Mordechai’s Shock Treatment
The Megillah in Depth, Chapter 4, Part 1
By Mendel Kaplan
Watch
This webcast begins:
Wednesday, March 2, 2016 at 7pm ET
About this webcast:
The plot thickened as news of Haman's secret final solution leaked, and consequently plunged all the Jewish citizens of the vast Persian Empire into deep mourning and depression. Discover how Mordechai’s shocking response woke up a comatose nation. Learn the key insight embedded in a fascinating Midrash involving Mordechai, Moses, and Elijah the Prophet.
Recent and Upcoming Jewish.tv Webcasts:
Shulchan Aruch, Netilas Yodayim 4:19-21 (First Edition)
Laws of Hand Washing, Part 16
By Avraham Meyer Zajac
Airs Thursday, March 3 at 6am ET
Laws of Hand Washing, Part 16
By Avraham Meyer Zajac
Airs Thursday, March 3 at 6am ET
Talmud Gitin 82 (Advanced)
By Avraham Meyer Zajac
Airs Thursday, March 3 at 6am ET
By Avraham Meyer Zajac
Airs Thursday, March 3 at 6am ET
My Portion in the World to Come
By Avraham Plotkin
Airs Thursday, March 3 at 7pm ET
Click here to browse our full programming schedule.
---------------------
"Campaign now turns to anti-semitism issue; Dealing with Trumpism; Is the 'sauna' rabbi stepping down?; Celebrating Sephardic culture....more." The Jewish Week Connecting the World to Jewish News, Culture, Features, and Opinions for Wednesday, 2 March 2016 - This week on TheJewishWeek.com
Wednesday, March 2, 2016
Campaign Now Turns To Anti-Semitism Issue
Louis Farrakhan and David Duke praise Trump;
ADL urges 'unequivocal' disavowal of bigots.
Stewart Ain reports.
National
Election Wildcard Is Now Anti-Semitism
Strong Super Tuesday showing by Trump, Clinton sets up likely insider-outsider matchup.
Stewart Ain
Staff Writer
Donald Trump celebrates his victory in seven states on Super Tuesday. All photos by Getty Images.
As both Democrat Hillary Clinton and Republican Donald Trump emerged as their party’s likely presidential nominees given their impressive Super Tuesday primary victories, anti-Semitism has suddenly surfaced as an issue.
Nation of Islam leader Louis Farrakhan praised Trump this week for being the “only member who has stood in front of the Jewish community and said, ‘I don’t want your money.’”
He stopped short of endorsing Trump but added, “I like what I’m looking at.”
His comments came after David Duke, a former Ku Klux Klan Imperial Wizard, and Jean-Marie Le Pen, founder of France’s far-right National Front party who has described the Nazi gas chambers as a “detail of history,” both endorsed Trump.
“If I were an adviser to the Trump campaign, I would tell him to immediately go before the cameras and repudiate David Duke, Farrakhan and Le Pen,” said Rabbi Marvin Hier, founder and dean of the Simon Wiesenthal Center. “When the anti-Semites are circling the wagons, if I were Trump I would say I don’t need their support and don’t want it.”
Trump did so well in election returns Tuesday night because the majority of voters told exit pollsters that they wanted to see an “outsider” in the White House.
Thus, 72 percent of voters in Massachusetts said they voted for Trump because they wanted an outsider while Texas Sen. Ted Cruz and Ohio Gov. John Kasich both got only 8 percent of the “outsider” vote.
In Alabama, which Trump also won, 64 percent of Trump supporters said they wanted an outsider while Cruz got 12 percent of the “outsider” vote. In Tennessee, Trump received 67 percent of the “outsider” vote compared to 13 percent for Cruz.
In all, Trump won in Alabama, Arkansas, Georgia, Massachusetts, Vermont, Virginia and Tennessee. Cruz trumped his rivals in Alaska, Oklahoma and Texas. Florida Sen. Marco Rubio won the state of Minnesota.
By Avraham Plotkin
Airs Thursday, March 3 at 7pm ET
Click here to browse our full programming schedule.
---------------------
"Campaign now turns to anti-semitism issue; Dealing with Trumpism; Is the 'sauna' rabbi stepping down?; Celebrating Sephardic culture....more." The Jewish Week Connecting the World to Jewish News, Culture, Features, and Opinions for Wednesday, 2 March 2016 - This week on TheJewishWeek.com
Wednesday, March 2, 2016
Campaign Now Turns To Anti-Semitism Issue
Louis Farrakhan and David Duke praise Trump;
ADL urges 'unequivocal' disavowal of bigots.
Stewart Ain reports.
National
Election Wildcard Is Now Anti-Semitism
Strong Super Tuesday showing by Trump, Clinton sets up likely insider-outsider matchup.
Stewart Ain
Staff Writer
Donald Trump celebrates his victory in seven states on Super Tuesday. All photos by Getty Images.
As both Democrat Hillary Clinton and Republican Donald Trump emerged as their party’s likely presidential nominees given their impressive Super Tuesday primary victories, anti-Semitism has suddenly surfaced as an issue.
Nation of Islam leader Louis Farrakhan praised Trump this week for being the “only member who has stood in front of the Jewish community and said, ‘I don’t want your money.’”
He stopped short of endorsing Trump but added, “I like what I’m looking at.”
His comments came after David Duke, a former Ku Klux Klan Imperial Wizard, and Jean-Marie Le Pen, founder of France’s far-right National Front party who has described the Nazi gas chambers as a “detail of history,” both endorsed Trump.
“If I were an adviser to the Trump campaign, I would tell him to immediately go before the cameras and repudiate David Duke, Farrakhan and Le Pen,” said Rabbi Marvin Hier, founder and dean of the Simon Wiesenthal Center. “When the anti-Semites are circling the wagons, if I were Trump I would say I don’t need their support and don’t want it.”
Trump did so well in election returns Tuesday night because the majority of voters told exit pollsters that they wanted to see an “outsider” in the White House.
Thus, 72 percent of voters in Massachusetts said they voted for Trump because they wanted an outsider while Texas Sen. Ted Cruz and Ohio Gov. John Kasich both got only 8 percent of the “outsider” vote.
In Alabama, which Trump also won, 64 percent of Trump supporters said they wanted an outsider while Cruz got 12 percent of the “outsider” vote. In Tennessee, Trump received 67 percent of the “outsider” vote compared to 13 percent for Cruz.
In all, Trump won in Alabama, Arkansas, Georgia, Massachusetts, Vermont, Virginia and Tennessee. Cruz trumped his rivals in Alaska, Oklahoma and Texas. Florida Sen. Marco Rubio won the state of Minnesota.
On the Democratic side, Clinton won in Alabama, Arkansas, Georgia, Massachusetts, Tennessee, Texas and Virginia. Sen. Bernie Sanders defeated Clinton in Colorado, Minnesota, Oklahoma and his home state of Vermont.
Among Jews, racism has already become an issue in the campaign as a result of Trump’s comments critical of Mexicans and Muslims. Other areas of particular importance to the Jewish community include Israel and the conflict in the Middle East, immigration, health care, education and gun control.
“I’m troubled that Donald Trump does not understand the issues that concern our community,” said Seymour Reich, a former chairman of the Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations. “Whether it is David Duke or the Ku Klux Klan or even Israel, he is ambivalent. It is not clear to me that he has thought these things through. His position changes from day to day and it’s troubling.”
He was referring to the fact that last Friday Trump repudiated Duke, but when asked by CNN on Sunday whether he would disavow Duke and other white supremacist groups that are supporting his campaign, he replied: “I know nothing about David Duke; I know nothing about white supremacists.” Later, he again repudiated Duke on Twitter and in television interviews.
In response to Trump's equivocal reply, the Anti-Defamation League sent to all of the presidential candidates information about Duke, other extremists and hate groups.
“The last thing we want is for white supremacists to use this campaign to mainstream their bigotry,” said Jonathan Greenblatt, ADL’s CEO. “It is imperative for elected leaders and political candidates like Mr. Trump and others in the public eye to disavow haters such as Duke and the other white supremacists who have endorsed his candidacy. By not disavowing their racism and hatred, Trump gives them and their views a degree of legitimacy.”
Reich said he has a “sense that he [Trump] just shoots from the hip too frequently and that he just doesn’t know the issues. He rambles. He does not use a text. He’s like a loose canon. … The Jewish community needs stability in the White House and sadly, regrettably, Trump does not offer that.”
But there are some conservative Jewish Republicans who are prepared to hold their nose and vote for Trump to keep Clinton from winning the presidency.
Among Jews, racism has already become an issue in the campaign as a result of Trump’s comments critical of Mexicans and Muslims. Other areas of particular importance to the Jewish community include Israel and the conflict in the Middle East, immigration, health care, education and gun control.
“I’m troubled that Donald Trump does not understand the issues that concern our community,” said Seymour Reich, a former chairman of the Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations. “Whether it is David Duke or the Ku Klux Klan or even Israel, he is ambivalent. It is not clear to me that he has thought these things through. His position changes from day to day and it’s troubling.”
He was referring to the fact that last Friday Trump repudiated Duke, but when asked by CNN on Sunday whether he would disavow Duke and other white supremacist groups that are supporting his campaign, he replied: “I know nothing about David Duke; I know nothing about white supremacists.” Later, he again repudiated Duke on Twitter and in television interviews.
In response to Trump's equivocal reply, the Anti-Defamation League sent to all of the presidential candidates information about Duke, other extremists and hate groups.
“The last thing we want is for white supremacists to use this campaign to mainstream their bigotry,” said Jonathan Greenblatt, ADL’s CEO. “It is imperative for elected leaders and political candidates like Mr. Trump and others in the public eye to disavow haters such as Duke and the other white supremacists who have endorsed his candidacy. By not disavowing their racism and hatred, Trump gives them and their views a degree of legitimacy.”
Reich said he has a “sense that he [Trump] just shoots from the hip too frequently and that he just doesn’t know the issues. He rambles. He does not use a text. He’s like a loose canon. … The Jewish community needs stability in the White House and sadly, regrettably, Trump does not offer that.”
But there are some conservative Jewish Republicans who are prepared to hold their nose and vote for Trump to keep Clinton from winning the presidency.
“As boorish as he is, as occasionally foolish as he is, and how vituperative he can be, I would vote for Donald Trump over Hillary Clinton any day,” Ari Fleischer, a former spokesman for President George W. Bush and a board member of the Republican Jewish Coalition, told JTA.
