#976: Just So Long As There's Something in the Glass

Just about everyone is familiar with the old saw that goes “The optimist sees the glass as being half full; the pessimist sees the glass as being half empty.” Years ago, I decided that there was actually a third option. This axiom states “As long as there’s something in the glass, there’s always the possibility of hope” I believe this is especially true in the world of politics. How so? Well, if one is overly pessimistic about the outcome of, say, an election or an issue, there is the likelihood that they will sit on their hands and let reality take its nasty course. Then too, frequently an optimist will sit back and await the good news . . . which may never come. The one who finds a ray of hope in what others may find to be either utterly hopeless or a lead-pipe cinch, is more likely to roll up their sleeves and take part in turning hope into reality.

Depending on where you live in these United States, there are just as many prospects for optimism as pessimism. As an example, a staunch Democrat has every reason to feel optimistic if they vote in, say, California, New York or Rhode Island, and every reason to feel pessimistic - if not downright hopeless -  if they reside and vote in, say, Alabama, Oklahoma or a majority of Florida.  Let’s face it: would take as much of a miracle for Republicans to control the legislature in California or Hawaii as it would for Democrats to rule in Texas or Missouri.  Being a progressive Democrat in Florida, I am grateful that we  live in the only liberal part of the state; at least those we vote for are likely to be be elected . . . even if they will be part of a tiny minority up in Tallahassee.  When it comes to my part of the state, I am an optimist; when it comes to the legislature I am a pessimist; when it comes to capturing the governor’s mansion, I am hopeful.  Thank G-d for their being something in the glass.

Every once in a while optimists get their electoral comeuppance because the hopeful have created a miracle.  Without question, the presidential election of 1948, which pitted the incumbent  Harry S. (“Give  ‘em Hell Harry”) Truman (D) against New  York Governor  Thomas E. Dewey (whom Alice Longworth Roosevelt stuck with the moniker "The Little Man on the Wedding Cake”).  Pundits and pollsters alike "knew” that Dewey would win in a landslide. So much so that nearly every newspaper in America carried the  same frontpage headline on November 2: DEWEY DEFEATS TRUMAN!  As things turned out, those who believed the glass half full lost not to those who saw the glass as half empty, but rather to those - the hopeful - who made sure their fellows went to the polls and voted for the man from Independence.  And they saw things, there was something in the glass.

Depending on which side of the aisle you occupy these days, there’s plenty of room or reason for optimism or pessimism.  MAGA-ites from Florida to Washington State along with their allies in the various state legislatures  as well as the Clown Car Caucus on Capitol Hill, see the political glass overflowing.  They firmly believe that G-d’s  savior will once again occupy the White House (even if they have to steal the election); that abortion for any reason will be outlawed at the national level; that America will "return” to being a nation of, by and for White Christians; and that LGBT+ people pay the price for defiling G-d’s word and will.  Meanwhile,  optimists see the tide turning.  They believe that finally - finally - Donald Trump will be hit with the two things he most hates and fears: losing his fortune (and thus his name) and forever being identified in the history books as America’s “most notorious grifter and biggest loser.”  I believe it will be left to the hopefuls - those who find both  strength and motivation in there being something in the glass - of doing whatever is in their power to right the wrongs of the lethal  optimists whose world-view could signal the death of democracy. In short, I am hopeful that together, we can turn back the tide of “Trumptastrophe.”

 There is far more pessimism than optimism - and just plain fear - emendating from the latest and bloodiest conflict in the Middle East. That which began with a bloody attack on the part of Hamas on October 7 of last year, has metathesized throughout the region and threatens to spread still further. Iranian-backed Houthis in Yemen firing missiles and drones at vessels in the Red Sea (which in turn led British and American warplanes to hit missile systems and launchers and other targets); Hezbollah launching missile attacks from Lebanon into Northern Israel; Israel decimating Gaza, killing tens of thousands of civilians while trying to destroy Hamas; a vexing and dangerous increase in anti-Semitism all over Europe as well as on Ivy League campuses here in the United States . . . the glass keeps draining.       

Where it would be both easy and completely understandable to see the glass as being far more than half empty, I am contenting myself with seeing something in the glass. In other words, there just may be a few hopeful signs on the horizon:

After a mostly successful round of talks in Paris last week, negotiations, aimed at securing a temporary cease-fire and the release of some hostages, will continue between an Israeli delegation and mediators from the U.S., Qatar and Egypt. It was announced earlier today (2/25/2024) that an Israeli delegation is expected to arrive in Qatar as soon as tomorrow for intensive talks with mediators aimed at closing the gaps around a new deal for a temporary cease-fire with Hamas and the release of some hostages held in Gaza - this according to an Israeli official familiar with the negotiations.

