he did not feel deserving, since he has not yet achieved enough. He seemed genuinely uncomfortable. He was right to say that he would accept the prize for those who believe in a world of dialogue. He was also right that this is meant to encourage him to continue with his international policies, rather than to acknowledge his work till now.

So, Obama should not have been chosen by the Nobel Committee, but I don't hold it against him. I hold it against the committee.

An Israeli Wins a Nobel

A few days ago, an Israeli chemist, Prof. Ada E. Yonath of the Weitzman Institute, won the Nobel Prize for Chemistry, together with two Americans. She is the first woman to win the chemistry prize in 40 years. I'm very happy whenever an Israeli wins, but this also reminds me of the fact that Israeli academia is seriously underfunded. Israel needs to give universities more resources in order for today's students and young researchers to one day be able to win another scientific Nobel Prize.

Obama Cult of Personality Reaches Oslo

I voted for Barack Obama, and I'm glad he's the president, rather than a Republican. I support many of his policies. Still, I see absolutely no reason why he is worthy of a Nobel Peace Prize so early into his presidency, especially since he certainly never did anything significant before he was elected president. Though he has lofty goals, he has not achieved them yet. He is repairing the damage left by George W. Bush in the international arena, but he has a lot of work left. The world hasn't suddenly fallen in love with America because of Obama, at least not the third world. He has brought some change, but not a revolution.

Two previous sitting presidents won the Nobel Prize. Teddy Roosevelt was five years into his presidency when he was honored with the prize. Woodrow Wilson had been president for seven years. A third US president, Jimmy Carter, won decades after leaving office. And Obama? He was just 9 months into the job. I've heard a report that he was nominated just two weeks after taking the oath of office.

There are many who see Barack Obama as some kind of political messiah. All the political art he inspired during the campaign, and all the enthusiasm he generated among young Americans who are interested more in celebrities than politics, the zillion Time magazine covers (I'm sure they'll be happy for the excuse to put Obama on the cover again) - it looked quite a bit like a cult of personality. Now, the Nobel Committee has joined in.

Giving Obama the prize now is a mistake. The Norwegians should have waited a few years to see if he actually earns it. I have to say, though, that compared to the egregious mistakes of some of the previous years, this year's choice is just misguided, but not totally outrageous.

The "Tape for Prisoners" Deal

The Israeli government has agreed to release twenty female Palestinian prisoners, aged 15 to 42, in exchange for a recent one-minute video recording of Sgt. Gilad Shalit, proving he's alive and showing what his physical and mental health status is, more or less. Hopefully, this is the first stage before a deal with Hamas where Shalit himself is exchanged for prisoners, and not just a recording of him.

I have mixed feelings about releasing prisoners for a tape. On the one hand, I believe Palestinian prisoners should be exchanged for live Israeli prisoners, and not just for a sign of life. If these 20 prisoners are counted as a down payment for the release of Shalit, then this will be less of a negative precedent.

There is also a question of how dangerous these prisoners are. Remember, women can be as dangerous as men. What they have done to land them in prison worries me less than what they might still do. In fact, some of those who have only attempted to murder Israelis may want to try again more than those who have already killed people. Unfortunately, I am unable to make such assessments on my own.

One Word: Backups

Just writing to remind any readers of mine who might have valuable files on their computer(s) to back them up in as many ways as possible. Send them to yourself on Gmail, save them on CDs, DVDs and external hard drives.

A computer in the Schiff household just had a near-death experience and one computer technician kept very important documents and years of work from going down the drain.

Justice for Roman Polanski?

Yes, Roman Polanski is a wonderful filmmaker. Yes, the then-13 year old girl he had sex with in the 70's has since forgiven him and expressed her wishes that Polanski not be punished. Yes, the crime was committed more than thirty years ago.

And yes, Roman Polanski should be extradited to California from Switzerland and face time in prison. The man admitted he had sex with a minor and then ran to Europe when it seemed like he would have to serve jail time. Not punishing him would send the wrong message. If you are powerful enough and evade the law long enough, you can get away with criminal behavior even after you're finally caught.

