The New York Jewish Week - Connecting the World to Jewish News, Culture, Features, and Opinions for Wednesday, 5 March 2014

The New York Jewish Week - Connecting the World to Jewish News, Culture, Features, and Opinions for Wednesday, 5 March 2014
Dear Reader,
Ukraine's chief rabbi, speaking in New York this week, said his community of up to 400,000 Jews is relatively safe but worried about a possible expanding Russian attack. Staff Writer Steve Lipman reports on the crisis.
INTERNATIONAL
Fresh Fears For Jews In Ukraine Amid Strife
Community’s chief rabbi, speaking here, points fingers at Russians.
Steve Lipman
Staff Writer
As Russia’s grip over the Crimean Peninsula tightened this week, the deteriorating political situation in Ukraine could threaten the security of the country’s Jewish community, leaders of Ukrainian Jewry warn.
Some say the recent street fighting in Kiev, the Ukrainian capital, and the prospect of a nationwide civil war, could unleash latent Ukrainian anti-Semites. Others say the danger comes mainly from Russians who may assume a growing degree of control over Ukrainian society.
Rabbi Yaakov Dov Bleich, the Brooklyn native who has served as Ukraine’s chief rabbi since 1989, declared at a press conference in Manhattan Monday that native Ukrainians pose little threat to the country’s 350,000 to 400,000 Jews, despite reports of several anti-Semitic incidents during social unrest in recent months.
But, he added, “Today everyone is afraid of [an expanding] Russian attack.”
Synagogues in two Crimean cities, Simferopol and Sevastopol, were closed last weekend because of security concerns.
Rabbi Bleich hinted, during the media event at the headquarters of the United Jewish Communities of Eastern Europe & Asia organization, that Russians, possibly dressed in Ukrainian nationalist garb, are responsible for the latest attacks on Jewish sites.
He accused unnamed Russians of committing well-documented acts of anti-Semitic vandalism — most notably the painting of swastikas and “Death to the Jews” on a Reform synagogue in Simferopol — in recent days as orchestrated “provocations” and “propaganda” to help justify Russia’s growing military occupation of Ukraine and to gain sympathy for their cause, as Nazi Germany did before the 1938 annexation of Austria.
“The Russians are blowing this way out of proportion,” he said, referring to the threat of Ukrainian anti-Semitism and the recent vandalism.
But, the rabbi added, “We don’t know who did it.”
“Ukraine was successful in rebuilding a beautiful society” since it was established as an independent republic in 1991, after the breakup of the Soviet Union, Rabbi Bleich told reporters here. He said good relations between Jews and other Ukrainians were established over the last 23 years. “Jews fought alongside Ukrainians” in the recent demonstrations that forced President Viktor Yanukovych to leave the country.
“The Jews in Crimea are not choosing any side in this conflict, so I do not think they are threatened,” Yosef Zissels, president of the Association of Jewish Organizations and Communities of Ukraine (popularly known as the Vaad), told The Jerusalem Post. But less conciliatory, more concerned voices, fearing a return of the organized pogrom attacks on Jews that cost thousands of Jewish lives and forced many to flee from Ukraine and bordering countries for hundreds of years, are coming out of the region, according to stories in the Israeli press.
Alexander Boroda, president of the Federation of Russia, said leaders of Ukrainian Jewry should avoid commenting on the current political situation, according to The Jerusalem Post. Boroda called Rabbi Bleich’s recent comments, including his participation in a group letter that urged Russia to pull out its troops and “stop its aggression” against Ukraine, counter-productive. “Jews and rabbis should stay away from politics,” he said.
Some Ukrainian Jews see the Russian military incursion into Crimea as restoring order in the wake of a violent revolution, JTA reported this week. A JTA story described Leah Cyrilkova, who lives in Sevastopol, chatting with a group of soldiers in a city park. “I feel safer with them around,” she said. “These are crazy times, and now I know that if something bad happens, they will stop it.”
Rabbi Misha Kapustin, whose synagogue in Simferopol was recently vandalized, acknowledged that some Jews support Russian involvement in the crisis. “In this area there is considerable support for the Russian invasion, and the local [Crimean Jewish] community is very assimilated here. You should take into account the effect of Russian propaganda: the television they watch, what papers they read.”
Rabbi Reuven Azman, a prominent Chabad representative based in Kiev, Ukraine’s capital, recently encouraged the city’s Jews to leave the country.
“Many here are against the Russians but are afraid to talk,” Rabbi Kapustin, told Haaretz. “The Russians have invaded illegally and that must be opposed. So far, people have encouraged me and I don’t believe my petition will cause any harm to the Jews.”
In a similar vein, the worldpolicy.org website warned this week, that, “Anti-Semitism has always existed alongside the Ukrainian independence movement.”
Ukraine’s Jewish population faces no special threat, Rabbi Bleich said at the press conference, the day before he was to meet with U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry back in Kiev.
He conceded that the nationalistic Svoboda (Freedom) party has made statements that many see as anti-Semitic, including remarks by Svoboda leader Oleh Tyahnybok that “organized Jewry” dominates the country’s media and government, and several attacks on synagogues and individual Jews have taken place in recent months, but he called those isolated instances.
“The revolution brought out a measure of anarchy,” offering cover for individuals with anti-Semitic leanings, the rabbi said.  “When there is a breakdown, minorities suffer. Jews are a good [target].”
Rabbi Pinchas Goldschmidt, president of the Conference of European Rabbis, said in a public statement in January that government and opposition tolerance of anti-Semitic statements gave anti-Semites  “free reign” to attack Jews.
But most Ukrainian Jews do not fear a widespread outbreak of anti-Semitism, Rabbi Bleich told reporters here. “No one has run away. My community does not feel in danger. The community doesn’t feel threatened.” He said he warns all Ukrainians now to avoid known danger spots and “isolated areas.”
Rabbi Bleich said Ukrainian Jewry has not faced a major problem of anti-Semitism since it became an independent republic in 1991, following decades of state-sponsored anti-Semitism in the Soviet Union.
“People feel safe, Jews feel safe, Ukrainians feel safe, Russians feel safe,” he said. “We don’t want to return to Soviet times” of state-sponsored anti-Semitism.
“There is not a danger to Jews today in Ukraine [from Ukrainians]. We are more afraid of the Russians,” in case Russia re-establishes control over Ukraine.
The rabbi was here to raise funds for two humanitarian organizations he has established, one focusing on the Jewish community (jewishkiev.org), and one non-sectarian (kievrelief.org), which will provide security for institutions of various minority communities and provide food for isolated elderly people.
Meanwhile, the Jewish Agency has announced that it is prepared to increase emergency assistance to Ukraine’s Jewish communities, and the Joint Distribution Committee activated emergency plans to assist Crimea’s estimated 17,000 Jews. These plans include stepped-up delivery of food and medicine to the elderly, increased security at three Hesed social welfare community centers and an emergency phone chain to determine the needs of clients.
Rabbi Bleich was among the leaders of several Ukrainian religious communities who signed a letter that criticized Russian aggression and urged the international community to “stop foreign invasion into Ukraine and brutal interference into our internal affairs.” Other signees of the letter, under the auspices of the Institute for Religious Freedom, included leaders of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church, the Ukrainian Greek Orthodox Church, the Evangelical Baptist Union, the Seventh-day Adventist Church, and the Ukrainian Lutheran Church.
The opposition leaders who now head Ukraine’s interim government have pledged to protect the interests of Jews and other minority groups, Rabbi Bleich said; the country’s minorities include Tatars, Poles, Romanians and Germans.
“We have a very good working relationship with the government,” he said.
“Nothing will better guarantee a future for Ukrainian Jewry than the end of violent confrontations and the restoration of future democratic rule,” Rabbi Abraham Cooper, associate dean of the Simon Wiesenthal Center said in a statement.