In last week’s discussions in Paris, Israel’s delegation agreed to a basic outline for a deal that would involve a six-week truce and the exchange of about 40 hostages captive in the enclave for Palestinian prisoners held by Israel, The numbers of hostages and prisoners will likely change over the course of further negotiations, the Israeli officials cautioned. Recent discussions around a potential hostage deal have focused on the release of women, elderly and wounded captives.

For the first time, Israeli politicians and political influencers are beginning to imagine out loud what a next step could look like in Gaza. Prime Minister Bibi Netanyahu's newly released plan for Gaza's future lacks much innovation, but it could fit into the outline formulated by the international community. The important question is when will Israel withdraw from the Gaza Strip and allow for its rehabilitation to begin. His proposal, which calls for indefinite Israeli military control and buffer zones in the territory, rankled Arab nations and was rejected by Palestinians. This is not surprising; Bibi must dance to the tune played by his cabinet’s right flank (read: ultra-Orthodox, ultra-Nationalist) if he is to remain in power. Like his American counterpart, Donald Trump, the Israeli P.M. needs to remain in office in order to cloak himself in ministerial immunity in his ongoing corruption trials.

Influential members of the international press - including Serge Schmemann, a member of the New York Times editorial board and the former longtime Jerusalem bureau chief for “America’s Paper of Record,” has recently written about Marwan Barghouti, a long imprisoned terrorist who is considered by many to be the Palestinian’s Nelson Mandela. Unlike most Palestinian leaders, Barghouti has long accepted a two-state solution, speaks Hebrew, and learned diplomacy as a young up-and-coming assistant to Yasir Arafat. Barghouti, now in his mid 60’s, was part of Arafat’s team that helped create the Oslo Accords. During his time in the United States, he proved himself to be open and available to the press, warm and engaging.

                                       Marwan Barghouti

The search for a Palestinian leader has become more pressing, as the attention of Israel’s allies and its Arab neighbors turns to “after Gaza,” as Israelis refer to what will follow the extraordinarily destructive and deadly war there. Negotiations involving the United States and Arab states for a way to stop the fighting are intensifying, and one crucial unresolved question is whether there is anyone not linked to Hamas or the corruption in the Palestinian Authority who could take charge in a ravaged Gaza and replace the unpopular leader in the West Bank, the 88-year-old Mahmoud Abbas.

Ami Ayalon, a highly decorated Israeli official who had served as naval commander in chief, head of the internal Shin Bet security service and cabinet member, recently referred to Barghouti as “The only leader who can lead Palestinians to a state alongside Israel. First of all because he believes in the concept of two states, and secondly because he won his legitimacy by sitting in our jails.”

Even before completing, editing, recording and posting this blog piece, I can hear the jeers and catcalls from some of my readers who love to prove how little I know about virtually anything; calling me a fool, a dupe and a naïve self-hating Jew. Fortunately, over the course of a reasonably long life, I’ve developed a pretty thick hide and a desire to feel hopeful whenever I see at least a few drops in the glass.

Copyright©2024 Kurt Franklin Stone

#962: ס'איז שװער צו זײַן אַ ייִד ("It's Hard to Be a Jew")

Audio Block

Double-click here to upload or link to a .mp3. Learn more

Although it is rather simple to translate the title of this essay from Yiddish to English, its meaning can likely only be understood on an emotional level by what we Jews refer to as “MOT,” - i.e. “A member of the tribe.” Translated into French (C'est dur d'être juif), Spanish Es difícil ser judío) or even German (Es ist schwer, Jude zu sein), the expression loses the cultural angst, the shrug-of-the-shoulders fatalism that pervades the original. In English, French, Spanish, German or any other language, the expression is only “understood” as a mere translation of words . . . a matter for the cerebellum. In Yiddish, it is best translated by what we MOTs called די קישקע - “the guts.”

                               Rabbi Abraham Ibn Ezra

Historically, Jewish literature is filled with the kind of fatalism that is best comprehended in the guts, rather than the frontal lobes, which make expressive language possible. Jewish fatalism is perhaps best expressed by that most distinguished of rabbinic commentators and poets, Abraham Ibn Ezra (1089-1167) who wrote: “If I started out selling candles/the sun would never go down.  If I started selling funeral shrouds/people would stop dying. If I went into the arms trade/ universal peace would break out.” 