Aspie Racer

After the previous season of The Amazing Race included a team of a deaf man and his mother, the current season, which had its debut last night in the States, includes Zev, a guy with Asperger's Syndrome who is racing with his best friend Justin. Since I live in Israel, I haven't seen anything from the current season, but I'm very curious about it.

Lately, it seems there's a spike in the entertainment industry's interest in autism, mostly in its Aspie form. Films such as "Adam" and shows such as "Boston Legal" and "Grey's Anatomy" have featured characters with Asperger's. The Amazing Race, as far as I know, is the first show to actually feature a real autistic person, and not just an actor playing one.

Good luck, Zev & Justin!

The Arab Initiative and Hamas

It has long been my view that Israel should have responded favorably to the Saudi Initiative, not by agreeing to all its details but by starting negotiations with the Arab League, with the Initiative recognized as the Arabs' starting point. As it turns out, that wasn't Saudi Arabia's intent. In an op-ed in the New York Times on September 12, Prince Turki Al-Faisal summarized the Saudi stance in the title, "Land First, Then Peace". The Arab demands are not negotiable. They are preconditions.

I had read the op-ed piece when it came out, and was reminded of it again when Shlomo Avineri wrote a critical op-ed piece about it in yesterday's Ha'aretz (here in English or Hebrew). Here is his final paragraph, which I agree with:

"The initiative should not be ignored, because it includes an Arab declaration of willingness for peace, but its meaning should not be mistaken. At this stage it is not calling for negotiations, but rather unconditional acceptance of the Arab position, and that is also its main stumbling block."

This reminded me of the discussion I've been having over at Gert's blog surrounding a recent interview Ken Livingstone, the former mayor of London, conducted with Khaled Meshal in The New Statesman. Hamas's stance towards peace negotiations with Israel is strikingly similar, if not absolutely identical, to the one Al-Faisal presents in his op-ed as Saudi Arabia's position, and indeed the whole Arab League's. First, leave all territories captured in 1967, including East Jerusalem, and only then will we talk about peace. So, Hamas and Saudi Arabia have the same basic ideas about peace with Israel, yet the former is considered radical and the latter is considered moderate?

Hamas and the rest of the Arab world have to understand that withdrawal and the creation of a Palestinian state is the final step of the peace process. There can be no further claims after this.

Happy New Year!

Rosh Ha'Shana starts tonight, and with it begins the year Ha'Tasha, which is 5770. I hope it will be a year of peace, but with Benjamin Netanyahu, Ehud Barak and Avigdor Lieberman at the helm, I'll settle for a year of quiet. I hope it will be a year of health, happiness and prosperity.


This also marks the beginning of a new Jewish decade, just three and a half months before the new decade AD (the Twenty Teens, fun to say). It's a good opportunity to think about my long-term expectations. What would I like to achieve before the 5770's (and the Twenty Teens) are out?

I'd like to be a successful young university lecturer with at least moderate success as a fiction writer. I'd like to be happily married with kids, who I hope will be close to their cousins, despite age differences.

I hope my nephew, who would be 19 in 2020, will be an independent young university student, and will not be a soldier, because by that time service will not be mandatory rather than because he'll get an exemption as an autistic person. I hope my 15 year old niece will be a successful high-school student. I hope my sisters and their families won't live too far away from me and my family and that we'll see each other on a regular basis. Maybe one or both of them will be working on something that would get them a Nobel Prize a few years later.

I hope my parents will be healthy in their 70's, happily enjoying their retirement together. I'm sure my mother won't be entirely retired, though, still keeping busy with interesting projects.

Anyway, that's about it. Shana tova! Assor tov!

Tragedy Strikes Twice

Lt. Assaf Ramon, whose father Ilan died in the Space Shuttle Columbia disaster in 2003, was killed in a training accident today. His plane crashed to the ground for unknown reasons.