Rabbi Bleich said he would urge Kerry on Tuesday to move this year’s G8 Summit on industrialized countries to Kiev as a sign of solidarity with Ukraine, and to take a string stand against Russian President Vladimir Putin,
The rabbi said a U.S. military presence in Ukraine may be required. Ukraine, he said, need “boots on the ground” to protect “the Cold War from getting hot.”

steve@jewishweek.org
-------
I was in Washington, D.C. this week for the annual AIPAC policy conference, where a record 14,000 participants showed their support for Israel, as did Congressional leaders. But the standoff between the lobby and the White House on Iran and Mideast peace talks remains. Also, an Editorial on what AIPAC stands for.
GARY ROSENBLATT
Everyone Loves Israel?
AIPAC has record 14,000 attendees and Congressional support. But what about the White House?
Wed, 03/05/2014
Gary Rosenblatt
Washington, D.C. — A black revivalist minister leads thousands of people, who are out of their seats and clapping their hands, in a rousing spiritual and praises the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), the traditionally pro-Israel lobby; Latinos and African-Americans describe their love for the Jewish state; 2,300 high school and college students give full voice to their solidarity with Jerusalem; and Democratic and Republican leaders of Congress outdo each other in expressing their unyielding commitment to the people and state of Israel.
Welcome to the AIPAC Policy Conference, the three-day annual event that transforms the Washington Convention Center into a pro-Israel Garden of Eden for huge numbers of faithful supporters – more than 14,000 this year, a record. The theme, featuring photos of dozens of people, young and old and of every race, is “I am Pro-Israel. I am AIPAC.”
It’s a massive and impressive advocacy event, so sophisticated in its multi-media presentations, so on-message in its talking points for participants who will spend the last conference day lobbying on Capitol Hill, and so crisp and well-organized from timing to crowd control that it’s hard to believe it’s being staged by a Jewish organization.
You also have to keep reminding yourself that you are in a bubble, a place where people of different religions, politics and colors share an abiding sense of care and concern for Israel. So while polls and surveys show that Israel support is strongest among older, white males who vote Republican, here at the policy conference one encounters a bipartisan, multi-cultural experience with college students just as fervent as their parents and grandparents in celebrating Israel.
J Street? Open Hillel? Massive indifference to Israel’s challenges? Not here. A sense that AIPAC has lost the Iran sanctions legislation battle to the White House? Not on the public agenda.
And while other major Jewish or Mideast-oriented conferences may pride themselves on offering a wide range of viewpoints on the crises of the day and how to respond, the speakers at dozens of breakout sessions here tend to present a perspective that ranges from A to B – that is, a robust support for Israel’s position on being tougher on Iran, including new sanctions in Congress; putting the onus on the Palestinians for the lack of progress on Mideast peace talks; and implicitly or explicitly expressing deep reservations about a naïve Administration that appears far more committed to diplomacy on Iran than backing it up with the threat of force.
Not that I disagree with much of that message, I hasten to add. But don’t come here looking for the other side of these complex issues. And they got a great deal more complicated with President Obama’s tough message to Prime Minister Netanyahu on the eve of their White House meeting Monday.
In a rude welcome to the U.S., Obama set the tone for a showdown, telling journalist Jeffrey Goldberg that it is up to Israel to make peace with the Palestinians before the window of opportunity closes. The interview, posted on Bloomberg View on Sunday, suggests that Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas is ready to make peace – no mention of his refusals to recognize Israel as a Jewish state, compromise on the right of return, or speak out against the continuing demonization of Israel among his people – and that it is Netanyahu, and the settlements, that block the path to a brighter future.
Obama invoked Hillel the Elder in his message to Netanyahu: “If not now, when? And if not you, Mr. Prime Minister, who?”
No doubt the takeaway for the Israeli leader, in the face of this verbal affront, is the first half of Hillel’s aphorism: “If I am not for myself, who will be for me?”
It should be noted that the interview took place last Thursday, prior to the outbreak of the Russia-Ukraine conflict. That crisis complicates the U.S. efforts in dealing with both the Iran and Mideast talks, where Russian support is vital. It is likely that had the invasion of Ukraine already taken place, Obama would not have been so confrontational with Netanyahu, given the president’s more immediate problems. That is borne out by the fact that when the U.S. and Israeli leaders met at the White House on Monday, the tone, at least in their public comments, was cordial and respectful.
Still, Obama’s comments in the Goldberg interview reflect his sense that the onus is on Israel to be more forthcoming in the peace talks, and Netanyahu has responded by insisting that Israel, not the PA, has been the flexible party willing to make compromises.
In the prime minister’s address to AIPAC Tuesday morning, he emphasized the benefits that peace could have throughout the region and urged Abbas to “stop denying history” and recognize Israel as the nation state of the Jewish people.
“President Abbas, recognize the Jewish state, and in doing so you would be telling your people that - while we might have a territorial dispute, the right of the Jewish people to a state of their own is beyond dispute.
“I hope the Palestinian leadership will stand with Israel and the United States on the right side of the moral divide, the side of peace, reconciliation and hope,” Netanyahu said.
‘Forceful Diplomacy’
AIPAC officials struggle mightily to maintain a bipartisan approach to the Mideast, sometimes showcasing Republican and Democratic leaders of Congress addressing the crowd from the same podium, stressing their common concern for Israel. But disappointment with Obama, at least on foreign policy, runs through the crowd and was acknowledged implicitly by several Democratic officials in their remarks. Jack Lew, the Jewish secretary of the treasury, made a strong case for the effectiveness of the current sanctions and asserted that “Iran is not open for business.” Applause from the delegates was polite and measured. He and Sen. Chuck Schumer of New York emphasized the president’s rock solid support for Israel, the unparalleled level of military and intelligence cooperation between Jerusalem and Washington and Obama’s commitment to preventing Iran from obtaining a nuclear bomb.
This point was made most effectively by Secretary of State John Kerry, who was passionate in his assurances of employing “forceful diplomacy” to protect Israel’s security on both the Iran front and in the peace talks with the Palestinians.
In dealing with Iran, the U.S., he said, “is guided by a simple bottom line: No deal is better than a bad deal. We get it, we understand the existential threat in our gut.” He said America’s stance was “not a favor to Israel but in the interest of the U.S.”
Kerry, who has Jewish lineage, made an effective case for diplomacy, and his well-crafted remarks received more than polite applause at times. Alternating between policy assurances and personal anecdotes, he asserted that the U.S. will oppose boycotts of Jerusalem and that Israel must be recognized by the Palestinians as “the nation state of the Jewish people” and he described his first visit to Masada when he and other visitors were invited to shout “Am Yisrael Chai” [the people of Israel live] into the air and heard “the haunting echoes of chai, chai…something I’ll never forget.”
I suspect that many in the audience, like me, wanted very much to believe Kerry. Unlike a year ago at this conference, no one was calling for a military strike on Iran. Everyone would prefer to prevent a nuclear Iran through talks. And the secretary certainly seemed sincere when he spoke of his tireless efforts and said that U.S. negotiators on Iran have their “eyes open wide,” that the talks are “not about trusting Tehran but about testing Iran,” and that America’s first priority in the Mideast negotiations is Israel’s security.
But rhetoric can only go so far. And ever since Obama backed off his own “red line” pledge last fall on punishing Syria for using chemical weapons against its own people, his deep resistance to the use, or real threat, of military force has been palpable.
According to Goldberg, speaking at a session analyzing the current Mideast situation, the question now is “to what degree is Obama uninterested in projecting American force in the Mideast and beyond?”
Fellow panelist Robert Satloff, executive director of the Washington Institute for Near East Policy, asserted that the negotiations on Iran are about “how much time we’ll have to figure out that Iran is cheating. It’s not about denying Iran the ability to cheat” or preventing its nuclear efforts, he said, adding: “In a fundamental way Iran has won.”