Got it?

Although rabbis, scholars and writers of every stripe have long attempted to explain Jewish fatalism and the ongoing historic nature of anti-Semitism,  no one has truly succeeded; it is just a fact of life.  And now, as the modern State of Israel and Hamas, a terrorist group fueled by its ghoulish 7th century theocracy go-toe-to-toe with one another in war, those who know little - if anything - about history and clash between theocracy and Democracy have chosen to take sides with “the Palestinians” (who historically, don’t really exist) over the Israelis (who, for most of history were the ones referred to as "Palestinians”).  The Gaza Strip is ruled not by a government, but by a terrorist group called Hamas, which is an acronym for Harakat – Harakat al-Muqawamah al-Islamiyya – or "Islamic Resistance Movement.  In Arabic, hamas (حماسة) also means “zeal,” “fervor” or “ardor,” which just about says it all. 

The religious “zeal” of the Islamic Resistance Movement has as much to do with the murderous October 7 attack on Israel, as does the more than half-century occupation of Gaza by the Israelis.  Truth to tell missiles have been raining down on Jewish Gaza-border towns and kibbutzim  on a regular basis for years and years.  It’s just that the October 7th attack/invasion was on such a massive scale and that the Netanyahu government was caught with its pants down . . . largely concerning itself with political issues affecting the P.M.’s ability to keep his right flank satisfied and himself out of the courtroom where he faces charges of fraud, breach of trust and accepting bribes in three separate scandals involving powerful media moguls and wealthy associates.

By the end of the day (October 7, 2023), Israel declared war on Hamas, thus beginning its massive assault on Gaza. Today, nearly 37 days into the war, the Israeli Defense Forces (IDF) have killed more than 10,000 people; of these, the majority are civilians. Food, water and fuel have been embargoed; surgeons in Gaza City are performing operations and delivering newborns by flashlight, because there simply is no electricity. And all across the world, people are condemning Israel for its “heartless excesses” and demanding an immediate cease-fire. The chances of this happening are slim at best; Hamas would immediately get back to restoring its weaponry and fortifying its many subterranean encampments. Israeli military leaders have no interest in a case-fire; not due to a love for killing Palestinian civilians or insensitivity towards saving and repatriating the hundreds of civilians kidnapped by Hamas.

In Hebrew, one would say that the Israelis - and Jews worldwide - are caught בין הפטיש והסדן - literally, “between the hammer and the anvil” . . . more commonly, “between a rock and a hard place.” On the one hand, almost all will admit that Israel, a sovereign state with a democratically-elected government, has every right to defend itself against heavily-armed terrorists whose rai·son d'ê·tre is the annihilation and utter dismemberment of Israel and the Jewish people from Afghanistan to Zimbabwe. On the other, Israel’s response to Hamas’ deadly - and ongoing - invasion is both deeply repellant and repugnant. But what can the Israelis do? To a growing number of anti-Semites, and-Zionists, the answer is simple: “Just die! Leave the Palestinians alone. Stop your intended act of genocide!”

On the other side of the aisle, there are ultra-conservatives coming out of the cracks urging that “all Palestinians should be killed,” or urged the banning of all pro-Palestinian groups on college campuses for offering “material support” to terrorists. The rise in supporting Palestinians and attacking Israelis and Jews in general is being both seen and heard in both Europe and South America. Indeed, ס'איז שװער צו זײַן אַ ייִד “It’s hard to be a Jew.” Recently, both the Trump-supporting Fox entertainer Sean Hannity and the left-leaning U.K. talk show host Piers Morgan have interviewed Mosab Hassan Yousef, the disowned son of Hamas co-founder Sheikh Hassan Yousef.

In both interviews, Yousef., who was long ago dubbed the“Green Prince” (also the title of a 2014 documentary based on his autobiography) for his efforts to help the Shin Bet (the Israeli security agency) thwart terror attacks during the Second Intifada in the early 2000s. In both interviews, Yousef (a “marked man” who now lives in San Diego), predicted that once Israel removes Hamas from power in the Gaza Strip as it has vowed to do following the October 7 terror onslaught, Palestinian residents would celebrate and thank Israel for ending their oppression and “lust for power.” Contrasting 21st century Israel and Hamas “which possesses a 7th century mentality,” Yousef went on to describe the two sides in saying: “. . . the gap is very huge. Hamas represents chaos. This is where they thrive. Israel represents order; democracy – Hence those are the two opposite extremes that have been clashing,"

Like many Jews, it truly hurts, bothers and worries me that Israel has taken such savage reprisals against the people of Gaza.  Yes, I support Israel’s right to defend itself and its citizens by going after and eliminating the murderers of Hamas.  And yet, I feel like that parent who chastises the child by saying “But we expect more of you.”