Ilan Ramon was Israel's first, and so far only, astronaut. The Columbia disaster was seen as a national tragedy here in Israel, and several places have been named after Ramon, who among other things, also participated in the bombing of Iraq's nuclear facility in 1981. After his death, his son Assaf was determined to follow his footsteps and become a pilot in the Israeli Air Force. As a pilot's widow, Rona Ramon had a right not to allow her son to enter the pilot training program, but she did not stand in his way. I can't even imagine how she and the whole Ramon family are feeling right now. It's just too horrible.

Lebanon Through Israeli Movie Cameras

The first Lebanon War was a disaster when it took place in 1982, and then when it lead to an Israeli occupation of Southern Lebanon and a war of attrition with Hezbollah and other local groups. In the latter half of this current decade, though, the misadventures in Lebanon have led traumatized Israeli filmmakers to make excellent, award-winning movies about the war. It wasn't the Second Lebanon War that prompted directors and writers to look back at Israel's Vietnam, since 2007's Beaufort and 2008's Waltz with Bashir were already long in the making. I wonder what was.


A new Israeli film, "Lebanon" won the Golden Lion (first prize) at the Venice Film Festival yesterday. I haven't seen it, and hope to have an opportunity soon. Director Samuel Maoz recounts his own experiences as part of a tank crew in the 1982 invasion.

I must admit that the first time I heard about "Lebanon" I thought to myself, "Oh, no, not another one." Then I thought of the fact that I actually liked the previous Israeli war movies, and if the new one is good, there is no reason not to see it.

Now I wonder if for the third year in a row, an Israeli movie about Lebanon will be nominated for Best Foreign Film at the Oscars. If it is, it will be weird when they announce "From Israel: Lebanon".

Celebrity Dead Ringers

So, I'm watching a Season 6 episode of CSI: Miami, and there's a guest actress there who I was sure is the same one who plays Sarah Newlin on True Blood. She looks exactly the same, only slightly younger. Turns out, the actress from CSI is Jessy Schram, while the True Blood actress is Anna Camp.

Compare for yourselves:

Left: Anna Camp; Right: Jessy Schram

Self-Boycotting Jew

On August 20, Prof. Neve Gordon, chairman of the Department of Politics and Government at Ben Gurion University, published an article in the Los Angeles Times, supporting the BDS (boycott, divestment and sanctions) movement against Israel. The university president has announced she is checking into possible sanctions against Gordon, and has called him to resign, or at the very least, leave his post as department chair. It seems that legally she can't really do anything against him. Others have also called him to resign, while others have jumped to his defense and denounced the president's response.

Gordon did not mention an academic boycott in his article. He mentioned a boycott that is sensitive to circumstances and context, and gradual. He doesn't want to boycott all Israeli institutions and companies, but only those who participate in, or gain from, the occupation. One could easily find a reason to say that Gordon's own institution, Ben Gurion University, is participating in the occupation and so it should be boycotted. After all, it practically has a mini-campus at Hazerim Air Force Base, where BGU professors teach pilot trainees.

Prof. Gordon should be allowed to continue teaching at Ben-Gurion. His call for a boycott may be outrageous, and in my opinion anti-democratic and anti-peace, but it is his right as a citizen in general, and in particular as a professor whose field of expertise is the study of the occupation. However, I don't think he should continue serving as chairman of the political science department. The chairman needs to promote his department's cooperation with foreign universities and international organizations. He can't honestly do that while calling for a boycott.

Crazy Orly Taitz

Moldovan-Israeli-American Orly Taitz, Commander-in-chief of the lunatic birther squad, made the rounds on American TV stations last month. Now it's Israel's turn. About a week or two ago she was interviewed on Channel 10 News, where she said Benjamin Netanyahu was now her Facebook friend (umm, Orly, I hate to say it, but it certainly ain't really Bibi, and you're an idiot for thinking that it is). The next day she appeared on another Channel 10 show, "London and Kirshenbaum", where she was interviewed by veteran journalists Yaron London and Moti Kirshenbaum, who subtly mocked her. Taitz seemed pleased, as if she thought she had convinced the duo.