Bolstering that impression, at a session on “Inside Iran: The Politics of the Islamic Republic,” the two key speakers, both natives of Iran now working at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies in the U.S., were pessimistic about negotiations on Iran’s nuclear program. Ali Alfoneh and Emanuele Ottolenghi agreed that President Hassan Rouhani is a milder, more sophisticated leader than his predecessor, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, but that he is not a reformist and does not represent a strategic shift in Iran policy.
At a panel on Israeli public opinion, Ari Shavit, the Haaretz correspondent and author of the best-seller, “My Promised Land,” said that Israelis are caught in a bind, willing to make concessions to the Palestinians but only if their own security is assured.
Israelis are afraid of U.S. pressure, he said, and realize they must change the status quo to avoid being further delegitimized by the rest of the world. While insisting on a deal that would include recognition of Israel as a Jewish state, Shavit called for “changing the dynamic” in ways that “take the high moral ground” for both strategic and moral reasons.
“The ice is thin, we’re on the edge, and if we don’t change, we’re in trouble, especially with young people,” he said.
After touring U.S. campuses for much of January, Shavit observed that Israel is seen as “tribal and as human rights violators,” even among many Jewish students. He called for “a love offensive to win the hearts and minds” of young people, saying it is “the most important battle of all.”
The large audience applauded and then went on to other sessions preparing them to lobby a Congress highly sympathetic to their concerns.
It’s the White House that AIPAC and its supporters need to worry about.
Gary@jewishweek.org
------- 
At 23, chef Matt Loory feeds more than 300 circus performers traveling the country with Ringling Bros. Web Editor Helen Chernikoff describes the scene.
NEW YORK
He Feeds The Greatest Show On Earth
A 23-year-old Cordon Bleu grad rides the rails and churns out meals in the Ringling Bros. ‘Pie Car.’
Helen Chernikoff
Web Editor
As a kid, Matt Loory always loved both the circus and Purim.
Now that he’s a grown-up — just barely, at 23 years old — and in charge of feeding a Ringling Bros. and Barnum & Bailey’s circus, he’ll have to sacrifice shul for the show.
When Purim starts, Loory will be at work, presiding over an operation that churns out between 1,000 and 1,500 meals a week for the 300-plus circus performers and crew on the “Legends” show that just played the Barclays Center and will be in Newark over the holiday.
He’s a proud Jew who taught Sunday school at two synagogues in the Orlando-area community where he grew up; ate — and made — Shabbat dinner with his family and did a high school semester in Israel. The circus wasn’t a religion for his family, but they did make a point of going at least as often as some folks attend synagogue. Loory was in the audience every year from ages 3 to 22.
“At the circus, everyone is dressed up,” he said. “It’s a giant spectacle. We’re not battling for people’s right to live, like the Purim story. But I’d like to think that we bring joy to people’s lives, like the Megillah and the simcha. Every day on the circus is a simcha.”
Of course, as a historical phenomenon and a staple of popular culture, the circus enjoys a certain glamour. The modern-day version has its roots in ancient Chinese acrobatics and medieval market fairs, and Americans have long consumed stories of life behind the scenes.
About 10 years after Loory’s employer — then called P.T. Barnum’s Grand Traveling Museum, Menagerie, Caravan and Circus — made its debut in 1870, the children’s version of Harper’s Magazine serialized “Toby Tyler: Or Ten Weeks With the Circus,” a novel about a runaway boy that became a classic and a Disney film.
More recently, “Water for Elephants,” Toby Tyler for grown-ups, topped bestseller lists and was also turned into a film, starring Oscar-winner Reese Witherspoon.
But today, as in ancient China, putting on such a massive show is a lot of hard work, Loory says.
He runs two locations: “Pie Car Jr.,” essentially a food truck that travels with the show to provide cast and crew with sustenance at the venues, and the 110-foot-long “Pie Car Sr.,” where he and his five-person staff do most of their bulk cooking in addition to selling food 24 hours a day when the circus train is moving from show to show. Workweeks for staff can amount to 60 hours; for Loory himself, 17-hour days are not uncommon.
He does his work on an actual train — it looks like an Amtrak vehicle, except for the huge “Greatest Show on Earth” signs on the side — that’s more than a mile long. All show workers get their food from the Pie Cars, unless they’re playing a city like New York, where restaurants are worth paying more for.
The circus subsidizes Pie Car food, providing a dinner of a protein, starch, vegetable and a drink every night for between $5 and $10, Loory said.
“We all share this city without a zip code,” Loory said.
He’s been manager on the “Legends” show for a year and got that job just two months after he joined the crew, when his predecessor resigned for health reasons.
“This came as a surprise to everyone,” Loory said; indeed, spokeswoman Marni Raitt says he’s one of the youngest Pie Car managers in Ringling Bros. history.
Loory was always interested in food, and remembers standing on a stepstool and rolling matzah balls for soup from a young age. His family business is in television. His grandfather was a vice-president with CNN; his mother does freelance graphics and his father just closed his postproduction business. Loory likes the rush of doing live TV and considered going to college and then pursuing a career in it. But he decided it wasn’t for him.
“I didn’t want an office job, to be stuck behind a cubicle,” he said. “I didn’t want to wear a suit. Some of my friends are consultants or working in marketing. But I think that I have the coolest job out of all of them.”
A graduate of a Le Cordon Bleu — the venerable French cooking school has locations all over the world, including Orlando — Loory found out about the Ringling Bros. job by opening an e-mail from the school’s career services department. He had a job at a First Watch restaurant, one of a national chain of cafés focused on breakfast food, and was due for a promotion there, so he usually ignored the listings, but his love of the circus compelled him to apply.
“The beauty of this is, I’m seeing the entire country so I can figure out where I want to get off,” he said. “When the time comes, and I’m ready to do something else, I can just get off at Moline, Ill., or Austin, Texas.”
Ultimately, Loory dreams, like most cooking school graduates, of opening his own restaurant. Fifteen years ago, he worked out the concept with a friend: a kosher-style place that’s deli by day, and offers a rotating menu of traditional Jewish holiday dishes at night.
But for now, and for the next three to five years, he’s happy where he is; he never expected this or, for that matter, any job in his future to enable him to do the kind of fancy cooking he learned in school.
“I call this refined multicultural industrial cooking,” he said. “That’s the unfortunate part of working on a circus. We’re not boiling potatoes to mash them; we’re using mashed potatoes. We don’t cut corners, but we have to do things quicker.”
There’s eight Jews on the train — “not quite a minyan,” or prayer quorum, as Loory puts it — and they’re just one minority among many, since the cast and crew come from as least 20 different countries and speak about 10 languages, including Hungarian, Portuguese, Russian and Chinese.
Since taking the manager job, Loory has made it his mission to add to the Pie Cars’ offerings, which now include accommodations for special dietary needs like gluten intolerance and cuisines from the train’s various cultures.
Loory tries to use his food to enhance the circus community, said Emily Ritter, the show’s events coordinator. He asks his customers for recipes, and their favorite foods, and even launched an initiative in which the children on the train (they attend a traveling school and daycare) compile facts about different countries that Loory then posts on a board outside Pie Car Sr. On Saturdays, he hangs a flag from that country and makes its traditional foods, Ritter said.
All of these differences make it easy for Loory and the other Jews on the train to keep their faith, too.
He’s planning a Passover Seder. He wants to go on Birthright. And last Yom Kippur, Loory and the show’s accountant crashed Kol Nidre services at Congregation Beth Shalom in Kansas City, Kan.

“Pretty much everybody else who is Jewish actually works in the show, so they couldn’t come with us, but we could escape, and at least get there,” he said. “It’s difficult to do Shabbos services when there’s three shows going on. We do what we can.” 
