48.7 F
New York
Thursday, March 28, 2024
Home Blog Page 3

With its Soldiers in Gaza, Israel Fights a Battle at Home Over Drafting the Ultra-Orthodox

0
Israeli police officers scuffle with Ultra-Orthodox Jewish men during a protest against a potential new draft law. Credit: AP Photo/Leo Correa

By: Melanie Lidman

As Israel battles a prolonged war in Gaza, broad exemptions from mandatory military service for ultra-Orthodox men have reopened a deep divide in the country and rattled the government coalition, with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s fellow War Cabinet members staunchly opposed to his proposed new conscription law.

By the end of the month, Israel’s government must present legislation aimed at increasing recruitment among the religious community. As the deadline approaches, public discourse has grown increasingly toxic — a departure from demonstrations of unity early in the war.

Netanyahu’s government so far has survived the public angst sparked by Hamas’ Oct. 7 attack that ignited the war, but the draft issue has put him in a bind. The collapse of the three-member War Cabinet would undermine the country’s stability at a sensitive time in the fighting. But a loss of the ultra-Orthodox parties would bring down his broader governing coalition and plunge the country into new elections as he and his Likud party are badly trailing in opinion polls.

“Politically, this is one of the most concrete threats to the government,” said Gilad Malach, an expert on the ultra-Orthodox at the Israel Democracy Institute, a Jerusalem think tank.

Most Jewish men are required to serve nearly three years followed by years of reserve duty. Jewish women serve two mandatory years. But the politically powerful ultra-Orthodox, who make up roughly 13% of Israeli society, have traditionally received exemptions if they are studying full-time in religious seminaries. The exemptions — and the government stipends many seminary students receive through age 26 — have infuriated the wider general public.

The Supreme Court has ruled the current system discriminatory and given the government until April 1 to present a bill and until June 30 to pass it.

Yoav Gallant and Benny Gantz — who with Netanyahu comprise the War Cabinet — say the prime minister’s proposed law doesn’t go far enough toward increasing the number of ultra-Orthodox who will join the army. Critics say some aspects, such as raising the age for exemption, could even depress the numbers.

Gantz, Netanyahu’s top political rival, said he’d leave the Cabinet if the enlistment law is weakened or fails to pass by the deadline. Defense Minister Gallant said he’d support a new law only with the support of Gantz and more centrist members of the country’s emergency wartime government.

The government is composed of ultra-Orthodox and religious ultranationalist parties who were joined in the early days of the war by a faction led by former military generals, including Gantz. The union was meant as a show of unity in the aftermath of Oct. 7, but the parties differ widely on the issue of conscription.

After Hamas’ attack, Israel activated 360,000 reservists, its largest mobilization since the 1973 Mideast war. Many have since been released but will be expected to return to active duty in coming months. The increased reserve duty and talk of lengthening mandatory service have deepened public anger.

Among Israel’s Jewish majority, mandatory military service is largely seen as a melting pot and rite of passage. The ultra-Orthodox say that integrating into the army will threaten their generations-old way of life and that their devout lifestyle and dedication to upholding the Jewish commandments protect Israel as much as a strong army.

“We prefer dying to serving in the Israeli army,” said Yona Kruskal, 42, a father of 11 and full-time seminary student, as he blocked traffic in Jerusalem with about 200 others last week in one of the frequent protests against the conscription law. “There’s no way you can force us to go to the army, because we are hell-bent that the army and religion contradict one another.”

As the ultra-Orthodox scuffled with police at the protest, other Israelis berated them, chanting “Shame! Shame!”

“My friends are sitting in Gaza while you’re here, sitting on the ground,” one man yelled. A woman screamed at the protesters that her son was serving in Gaza to protect them.

Oren Shvill, a founder of Brothers in Arms, a protest group representing reserve soldiers who oppose Netanyahu, said the ultra-Orthodox are benefitting from the army’s protection without participating. “There’s one law for everyone, and it should be enforced equally,” he said.

Economists say the system is unsustainable. With its high birthrate, the ultra-Orthodox community is the fastest-growing segment of the population, at about 4% annually. Each year, roughly 13,000 ultra-Orthodox males reach the conscription age of 18, but less than 10% enlist, according to the Israeli parliament’s State Control Committee, which recently held a hearing on the matter.

“One of the things that in the past was debatable and now is much more clear is that we need more soldiers,” said Yoaz Hendel, a former Netanyahu aide and Cabinet minister who just finished four months of reserve duty as commander of a special forces unit. He said the burden of service should be shared equally among all sectors of the population.