And Fred Zeidman, a major Republican donor who had backed Jeb Bush’s failed candidacy, suggested to JTA that he was prepared to vote for Trump if most Republicans prefer him. “The fact of the matter is we have to go on to defeat the Democratic candidate.”
The Jewish Week has spoken with Jewish Republicans in New York and Florida who say their friends are telling them privately — and sometimes openly — that they plan to vote for Trump. One said his friends don’t want others to know of their support for the New York businessman because to date he has run a campaign of little substance that is largely filled with bravado, slogans and promises “to make America great again.”
But the recent flare-up of the racism and anti-Semitism could complicate things for Jewish Trump supporters.
Among the reasons Trump is turning off Jewish voters is that he is “a vulgarian, coarse, unrefined and [most] Jews have never liked populism of the left or right,” said Bill Schneider, a former CNN political analyst and now a professor of policy, government and international affairs at George Mason University. “They like sophisticated, refined, tolerant candidates.”
Jewish support for Democratic presidential candidates reached a whopping 90 percent when they voted for both Franklin D. Roosevelt and Lyndon B. Johnson. It has slipped in recent years, dropping to 69 percent in the 2012 election. But should Clinton prove to be her party’s candidate, Jewish support could soar to 90 percent in a contest against Donald Trump, suggested Peter Beinart, a contributing editor at The Atlantic and the National Journal.
“My guess is that Trump will win less than 20 percent — maybe 15 or even 10 percent” of the Jewish vote,” he said. “She will win in a blowout against Trump. He plays poorly against [the majority of] Jews, despite being the grand marshal of the Israel Day Parade. … Most Jews are still attached to the Democratic Party and need something unusual to pull them away. Trump does just the opposite – he will not even get those who naturally go for the Republican.”
Beinart added that Trump’s equivocation on Duke “absolutely hurts him among Jews — and in general.”
When it comes to Israel, an election campaign is typically the season to be very pro-Israel, but Trump’s “neutral” stance has left some Israel supporters puzzled, according to Aaron David Miller, a vice president at the Woodrow Wilson Center for Scholars.
And Fred Zeidman, a major Republican donor who had backed Jeb Bush’s failed candidacy, suggested to JTA that he was prepared to vote for Trump if most Republicans prefer him. “The fact of the matter is we have to go on to defeat the Democratic candidate.”
The Jewish Week has spoken with Jewish Republicans in New York and Florida who say their friends are telling them privately — and sometimes openly — that they plan to vote for Trump. One said his friends don’t want others to know of their support for the New York businessman because to date he has run a campaign of little substance that is largely filled with bravado, slogans and promises “to make America great again.”
But the recent flare-up of the racism and anti-Semitism could complicate things for Jewish Trump supporters.
Among the reasons Trump is turning off Jewish voters is that he is “a vulgarian, coarse, unrefined and [most] Jews have never liked populism of the left or right,” said Bill Schneider, a former CNN political analyst and now a professor of policy, government and international affairs at George Mason University. “They like sophisticated, refined, tolerant candidates.”
Jewish support for Democratic presidential candidates reached a whopping 90 percent when they voted for both Franklin D. Roosevelt and Lyndon B. Johnson. It has slipped in recent years, dropping to 69 percent in the 2012 election. But should Clinton prove to be her party’s candidate, Jewish support could soar to 90 percent in a contest against Donald Trump, suggested Peter Beinart, a contributing editor at The Atlantic and the National Journal.
“My guess is that Trump will win less than 20 percent — maybe 15 or even 10 percent” of the Jewish vote,” he said. “She will win in a blowout against Trump. He plays poorly against [the majority of] Jews, despite being the grand marshal of the Israel Day Parade. … Most Jews are still attached to the Democratic Party and need something unusual to pull them away. Trump does just the opposite – he will not even get those who naturally go for the Republican.”
Beinart added that Trump’s equivocation on Duke “absolutely hurts him among Jews — and in general.”
When it comes to Israel, an election campaign is typically the season to be very pro-Israel, but Trump’s “neutral” stance has left some Israel supporters puzzled, according to Aaron David Miller, a vice president at the Woodrow Wilson Center for Scholars.
“Trump is pursuing a policy that is less rhetorical and more detached so he can be a mediator” of the Israel-Palestinian conflict, he said. “He was booed at the Republican Jewish Coalition when he refused to say he would move the American Embassy to Jerusalem. He keeps talking about what an honor it would be to get involved to broker a solution.”
But Steven Spiegel questioned how Trump could be “both positive on Israel and neutral.”
Spiegel, a professor of political science at UCLA and national scholar of the Israel Policy Forum (a group promoting a two-state solution to the Israel-Palestinian conflict), asked, “What does neutrality mean? He says, ‘Trust me, I’m such a great deal maker I can make negotiations work.’ He has also said that if he is elected, there will be a certain amount of surprise. What does that mean about Israel?
“Trump says Germany, Japan, South Korea and other countries must pay more for the American troops based in their countries. What happens to [joint military exercises with] Israel? Does he see Israel as a special case? On Hillary, everyone knows where she stands. She talks of keeping America’s unshakeable commitment to Israel’s security, its military edge, missile defense and intelligence sharing. She talks of selling Israel the most sophisticated fighter aircraft and that she will push tunnel technology detection. So we’re comparing someone who speaks in broad strokes and about maintaining neutrality with someone who supports Israel and has pressured Israel in the same way other [American leaders] have.”
Miller said he has “never seen a candidate like [Trump]. Based on the statements he has made, there is very little to go on except for slogans. He has not said he is going to shred the agreement on Iran’s nuclear program,” but has been harshly critical of it and of the $150 billion Iran will get that Trump said Iran would use for terrorist activities in much of the world.
“He will have to define himself even more before the [November] election,” he said.
On the other hand, Miller noted, Clinton’s “sensitivities are more pro-Israel, but at the same time she has made comments critical of Israeli settlements and Israeli policy regarding the West Bank. … She would be more predictable as president regarding the Middle East. How much priority she would give to Israel [as president] is unknown.”
Regarding Iran, Clinton said she strongly backs the nuclear agreement.
Foreign policy has received little attention in the campaign to date, something Malcolm Hoenlein, executive vice chairman of the Conference of Presidents, said he would like to see change.
“Sixty-percent of Americans oppose the Iran agreement and the Jewish community is opposed to it,” he said. “Even more Americans are skeptical about Iran with its missile launches, continued support for terrorism … and continued demonstrations chanting death to America and death to Israel.”
“I hope Iran does not become a political football and that the focus can be on Iranian compliance with the agreement,” Hoenlein said.
Spiegel, the UCLA professor, said Trump has business investments in several Arab countries but that he does not know if he has any in Israel.
“You could say this may cause him to have more influence with the Arab countries,” he said. “On the other hand, it may make him more interested in pressuring Israel.” ---------------------
Editorial: `Dealing With Trumpism'
Jewish Week says "brash, ballsy, bigoted" Trump campaign
threatens fabric of society.
Editorial
Dealing With Trumpism
Trump's brash, ballsy and bigoted campaign threatens our country's founding principles of democracy and decency.
Donald Trump at a rally in Fort Worth, Texas, last week. Getty images
A political campaign for the Republican nomination for the presidency that was first perceived as a lark and a publicity stunt by much of the public has become a national concern that speaks to the angry mood of the electorate and the violation of civil discourse on the part of Donald Trump.
We are not in the habit of endorsing or rejecting political candidates; rather, we write here about a worrisome trend brought to the fore by the brash, ballsy and bigoted campaign that Trump has conducted, one that threatens the fabric of American society as we know it.
Tapping into deep and legitimate fears about our country’s economic problems and perceived diminished stature on the world stage, the billionaire businessman has offered political promises and blustery bromides rather than detailed solutions to a host of issues, from illegal immigration to military engagement in the Middle East. In so doing he has lowered the level of serious discourse and defied the unwritten societal laws of personal decency in denouncing his opponents on a schoolyard level of taunts and name-calling. Equally disturbing, the more he defies conventional norms of debate the greater he is praised by supporters for his anti-Establishment, tell-it-like-it-is stance. The prospect of such anger on the part of the candidate and a wide swath of the electorate boiling over into an “us” vs. “them” conflict is all too possible a scenario.
None seem more appalled by this behavior than Republican leaders and conservative pundits who feel Trump is hijacking their party and political ideals. Bret Stephens, in his Wall Street Journal column on Tuesday, wrote that “the candidacy of Donald Trump is the open sewer of American conservatism.” Stephens asserted that “a Trump presidency … would mark the collapse of the entire architecture of the U.S.-led post-World War II global order.”
Until recently Trump’s bigotry has focused on his nativist solution and ugly language regarding illegal immigrants from Mexico and his call to ban all Muslims from entry to the U.S. Remarkably, and most disturbingly, such positions are discussed now as legitimate areas for debate, an indication of how low the bar has become for acceptable discussion in American society.
This past weekend Trump evaded prompts to condemn David Duke and his Ku Klux Klan, the symbol of racial and ethnic hatred in our country. The Anti-Defamation League, noting that Duke is “perhaps America’s best-known racist and anti-Semite,” was among the first to call on Trump to “distance himself from white supremacists … unequivocally.”
Only after a strong backlash did the candidate “disavow” such support. How sad. And worrisome.
Our concern, beyond the candidate himself, is the dark mood and deep frustration of so many Americans seeking a strong leader who may be willing to push against the Founding Fathers’ boundaries of democracy and decency. Now is the time for each of us to become engaged in the political process and assure that America remains a country of compassion as well as strength.
---------------------
`Sauna' Rabbi Stepping Down; Or Is He?
Riverdale leader's surprise statement unclear about intentions and timing.
Gary Rosenblatt analyzes the communal standoff.Gary Rosenblatt
‘Sauna’ Rabbi Stepping Down; Or Is He?
Riverdale leader’s surprise statement unclear about intentions and timing.
Gary Rosenblatt
Editor And Publisher
Rabbi Rosenblatt. Via Youtube.com
A brief statement last Wednesday evening from the leadership of the Riverdale Jewish Center, informing members that their embattled rabbi, Jonathan Rosenblatt, “intends to step aside from the senior rabbinate” of the Modern Orthodox congregation, is being scrutinized and parsed in the community this week like a passage from the Talmud.