-------
Also this week, a dark horse candidate among others who might succeed Abe Foxman at ADL; the ongoing dialogue at Columbia U. between Rashid Khalidi and Jewish students; Erica Brown on her grandmother turning 100; and our Food and Wine Purim edition offers ideas to enhance your holiday, like this updated recipe for hamentaschen and a review of a new sparkling wine that will be perfect for any party!
SHORT TAKES
Filling Foxman’s Large Shoes
Robert Goldblum
Managing Editor
When Mark Burnett and Roma Downey looked for the kosher seal of approval for “Son of God,” their retelling of the Jesus story, which opened in theaters nationwide last week, they turned to Abe Foxman, the iconic Anti-Defamation League national director. Foxman blessed the film as an “antidote” to Mel Gibson’s Jewishly troubling “Passion of the Christ,” according to The Wrap, which covers Hollywood.
When Foxman walks out the door next summer after nearly 40 years at the ADL (27 as its head), it’s hard to imagine folks like Burnett and Downey seeking such approval from his replacement, whoever he or she might be.
Nevertheless, the race for his replacement is on. And sources close to the ADL say Foxman’s replacement will likely be named by Sept. 1, even though he isn’t scheduled to step down until July of 2015. The reason? “So someone can sit at Abe’s knee for 10 months,” a source said, adding that the search committee has already conducted some interviews.
Last month, the Religion News Service, in a piece carried in the Washington Post, floated some names as possible replacements; they were culled, RNS said, from conversations with activists across the Jewish community. Some are former members of Congress (Rep. Gary Ackerman from Long Island and Sen. Rudy Boschwitz from Minnesota); others are Jewish community insiders (Jewish Federations of North America Washington director William Daroff and American Jewish Committee interfaith director Noam Marans). Still others, like former Jewish Council for Public Affairs head Hannah Rosenthal and former National Jewish Democratic Coalition head Ira Forman, have close ties to the Obama administration and have headed the government’s anti-Semitism monitoring operation.
A far-outside-the-box name that has emerged as a possible Foxman successor is Fordham law school professor and novelist Thane Rosenbaum, who has been a regular Jewish Week contributor.
Rosenbaum, 54, who teaches human rights at Fordham Law School and directs the Forum on Law, Culture and Society at Fordham, is a leading figure of the so-called Second Generation of Holocaust survivors. As a child of survivors, he has spoken out forcefully for the rights of survivors and their heirs in the ongoing debate over Holocaust reparations, often clashing with Jewish institutions like the Conference on Jewish Material Claims Against Germany. He criticized The Jewish Museum for its 2002 exhibit that featured the use of Zyklon B gas canisters artwork, arguing that such art is insensitive to survivors. His trilogy of Holocaust novels (“Elijah Visible,” “Second Hand Smoke” and “The Golems of Gotham”) probes the lingering effects of the Shoah on the children of survivors.
Rosenbaum has long moderated panels at the 92nd Street and currently hosts “The Talk Show with Thane Rosenbaum” at the Y.
According to sources, Foxman, who was hidden by his Polish nanny during the Holocaust, threw Rosenbaum’s name (among others) into the ring, passing it on to the Maryland-based headhunting group that is trolling for candidates. Over the years, Rosenbaum has moderated some panels at ADL conferences.
Whether a dark-horse candidate like Rosenbaum (who has no experience running an operation as big as the $50 million ADL) or a more traditional pick is tapped to lead the ADL, the group will have to determine what kind of organization it wants to be, post-Foxman. It has drawn some criticism for its increasing focus on Israel in recent years, though Foxman has framed the BDS (boycott, divestment and sanctions) movement to isolate Israel on the world stage as a cover for anti-Semitism. The ADL is sometimes the butt of jokes for churning out a seemingly endless parade of press releases, even about minor incidents. And some have criticized Foxman’s leadership for not having groomed a successor, a charge he bristles at.
A close observer of the Jewish organizational world, Jerome Chanes, who has written extensively about anti-Semitism, wonders whether it matters at all who replaces Foxman. “Who cares?” Chanes said.
The key questions for him are more existential: “What’s the mission of the ADL? Can it retool itself to address new realities, including the diminution of anti-Semitism in the U.S.? Will it be able to contour a sober response to threats to the security of Jews in Europe? Is Israel still to be at the core of its mission? And, of course, the money. Where will the money come from?”

robert@jewishweek.org
-------
NEW YORK
Ramaz Israel Row Points To Larger Trends
In extending invitation to Khalidi, Modern Orthodox students seen seeking wider view on Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
Steve Lipman
Staff Writer
The decision by a prominent Manhattan day school to rescind a speaking invitation offered to an Arab-American critic of Israel, and some students’ online effort to overturn the administration’s cancellation decision, is the latest sign of many young American Jews’ desire for what they consider a more-balanced education about Israel.
Rashid Khalidi, professor of Modern Arab Studies at Columbia University, was invited to speak last week at Ramaz, a flagship Modern Orthodox day school on the Upper East Side, by the school Ramaz Politics Society, which was formed two years ago. Paul Shaviv, the head of school who had been out of town when Khalidi’s speech was announced, cancelled the academic’s appearance, traveling to Khalidi’s office to explain his decision in person.
Khalidi’s reputation as an outspoken defender of the Palestinian cause would cause a controversy that would “massively overshadow any conversation” about Israeli-Palestinian relations “and make an educational experience impossible,” Shaviv wrote in a message to Ramaz parents and faculty members. “Professor Khalidi, who is an international personality of great political stature, was not the right partner for ‘dialogue’ with high school students.”
In response, the Politics Society (known at Ramaz as RamPo), initiated a petition drive on the Internet that urges Shaviv to “reverse his prohibition.” Several hundred people had signed the petition by early this week, but there was no way to determine how many have a connection to Ramaz.
The controversy over Khalidi’s speech, and the Politics Society’s invitation, are a reflection of the school’s balanced approach to education about Israel and of many Jewish students’ desire for a nuanced presentation about the Jewish state, observers say.
According to a 2011 study by Hebrew University’s Melton Centre for Jewish Education, a growing number of day school students reject what they view as one-sided, pro-Israel “propaganda” they learn in the classroom, and seek out other perspectives.
The invitation to Khalidi appears to be a case in point.
“We are a school of diverse views and diverse opinions,” encouraging students to study subjects — including the Middle East situation — from many perspectives, Shaviv told The Jewish Week in an interview. But, he added, Khalidi, “a controversial, highly partisan character,” would not present “the right balance for dealing with high school students.”
Matthew Hiltzik, a Ramaz alumnus and father of three current students at the school, said he supports both the students’ initial invitation to Khalidi and the administration’s cancellation of the invitation.
“Clearly, the students felt comfortable seeking out other points of view” about Israel, said Hiltzik, who is a public relations professional and member of The Jewish Week’s board of directors. “I think it’s great that the kids did it. The school … unequivocally a pro-Zionist school … did not say no to having other points of view expressed; it simply raised reservations about this particular person.”
Hiltzik said most fellow alumni and Ramaz parents with whom he has been in contact agree that Shaviv made the right decision. “Most feel it was not appropriate to have Mr. Khalidi participate.”
Shaviv said he has received some 200 email messages on this topic from parents of Ramaz students, “overwhelmingly supportive” of his decision.
The decision by Ramaz to disinvite Khalidi comes as debate over Israel continues to roil the Jewish community. Some congregants at popular mega-synagogue B’nai Jeshurun on the Upper West Side have expressed anger in recent weeks about two of their spiritual leaders signing on to a letter criticizing Mayor Bill de Blasio for statements he made that were seen as favorable to AIPAC, the pro-Israel lobby in Washington. (See story on page 1.) And on the college front, the Vassar Jewish Union last week became the second school to declare itself an “Open Hillel,” stating that it is rejecting Hillel International’s guidelines banning partnerships with groups that support the BDS (boycott, divestment and sanctions movement) against Israel. (See story on page 9.) Swarthmore made a similar break with Hillel late last year.