The shock of the Oct. 7 attack appeared to ignite some enthusiasm among the ultra-Orthodox to serve, but no large enlistment materialized, according to Israeli media. The army declined to comment on the ultra-Orthodox enlistment rate.

The debate has long divided Israel, and a string of court decisions have repeatedly found the system unjust. But Israeli leaders, under pressure from ultra-Orthodox parties, have repeatedly stalled. It remains unclear whether Netanyahu will be able to do so again.

The rift over exemptions was exacerbated last year when Netanyahu’s government pressed ahead with an overhaul of the legal system supported by ultra-Orthodox governing partners who sought to override court decisions on conscription. The government froze the overhaul after the war broke out.

The army has attempted to accommodate the ultra-Orthodox by creating separate units that allow them to maintain religious practices, including minimizing interaction with women.

Ephraim Luff, 65, a full-time seminary student in the ultra-Orthodox city of Bnei Brak, dismissed such efforts, saying the men who enlist in these units are not “real Haredim,” as the ultra-Orthodox are known in Hebrew.

“The army is the final stage of Israeli education to make people into secular Israelis and to disconnect them from their Jewish heritage,” said Luff, who described how one of his eight children “strayed from the path” of full-time learning and served in the army as a truck driver for a year and a half.

One of the country’s two chief rabbis, Yitzhak Yosef, said this month that the ultra-Orthodox “will all move abroad” if forced to enlist. The comment drew both condemnation, for encouraging Israelis to leave during a national crisis, and ridicule, because many secular Israelis would have no problem with the ultra-Orthodox leaving en masse, said the Israel Democracy Institute’s Malach.

On the contrary, the ultra-Orthodox leadership’s unwillingness to compromise even as other parts of Israeli society make significant sacrifices has alienated more of the public, Malach said.

“In this government, I don’t see a real opportunity for change,” he said. “But if there are elections and there is a coalition without haredim or with weakened haredim, there could be a change.”

(AP)

Israeli Lawyer’s Ordeal: Abducted, Brutally Raped & Held Captive in Gaza

0
Amit Soussana, a 40-year-old Israeli, has bravely stepped forward as the first to publicly recount her traumatic ordeal of brutal sexual assault during captivity following the Hamas-led October 7th massacre in southern Israel. Credit: LinkedIn

Edited by: TJVNews.com

Amit Soussana, a 40-year-old Israeli, has bravely stepped forward as the first to publicly recount her traumatic ordeal of brutal sexual assault during captivity following the Hamas-led October 7th massacre in southern Israel. In a series of interviews with The New York Times, primarily conducted in English, Soussana provided chilling details of the 55-day nightmare she endured.

Her personal account, corroborated by reports from two doctors and a social worker within 24 hours of her liberation on November 30, sheds light on the horrifying realities faced by Israeli hostages held by the Iranian-backed Hamas terrorists, the NYT report indicated. While the specifics of the sexual violence are withheld out of respect for Soussana’s privacy, her testimony underscores the egregious nature of the abuse she suffered.

According to accounts provided by Soussana herself during extensive interviews with The New York Times in mid-March, her abduction unfolded in a terrifying manner. She was forcibly taken from her home by at least 10 armed Hamas terrorists and dragged into Gaza, where she endured unimaginable horrors at the hands of her captors.

Throughout her captivity, Soussana was subjected to dehumanizing treatment, including isolation and physical violence. According to the NYT report, she described being held alone in a child’s bedroom, chained by her left ankle, with her guard frequently intruding into her personal space. The guard, who identified himself as Muhammad, would enter the room, lift her shirt, and touch her, creating an atmosphere of constant fear and vulnerability.

As days turned into weeks, Soussana’s ordeal took a darker turn. On one fateful morning around October 24, Muhammad launched a violent attack against her. The NYT report revealed that after unlocking her chain and leaving her momentarily unguarded in the bathroom, he returned with a pistol in hand, threatening Soussana with lethal force.

In a chilling recounting of the events, Soussana recalled Muhammad’s menacing presence as he brandished the firearm and subjected her to physical assault. As per the information contained in the NYT report, despite her desperate attempts to resist, she found herself at the mercy of her captor, forced to endure unspeakable acts of violence and degradation.

During her captivity, Soussana was shuttled between roughly half a dozen locations, ranging from private homes to subterranean tunnels. The NYT report said that in one particularly brutal episode, she recounted being suspended between two couches by her captors, who subjected her to relentless beatings.