Raising more questions than answers, the two-sentence message seems to indicate that nine months after published reports described the rabbi’s longtime practice of showering and chatting in the sauna with boys and young men, and six months after he overcame efforts to have him removed from his pulpit, the prominent religious leader will be leaving his post soon in an effort to unify the community. Or will he?
Meyer Koplow, an attorney representing Rabbi Rosenblatt in this issue, told The Jewish Week that the rabbi, eager to leave a positive legacy for his years of service to RJC, initiated this step to help the synagogue community “heal and grow.” Koplow, who offered his services pro bono and is negotiating between the rabbi and the lay leadership, said he expected the issues to be resolved in the next week and then voted on by the congregation.
RJC’s president, Samson Fine, referred a request for comment to the brief statement that was issued.
The controversy, which began over the rabbi’s unusual behavior and later morphed into how the RJC lay leadership has handled the situation, now finds members of the community wondering if Rabbi Rosenblatt, who has led the congregation for more than three decades, is stepping down or just “aside” — and whether he is leaving his pulpit altogether or just “the senior rabbinate,” possibly staying on as rabbi emeritus or scholar-in-residence. And it is unclear when this would take place. Some believe a change in the rabbi’s status is imminent while others point out that his contract extends through July 2018. The statement, which appeared to be purposefully vague, did not indicate timing.
Another key question is whether the estimated 20 percent of the RJC membership that left the congregation last summer and created a breakaway Shabbat prayer group now known as The Riverdale Minyan will consider coming back to RJC — and if so, under what circumstances. The group is leasing space from the nearby Riverdale Temple (Reform) and appears to have coalesced into a thriving, active band of worshippers of all ages, with the younger set heading up a number of active committees, including weeknight lectures for adults and a variety of programs for children. More than 100 families are paying members of the Minyan, which often attracts in excess of 200 people on Shabbat. (It does not hold regular services during the week.)
Several participants noted that while the Minyan may have come together initially out of a shared sense of dissatisfaction with the lay and rabbinic leadership of RJC, it has become an increasingly tight-knit group. Steven Bayme, who resigned from RJC after the rabbi’s sauna activities were first published in The New York Times last May, said the Minyan has become “a real community of people who care about each other.” In particular, he noted that after his son was killed in a car accident last summer, the group became an ongoing “source of enormous support” for him and his family.
Bayme and other attendees interviewed said they left RJC out of a sense of disappointment both with the rabbi’s behavior, described as, at best, inappropriate — especially for a spiritual leader — and frustration with the alleged lack of accountability and transparency by the board leadership, which by all counts has made blunders along the way. The Minyan attendees say they are happy where they are and will be following closely the resolution of the rabbi’s status at RJC, reluctant to come back unless the rabbi leaves, with some calling for the synagogue board to resign as well.
But defenders of the rabbi maintain that the issue has always been “more about power than the shvitz,” as one longtime RJC member put it. The source, who asked to remain anonymous because of the delicacy of the situation, asserted that some of those who left had been major funders of the congregation who were unhappy with its direction and chose to leave for a variety of reasons. Supporters of the rabbi also charge those who left were “hypocrites,” noting that the great majority of the congregation knew of the rabbi’s behavior with young men for years and didn’t seem to express outrage until the news became public. Key critics counter that they actively tried to buy out the rabbi’s contract for years but were stymied by concern about legal action since no direct allegations of illegal behavior emerged. Nor have they to this day.
And so it goes.
In interviews with The Jewish Week in recent days, a number of defenders and critics, all of whom asked for anonymity, characterized the situation as very sad, given the deep rift that has resulted in the community. But conflicting narratives have emerged to explain the rabbi’s recent announcement.
One has the rabbi initiating this “step aside” move for the good of the congregation and the community. Another has him heading off a board effort to ensure that he not seek a contract renewal beyond 2018. Still another sees the rabbi as gradually worn down by the loss of key congregants, including several former RJC presidents and major donors, and hoping to negotiate his financial package before Fine, the current president, perceived as sympathetic to the rabbi, completes his term this spring.
All sides see a key issue being who will be in control of the RJC, including its lay and rabbinic leadership, going forward.
Defenders are clearly the majority of the synagogue now, which is believed to have between 500 and 550 member families. The rabbi’s supporters want to assure a dignified conclusion to his tenure. Within a day of Rabbi Rosenblatt’s brief statement, a petition began circulating among congregants, urging that he “continue to have a connection to the RJC… whether he is called the RabbiEmeritus or something else is not important. What is important is his continued presence.”
That’s precisely what a number of worshippers at the Minyan oppose. They want to see the rabbi make a clean break with the congregation so that the rift they believe he caused can begin to heal.
Whether or not those discontented former congregants will ever return to RJC is one of the many questions that may be answered down the road. But for now the focus is on what “stepping aside” means, and when.
Gary Rosenblatt, Editor & Publisher, The Jewish Week
Rabbi Jonathan Rosenblatt, Riverdale Jewish Center, sauna rabbi---------------------
New Fears Over Russia's Role In Syria
From Israel, Josh Mitnick writes that a policy reassessment may be imminent.
Israel News
New Fears Over Russia’s Role In Syria
Is policy reassessment imminent?
Joshua Mitnick
Contributing Editor
Syria’s Bashar Assad: A boost from Putin.
Tel Aviv — The Quneitra Overlook rest stop at the eastern edge of the Golan Heights border with Syria offers a front-row-seat look into a country decimated by five years of civil war.
One recent morning, the Syrian side of the border seemed normal and quiet. But it’s a calm that belies the changing tide of the fighting that has seen Russia’s military intervention give a major boost to President Bashar Assad and his alliance with Iran and Hezbollah.
Now, as a fragile cease-fire went into effect this week reflecting Russia’s tip in the power balance, will the new geopolitical dynamics at play prompt a rethinking of Israel’s five-year policy of keeping out of the civil war?
“There are worries that the Russian involvement will bring Assad back to life in a way that he will rule the country again under the supervision of Iran,” said Alon Liel, a former director general of the Israeli foreign ministry. “I don’t think Israel is enthusiastic about that.”
On Sunday, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu welcomed the cease-fire despite skepticism in Israel that it will hold over the long term. Netanyahu reminded the powers involved that Israel reserved the right to intervene to prevent weapons transfers to Hezbollah and to block Shia-allied groups from establishing a new hostile front along the Golan Heights.
“Israel wants to preserve its freedom of action,” said Ofer Zalzberg, an Israel analyst at the International Crisis Group.
“Netanyahu is concerned that there is a period now in which every use of arms is seen as a breach, which endangers the entire cease-fire.” Netanyahu is saying that Israel’s “red lines” are separate from the cease-fire and defending them doesn’t violate it, Zalzberg said.
The bigger question concerns what Israel should do — if anything — in the face of the resurgent Russian-backed axis of Assad, Iran and Hezbollah. Amid the growing possibility that a weak Assad might give a freer hand to Hezbollah and to Iran, already strengthened by the removal of economic sanctions, should Israel change its policy of neutrality on the outcome of the civil war?
“Until now Israel has acted wisely, setting minimal number of red lines,” said Ehud Eiran, a political science professor at the University of Haifa. “Israel has been realistic about its [limited] ability to affect the events in Syria, and I don’t think this is changing.”
Part of that neutrality stemmed from a lack of attractive outcomes: Israeli officials remain split over whether it was preferable for Assad to remain in power as “the devil Israel knows” or whether it prefers a chaotic alliance in its place that could further destabilize its northern neighbor.
Eiran noted that, with the stepped-up Russian involvement, Israel’s room for military action inside of Syria has been constrained. Indeed, the two countries have established a coordination mechanism in recent months to avoid a confrontation.
Despite the concern, analysts have pointed to an upside: Israel can use its dialogue with Russia to communicate to Iran and Syria what its red lines are.
In an article in the Haaretz newspaper last week, military commentator Amos Harel wrote that while Jerusalem isn’t expected to step up military action in Syria, Israel will lobby harder for Western intervention to help the Kurdish and Sunni rebels.
Writing shortly after Russia stepped up its actions in Syria, Amos Yadlin, a former Israeli military intelligence chief, argued that given Moscow’s deepened involvement in the hostilities, Israel should consider more actively trying to topple Assad.
Israel could “find itself in an inferior strategic position,” because Russia’s involvement could provide a “seal of approval” for Iranian activity in Syria for years to come, wrote Yadlin, now the director at Tel Aviv University’s Institute for National Strategic Studies.
Yadlin argued for tightening Israel’s quiet ties with Saudi Arabia and reaching a reconciliation with Turkey — another enemy of Assad — to pressure the Syrian regime. In recent weeks Turkish leaders have made optimistic statements about finally mending the five-year rift with Israel, though Russia (along with Egypt and Greece) is reportedly trying to dissuade Jerusalem from the rapprochement with Ankara. The former general also suggested that Israel persuade Russia to push Assad aside.
Since the Russian intervention began last summer, Israeli observers have already taken note of the scope of support rolled out for the pro-regime forces: In the southern province of Daraa near the Jordanian border, Russian aircraft have provided air cover for Shiite irregular militias and Hezbollah forces that focused on retaking a town, known as Sheik Miskeen, that is at a strategic crossroads linking the south to Damascus.
“Hezbollah showing up in the south has raised some eyebrows among the Israelis,” said Andrew Tabler, a fellow who focuses on Syria at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy. “They think they are down there to set up another front.”
In the last year, Israel is believed to have launched attacks that killed a key Iranian general and high-ranking Hezbollah officers who were in the border area near the Golan.
Two months ago, an Israeli security official looked out to the border and gave a rundown of the diverse variety of militias active along the frontier: In the north near the Hermon were regime forces and regime-allied Druze militias. Near the border town of Quneitra, a mixture of Free Syrian Army and jihadist groups were fighting the regime and among themselves.
Israel has been giving medical care and humanitarian support to Syrians from rebel villages and militants from the border area. Beyond the humanitarian gesture, the goal is to keep the frontier region as quiet as possible and prevent cross-border attacks. “It’s to create a ‘good fence,’” said the official, a reference to an Israeli crossing into Southern Lebanon during the 1980s.
For all the potential troubling fallout, Russian regime forces are still far from the frontier area with Israel — mostly focusing on the north. For the foreseeable future, Jerusalem and Russia want to avoid an entanglement, each for its own interests.
“Israel is careful about Russia; the sense is that [Moscow’s presence] doesn’t play into the hands of Israel,” said Eyal Zisser, a political science professor at Tel Aviv University who is an expert on Syria.