Khalidi, born in New York to a Saudi father and a Lebanese-American mother, is a respected scholar and frequent guest on television and radio shows, where he criticizes the Israeli “occupation” and supports Palestinians’ armed resistance.
During Barack Obama’s first campaign for the presidency, Khalidi’s close ties with the then-senator were often cited as evidence of the candidate’s anti-Israel leanings.
Khalidi, in an email message to The Jewish Week, declined to comment on his cancelled speech at Ramaz. The student leaders of RamPo also declined to be interviewed indivisually.
Khalidi is “certainly not the ‘anti-Semite’ some people made him out to be,” said Rabbi Andy Bachman, spiritual leader of Congregation Beth Elohim in Brooklyn, where Khalidi spoke in 2009.
“We invited [Khalidi] after we felt he was unfairly maligned during the 2008 presidential election,” Rabbi Bachman said. Khalidi, in his remarks at the synagogue, “was measured, informative and gracious,” the rabbi said. “He was critical of Israel and understood the Israeli-Palestinian conflict from a ‘pro-Palestinian’ perspective, as I understand the conflict from a ‘pro-Israel’ perspective.
“It was our goal to model that from a synagogue pulpit, a community could have a civil and respectful dialogue about Israel,” Rabbi Bachman said. “As a lover of Israel, I think the very act of not talking to those with whom we disagree causes more harm than good.”
“The Ramaz Politics Society will continue to stay committed to encouraging open dialogue in our community,” an email message from the presidents of the organization states. “While we disagree with the Head of School’s decision on this matter, we look forward to working together with the Ramaz administration to expose students to outside perspectives.”
RamPo and the school’s administration are planning a future program that will present alternative perspectives on the Middle East situation. “The partner in dialogue,” Shaviv said, “will be more balanced.”

steve@jewishweek.org
-------
Halvah Hamantaschen
An updated filling and dough bring richness and tenderness to an often-disappointing Purim classic.
Amy Kritzer
Jewish Week Online Columnist
Welcome to our new series in which we seek to gently tweak the anachronisms of the Jewish culinary canon (shav, we’re looking at you). With a little bit of love, we’re convinced we can reclaim the dishes that seem the strangest to the modern palate. Sweet and sour tongue, anyone?
Moist, nutty sesame seed filling adds a twist to the classic cookie. Photo courtesy of Amy Kritzer
First up, because it’s that time of year: hamantaschen. They’re cookies, so what could be bad, right? Sadly, plenty. They’re bland. They’re dry. And all too often, the traditional prune and poppy seed fillings are sickly sweet. This disappointing dessert is especially painful on a holiday uniquely dedicated to pleasure.
The origin of the cookie’s name is a mystery. As kids, we’re fed the theory that hamentaschen are named after the three-cornered hat Haman wore, and that we eat them to celebrate his demise. Nu, we would celebrate more if they tasted better! Another possibility is that the cookies are shaped like his ears, not his hat. The Hebrew for hamentaschen is oznei Haman, or Haman’s ears. Criminals' ears were often cut off before they were executed, so that makes sense. But then we’re eating ears—ugh! Finally, there’s the Biblical explanation: that the three corners represent Judaism’s forefathers, Abraham, Isaac and Jacob.
What makes the most sense is the theory that the word hamentaschen comes from the German words mohn (poppy seed) and taschen (pockets). An article in Reform Judaism magazine speculates that because the popular poppy seed pockets of about a millennium ago sounded, in Ashkenaz, like Haman’s name, they became the designated treat of the holiday.
Halvah hamantaschen in progress. Photo courtesy of Amy Kritzer
A thousand years later, poppy seed is still the go-to filling, but why stop at upgrading the dough? Halvah, the sweet Middle Eastern sesame paste, is a great addition to this version of hamentaschen, which is neither dry nor bland thanks to a drizzle of orange juice in the dough. Sesame and orange bring a welcome Sephardi spin to a traditional Ashkenazi food, making these cookies the perfect treat for any Purim table.
Ingredients: 
For the Dough:
¾ cup granulated sugar
2 cups all-purpose flour, sifted
1½ teaspoons baking powder
¼ teaspoon salt
1 stick butter, softened
½ teaspoon vanilla extract
2 eggs
2 tablespoons orange juice
For the Filling:
1 cup tahini paste
1 cup powdered sugar
Water, as needed
2 tablespoons sesame seeds, for garnish
Recipe Steps: 
In a large bowl, combine sugar, flour, baking powder and salt. Add butter, vanilla, 1 egg and orange juice to the dry ingredients and mix with fingers. Combine and form dough into a ball. Chill for 1-2 hours or up to overnight.
Meanwhile, make the filling. Mix together tahini paste and powdered sugar to desired level of sweetness. If tahini is a little dry, add water until the mixture is easy to combine and is about the consistency of peanut butter.

Preheat oven to 350 degrees F. On a floured surface, roll dough out to about 1/8” thickness, then cut into circles with a 3-inch round cookie cutter or a wine glass. Place 1 teaspoon filling at center of dough circle and fold over the three corners to form a triangle. Using a pastry brush, brush with egg wash and sprinkle with sesame seeds. Bake for 12-15 minutes until browned on the bottom. Cool completely on a rack before serving.
-------
WINE
Gamliel Kronemer
Special To The Jewish Week
Sparkle Up Your Purim
In praise of the Champagne-like, yet affordable, Cava.
Bright, effervescent Cava is just as festive — but much less expensive — than kosher champagne. 
Bright, effervescent Cava is just as festive — but much less expensive — than kosher champagne.
When it comes to victory celebrations, the ubiquitous wine of choice is Champagne, that almost magical sparkler from Northern France. At sporting events, winners drink Champagne from trophies. Ship captains launch their vessels by smashing a bottle on the prow. In military messes, officers have long quaffed the bubbly to celebrate victories old, new and not yet won.
A mere three days before the Battle of Waterloo, for instance, the Duke of Wellington threw a Champagne-soaked ball to put his men into a mood for victory. Wellington’s opponent, Napoleon Bonaparte, had a more philosophical approach to Champagne: “I drink Champagne when I win, to celebrate ... and I drink Champagne when I lose, to console myself.”
As Purim is the celebration of the Jewish people’s victory over Haman, Champagne seems to be a perfect choice of wine to serve at the Purim meal. Though the chalky soil of the Champagne region in northern France indisputably produces the world’s best sparkling wines, unfortunately, these days kosher Champagne is rather costly, starting at around $50 per bottle. Fortunately, though, the Champagne winemaking formula has been copied frequently, and good or even great Champagne-like wines are now available from all over the world. Luckily, some of them are even kosher. 
One of my favorite Champagne alternatives is Cava. Made mostly in the Catalan region of Spain, Cava is produced using the traditional Champagne method — which involves a second fermentation in the bottle to make the wine sparkle — but from native Spanish grapes, most often Macabeu, Parellada and Xarel-lo. Unlike Champagne, kosher Cava is affordable on almost any budget, costing as little as little as $11 per bottle.
Please note that there are a few points that one should keep in mind when buying Cava. First, most Cavas have a shelf life of about three to five years. As kosher Cavas are all non-vintage, it can be difficult to determine a bottle’s age, so try to avoid purchasing bottles that look like they have been sitting on the shelf of the wine shop for a while. Also, if you ever open a bottle of Cava that is not quite to your liking, consider using that bottle to make Champagne cocktails. Put a sugar cube and a few dashes of Angostura Aromatic Bitters (available at almost any supermarket) in the bottom of a Champagne flute, let the glass sit for a few minutes and then fill with Cava. The sugar and bitters add delightful flavors and can mask many of the flaws that might be found in sparkling wines.  