So what is to be done and how can we get across to the growing masses of those who support the “poor oppressed Palestinians” against the “genocidal Israelis?”

One possible answer is to teach history; to open the minds, hearts and souls of those who protest in the streets with a handful of crucial facts to ponder.  The other day, my friend Herb Stoller forwarded me the following video from an unknown Yemini under the title of “Hypocrisy for ‘Pro-Palestinians.”  It just about says it all:

All I can get is that those who whole-heartedly support the Palestinians against the military might of the Israelis, ponder what this young man has to teach . . . and learn a bit of history. It just might save the world from the planet’s most catastrophic collision.

Not only is it “hard to be a Jew”; it is doubly difficult to be an intelligent human being.

Copyright©2023 Kurt Franklin Stone

#958: The Words and the Passion of Yair Lapid

Among Israelis, oh-havei Yisrael (“lovers of Israel”), Jews from America to Zaire (‘The Democratic Republic of the Congo”) and diplomats the world over, the name Yair (Hebrew for either “to illuminate” or “to clarify”) Lapid (hebrew for “torch” or “flame”) is as well known as that of Bibi Netanyahu or Anthony Blinken.  And in my opinion, deservedly so. For the now 59 year old (he will become 60 this coming November 5) is a true polymath, herein understood to be “a person with a wide range of interests and expertise in many various fields of science, humanities and the arts.”  In his adult life, Lapid, who himself is the descendent of journalists, writers, poets and politicians (several of whom were murdered in the Holocaust), is himself a writer in various genres (novels, thrillers, plays, memoirs, biographies, daily columns and politics), an actor, songwriter and, for many years, one of Israel’s most famous news anchors and television "presenters” - sort of like  Israel’s Johnny Carson.  He is married to photojournalist and columnist Lehi Lapid who, although being the daughter and granddaughter of distinguished Orthodox rabbis, was recently  accused of being a Messianic Jew.  She sued the rabbi who made the original accusation, and almost immediately received a public apology.  

in January 2012, Yair Lapid announced that he would leave the world of broadcast journalism and enter politics, quickly creating a new political party, the centrist יש עתיד (yesh atid, Hebrew for “there is a future.”)  The move was timed to coincide with the general expectation in Israel for early elections to be held in the early fall of 2012.

A few days after Yesh Atid's party registration in early 2012, in a surprise move, Benjamin Netanyahu formed a national unity government. At the time it It was thought that Lapid's party would have to wait until late 2013 before it could participate in national elections. But in October 2012, following the departure of Kadima from Netanyahu's coalition over how to implement a Supreme Court decision ending the exemption from the military draft for the ultra-Orthodox, Netanyahu announced that elections would take place in late January 2013, thus affording Yesh Atid its first opportunity to run. In November 2012, Yesh Atid was polling an average of 11.6%, or 13–14 seats in the 120-seat Knesset (the Israeli Parliament). The January election results showed Lapid’s party winning an unexpected 19 seats, making Yesh Atid the second-largest party in the 19th Knesset.  P.M. Netanyahu named Lapid his Finance Minister. The former journalist/talk-show host’s name was quickly getting known in international circles: In April 2013, Lapid appeared on Time magazine's list of the "100 Most Influential People in the World 2013" in the category “Leaders." The following month, he ranked first on the list of the "Most Influential Jews in the World" by The Jerusalem Post; he also was listed as one of the "Foreign Policy Global Thinkers of 2013.” 

In his first decade as a politician, the man who came into nearly every secular Israeli’s living room on a nightly basis, went on to serve as Minister of Foreign Affairs (2021-2022), Second Alternate Prime Minister (June 13, 2021-June 30, 2022), and Prime Minister (July 1, 2022-December 30, 2023).  Lapid and his party have fought long and loud against corruption through their support of the “Nachshon Plan,” the imbalance of political favoritism shown to the ultra-Orthodox political parties in order to curry favor, and the absolute correctness of a "Two-party solution.” 