“From the beginning, Israel hasn’t had a clear policy about what we want to happen, and whether we should do anything,” he added. “I don’t see any change.”
---------------------
Special Section on Sephardic Life today
with a focus on culture and cuisine.
Sephardic Life (2016)
Kubbeh in the culinary spotlight, the Sephardic Shylock, and more.
Tuesday, March 1, 2016 (All day)
Inside This Special Section
---------------------
'Jewish Jesters' from the Golden Age Of American Comedy
New YIVO exhibit at Center for Jewish History features records,
photos, posters, and more.
New York
New Exhibit In Town: Funny, You Should Ask?
Steve Lipman
Jewish comedians like Groucho Marx and Jack Benny are featured in new YIVO exhibition. Photo courtesy of YIVO
Did you know that a few generations ago you could amuse yourself by playing board games like Rodney Dangerfield’s “No Respect” or Groucho Marx’s “Your Bet Your Life” or “Jan Murray’s TV Word Game”?
None of those games became big sellers, but they are featured in a new YIVO exhibition that is dedicated to the Jewish men and women of comedy’s early years who played a major role in shaping popular entertainment in this country.
“Professional Jokers: Jewish Jesters from the Golden Age of American Comedy” opened this week at the Center for Jewish History, in Chelsea, preceded the night before by a panel discussion that included comedians Robert Klein and Judy Gold, comedy writer Alan Zweibel, and “surprise guest” comedian Gilbert Gottfried. The exhibit runs through May 1.
In the exhibition’s cases and frames are artifacts (records, photographs, posters, playbills, joke books, etc.) from the careers of such headliners as Dangerfield and Marx and Murray, and Milton Berle and Joan Rivers and Mel Brooks, as well as mementoes from a few dozen other funny Jews whose stars have faded over the years.
“There are dozens and dozens more” who did not make it into the exhibition,” said Eddy Portnoy, who curated the show. “From the 1920s to the beginning of the 21st-century Jewish comics dominated the comedy industry in the United States,” said Portnoy, who serves as academic adviser at YIVO’s Max Weinrich Center for Advanced Jewish Studies and teaches in the Judaic Studies Program at Rutgers University.
Most of the “hundreds” of items — “We didn’t bother to count” — are from the collection of artist-illustrator Drew Friedman, who took part in Monday’s panel, Portnoy said. YIVO’s contribution is some old material in Yiddish, like an 1867 joke book from Vilna.
“It’s never been done before,” he said. “No one has seen so much material by so many comedians in one place. It’s worth showing.”
Fittingly, the first thing a visitor sees when stepping off a Center elevator into the exhibition’s third-floor space is a bust of Sholem Aleichem, the dean of Yiddish humor writers.
How does an exhibition of 20th-century English-speaking jokesters fit into YIVO’s mission of preserving the Yiddish culture of Eastern Europe?
“All of these comedians were children of immigrants” from the Old Country, Portnoy said. “They all understood Yiddish. They all used Yiddish.”
The current crop of superstar Jewish comedians, like Jerry Seinfeld, do not appear in the exhibition. Not that there’s anything wrong with that. The funny Jews who together played a disproportionate role in Vaudeville, Broadway, radio and TV influenced the contemporary generation of Jewish comedians, Portnoy said. Gottfried, in his remarks on Monday, said he “was very much influenced by these people.”
Posters and photographs are the normal fare of museum exhibitions. Why the board games? “It reflects the fact that these people were major celebrities,” Portnoy said. “Famous people beget products.”
steve@jewishweek.org
---------------------
Erica Brown on the art of Kiddush talk
Sociologist, and author, wrote to nine rabbis to discover
how to master the kiddush schmooze
Jew By Voice
Kiddush Talk
Erica Brown
Special To The Jewish Week
Erica Brown
Make kiddush great again, some may bellow. As for me, I do my very best to avoid kiddush altogether. Nothing is less appealing than small talk with people who have egg salad in their teeth. I enjoy people but not in crowded social halls with outsized decibel levels. I’ve been criticized for hurting people’s feelings at kiddush because I didn’t see them. They were right. At a kiddush, I can’t hear. I can’t see.
But I am not the only one. Like a sociologist, I’ve been observing kiddush behavior in the hopes of getting techniques to work the room better, so I wrote to a dozen-plus rabbis across the country and of every denomination asking for advice. Who better to master kiddush talk than rabbis?
As it turns out, nearly everyone. I received nine pages of comments from rabbis who struggle with kiddush. “I hate tuna fish and oftentimes people talk, and it sometimes inadvertently comes flying at me.” It’s not just me. One rabbi went so far as to say he suffers from Kiddush Anxiety, a new neurological disorder. After services, he just wants to read a book and take a nap. For a rabbi who has been “performing” for the past several hours — noticing congregants’ needs, making sure the service goes smoothly, delivering a sermon — kiddush comes at a bad time. Many rabbis used the word “exhausted” in relation to kiddush duty. Some haven’t prayed properly in years. Some also shared that they are hungry.
Many rabbis saw liability in offering the ruse of a meaningful conversation with constant kiddush-style interruptions. “It can feel (and be) fake. It opens us to ambushes. It can backfire and make a community feel less genuine, open, and welcoming, rather than more. It can unintentionally promote lashon hara [gossip].”
One rabbi who works hard at his pastoral skills, his sermons and his classes, feels judged most by his performance or lack thereof at a kiddush. Still another observed that, “For those of us who lean more toward the introverted side of the social spectrum, there’s nothing that requires the output of more emotional energy than a cocktail party. Every interaction requires me to summon charm and wit; to call on memory banks at lightning speeds (to remember names of grandchildren living in foreign countries that I’ve never met!) … to transition spontaneously from sobriety to celebration; and then to do it all again in the next instant. And for those of us who privilege depth over breadth, we’re often left feeling cheated…”
Yet every rabbi recognized the importance of schmoozing. A former president said that kiddush “allows for the humanizing of an authority figure” — the rabbi, and one rabbi believes that for congregants who don’t take to prayer, the rabbi at kiddush is their Sinai. “If we teach Judaism as a real living thing, part of that is standing with, eating with, talking with people.”
One rabbi is improving his networking skills this way: “I began to look at each conversation as discovering the story of each person. It was like reading autobiographies in conversation.” To add to this, another rabbi thinks that kiddush is actually a gift. “Kiddush is not something you survive but an engraved invitation to a profound encounter.”
On the positive side, one rabbi quipped that, “a good kiddush can save a rabbi three weeks’ worth of appointments.” A synagogue president had a similar reaction: “for congregants the easiest time for them to share opinions or ask questions was in shul on Shabbat.” Another rabbi saw an important side benefit: “If you feel like you gave a crappy drash, it’s a nice chance to hear compliments about it anyway.”
One rabbi (whose name I will withhold here) gave a very powerful sermon and deeply inspired a person in the pews to convert. The worshipper waited until after the service and approached the rabbi. He wanted to be part of the Jewish people. The rabbi paused and pointed to a set of doors: “You see those doors? Behind them is a kiddush. I want you to go into kiddush and then tell me if you still want to be a part of the Jewish people.”
How can we do this better? Here’s some tips from the experts.
Reach out — don’t only speak to your friends; make eye contact with everyone in the circle, especially those entering and exiting; acknowledge those who would like to break in; avoid the temptation to broach a heavy, personal topic — it’s not the place.
Also, suggest a post-kiddush conversation if the topic is sensitive or can lead to misunderstanding; transition out of one conversation by introducing people and “handing them off” rather than “leaving them hanging”; let go of conversations with dignity and love. And finally, my favorite: “leave as soon as possible.”
Erica Brown’s column appears the first week of the month.
---------------------
More Headlines:
Abuse Whistleblower's Case Vs. Forward Can Proceed
New York
Abuse Whistleblower’s Case Vs. Forward Can Proceed
Judge refuses to throw out Sam Kellner’s defamation suit against Jewish newspaper.
Hella Winston And Amy Sara Clark
Sam Kellner’s defamation suit against The Jewish Daily Forward lives to fight another day.
Last week, Manhattan Supreme Court Justice Debra A. James denied the newspaper’s motion to dismiss the case, which was filed by Kellner in November 2014.
In 2008, Kellner brought allegations of his son’s sexual abuse by Baruch Lebovits to the police and worked closely with law enforcement to bring forward additional Lebovits victims. Lebovits was convicted in 2010 and sentenced to 10 ½ to 32 years in prison. But that conviction was overturned on a prosecution error (Lebovits took a plea deal in 2014). In 2011, Kellner was indicted for perjury and extortion related to the Lebovits case, but in 2014 those charges were dropped.
The defamation suit concerns a 2013 article written by Paul Berger, “Sam Kellner’s Tangled Hasidic Tale of Child Sex Abuse, Extortion and Faith,” and a tweet, mistakenly referring to Kellner as a convicted extortionist.
The lawsuit alleges that Berger used an illegally obtained recording that had been doctored by the Lebovits family to falsely claim that Kellner suggested to the family of a child molester that they could “buy off prosecutors” with Yankee tickets and other gifts.
It also claims that Berger accused Kellner of “conspiring to commit extortion” based on another recording. His lawyer argues, however, that Berger relied on an out-of-context statement and that when one listens to the entire recording, it’s clear that the claim is not true.
The lawsuit alleges that Berger used an illegally obtained recording that had been and doctored by the Lebovits family to falsely claim that Kellner suggested to the family of a child molester that they could “buy off prosecutors” with Yankee tickets and other gifts.
It also claims that Berger falsely accused Kellner of “conspiring to commit extortion.” However, Kellner’s lawyer argues that when one listens to the entire recording, it is clear that claim is not true.
Lastly, it points to the tweet, which not only mistakenly refers to Kellner as a convicted extortionist but also went uncorrected for six days after the paper was alerted to the error.
The Forward sought to have the case dismissed on the grounds that the article was purely opinion, and thus protected speech. It also argued that the mistaken language of the tweet was inadvertent and not intended to defame Kellner.
James rejected the claim that the article was an opinion piece, but wrote that based on the evidence presented so far, the piece appears to be based on undisclosed and/or misrepresented facts. As for the tweet, James ruled that its “required intent cannot be determined on these motion papers.”
The judge also found that in its motion to dismiss, the Forward failed to prove that Kellner is a public figure rather than a private person, writing that he “was drawn into the public forum against his will in order to obtain redress for his son, and then to defend himself.” This is a key distinction because as a private figure, Kellner would have to show only that The Forward acted negligently rather than with actual malice. However, the judge also noted that this determination could change after the discovery period, during which witnesses are deposed, and more facts come into evidence.