In preparation for Purim, Fruit of the Vine tasted three kosher Cavas, all of which were good or very good, and any of which would make a nice addition to your holiday table.
Freixenet’s Excelencia Kosher Cava Brut was the best one. This dark straw-colored Cava has a rich mousse of large bubbles, and a bouquet of peaches and honeysuckle with a lovely yeasty earthiness. Look for flavors of peaches, pears, and cantaloupe, with a yeasty overtone, and a nice hint of Seville oranges on the finish.
Score A-/B+ $18. This wine is being released presently and should be in stores by Purim. (Please note that the sample submitted to me was non-mevushal, meaning it was not boiled, and the version being released will be mevushal, and may differ in quality as a result.)
Also good is Elvi’s Cava Brut, a light, elegant sparkling wine that has flavors and aromas of peaches and pears. Look for a hint of spice on the finish, and a light-but-still-pleasant mousse of tiny bubbles.
Score B+ $21.99. (Available at Wine Country, 89 New Bridge Rd. in Bergenfield, N.J., (201) 385-0106)  
The best bargain in Cava that we tasted was En Fuego’s Reserva Brut Cava. This one has a lively mousse of tiny bubbles and flavors of apples, pears, lemons and heather, with a hint of toasted challah.
Score B/B+.  $10.95. Available at Skyview Wine and Spirits, 5681 Riverdale Ave, Riverdale, N.Y. (888) 759-8466.)
Wines are scored on an ‘A’-‘F’ scale where ‘A’ is excellent, ‘B’ is good, ‘C’ is flawed, ‘D’ is very flawed, and ‘F’ is undrinkable. Prices listed reflect those of the retailer mentioned.
-------
Enjoy the read,
Gary Rosenblatt
P.S. Please check our website anytime for breaking news and exclusive videos, blogs, and opinion and advice columns. 
http://www.thejewishweek.com/
-------
Between the Lines - Gary Rosenblatt
Everyone Loves Israel?
AIPAC has record 14,000 attendees and Congressional support. But what about the White House?
Washington, D.C. — A black revivalist minister leads thousands of people, who are out of their seats and clapping their hands, in a rousing spiritual and praises the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), the traditionally pro-Israel lobby; Latinos and African-Americans describe their love for the Jewish state; 2,300 high school and college students give full voice to their solidarity with Jerusalem; and Democratic and Republican leaders of Congress outdo each other in expressing their unyielding commitment to the people and state of Israel.
Welcome to the AIPAC Policy Conference, the three-day annual event that transforms the Washington Convention Center into a pro-Israel Garden of Eden for huge numbers of faithful supporters – more than 14,000 this year, a record. The theme, featuring photos of dozens of people, young and old and of every race, is “I am Pro-Israel. I am AIPAC.”
It’s a massive and impressive advocacy event, so sophisticated in its multi-media presentations, so on-message in its talking points for participants who will spend the last conference day lobbying on Capitol Hill, and so crisp and well-organized from timing to crowd control that it’s hard to believe it’s being staged by a Jewish organization.
You also have to keep reminding yourself that you are in a bubble, a place where people of different religions, politics and colors share an abiding sense of care and concern for Israel. So while polls and surveys show that Israel support is strongest among older, white males who vote Republican, here at the policy conference one encounters a bipartisan, multi-cultural experience with college students just as fervent as their parents and grandparents in celebrating Israel.
J Street? Open Hillel? Massive indifference to Israel’s challenges? Not here. A sense that AIPAC has lost the Iran sanctions legislation battle to the White House? Not on the public agenda.
And while other major Jewish or Mideast-oriented conferences may pride themselves on offering a wide range of viewpoints on the crises of the day and how to respond, the speakers at dozens of breakout sessions here tend to present a perspective that ranges from A to B – that is, a robust support for Israel’s position on being tougher on Iran, including new sanctions in Congress; putting the onus on the Palestinians for the lack of progress on Mideast peace talks; and implicitly or explicitly expressing deep reservations about a naïve Administration that appears far more committed to diplomacy on Iran than backing it up with the threat of force.
Not that I disagree with much of that message, I hasten to add. But don’t come here looking for the other side of these complex issues. And they got a great deal more complicated with President Obama’s tough message to Prime Minister Netanyahu on the eve of their White House meeting Monday.
In a rude welcome to the U.S., Obama set the tone for a showdown, telling journalist Jeffrey Goldberg that it is up to Israel to make peace with the Palestinians before the window of opportunity closes. The interview, posted on Bloomberg View on Sunday, suggests that Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas is ready to make peace – no mention of his refusals to recognize Israel as a Jewish state, compromise on the right of return, or speak out against the continuing demonization of Israel among his people – and that it is Netanyahu, and the settlements, that block the path to a brighter future.
Obama invoked Hillel the Elder in his message to Netanyahu: “If not now, when? And if not you, Mr. Prime Minister, who?”
No doubt the takeaway for the Israeli leader, in the face of this verbal affront, is the first half of Hillel’s aphorism: “If I am not for myself, who will be for me?”
It should be noted that the interview took place last Thursday, prior to the outbreak of the Russia-Ukraine conflict. That crisis complicates the U.S. efforts in dealing with both the Iran and Mideast talks, where Russian support is vital. It is likely that had the invasion of Ukraine already taken place, Obama would not have been so confrontational with Netanyahu, given the president’s more immediate problems. That is borne out by the fact that when the U.S. and Israeli leaders met at the White House on Monday, the tone, at least in their public comments, was cordial and respectful.
Still, Obama’s comments in the Goldberg interview reflect his sense that the onus is on Israel to be more forthcoming in the peace talks, and Netanyahu has responded by insisting that Israel, not the PA, has been the flexible party willing to make compromises.
In the prime minister’s address to AIPAC Tuesday morning, he emphasized the benefits that peace could have throughout the region and urged Abbas to “stop denying history” and recognize Israel as the nation state of the Jewish people.
“President Abbas, recognize the Jewish state, and in doing so you would be telling your people that - while we might have a territorial dispute, the right of the Jewish people to a state of their own is beyond dispute.
“I hope the Palestinian leadership will stand with Israel and the United States on the right side of the moral divide, the side of peace, reconciliation and hope,” Netanyahu said.
‘Forceful Diplomacy’
AIPAC officials struggle mightily to maintain a bipartisan approach to the Mideast, sometimes showcasing Republican and Democratic leaders of Congress addressing the crowd from the same podium, stressing their common concern for Israel. But disappointment with Obama, at least on foreign policy, runs through the crowd and was acknowledged implicitly by several Democratic officials in their remarks. Jack Lew, the Jewish secretary of the treasury, made a strong case for the effectiveness of the current sanctions and asserted that “Iran is not open for business.” Applause from the delegates was polite and measured. He and Sen. Chuck Schumer of New York emphasized the president’s rock solid support for Israel, the unparalleled level of military and intelligence cooperation between Jerusalem and Washington and Obama’s commitment to preventing Iran from obtaining a nuclear bomb.
This point was made most effectively by Secretary of State John Kerry, who was passionate in his assurances of employing “forceful diplomacy” to protect Israel’s security on both the Iran front and in the peace talks with the Palestinians.
In dealing with Iran, the U.S., he said, “is guided by a simple bottom line: No deal is better than a bad deal. We get it, we understand the existential threat in our gut.” He said America’s stance was “not a favor to Israel but in the interest of the U.S.”
Kerry, who has Jewish lineage, made an effective case for diplomacy, and his well-crafted remarks received more than polite applause at times. Alternating between policy assurances and personal anecdotes, he asserted that the U.S. will oppose boycotts of Jerusalem and that Israel must be recognized by the Palestinians as “the nation state of the Jewish people” and he described his first visit to Masada when he and other visitors were invited to shout “Am Yisrael Chai” [the people of Israel live] into the air and heard “the haunting echoes of chai, chai…something I’ll never forget.”