Within days of Hamas’ swift and demoralizing attack on Israel, Yair Lapid announced that he would not join Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Benny Gantz’s national emergency government, saying that he does not believe it will work with its current structure and membership.   Lapid pointed to three issues:

• The keeping of “extremists” in the hardline government;

• A double security cabinet structure without clear lines of authority, and 

• The continued presence of those at fault for the “unpardonable failure” to prevent Saturday’s crushing Hamas terror attack, which triggered the ongoing war.

While saying that his Yesh Atid party will, without question, continue to support the war effort from outside the shared leadership of the so-called “Unity Government,” and will not vote against the Knesset confirmation of five National Unity party ministers being added to Netanyahu’s government, Lapid said that it’s still necessary to “take the extremists out of the government of extremists.”

Time and again, Yair Lapid has proven himself to be one of the very best, most eloquently effective and moving speakers in international politics.  To hear his words, to feel his passion, is a humbling yet electrifying experience . . . if those two bipolar opposites are possible.  I end with a video of a speech he delivered at a German railroad crossing on August 21, 2014.  Despite the fact that the speech is now more than 9 years old, it has the power, the prescience and message of a message just completed in the early morning  hours today.  Like all truly great speeches, it has the power to both tug at the heartstrings and give steel to the spine.  Lapid gave this speech twice: first in Hebrew with English subtitles, and next in English  with Hebrew underscoring his words.  What follows is the English  version.  And for those who And for those who, for whatever reason do not have access to YouTube, I have appended a transcript of the English version.

(My deep thanks to My Pal Al for sending me a copy of Lapid’s masterpiece.  You are the best!)

                                                                      A fatal blind spot for sheer evil

Good people refuse to accept the possibility that human beings could use children as human shields

The Holocaust causes us all to ask of ourselves the same question: What would I have done?

What would I have done if I was a Jew in Berlin in 1933, when Hitler rose to power? Would I have run? Would I have sold my house, my business? Removed my children from school in the middle of the year? Or would I have said to myself: it will pass, it is just momentary madness, Hitler says all these things because he is a politician seeking election. Yes, he’s anti-Semitic, but who isn’t? We’ve been through worse than this. It’s better to wait, to keep my head down. It will pass.

What would I do if I was a German in Berlin on the 18th October 1941, when the first train left this platform, heading East and on it 1,013 Jews – children, women, the elderly — all destined for death.

I don’t ask what I would have done if I was a Nazi, but what would I have done if I was an honest German man, waiting for his train here? A German citizen the same age I am now, with three children like mine. A man who educated his children on the values of basic human decency and the right to life and respect? Would I have remained silent? Would I have protested? Would I have been one of the few Berliners to join the anti-Nazi underground, or one of the many Berliners who carried on with life and pretended that nothing was happening?

And what if I was one of the 1,013 Jews on that train? Would I have boarded the train? Would I have smuggled my 18-year-old daughter to the northern forests? Would I have told my two sons to fight until the end? Would I have dropped my suitcase and started to run? Or would I have attacked the guards in the black uniforms and died an honorable, quick death instead of dying slowly of hunger and torture?

I think I know the answer. I think you do too.

None of the 1,013 Jews departing for their deaths fought the guards. Not them and not the tens of thousands who followed them from this place. Neither did my grandfather, Bela Lampel, when a German soldier took him from his home late at night on the 18th March 1944. “Bitte,” said his mother — my great-grandmother Hermine — to the German soldier. She slowly got down on her knees and hugged the soldiers boots. “Bitte, don’t forget that you also have a mother.” The soldier didn’t say a word. He didn’t know that from the bed, hiding under the duvet, my father was looking at him. A Jewish boy of 13 who over night became a man.

Why didn’t they fight? That is the question that haunts me. That is the question that the Jewish people have struggled with since the last train left for Auschwitz. And the answer – the only answer – is that they didn’t believe in the totality of evil.

They knew, of course, that there were bad people in the world, but they didn’t believe in total evil, organized evil, without mercy or hesitation, cold evil that looked at them but didn’t see them, not even for a moment, as human.

According to their murderers, they weren’t people. They weren’t mothers or fathers, they weren’t somebody’s children. According to their murderers, they never celebrated the birth of a child, never fell in love, never took their old dog for a walk at two in the morning or laughed until they cried at the latest comedy by Max  Ehrlich.