Andrew T. Miltenberg, a veteran trial lawyer who focuses on complex commercial litigation and civil rights told The Jewish Week that the fact that the court has not, so far, deemed Kellner a public figure “is critical.”
“To have held otherwise would have had the effect of frightening the general public away from reporting crimes or otherwise comfortably being a being a witness to events of great import. I am encouraged by the fact the Court would not allow the father of an abuse victim to be silenced or discredited,” he said.
Samuel Norich, The Forward’s publisher and CEO, said that James’ denial of his paper’s motion to dismiss does not mean the Forward’s defense has no merit, but only that more information is needed before a decision can be reached.
“The court concluded that a number of the issues we raised could not be decided on a motion to dismiss but have to await discovery,” he said. “We look forward to presenting our case to the judge on a fuller record.”
As for Kellner’s attorney, Niall MacGiollabhui, he is also looking forward — to the discovery process.
“We are pleased with Judge James’ comprehensive and well-reasoned decision,” he said. “We now look forward to the discovery stage of this litigation, during which the perfidious nature of Paul Berger’s reporting and his collusion with a serial pedophile will be laid bare.”
A preliminary hearing is set to take place on April 5.
Hella Winston is special correspondent and Amy Sara Clark is deputy managing editor.
---------------------
Rabbi Jonathan Sacks Awarded $1.5 Million Templeton Prize
International
Rabbi Jonathan Sacks Awarded $1.5 Million Templeton Prize
JTA
Rabbi Jonathan Sacks. JTA
Rabbi Jonathan Sacks, the former chief rabbi of Britain, has been awarded the 2016 Templeton Prize honoring a living person who has made an exceptional contribution to affirming life’s spiritual dimension.
Sacks, the author of more than two dozen books, will receive a cash prize worth about $1.5 million. He will receive the prize, one of the largest awarded to an individual, at a May 26 ceremony in London.
The announcement was made Wednesday morning at the British Academy in London by the Pennsylvania-based John Templeton Foundation. The prize was established in 1972 by the late global investor and philanthropist Sir John Templeton.
Sacks, 67, served as chief rabbi from 1991 to 2013, and revitalized Britain’s Jewish community during his tenure, according to the prize committee.
“During his tenure he catalyzed a network of organizations that introduced a Jewish focus in areas including business, women’s issues and education, and urged British Jewry to turn outward to share the ethics of their faith with the broader community,” the committee said in a statement. “Central to his message is appreciation and respect of all faiths, with an emphasis that recognizing the values of each is the only path to effectively combat the global rise of violence and terrorism.”
Sacks was knighted by Queen Elizabeth II in 2005. He currently serves as a professor of Judaic thought at New York University and Yeshiva University, and as a professor of law, ethics and the Bible at King’s College in London.
In a statement delivered at the announcement of the prize, Sacks said: “I believe that religion, or more precisely, religions, should have a voice in the public conversation within the societies of the West, as to how to live, how to construct a social order, how to enhance human dignity, honor human life, and indeed protect life as a whole from environmental hazard. … Religion must have a voice in the public conversation, but it must be a reasoned and reasonable voice and one that makes space for other voices also.”
Past recipients include Mother Teresa, who received the inaugural prize, Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn in 1983, and the and the Dalai Lama in 2012.
---------------------
Israeli Father Of 5 Attacked Outside His West Bank Home
Saves His Children
Israel News
Israeli Father Of 5 Attacked Outside His West Bank Home Saves His Children
JTA
Roi Harel, an army reservist who lives in the West Bank settlement of Eli, being treated at the Shaare Zedek Medical Center. JTA
Jerusalem — A father of five who was attacked by two Palestinian teens said he managed to shove his assailants out of his West Bank home before they could hurt his family.
Roi Harel was heading to army reserve duty in uniform at 5 a.m. Wednesday when the assailants attacked him with clubs and axes outside his home in the Eli settlement, then entered the premises, according to the Israel Defense Forces. Harel told reporters he chased them to the doors of his children’s bedrooms and managed to push them outside the house and lock the door.
Harel was treated at a Jerusalem hospital for cuts to his head.
The attackers were both 17 and from a nearby Palestinian village, according to the Palestinian Maan news agency. After leaving a knife stuck in the door of the home, they fled on foot and were killed by security forces who attempted to apprehend them.
“If anyone has any doubts as to their intentions, two 17-year-olds came to slaughter me, my wife and my kids,” Harel told Ynet. “In the seconds during which I fought with them, I thought to myself that what happened to the Fogel and Gavish families. I screamed to my wife to call the settlement’s guard, the children woke up and cried, but my wife was with them in the bedroom, so they hardly saw anything.”
Ruth and Udi Fogel and three of their five children, aged 3 months to 11 years, were murdered in their beds by Palestinian attackers who entered their home in the West Bank settlement of Itamar. Four members of the Gavish family, including both parents, one of their seven children and a grandfather were killed by a Palestinian attacker in 2002 in their home in Elon Moreh, located near Nablus in the West Bank.
Eli is located about 20 miles north of Jerusalem, near Ramallah in the West Bank.
---------------------
Germany Launches New Attempt To Ban Main Neo-Nazi Party
International
Germany Launches New Attempt To Ban Main Neo-Nazi Party
JTA
Germany's Federal Constitutional Court begins its second day of hearings over a ban of the far-right NPD party. Getty Images
Berlin — Germany’s top Jewish organization has applauded a new attempt to ban the country’s main neo-Nazi party.
Three days of hearings began Tuesday in Germany’s top court – the Federal Constitutional Court in Karlsruhe – to examine the
constitutionality of outlawing the far-right National Democratic Party of Germany (NPD).
It would be the second attempt to ban the party – the first failed on a legal technicality in 2003. Observers say a second failure would be
devastating.
At issue is whether the NPD poses a threat to democracy. It is very difficult to ban a party in Germany, due to post-Nazi era laws designed to safeguard free speech.
Josef Schuster, head of the Central Council of Jews in Germany, said in a statement Tuesday that a trial would “show [the NPD’s] true face” to the world.
The NPD blames foreigners for Germany’s problems and belittles the Holocaust. Though the party has never made it into the federal
parliament, its representatives have been elected into two state parliaments in the past decade by barely passing the 5 percent vote minimum. It currently has representatives in the state legislature of Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania. Election success earns the party
federal taxpayer money.
In 2014, a notorious German NPD member was elected to the European parliament, which has a lower minimum of votes.
Said Schuster: “The NPD wants to do away with our democracy and set up a nationalist state where there is no more room for minorities.” A trial would not work as an advertisement for the party, but rather as a deterrent, he added.
The 2003 attempt to ban the NPD failed after the Supreme Court learned that government informants themselves instigated some of the allegedly unconstitutional activities.
On Tuesday, NPD lawyers challenged the impartiality of two judges in the new hearings, and portrayed the party as a victim of
surveillance and infiltration, according to news reports. They demanded confirmation from German Chancellor Angela Merkel herself that there were no government spies within their party’s ranks.
German Justice Minister Heiko Maas told reporters that even if the trial succeeds, the fight against racism and extremism in Germany
would not be over. Right-wing and populist parties appear to have been gaining support for their opposition to Merkel’s liberal refugee policy.
---------------------
The Jewish Week
But Steven Spiegel questioned how Trump could be “both positive on Israel and neutral.”
Spiegel, a professor of political science at UCLA and national scholar of the Israel Policy Forum (a group promoting a two-state solution to the Israel-Palestinian conflict), asked, “What does neutrality mean? He says, ‘Trust me, I’m such a great deal maker I can make negotiations work.’ He has also said that if he is elected, there will be a certain amount of surprise. What does that mean about Israel?
“Trump says Germany, Japan, South Korea and other countries must pay more for the American troops based in their countries. What happens to [joint military exercises with] Israel? Does he see Israel as a special case? On Hillary, everyone knows where she stands. She talks of keeping America’s unshakeable commitment to Israel’s security, its military edge, missile defense and intelligence sharing. She talks of selling Israel the most sophisticated fighter aircraft and that she will push tunnel technology detection. So we’re comparing someone who speaks in broad strokes and about maintaining neutrality with someone who supports Israel and has pressured Israel in the same way other [American leaders] have.”
Miller said he has “never seen a candidate like [Trump]. Based on the statements he has made, there is very little to go on except for slogans. He has not said he is going to shred the agreement on Iran’s nuclear program,” but has been harshly critical of it and of the $150 billion Iran will get that Trump said Iran would use for terrorist activities in much of the world.
“He will have to define himself even more before the [November] election,” he said.
On the other hand, Miller noted, Clinton’s “sensitivities are more pro-Israel, but at the same time she has made comments critical of Israeli settlements and Israeli policy regarding the West Bank. … She would be more predictable as president regarding the Middle East. How much priority she would give to Israel [as president] is unknown.”
Regarding Iran, Clinton said she strongly backs the nuclear agreement.
Foreign policy has received little attention in the campaign to date, something Malcolm Hoenlein, executive vice chairman of the Conference of Presidents, said he would like to see change.
“Sixty-percent of Americans oppose the Iran agreement and the Jewish community is opposed to it,” he said. “Even more Americans are skeptical about Iran with its missile launches, continued support for terrorism … and continued demonstrations chanting death to America and death to Israel.”
“I hope Iran does not become a political football and that the focus can be on Iranian compliance with the agreement,” Hoenlein said.
Spiegel, the UCLA professor, said Trump has business investments in several Arab countries but that he does not know if he has any in Israel.
“You could say this may cause him to have more influence with the Arab countries,” he said. “On the other hand, it may make him more interested in pressuring Israel.” ---------------------
Editorial: `Dealing With Trumpism'
Jewish Week says "brash, ballsy, bigoted" Trump campaign
threatens fabric of society.
Editorial
Dealing With Trumpism
Trump's brash, ballsy and bigoted campaign threatens our country's founding principles of democracy and decency.
Donald Trump at a rally in Fort Worth, Texas, last week. Getty images
A political campaign for the Republican nomination for the presidency that was first perceived as a lark and a publicity stunt by much of the public has become a national concern that speaks to the angry mood of the electorate and the violation of civil discourse on the part of Donald Trump.
We are not in the habit of endorsing or rejecting political candidates; rather, we write here about a worrisome trend brought to the fore by the brash, ballsy and bigoted campaign that Trump has conducted, one that threatens the fabric of American society as we know it.