I suspect that many in the audience, like me, wanted very much to believe Kerry. Unlike a year ago at this conference, no one was calling for a military strike on Iran. Everyone would prefer to prevent a nuclear Iran through talks. And the secretary certainly seemed sincere when he spoke of his tireless efforts and said that U.S. negotiators on Iran have their “eyes open wide,” that the talks are “not about trusting Tehran but about testing Iran,” and that America’s first priority in the Mideast negotiations is Israel’s security.
But rhetoric can only go so far. And ever since Obama backed off his own “red line” pledge last fall on punishing Syria for using chemical weapons against its own people, his deep resistance to the use, or real threat, of military force has been palpable.
According to Goldberg, speaking at a session analyzing the current Mideast situation, the question now is “to what degree is Obama uninterested in projecting American force in the Mideast and beyond?”
Fellow panelist Robert Satloff, executive director of the Washington Institute for Near East Policy, asserted that the negotiations on Iran are about “how much time we’ll have to figure out that Iran is cheating. It’s not about denying Iran the ability to cheat” or preventing its nuclear efforts, he said, adding: “In a fundamental way Iran has won.”
Bolstering that impression, at a session on “Inside Iran: The Politics of the Islamic Republic,” the two key speakers, both natives of Iran now working at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies in the U.S., were pessimistic about negotiations on Iran’s nuclear program. Ali Alfoneh and Emanuele Ottolenghi agreed that President Hassan Rouhani is a milder, more sophisticated leader than his predecessor, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, but that he is not a reformist and does not represent a strategic shift in Iran policy.
At a panel on Israeli public opinion, Ari Shavit, the Haaretz correspondent and author of the best-seller, “My Promised Land,” said that Israelis are caught in a bind, willing to make concessions to the Palestinians but only if their own security is assured.
Israelis are afraid of U.S. pressure, he said, and realize they must change the status quo to avoid being further delegitimized by the rest of the world. While insisting on a deal that would include recognition of Israel as a Jewish state, Shavit called for “changing the dynamic” in ways that “take the high moral ground” for both strategic and moral reasons.
“The ice is thin, we’re on the edge, and if we don’t change, we’re in trouble, especially with young people,” he said.
After touring U.S. campuses for much of January, Shavit observed that Israel is seen as “tribal and as human rights violators,” even among many Jewish students. He called for “a love offensive to win the hearts and minds” of young people, saying it is “the most important battle of all.”
The large audience applauded and then went on to other sessions preparing them to lobby a Congress highly sympathetic to their concerns.
It’s the White House that AIPAC and its supporters need to worry about.
Gary@jewishweek.org
-------
NEWS and FEATURES
Factions Clash Over Hillel Israel Policy
Campuses need a haven where students don't have to defend pro-Israel views, says group backing current guidelines.
Amy Sara Clark - Staff Writer
A backlash against the growing Open Hillel movement has slowly been gaining support, with nearly 400 students backing Hillel International’s ban on partnerships with groups that delegitimize the State of Israel.
Raphael Fils, a Boston University sophomore and Daniel Mael, a junior at Brandeis, started Safe Hillel in late February after the Vassar Jewish Union became the second Hillel-affiliated group to declare itself “open,” and repudiate Hillel’s Israel guidelines prohibiting partnerships with groups that support BDS (boycott, divestment and sanctions) movement against Israel or question its right to exist.
Mael and Fils say Hillel should be a refuge where students aren’t forced to defend their pro-Israel views.
“It’s not like I don’t believe these debates should happen, I just don’t believe Hillel is the place for them or that Hillel’s funds should be paying for them,” said Fils.
“Tons of students have reached out to me and explained how they feel uncomfortable on their campus and some of them are afraid to speak up,” he added.
So Fils and Mael started two petitions. The first urges Hillel International to stand strong, while the second asks Open Hillel to stand down. 
“Open Hillel has badly slandered Hillel International,” said Mael. “They have attempted to portray Hillel as an unwelcoming space which doesn’t host productive dialogue and isn’t inclusive to all students. Safe Hillel is attempting to organize support for Hillel’s guidelines.”
The first petition was posted on Feb. 26. As of Tuesday morning it had 377 signatures, including nine students from Vassar.
The petition to Open Hillel, posted on the evening of March 1, says that while the petitioners want to be “open and inclusive” there are “some ideas and opinions that are unacceptable in the Jewish community.”
Mael and Fils write that they are concerned about the “safety of Jewish students on campus if Open Hillel were to succeed with its current positions,” and ask “the Open Hillel movement to amend their requests and impose a ban on speakers who advocate terrorism, are pro-Hamas, pro-Hezbollah, and/or favor the end of Jewish sovereignty in Israel.” As of Tuesday morning, it had 71 signatures.
“The Open Hillel petition says that every organization has a boundary and that absolute openness is a farce,” said Mael, adding that the NAACP wouldn’t sponsor a speaker from the Klu Klux Klan.
“So we’re asking them to amend their petition and once they acknowledge that there is a boundary we can have a legitimate conversation about where it should be established,” he added. 
Emily Unger, one of Open Hillel’s founders, said her organization has always opposed “calls for violence, terrorism, anti-Semitism, or racism” and has had a statement to that effect on the group’s website for months.
“Thus, it strikes us as strange that Safe Hillel is petitioning us to take up policies that we already support. Personally, I think this suggests that the founders of Safe Hillel have not fully researched our campaign or read most of our materials,” she said in an email to The Jewish Week.
Fils and Mael started their petitions a week after Vassar’s Jewish Union declared itself an Open Hillel in late February. It was the second Hillel to make the declaration, following Swarthmore’s Hillel’s declaration in early December.  
The Open Hillel movement itself was started by The Harvard College Progressive Jewish Alliance a year earlier, in November of 2012, after Harvard’s Hillel asked them to move a discussion, “Jewish Voices Against the Israeli Occupation” which they were hosting with the Harvard Palestine Solidarity Committee, to another venue. The event violated Hillel International’s Israel Guidelines, which, in addition to banning partnerships with groups supporting BDS, also prohibit Hillel-affiliated groups from hosting or partnering with groups that “deny the right of Israel to exist … Delegitimize, demonize, or apply a double standard to Israel … [or] exhibit a pattern of disruptive behavior towards campus events or guest speakers or foster an atmosphere of incivility.”
Over the past 15 months, more than 1,300 people have signed Open Hillel’s petition asking Hillel to get rid of the guidelines, which Open Hillel says exclude some Jewish groups from campus Hillels and stifle “real conversations about Israel.”
“Open Hillel calls for there to be space within Hillel to learn about, discuss, and debate the full range of political views on Israel including views on the right and the left,” Unger wrote in the email. Not only will this “make more students feel welcome,” at Hillel, but it will also let students learn about other perspectives, which is useful whether they end up supporting those views, or use the insights to make stronger arguments against them, she said.
But Mael said via email that this kind of exchange doesn’t have to happen at Hillel. “It’s not about liberal versus conservative. It is about whether or not donors and students should be supporting, funding and providing legitimacy to those who question Israel’s right to exist as a Jewish state. Not a specific Israeli policy — Israel herself.”
Originally, Mael and Fils had also planned to grant Hillels a Safe Hillel designation so that students would know that chapter follows Hillel’s guidelines. They also planned to collect reports (signed or anonymous) about Hillels that violate the guidelines, or pro-Israel students being bullied, and send the information to the affected chapter and Hillel International and “work with them until the issue is resolved.”
However, the pair removed those pages from their site over the weekend, saying they didn’t want to give the impression they were trying to censor activity. Instead, they’re hoping the petitions will empower students to voice their support for the guidelines, Mael said.