That’s what you need to kill another man. To be convinced that he isn’t a man at all. When the murderers looked upon the people who departed from this platform on their final journey they didn’t see Jewish parents, only Jews. They weren’t Jewish poets or Jewish musicians, only Jews. They weren’t Herr Braun or Frau Schwartz, only Jews.

Destruction starts with the destruction of identity. It is no surprise that the first thing done to them, when they arrived at Auschwitz, was to tattoo a number on their arm. It is hard to kill Rebecca Grunwald, a beautiful, fair-haired 18-year-old romantic, but Jew number 7762 A is easy to murder. Yet it remains the same person.

Seventy-five years later, do we know any more? Do we understand more?

The Holocaust placed before Israel a dual challenge:

On the one hand it taught us that we must survive at any price, and be able to defend ourselves at any price. Trainloads of Jews will never again depart from a platform anywhere in the world. The security of the State of Israel and its citizens must forever be in our hands alone. We have friends, and I stand here among friends. The new Germany has proven its friendship to Israel time and again, but we must not, and we cannot, rely on anyone but ourselves.

On the other hand, the Holocaust taught us that no matter the circumstances we must always remain moral people. Human morality is not judged when everything is ok, it is judged by our ability to see the suffering of the other, even when we have every reason to see only our own.

The Holocaust cannot be compared, and must not be compared, to any other event in human history. It was, in the words of the author K. Zetnik, a survivor of Auschwitz, “another planet.” We must not compare, but we must always remember what we learned.

A war like the one we fight today, which looks likely to continue and which the civilized world — whether it wants to or not — will be a part of, causes the two lessons we learned from the Holocaust to stand opposite one another.

The need to survive teaches us to strike hard to defend ourselves.

The need to remain moral, even when circumstances are immoral, teaches us to minimize human suffering as much as possible.

Our moral test is not taking place in a sterile laboratory or upon the philosopher’s page. In the past weeks, the moral test put before us has taken place during intense fighting. Thousands of rockets were fired at our citizens and armed terrorists dug tunnels next to kindergartens with the aim of killing or kidnapping our children. Anyone who criticizes us must ask themselves one question: “What would you do if someone came to your child’s school with a gun in their hand and started shooting?”

Hamas, as opposed to us, wants to kill Jews. Young or old, men or women, soldiers or civilians. They see no difference, because for them we are not people. We are Jews and that is reason enough to murder us.

Our moral test, even under these circumstances, is to continue to distinguish between enemies and innocents. Every time a child in Gaza dies it breaks my heart. They are not Hamas, they are not the enemy, they are just children.

Therefore Israel is the first country in military history that informs its enemy in advance where and when it will attack, so as to avoid civilian causalities. Israel is the only country that transfers food and medication to its enemy while the fighting continues. Israel is the only country where pilots abandon their mission because they see civilians on the ground. And despite it all, children die, and children are not supposed to die.

Here in Europe, and elsewhere in the world, people sit in their comfortable homes, watching the evening news, and tell us that we are failing the test. Why? Because in Gaza people suffer more. They don’t understand — or don’t want to understand — that the suffering of Gaza is the main tool of evil. When we explain to them, time after time, that Hamas uses the children of Gaza as human shields, that Hamas intentionally places them in the firing line, to ensure they die, that Hamas sacrifices the lives of the young to win its propaganda war, people refuse to believe it. Why? Because they cannot believe that human beings — human beings who look like them and sound like them — are capable of behaving that way. Because good people always refuse to recognize the totality of evil until it’s too late.

Time after time we ask ourselves why people in the world prefer to blame us when the facts so clearly indicate otherwise. Across the world, fanatic Muslims are massacring other Muslims. In Syria, in Iraq, in Libya, in Nigeria more children are killed in a week than die in Gaza in a decade. Every week, women are raped, homosexuals are hung and Christians are beheaded. The world watches, offers its polite condemnation, and returns obsessively to condemning Israel for fighting for our lives.

Some of the criticism stems from anti-Semitism. It has raised its ugly head once more. To those people we say: we will fight you everywhere. The days when Jews ran away from you are over. We will not be silent in the face of anti-Semitism and we expect every government, in every country, to stand shoulder to shoulder with us and fight this evil with us.

Other critics, perhaps more enlightened in their own eyes, prefer to blame only us for what happens in Gaza because they know we are the only ones who listen. They prefer to focus their anger upon us not in spite of but because we are committed to the same human values which Hamas rejects – compassion for the weak, rationality, protection of gay people, of women’s rights, of the freedom of religion and freedom of speech.