Tapping into deep and legitimate fears about our country’s economic problems and perceived diminished stature on the world stage, the billionaire businessman has offered political promises and blustery bromides rather than detailed solutions to a host of issues, from illegal immigration to military engagement in the Middle East. In so doing he has lowered the level of serious discourse and defied the unwritten societal laws of personal decency in denouncing his opponents on a schoolyard level of taunts and name-calling. Equally disturbing, the more he defies conventional norms of debate the greater he is praised by supporters for his anti-Establishment, tell-it-like-it-is stance. The prospect of such anger on the part of the candidate and a wide swath of the electorate boiling over into an “us” vs. “them” conflict is all too possible a scenario.
None seem more appalled by this behavior than Republican leaders and conservative pundits who feel Trump is hijacking their party and political ideals. Bret Stephens, in his Wall Street Journal column on Tuesday, wrote that “the candidacy of Donald Trump is the open sewer of American conservatism.” Stephens asserted that “a Trump presidency … would mark the collapse of the entire architecture of the U.S.-led post-World War II global order.”
Until recently Trump’s bigotry has focused on his nativist solution and ugly language regarding illegal immigrants from Mexico and his call to ban all Muslims from entry to the U.S. Remarkably, and most disturbingly, such positions are discussed now as legitimate areas for debate, an indication of how low the bar has become for acceptable discussion in American society.
This past weekend Trump evaded prompts to condemn David Duke and his Ku Klux Klan, the symbol of racial and ethnic hatred in our country. The Anti-Defamation League, noting that Duke is “perhaps America’s best-known racist and anti-Semite,” was among the first to call on Trump to “distance himself from white supremacists … unequivocally.”
Only after a strong backlash did the candidate “disavow” such support. How sad. And worrisome.
Our concern, beyond the candidate himself, is the dark mood and deep frustration of so many Americans seeking a strong leader who may be willing to push against the Founding Fathers’ boundaries of democracy and decency. Now is the time for each of us to become engaged in the political process and assure that America remains a country of compassion as well as strength.
---------------------
`Sauna' Rabbi Stepping Down; Or Is He?
Riverdale leader's surprise statement unclear about intentions and timing.
Gary Rosenblatt analyzes the communal standoff.Gary Rosenblatt
‘Sauna’ Rabbi Stepping Down; Or Is He?
Riverdale leader’s surprise statement unclear about intentions and timing.
Gary Rosenblatt
Editor And Publisher
Rabbi Rosenblatt. Via Youtube.com
A brief statement last Wednesday evening from the leadership of the Riverdale Jewish Center, informing members that their embattled rabbi, Jonathan Rosenblatt, “intends to step aside from the senior rabbinate” of the Modern Orthodox congregation, is being scrutinized and parsed in the community this week like a passage from the Talmud.
Raising more questions than answers, the two-sentence message seems to indicate that nine months after published reports described the rabbi’s longtime practice of showering and chatting in the sauna with boys and young men, and six months after he overcame efforts to have him removed from his pulpit, the prominent religious leader will be leaving his post soon in an effort to unify the community. Or will he?
Meyer Koplow, an attorney representing Rabbi Rosenblatt in this issue, told The Jewish Week that the rabbi, eager to leave a positive legacy for his years of service to RJC, initiated this step to help the synagogue community “heal and grow.” Koplow, who offered his services pro bono and is negotiating between the rabbi and the lay leadership, said he expected the issues to be resolved in the next week and then voted on by the congregation.
RJC’s president, Samson Fine, referred a request for comment to the brief statement that was issued.
The controversy, which began over the rabbi’s unusual behavior and later morphed into how the RJC lay leadership has handled the situation, now finds members of the community wondering if Rabbi Rosenblatt, who has led the congregation for more than three decades, is stepping down or just “aside” — and whether he is leaving his pulpit altogether or just “the senior rabbinate,” possibly staying on as rabbi emeritus or scholar-in-residence. And it is unclear when this would take place. Some believe a change in the rabbi’s status is imminent while others point out that his contract extends through July 2018. The statement, which appeared to be purposefully vague, did not indicate timing.
Another key question is whether the estimated 20 percent of the RJC membership that left the congregation last summer and created a breakaway Shabbat prayer group now known as The Riverdale Minyan will consider coming back to RJC — and if so, under what circumstances. The group is leasing space from the nearby Riverdale Temple (Reform) and appears to have coalesced into a thriving, active band of worshippers of all ages, with the younger set heading up a number of active committees, including weeknight lectures for adults and a variety of programs for children. More than 100 families are paying members of the Minyan, which often attracts in excess of 200 people on Shabbat. (It does not hold regular services during the week.)
Several participants noted that while the Minyan may have come together initially out of a shared sense of dissatisfaction with the lay and rabbinic leadership of RJC, it has become an increasingly tight-knit group. Steven Bayme, who resigned from RJC after the rabbi’s sauna activities were first published in The New York Times last May, said the Minyan has become “a real community of people who care about each other.” In particular, he noted that after his son was killed in a car accident last summer, the group became an ongoing “source of enormous support” for him and his family.
Bayme and other attendees interviewed said they left RJC out of a sense of disappointment both with the rabbi’s behavior, described as, at best, inappropriate — especially for a spiritual leader — and frustration with the alleged lack of accountability and transparency by the board leadership, which by all counts has made blunders along the way. The Minyan attendees say they are happy where they are and will be following closely the resolution of the rabbi’s status at RJC, reluctant to come back unless the rabbi leaves, with some calling for the synagogue board to resign as well.
But defenders of the rabbi maintain that the issue has always been “more about power than the shvitz,” as one longtime RJC member put it. The source, who asked to remain anonymous because of the delicacy of the situation, asserted that some of those who left had been major funders of the congregation who were unhappy with its direction and chose to leave for a variety of reasons. Supporters of the rabbi also charge those who left were “hypocrites,” noting that the great majority of the congregation knew of the rabbi’s behavior with young men for years and didn’t seem to express outrage until the news became public. Key critics counter that they actively tried to buy out the rabbi’s contract for years but were stymied by concern about legal action since no direct allegations of illegal behavior emerged. Nor have they to this day.
And so it goes.
In interviews with The Jewish Week in recent days, a number of defenders and critics, all of whom asked for anonymity, characterized the situation as very sad, given the deep rift that has resulted in the community. But conflicting narratives have emerged to explain the rabbi’s recent announcement.
One has the rabbi initiating this “step aside” move for the good of the congregation and the community. Another has him heading off a board effort to ensure that he not seek a contract renewal beyond 2018. Still another sees the rabbi as gradually worn down by the loss of key congregants, including several former RJC presidents and major donors, and hoping to negotiate his financial package before Fine, the current president, perceived as sympathetic to the rabbi, completes his term this spring.
All sides see a key issue being who will be in control of the RJC, including its lay and rabbinic leadership, going forward.
Defenders are clearly the majority of the synagogue now, which is believed to have between 500 and 550 member families. The rabbi’s supporters want to assure a dignified conclusion to his tenure. Within a day of Rabbi Rosenblatt’s brief statement, a petition began circulating among congregants, urging that he “continue to have a connection to the RJC… whether he is called the RabbiEmeritus or something else is not important. What is important is his continued presence.”
That’s precisely what a number of worshippers at the Minyan oppose. They want to see the rabbi make a clean break with the congregation so that the rift they believe he caused can begin to heal.
Whether or not those discontented former congregants will ever return to RJC is one of the many questions that may be answered down the road. But for now the focus is on what “stepping aside” means, and when.
Gary Rosenblatt, Editor & Publisher, The Jewish Week
Rabbi Jonathan Rosenblatt, Riverdale Jewish Center, sauna rabbi---------------------
New Fears Over Russia's Role In Syria
From Israel, Josh Mitnick writes that a policy reassessment may be imminent.
Israel News
New Fears Over Russia’s Role In Syria
Is policy reassessment imminent?
Joshua Mitnick
Contributing Editor
Syria’s Bashar Assad: A boost from Putin.
Tel Aviv — The Quneitra Overlook rest stop at the eastern edge of the Golan Heights border with Syria offers a front-row-seat look into a country decimated by five years of civil war.
One recent morning, the Syrian side of the border seemed normal and quiet. But it’s a calm that belies the changing tide of the fighting that has seen Russia’s military intervention give a major boost to President Bashar Assad and his alliance with Iran and Hezbollah.
Now, as a fragile cease-fire went into effect this week reflecting Russia’s tip in the power balance, will the new geopolitical dynamics at play prompt a rethinking of Israel’s five-year policy of keeping out of the civil war?
“There are worries that the Russian involvement will bring Assad back to life in a way that he will rule the country again under the supervision of Iran,” said Alon Liel, a former director general of the Israeli foreign ministry. “I don’t think Israel is enthusiastic about that.”
On Sunday, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu welcomed the cease-fire despite skepticism in Israel that it will hold over the long term. Netanyahu reminded the powers involved that Israel reserved the right to intervene to prevent weapons transfers to Hezbollah and to block Shia-allied groups from establishing a new hostile front along the Golan Heights.
“Israel wants to preserve its freedom of action,” said Ofer Zalzberg, an Israel analyst at the International Crisis Group.
“Netanyahu is concerned that there is a period now in which every use of arms is seen as a breach, which endangers the entire cease-fire.” Netanyahu is saying that Israel’s “red lines” are separate from the cease-fire and defending them doesn’t violate it, Zalzberg said.
The bigger question concerns what Israel should do — if anything — in the face of the resurgent Russian-backed axis of Assad, Iran and Hezbollah. Amid the growing possibility that a weak Assad might give a freer hand to Hezbollah and to Iran, already strengthened by the removal of economic sanctions, should Israel change its policy of neutrality on the outcome of the civil war?
“Until now Israel has acted wisely, setting minimal number of red lines,” said Ehud Eiran, a political science professor at the University of Haifa. “Israel has been realistic about its [limited] ability to affect the events in Syria, and I don’t think this is changing.”
Part of that neutrality stemmed from a lack of attractive outcomes: Israeli officials remain split over whether it was preferable for Assad to remain in power as “the devil Israel knows” or whether it prefers a chaotic alliance in its place that could further destabilize its northern neighbor.
Eiran noted that, with the stepped-up Russian involvement, Israel’s room for military action inside of Syria has been constrained. Indeed, the two countries have established a coordination mechanism in recent months to avoid a confrontation.