So far, Hillel’s central office has been circumspect about Safe Hillel. David Eden, the foundation’s chief administrative officer said his organization would be happy to speak with Mael and Fils. “Hillels are both safe and open for all students,” Eden said in a statement last week. “The only Hillel movement I am aware of operates under the umbrella of Hillel International and includes more than 550 Hillels in North America and scores more in 13 countries on five continents, including many in the former Soviet Union.”
amy.jewishweek@gmail.com 
-------
Food and Wine
A New Coffee Shop For Bed-Stuy
Kava Shteeble to open in mid-March.
Lauren Rothman - Food and Wine Editor
If you live in Bed-Stuy, Brooklyn and you’ve been jonesing for some quality brew, then your wait will soon come to an end: Kava Shteeble, which its owners describe as “a small, cozy coffee house," will open on Ralph Avenue by mid-March. If the java turns out to be as good as its owners assert, the café will make a great addition to a neighborhood that’s underserved when it comes to coffee: currently, the most convenient spot to fuel up is a Dunkin’ Donuts.
“I’ve worked in this area for years, and I always wondered why there was no good coffee shop around,” said Yidi Brier, who is opening Kava Shteeble with business partner Shragie Schwartz. “So finally I thought: why don’t we just open up our own?”
Kava Shteeble is yet another business in the line of recently-opened hip Brooklyn Jewish establishments like the restaurant Mason & Mug and the gourmet sandwich pop-up Hassid + Hipster. Yiddish for “little coffee house,” the café's owners are religious but hope to attract a wide slice of the neighborhood. Just to be safe, though, they’ll provide kosher milk for those who might want it. 
The shop will serve Crop to Cup beans, which it buys from the shop of the same name in Gowanus, and little else, Brier said.
“We may buy some danishes, some croissants,” he said. “But we really want the focus to be on great coffee.”
A joe-lover himself, Brier said he didn’t discover good coffee until he became friendly with Taylor Mork, one of the owners of Crop to Cup, which sources its beans in developing nations where it ensures that all of the workers involved in harvesting and processing the coffee are paid a fair wage.
“There is a huge difference between high-quality, fresh-brewed coffee and just the normal stuff you find all over the place,” Brier said.
The interior features an original tin ceiling and exposed brick. Lauren Rothman/JW
In addition to its emphasis on great coffee, Kava Shteeble hopes to distinguish itself through its tailor-made, custom-designed interior that the team built almost entirely out of salvaged materials. Brier and Schwartz are in real estate—they work for Brooklyn-based Pacific Management—and as such, they’re often around when neighborhood buildings get renovated before sale. A building renovation means a lot of wood going into the trash, most of it perfectly usable, Brier said.
“We took almost all the wood used in the coffee shop out of dumpsters,” he said. “This wood looks good and it would be a total waste to throw it out.”
Kava Shteeble is indeed handsome, its tan-and-brown hardwood floors and walls giving off a sort of rustic appeal that’s echoed by an original, refinished tin ceiling and one wall of warm red exposed brick. There’s not a ton of room inside, but Brier said he hopes that will foster a sense of comfort.
“We want you to come here, hang out, do some work on your computer,” he said. “We want everybody to feel welcome."
Kava Shteeble
94 Ralph Avenue, Brooklyn, NY 11221
347-533-4165
facebook.com/kavashteeble
-------
Travel - Lisbon
Keeping The Jewish Past Alive
Hilary Larson - Travel Writer
The night clerk at my hotel in Lisbon’s port district was complaining. Too many immigrants, he groused. Brazilians, Cape Verdeans, Angolans — the breadth of Portugal’s erstwhile empire is visible on every street in downtown Lisbon. The clerk darkly suggested a link to increased prostitution.
Outside on the street, protesters marched and chanted, waving anti-austerity signs. Lisbon has always been one of the poorer capitals of Europe, charming in a shabby, mournful way.
Now the ever-present graffiti that scars the narrow, damp walls of Lisbon’s oldest districts reveals contemporary distress in the form of virulently anti-capitalist rhetoric. The mood is sour, which is to be expected when your average Portuguese family struggles to pay the bills.
Down in Alfama, Lisbon’s oldest quarter — and one of the few areas to survive the 1755 earthquake that destroyed most of the city — the wail of fado wafts from cafés and bars. Fado is the essential music of Portugal; its resigned, minor-key harmonies reflect a bittersweet worldview that reflects the national character. Migration and austerity, challenging as they may be in 21st-century Lisbon, are hardly novel here, given the grand, tragic sweep of Portuguese history.
I pondered all this as I wandered what was once a Jewish neighborhood. Along the Rua da Judiaria, synagogues flourished and kosher merchants plied their trades for a Sephardic community until its expulsion six centuries ago during the Iberian inquisition.
Today there are few visible remains of that heritage. But a growing number of Lisbon Jews and tourism officials are working to uncover Hebrew inscriptions, remnants of Jewish buildings and other vestiges of Alfama’s Jewish past.
Alfama is vintage Old Europe — a tangle of narrow, winding lanes, many impossibly steep. Laundry lines flutter from wrought-iron balconies; old women hobble up and down the hills, popping into dusty apothecaries and squeezing fruit on their daily shopping rounds. As you climb, dark alleys here and there give way to a stunning, sunlit view over the blue Tagus River. I took it in over vinho verde at a café with a waterfront balcony, contemplating the vastness of this river that looks like an ocean at Europe’s westernmost point.
Many people take the popular No. 28 tram up Alfama’s steep hills, the better to explore St. George’s Castle at the top. But this is a district best explored on foot; its charm unfolds in the details of its sepia-hued fountains, its startling blue-and-white tile facades, and in the way the shadows fall as its street lanterns come on at dusk.
As throughout Lisbon’s historic districts, Alfama is peppered with Roman Catholic churches. Elegant if somewhat down-at-the-heel, they are an enduring testament to the faith that has dominated Portuguese society for centuries.
A few blocks west of Alfama, some of Portuguese Catholicism’s darkest moments played out in Rossio Square, where executions are said to have taken place during the Inquisition. Vestiges of that time remain in a handful of ancient landmarks around the square, though it was largely rebuilt after the 1755 earthquake. The Rossios’ 18th-century grandeur — modeled very deliberately on Paris, like much of Lisbon — is evident in the “new” buildings’ neoclassical facades.
A century later, in the late 1800s, Jews were allowed to re-establish themselves in Lisbon, and the foundations were laid for a modern community. Today, Jewish life is centered far from the riverfront warrens of the Alfama; its hub is the Comunidade Israelita de Lisboa, a community center based at Lisbon’s landmark synagogue, Shaaré Tikvá.
Built in 1904 in the lavish neo-Byzantine style favored at the time, the temple is worth a visit (note that advance reservation is required, as is common throughout Europe). The synagogue can also arrange visits to the Principal Cemetery, where Jewish tombs date to the late 1800s.
You can find kosher food — including a private kosher meal service and bed-and-breakfast — in contemporary Lisbon, along with cuisine from virtually every corner of the globe. As it was before the ethnic cleansing of the Inquisition, Lisbon is again a city where cultural influences mingle. During my visit, a local music school was staging a concert of Hebrew and Israeli music, while Brazilian lilts are the latest twist to the “new fado” movement that emphasizes the genre’s syncretic — and even, partly, Semitic — roots.
On my way out of town, I stopped for a pastel de Belém, the custard-cream pastry that is Lisbon’s culinary signature. Men at the next table were excitedly discussing this summer’s Champions League final — the Super Bowl of European soccer — to be held in Lisbon’s Estádio da Luz. Six hundred years after the Inquisition tore apart Lisbon’s ethnic mosaic, soccer has become the universal religion of modern Portugal, giving austerity-weary locals a reason to cheer. 
editor@jewishweek.org
-------