Let us not fool ourselves. Evil is here. It is around us. It seeks to hurt us. Fundamentalist Islam is an ultimate evil, and like the evil which came before it, has learned how to use all our tools against us: Our TV cameras, our international organizations, our commissions of inquiry and our legal system. Just as terror uses rockets and suicide bombers, it uses our inability to accept that someone would sacrifice the children of their people just to get a supportive headline or an eye-catching photograph.

Standing here, in this place, I want to say clearly that the leaders of Hamas, an anti-western, anti-Semitic terrorist organization, cannot be safe while they continue to target innocent civilians. Just as every European leader would do, just as the United States did with Osama Bin Laden, so we will pursue every leader of Hamas.

This is the evil which we all face and Israel stands at the front. Europe must know, if we will fail to stop them, they will come for you. We must do everything to avoid suffering and the death of innocents but we stand in the right place from which to say to the entire world: We will not board the train again. We will protect ourselves from total evil.

Thank you.

        !לעום לא עוד      

(Never Again!)

Copyright©2023 Kurt Franklin Stone                                                                                                  

#957: Operation "Swords of Iron"

On October 6, 1973, (the tenth day of the Jewish month of Tishri, known as Yom Kippur - the Jewish “Day of Atonement”) Egypt and Syria launched a surprise attack against Israel. The ensuing battle, which we in the west know as the “Yom Kippur War” and those in the Middle East call “The Ramadan War,” lasted a mere 18 days, with Israel besting its Arab enemies and ultimately, their Russian backers.  Precisely 50 years and 1 day later, the terrorist group Hamas, which controls the Gaza Strip, and is  funded largely by  Iran, launched more than 2,000 rockets from the Gaza Strip into Israel, 

Needless to say, this murderous multi-pronged assault/invasion, which includes terrorist attacks from the ground, the sea and the air, is quite a bit different from the Yom Kippur War of 1973. True, both wars, (1973 and 2023) saw the IDF (Israeli Defense Forces) caught dangerously flatfooted. One obvious difference is that in 1973, Israel was attacked primarily by two countries - Egypt and Syria; in this new war, Israel’s enemy is far more amorphous - a well-armed, well-funded terrorist militia. In 1973, Israeli deaths in that 18-day war amounted to 2,688 . . . none of whom were civilians. Hamas quickly named their invasion “Operation Al-Aqsa Deluge,” after the Al-Aqsa Mosque, Islam’s 3rd holiest site, and long a bone of contention with observant Jews, who hold that it is the same site that housed both the First and Second Temple, long destroyed. Jews refer to the area as הר הבית (har ha beit - “the Temple Mount”), Muslims as al-Haram al-Sharif, the Noble Sanctuary.” 

Mohammad Deif, the enigmatic, leader of Hamas' military wing, claimed that the specific flashpoint for launching Operation Al-Aqsa Deluge was Israel's continued aggression on the area occupied by Al Aqsa. "They [Israeli forces] consistently assault our women, the elderly, children and [the] youth; and prevent our people from praying in the Aqsa Mosque while allowing groups of Jews to desecrate the mosque with daily incursions," he said.

Deif’s reasoning is doubtful, at best, and for a couple of reasons. First, there is nothing new about his charges; second, for the most part, they are false. Muslims have had access to al-Haram al-Sharif for purposes of entering the mosque for years. And third, while it is true that a large gathering of haridim (ultra-Orthodox Jews) did enter al-Haram a week ago (the fifth day of the Jewish Fall festival of Succot) armed with decidedly non-lethal lulavim v’etrogim, the attack on Israel by the terrorists of Hamas was far too complex and well-planned to have been the creature of a few days pique and tension; they must have been planning this multi-pronged incursion for months and months.

The Israeli response, which P.M. Netanyahu officially named מבצע חרבות ברזל miv’tza kharvot barzel - “Operation Swords of Iron”) has already seen 500 deaths in both Israel and the Gaza Strip. (By the time this essay is posted and you read it, these figures will no doubt have greatly increased. IDF strikes against Hamas targets in Gaza have already reportedly killed at least  230 Palestinians; Hamas terrorists are currently holding Israeli civilians hostage in their homes. 