Despite the concern, analysts have pointed to an upside: Israel can use its dialogue with Russia to communicate to Iran and Syria what its red lines are.
In an article in the Haaretz newspaper last week, military commentator Amos Harel wrote that while Jerusalem isn’t expected to step up military action in Syria, Israel will lobby harder for Western intervention to help the Kurdish and Sunni rebels.
Writing shortly after Russia stepped up its actions in Syria, Amos Yadlin, a former Israeli military intelligence chief, argued that given Moscow’s deepened involvement in the hostilities, Israel should consider more actively trying to topple Assad.
Israel could “find itself in an inferior strategic position,” because Russia’s involvement could provide a “seal of approval” for Iranian activity in Syria for years to come, wrote Yadlin, now the director at Tel Aviv University’s Institute for National Strategic Studies.
Yadlin argued for tightening Israel’s quiet ties with Saudi Arabia and reaching a reconciliation with Turkey — another enemy of Assad — to pressure the Syrian regime. In recent weeks Turkish leaders have made optimistic statements about finally mending the five-year rift with Israel, though Russia (along with Egypt and Greece) is reportedly trying to dissuade Jerusalem from the rapprochement with Ankara. The former general also suggested that Israel persuade Russia to push Assad aside.
Since the Russian intervention began last summer, Israeli observers have already taken note of the scope of support rolled out for the pro-regime forces: In the southern province of Daraa near the Jordanian border, Russian aircraft have provided air cover for Shiite irregular militias and Hezbollah forces that focused on retaking a town, known as Sheik Miskeen, that is at a strategic crossroads linking the south to Damascus.
“Hezbollah showing up in the south has raised some eyebrows among the Israelis,” said Andrew Tabler, a fellow who focuses on Syria at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy. “They think they are down there to set up another front.”
In the last year, Israel is believed to have launched attacks that killed a key Iranian general and high-ranking Hezbollah officers who were in the border area near the Golan.
Two months ago, an Israeli security official looked out to the border and gave a rundown of the diverse variety of militias active along the frontier: In the north near the Hermon were regime forces and regime-allied Druze militias. Near the border town of Quneitra, a mixture of Free Syrian Army and jihadist groups were fighting the regime and among themselves.
Israel has been giving medical care and humanitarian support to Syrians from rebel villages and militants from the border area. Beyond the humanitarian gesture, the goal is to keep the frontier region as quiet as possible and prevent cross-border attacks. “It’s to create a ‘good fence,’” said the official, a reference to an Israeli crossing into Southern Lebanon during the 1980s.
For all the potential troubling fallout, Russian regime forces are still far from the frontier area with Israel — mostly focusing on the north. For the foreseeable future, Jerusalem and Russia want to avoid an entanglement, each for its own interests.
“Israel is careful about Russia; the sense is that [Moscow’s presence] doesn’t play into the hands of Israel,” said Eyal Zisser, a political science professor at Tel Aviv University who is an expert on Syria.
“From the beginning, Israel hasn’t had a clear policy about what we want to happen, and whether we should do anything,” he added. “I don’t see any change.”
---------------------
Special Section on Sephardic Life today
with a focus on culture and cuisine.
Sephardic Life (2016)
Kubbeh in the culinary spotlight, the Sephardic Shylock, and more.
Tuesday, March 1, 2016 (All day)
Inside This Special Section
---------------------
'Jewish Jesters' from the Golden Age Of American Comedy
New YIVO exhibit at Center for Jewish History features records,
photos, posters, and more.
New York
New Exhibit In Town: Funny, You Should Ask?
Steve Lipman
Jewish comedians like Groucho Marx and Jack Benny are featured in new YIVO exhibition. Photo courtesy of YIVO
Did you know that a few generations ago you could amuse yourself by playing board games like Rodney Dangerfield’s “No Respect” or Groucho Marx’s “Your Bet Your Life” or “Jan Murray’s TV Word Game”?
None of those games became big sellers, but they are featured in a new YIVO exhibition that is dedicated to the Jewish men and women of comedy’s early years who played a major role in shaping popular entertainment in this country.
“Professional Jokers: Jewish Jesters from the Golden Age of American Comedy” opened this week at the Center for Jewish History, in Chelsea, preceded the night before by a panel discussion that included comedians Robert Klein and Judy Gold, comedy writer Alan Zweibel, and “surprise guest” comedian Gilbert Gottfried. The exhibit runs through May 1.
In the exhibition’s cases and frames are artifacts (records, photographs, posters, playbills, joke books, etc.) from the careers of such headliners as Dangerfield and Marx and Murray, and Milton Berle and Joan Rivers and Mel Brooks, as well as mementoes from a few dozen other funny Jews whose stars have faded over the years.
“There are dozens and dozens more” who did not make it into the exhibition,” said Eddy Portnoy, who curated the show. “From the 1920s to the beginning of the 21st-century Jewish comics dominated the comedy industry in the United States,” said Portnoy, who serves as academic adviser at YIVO’s Max Weinrich Center for Advanced Jewish Studies and teaches in the Judaic Studies Program at Rutgers University.
Most of the “hundreds” of items — “We didn’t bother to count” — are from the collection of artist-illustrator Drew Friedman, who took part in Monday’s panel, Portnoy said. YIVO’s contribution is some old material in Yiddish, like an 1867 joke book from Vilna.
“It’s never been done before,” he said. “No one has seen so much material by so many comedians in one place. It’s worth showing.”
Fittingly, the first thing a visitor sees when stepping off a Center elevator into the exhibition’s third-floor space is a bust of Sholem Aleichem, the dean of Yiddish humor writers.
How does an exhibition of 20th-century English-speaking jokesters fit into YIVO’s mission of preserving the Yiddish culture of Eastern Europe?
“All of these comedians were children of immigrants” from the Old Country, Portnoy said. “They all understood Yiddish. They all used Yiddish.”
The current crop of superstar Jewish comedians, like Jerry Seinfeld, do not appear in the exhibition. Not that there’s anything wrong with that. The funny Jews who together played a disproportionate role in Vaudeville, Broadway, radio and TV influenced the contemporary generation of Jewish comedians, Portnoy said. Gottfried, in his remarks on Monday, said he “was very much influenced by these people.”
Posters and photographs are the normal fare of museum exhibitions. Why the board games? “It reflects the fact that these people were major celebrities,” Portnoy said. “Famous people beget products.”
steve@jewishweek.org
---------------------
Erica Brown on the art of Kiddush talk
Sociologist, and author, wrote to nine rabbis to discover
how to master the kiddush schmooze
Jew By Voice
Kiddush Talk
Erica Brown
Special To The Jewish Week
Erica Brown
Make kiddush great again, some may bellow. As for me, I do my very best to avoid kiddush altogether. Nothing is less appealing than small talk with people who have egg salad in their teeth. I enjoy people but not in crowded social halls with outsized decibel levels. I’ve been criticized for hurting people’s feelings at kiddush because I didn’t see them. They were right. At a kiddush, I can’t hear. I can’t see.
But I am not the only one. Like a sociologist, I’ve been observing kiddush behavior in the hopes of getting techniques to work the room better, so I wrote to a dozen-plus rabbis across the country and of every denomination asking for advice. Who better to master kiddush talk than rabbis?
As it turns out, nearly everyone. I received nine pages of comments from rabbis who struggle with kiddush. “I hate tuna fish and oftentimes people talk, and it sometimes inadvertently comes flying at me.” It’s not just me. One rabbi went so far as to say he suffers from Kiddush Anxiety, a new neurological disorder. After services, he just wants to read a book and take a nap. For a rabbi who has been “performing” for the past several hours — noticing congregants’ needs, making sure the service goes smoothly, delivering a sermon — kiddush comes at a bad time. Many rabbis used the word “exhausted” in relation to kiddush duty. Some haven’t prayed properly in years. Some also shared that they are hungry.
Many rabbis saw liability in offering the ruse of a meaningful conversation with constant kiddush-style interruptions. “It can feel (and be) fake. It opens us to ambushes. It can backfire and make a community feel less genuine, open, and welcoming, rather than more. It can unintentionally promote lashon hara [gossip].”
One rabbi who works hard at his pastoral skills, his sermons and his classes, feels judged most by his performance or lack thereof at a kiddush. Still another observed that, “For those of us who lean more toward the introverted side of the social spectrum, there’s nothing that requires the output of more emotional energy than a cocktail party. Every interaction requires me to summon charm and wit; to call on memory banks at lightning speeds (to remember names of grandchildren living in foreign countries that I’ve never met!) … to transition spontaneously from sobriety to celebration; and then to do it all again in the next instant. And for those of us who privilege depth over breadth, we’re often left feeling cheated…”
Yet every rabbi recognized the importance of schmoozing. A former president said that kiddush “allows for the humanizing of an authority figure” — the rabbi, and one rabbi believes that for congregants who don’t take to prayer, the rabbi at kiddush is their Sinai. “If we teach Judaism as a real living thing, part of that is standing with, eating with, talking with people.”
One rabbi is improving his networking skills this way: “I began to look at each conversation as discovering the story of each person. It was like reading autobiographies in conversation.” To add to this, another rabbi thinks that kiddush is actually a gift. “Kiddush is not something you survive but an engraved invitation to a profound encounter.”
On the positive side, one rabbi quipped that, “a good kiddush can save a rabbi three weeks’ worth of appointments.” A synagogue president had a similar reaction: “for congregants the easiest time for them to share opinions or ask questions was in shul on Shabbat.” Another rabbi saw an important side benefit: “If you feel like you gave a crappy drash, it’s a nice chance to hear compliments about it anyway.”
One rabbi (whose name I will withhold here) gave a very powerful sermon and deeply inspired a person in the pews to convert. The worshipper waited until after the service and approached the rabbi. He wanted to be part of the Jewish people. The rabbi paused and pointed to a set of doors: “You see those doors? Behind them is a kiddush. I want you to go into kiddush and then tell me if you still want to be a part of the Jewish people.”
How can we do this better? Here’s some tips from the experts.
Reach out — don’t only speak to your friends; make eye contact with everyone in the circle, especially those entering and exiting; acknowledge those who would like to break in; avoid the temptation to broach a heavy, personal topic — it’s not the place.
Also, suggest a post-kiddush conversation if the topic is sensitive or can lead to misunderstanding; transition out of one conversation by introducing people and “handing them off” rather than “leaving them hanging”; let go of conversations with dignity and love. And finally, my favorite: “leave as soon as possible.”