Last night, Taitz appeared on Channel 2's "Mo'adon Layla" ("Night Club"), a comedy panel show. She was first asked a few questions and traded barbs with the comedians. This was the part where she not only compared Obama to Hitler, but said Obama was worse, which prompted panelist Ido Rosenblum to jump up from his chair and ask to "turn this thing off", meaning Taitz's satellite feed. She kind of seemed to storm off, though it wasn't entirely clear if she didn't just think her segment was over. After the interview, the comedians joked about her insanity.

Here's the clip, which, by the way, appears on the show's website under the title "Mo'adon Layla Supports Obama". It's in Hebrew without an English translation. Sorry about that:

Rooting For Hamas

I never thought I'd ever side with Hamas on anything, but that's just what happened this weekend. The Muslim terrorist organization which controls Gaza confronted an Al Quaeda-linked group, Jund Ansar Allah (Soldiers of God's Companions), after the group's leader declared Gaza an Islamic emirate under his control. Hamas killed this leader, Abdul-Latif Moussa, and other members of the fringe group.

Had Jund Ansar Allah not existed, Hamas would have to invent it. It's a great way to show the world that everything is relative. Sure, Hamas is a group of radical Islamic terrorists, but compared to Al Quaeda, they're like Switzerland.

Okay, not quite Switzerland...

A Free Country

Alexander Jacobson has a great piece in Haaretz today, which for some reason doesn't appear in the English version. I'll translate a few parts.

He starts out by recalling something he experienced during the peace rally on November 4, 1995, the one that ended with the assassination of Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin. He was in the crowd, and next to him were two religious teenagers who were arguing with those attending the rally. They accused the left of not allowing dissent. "I thought to myself, you [the religious teenagers] have a lot of confidence in the tolerance and non-violence of the Israeli left. You're standing in a sea of leftists and arguing with them without fear, and even accusing them of silencing dissent. Would any of us dare to venture into a crowd of right-wing protestors and open our mouths?", he writes.

Then he tells the story of the annual memorial service for the victims of the 2002 terrorist attack at the Hebrew University. The ceremony ended with the singing of "HaTikvah", the Israeli national anthem. One of the lecturers stayed put in his seat. He doesn't name him, but says it's a leftist Jewish lecturer who isn't even much of an extreme leftist. Jacobson says this was quite rude, but nobody said anything. This made Jacobson proud.

"[The lecturer] doesn't even think of appreciating the freedom he enjoys - he's Israeli, and freedom runs through his veins. He doesn't even think of fearing state or university authorities - and really, where has it been heard of that a brave dissident in a brutal apartheid state (one whose anthem is worthy of contempt) needs to fear the authorities?"

How Many Posts Per Page?

I just changed my blog's settings so it will display ten days' worth of posts on the main page, instead of five. Only days I post on are counted, which is why right now there are posts from as far back as June and not just from the last ten calendar days.

Do you have any preferences? Is it taking any longer to load now (though I don't see why it should, since I rarely add videos and pictures to my posts)? I'm open to feedback from all my avid readers. Yes, both of you.

Update (August 28, 2009): I've switched back to five days' worth of posts. I've shortened the list of labels, so a shorter first page is more suitable, in my opinion.

Israel Killed Arafat, Fatah Says

The Fatah Party Conference today decided unanimously to declare that Israel is responsible for the death of Yasser Arafat and to open an investigation into what they see as his assassination. Fatah asked for international aid in getting to the truth.

Oh, come on. The guy got sick and died. His own doctor said he had AIDS, though he blamed Israel for injecting him with the virus (how, with an AIDS rocket? Israelis weren't in physical contact with him during the Second Intifada, except for a few far left wing activists, who I wouldn't see as prime suspects).

How is this resolution blaming Israel and calling for an investigation constructive in any way? This won't bring peace to anyone. It will not even give the Palestinians peace of mind regarding the death of Arafat, since they will not except any conclusion other than the one they've already come to.