The timing of this horrific assault is notable, hitting Israel at one of the most difficult moments in its history. It comes after months of profound anxiety about the cohesion of Israeli society and the readiness of its military, a crisis set off by the far-right government’s efforts to reduce the power of the judiciary.  The conflict also jeopardizes a months-long effort by President Biden and his top aides to push Saudi Arabia to normalize diplomatic relations with Israel, its historical adversary. Saudi Arabia has never recognized the Jewish state out of solidarity with Palestinians but had seemed ready to change its policy.  In its first public comment on the war, the Saudis called for de-escalation, but stopped short of blaming Hamas . . . a sign that the progress Saudi, Israeli and American diplomats have been making might now take a backseat to regional politics.

While governments the world over - with the notable exception of those in the Middle East - have voiced support for Israel’s right to defend itself and its people - and, for the part condemning Hamas - here in America, Republican response is both highly partisan and none too surprising.  Virtually the entire cast of characters vying for their party’s presidential nomination (a quest fraught with failure) have blamed President Biden Hamas’ attack on the Jewish State.  Republican presidential contenders immediately tried to pin a portion of the blame on Biden,  seeking to tie his recent decision to release $6 billion in blocked Iranian funds in exchange for freeing five Americans who had been detained in Iran to Saturday’s complex attack. The White House pushed back fiercely against the GOP criticism, noting that the money unfrozen last month in the prisoner swap has yet to be spent by Iran and can only be used for humanitarian needs.  While campaigning in Iowa former POTUS Trump criticized President Joe Biden for being a ““weak leader. The Israeli attack was made because we are perceived as being weak and ineffective and with a weak, a really weak leader,” he told a gathering of his MAGA supporters. 

By contrast, all Democrats from the most centrist to the most progressive, have expressed support for Israel while roundly condemning Hamas. Even Minnesota Representative Ilhan Omar (herself a Muslim) took to X (formerly “Twitter”) voicing her concern: I condemn the horrific acts we are seeing unfold today in Israel against children, women, the elderly, and the unarmed people who are being slaughtered and taken hostage by Hamas. Such senseless violence will only repeat the back and forth cycle we've seen, which we cannot allow to continue. We need to call for de-escalation and ceasefire. I will keep advocating for peace and justice throughout the Middle East.”

Without question, the politician in the worst shape is Israeli P.M. Netanyahu, who is taking the brunt of the blame for his country’s lack of intelligence . . . despite having one of the very best cyber intelligence capabilities in the world. Haaretz opinion writer Yossi Verter hit the nail on the head in his first op-ed after the invasion: Israel was humiliated and routed on Saturday. A “small” terror organization exposed the nakedness of a regional superpower with intelligence and cyber capabilities that are among the best in the world. Even if all of the Gaza Strip is destroyed (and there is no need for this), and even if . . . Mohammed Deif, and his associates roll in the alleys, this will not make up for the biggest security failure since 1973. It will not sweeten the bitter taste of the debacle, and it won’t ease the shock of the number of those killed and kidnapped.”

Netanyahu is in such a political bind that he has reached out to centrist opposition parties Yesh Atid and National Unity to enter an emergency government. Netanyahu made the offer during a meeting with Yesh Atid leader Yair Lapid and National Unity party leader Benny Gantz held earlier today, saying such a government would be the same in format as the Levi Eshkol government then-opposition leader Menachem Begin joined before the Six Day War in 1967.

Gantz says he is considering entering such a government for the duration of the war but insists that government would “deal with security challenges alone” and in a manner that would allow “substantive partnership and influence over decision-making in relevant forums” for his party. Lapid said that he would join “a reduced, professional, emergency government” and says it would be impossible to manage a war with “the extreme and dysfunctional composition of the current cabinet,” essentially calling on the prime minister to remove the far-right Religious Zionism and ultra-nationalist Otzma Yehudit parties from the government in order for him to bring his Yesh Atid party into the coalition.

Regardless of how the government is restructured and who leads for how long, Israel is likely in for a long war . . . one that is as existentially challenging as any it has fought over the past three quarters of a century.   How the war will affect the future of a two-state solution, negotiations with Saudi Arabia, the “unstable stability” of the Middle East, the rise of anti-Semitism and a thousand other things is yet to be known, let alone to be seen.  

But know this of a certainty: the world is a better place for all, when Israel is both safe and secure.  Whether or not one agrees with everything the Israeli government or its people do (and I for one do not), it is still well worth our support.   As tiny as it is, as riddled with issues as it can be, Israel has proven time and time again what it can accomplish for the world when given the chance to live in peace. For when Israel succeeds, so too can the entire world.  

Stand with Israel, the iron fist inside the velvet glove . . . 

Copyright©2023 Kurt Franklin Stone