Erica Brown’s column appears the first week of the month.
---------------------
More Headlines:
Abuse Whistleblower's Case Vs. Forward Can Proceed
New York
Abuse Whistleblower’s Case Vs. Forward Can Proceed
Judge refuses to throw out Sam Kellner’s defamation suit against Jewish newspaper.
Hella Winston And Amy Sara Clark
Sam Kellner’s defamation suit against The Jewish Daily Forward lives to fight another day.
Last week, Manhattan Supreme Court Justice Debra A. James denied the newspaper’s motion to dismiss the case, which was filed by Kellner in November 2014.
In 2008, Kellner brought allegations of his son’s sexual abuse by Baruch Lebovits to the police and worked closely with law enforcement to bring forward additional Lebovits victims. Lebovits was convicted in 2010 and sentenced to 10 ½ to 32 years in prison. But that conviction was overturned on a prosecution error (Lebovits took a plea deal in 2014). In 2011, Kellner was indicted for perjury and extortion related to the Lebovits case, but in 2014 those charges were dropped.
The defamation suit concerns a 2013 article written by Paul Berger, “Sam Kellner’s Tangled Hasidic Tale of Child Sex Abuse, Extortion and Faith,” and a tweet, mistakenly referring to Kellner as a convicted extortionist.
The lawsuit alleges that Berger used an illegally obtained recording that had been doctored by the Lebovits family to falsely claim that Kellner suggested to the family of a child molester that they could “buy off prosecutors” with Yankee tickets and other gifts.
It also claims that Berger accused Kellner of “conspiring to commit extortion” based on another recording. His lawyer argues, however, that Berger relied on an out-of-context statement and that when one listens to the entire recording, it’s clear that the claim is not true.
The lawsuit alleges that Berger used an illegally obtained recording that had been and doctored by the Lebovits family to falsely claim that Kellner suggested to the family of a child molester that they could “buy off prosecutors” with Yankee tickets and other gifts.
It also claims that Berger falsely accused Kellner of “conspiring to commit extortion.” However, Kellner’s lawyer argues that when one listens to the entire recording, it is clear that claim is not true.
Lastly, it points to the tweet, which not only mistakenly refers to Kellner as a convicted extortionist but also went uncorrected for six days after the paper was alerted to the error.
The Forward sought to have the case dismissed on the grounds that the article was purely opinion, and thus protected speech. It also argued that the mistaken language of the tweet was inadvertent and not intended to defame Kellner.
James rejected the claim that the article was an opinion piece, but wrote that based on the evidence presented so far, the piece appears to be based on undisclosed and/or misrepresented facts. As for the tweet, James ruled that its “required intent cannot be determined on these motion papers.”
The judge also found that in its motion to dismiss, the Forward failed to prove that Kellner is a public figure rather than a private person, writing that he “was drawn into the public forum against his will in order to obtain redress for his son, and then to defend himself.” This is a key distinction because as a private figure, Kellner would have to show only that The Forward acted negligently rather than with actual malice. However, the judge also noted that this determination could change after the discovery period, during which witnesses are deposed, and more facts come into evidence.
Andrew T. Miltenberg, a veteran trial lawyer who focuses on complex commercial litigation and civil rights told The Jewish Week that the fact that the court has not, so far, deemed Kellner a public figure “is critical.”
“To have held otherwise would have had the effect of frightening the general public away from reporting crimes or otherwise comfortably being a being a witness to events of great import. I am encouraged by the fact the Court would not allow the father of an abuse victim to be silenced or discredited,” he said.
Samuel Norich, The Forward’s publisher and CEO, said that James’ denial of his paper’s motion to dismiss does not mean the Forward’s defense has no merit, but only that more information is needed before a decision can be reached.
“The court concluded that a number of the issues we raised could not be decided on a motion to dismiss but have to await discovery,” he said. “We look forward to presenting our case to the judge on a fuller record.”
As for Kellner’s attorney, Niall MacGiollabhui, he is also looking forward — to the discovery process.
“We are pleased with Judge James’ comprehensive and well-reasoned decision,” he said. “We now look forward to the discovery stage of this litigation, during which the perfidious nature of Paul Berger’s reporting and his collusion with a serial pedophile will be laid bare.”
A preliminary hearing is set to take place on April 5.
Hella Winston is special correspondent and Amy Sara Clark is deputy managing editor.
---------------------
Rabbi Jonathan Sacks Awarded $1.5 Million Templeton Prize
International
Rabbi Jonathan Sacks Awarded $1.5 Million Templeton Prize
JTA
Rabbi Jonathan Sacks. JTA
Rabbi Jonathan Sacks, the former chief rabbi of Britain, has been awarded the 2016 Templeton Prize honoring a living person who has made an exceptional contribution to affirming life’s spiritual dimension.
Sacks, the author of more than two dozen books, will receive a cash prize worth about $1.5 million. He will receive the prize, one of the largest awarded to an individual, at a May 26 ceremony in London.
The announcement was made Wednesday morning at the British Academy in London by the Pennsylvania-based John Templeton Foundation. The prize was established in 1972 by the late global investor and philanthropist Sir John Templeton.
Sacks, 67, served as chief rabbi from 1991 to 2013, and revitalized Britain’s Jewish community during his tenure, according to the prize committee.
“During his tenure he catalyzed a network of organizations that introduced a Jewish focus in areas including business, women’s issues and education, and urged British Jewry to turn outward to share the ethics of their faith with the broader community,” the committee said in a statement. “Central to his message is appreciation and respect of all faiths, with an emphasis that recognizing the values of each is the only path to effectively combat the global rise of violence and terrorism.”
Sacks was knighted by Queen Elizabeth II in 2005. He currently serves as a professor of Judaic thought at New York University and Yeshiva University, and as a professor of law, ethics and the Bible at King’s College in London.
In a statement delivered at the announcement of the prize, Sacks said: “I believe that religion, or more precisely, religions, should have a voice in the public conversation within the societies of the West, as to how to live, how to construct a social order, how to enhance human dignity, honor human life, and indeed protect life as a whole from environmental hazard. … Religion must have a voice in the public conversation, but it must be a reasoned and reasonable voice and one that makes space for other voices also.”
Past recipients include Mother Teresa, who received the inaugural prize, Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn in 1983, and the and the Dalai Lama in 2012.
---------------------
Israeli Father Of 5 Attacked Outside His West Bank Home
Saves His Children
Israel News
Israeli Father Of 5 Attacked Outside His West Bank Home Saves His Children
JTA
Roi Harel, an army reservist who lives in the West Bank settlement of Eli, being treated at the Shaare Zedek Medical Center. JTA
Jerusalem — A father of five who was attacked by two Palestinian teens said he managed to shove his assailants out of his West Bank home before they could hurt his family.
Roi Harel was heading to army reserve duty in uniform at 5 a.m. Wednesday when the assailants attacked him with clubs and axes outside his home in the Eli settlement, then entered the premises, according to the Israel Defense Forces. Harel told reporters he chased them to the doors of his children’s bedrooms and managed to push them outside the house and lock the door.
Harel was treated at a Jerusalem hospital for cuts to his head.
The attackers were both 17 and from a nearby Palestinian village, according to the Palestinian Maan news agency. After leaving a knife stuck in the door of the home, they fled on foot and were killed by security forces who attempted to apprehend them.
“If anyone has any doubts as to their intentions, two 17-year-olds came to slaughter me, my wife and my kids,” Harel told Ynet. “In the seconds during which I fought with them, I thought to myself that what happened to the Fogel and Gavish families. I screamed to my wife to call the settlement’s guard, the children woke up and cried, but my wife was with them in the bedroom, so they hardly saw anything.”
Ruth and Udi Fogel and three of their five children, aged 3 months to 11 years, were murdered in their beds by Palestinian attackers who entered their home in the West Bank settlement of Itamar. Four members of the Gavish family, including both parents, one of their seven children and a grandfather were killed by a Palestinian attacker in 2002 in their home in Elon Moreh, located near Nablus in the West Bank.
Eli is located about 20 miles north of Jerusalem, near Ramallah in the West Bank.
---------------------
Germany Launches New Attempt To Ban Main Neo-Nazi Party
International
Germany Launches New Attempt To Ban Main Neo-Nazi Party
JTA
Germany's Federal Constitutional Court begins its second day of hearings over a ban of the far-right NPD party. Getty Images
Berlin — Germany’s top Jewish organization has applauded a new attempt to ban the country’s main neo-Nazi party.
Three days of hearings began Tuesday in Germany’s top court – the Federal Constitutional Court in Karlsruhe – to examine the
constitutionality of outlawing the far-right National Democratic Party of Germany (NPD).
It would be the second attempt to ban the party – the first failed on a legal technicality in 2003. Observers say a second failure would be
devastating.
At issue is whether the NPD poses a threat to democracy. It is very difficult to ban a party in Germany, due to post-Nazi era laws designed to safeguard free speech.
Josef Schuster, head of the Central Council of Jews in Germany, said in a statement Tuesday that a trial would “show [the NPD’s] true face” to the world.
The NPD blames foreigners for Germany’s problems and belittles the Holocaust. Though the party has never made it into the federal
parliament, its representatives have been elected into two state parliaments in the past decade by barely passing the 5 percent vote minimum. It currently has representatives in the state legislature of Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania. Election success earns the party
federal taxpayer money.
In 2014, a notorious German NPD member was elected to the European parliament, which has a lower minimum of votes.
Said Schuster: “The NPD wants to do away with our democracy and set up a nationalist state where there is no more room for minorities.” A trial would not work as an advertisement for the party, but rather as a deterrent, he added.
The 2003 attempt to ban the NPD failed after the Supreme Court learned that government informants themselves instigated some of the allegedly unconstitutional activities.
On Tuesday, NPD lawyers challenged the impartiality of two judges in the new hearings, and portrayed the party as a victim of
surveillance and infiltration, according to news reports. They demanded confirmation from German Chancellor Angela Merkel herself that there were no government spies within their party’s ranks.
German Justice Minister Heiko Maas told reporters that even if the trial succeeds, the fight against racism and extremism in Germany
would not be over. Right-wing and populist parties appear to have been gaining support for their opposition to Merkel’s liberal refugee policy.
---------------------
The Jewish Week
1501 Broadway, Suite 505
New York, New York 10036, United States
---------------------
---------------------
No comments:
Post a Comment