For months, the Hamas terrorists and their sympathizers vehemently denied allegations of sexual abuse against hostages, dismissing them as propaganda, as was noted in the NYT report. However, a recent United Nations report has refuted these claims, citing “clear and convincing information” of sexual violence inflicted upon hostages. This acknowledgment underscores the severity of the atrocities perpetrated by Hamas.

Despite the immense trauma she endured, Soussana initially remained reticent about her experiences in the Gaza Strip, wary of reliving the horrors she faced. The NYT report also said that even as she was filmed by her captors moments before her release, she feigned compliance, fearing that speaking out could endanger her chance of freedom.

In the wake of her release, Soussana wasted no time in sharing her ordeal, seeking medical assistance and support to cope with the trauma inflicted upon her. Hours after regaining her freedom, she spoke candidly with Dr. Julia Barda, a senior Israeli gynecologist, and social worker Valeria Tsekhovsky, recounting the horrors she endured, as reported by The Times.

Dr. Barda remarked on Soussana’s remarkable ability to articulate her experience with clarity and detail, not only concerning the sexual assault but also the multitude of other challenges she faced during her 55-day captivity, the NYT report revealed.

The following day, Soussana bravely shared her account with a doctor from Israel’s National Center of Forensic Medicine, adding another layer of corroboration to her narrative. According to the NYT report, Professor Siegal Sadetzki, a respected figure at Tel Aviv University’s medical school, affirmed the consistency of Soussana’s testimony, highlighting the authenticity of her claims.

Soussana’s decision to speak out serves as a beacon of hope for other survivors and underscores the urgent need for accountability and justice in addressing the plight of the remaining Israeli hostages in Hamas captivity. As her story continues to reverberate, it serves as a courageous act of defiance against the perpetrators of violence and a testament to her resilience in the face of unspeakable adversity.

As Soussana continues on her path to healing, her bravery in speaking out serves as a beacon of hope for countless others who have suffered similar fates. It is a stark reminder of the indomitable human spirit and the power of resilience in the face of unimaginable hardship.

Trump Urges Israel to ‘Finish Up’ its Gaza Offensive; Warns of Global Support Fading

0
Former President Donald Trump said he would have responded the same way as Israel did after the Oct. 7 attack by Hamas. Credit: AP

By: Adriana Gomez Licon

Former President Donald Trump said he would have responded the same way as Israel did after the Oct. 7 attack by Hamas but urged the country to “finish up” its offensive in Gaza and “get this over with,” warning about international support fading.

“You have to finish up your war. You have to finish it up. You’ve got to get it done,” he said in an interview with Israeli newspaper Israel Hayom. “We’ve got to get to peace. You can’t have this going on, and I will say Israel has to be very careful because you are losing a lot of the world. You are losing a lot of support.”

Trump, who earlier this month became the Republican Party’s presumptive nominee, brought up global criticism of Israel’s offensive even as he has repeatedly attacked President Joe Biden’s handling of the conflict.

According to the newspaper’s transcript of the interview, Trump said “Israel made a very big mistake” in releasing photos and videos of its offensive in Gaza, commenting the country’s public image is “in ruin.” A video shared of the interview does not show those comments.

“That’s a terrible portrait. It’s a very bad picture for the world,” Trump said. “I think Israel wanted to show that it’s tough, but sometimes you shouldn’t be doing that.”

The Israel Hayom is widely seen as a mouthpiece for Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. Soon after the attack in which Hamas militants killed 1,200 people and took 250 hostages, Trump denounced Netanyahu for allegedly letting him down while he was in the White House. He also said Netanyahu “was not prepared” for the deadly incursion from Gaza.

More than 30,000 Palestinians have been killed in Israel’s offensive, according to the Health Ministry in the Hamas-ruled territory.

Trump also again suggested that American Jews were wrong to support Democrats, days after being criticized by some Jewish advocates for saying Jewish Democrats were being disloyal to their religion. He alleged that Biden “supports the enemy.”

Also on Tuesday, AP reported that a New York judge issued a gag order barring Donald Trump from commenting publicly about witnesses, prosecutors, court staff and jurors in his upcoming hush-money criminal trial, citing the former president’s history of “threatening, inflammatory, denigrating” remarks about people involved in his legal cases.

Judge Juan M. Merchan’s decision, echoing a gag order in Trump’s Washington, D.C., election interference criminal case, came a day after he rejected the defense’s push to delay the Manhattan trial until summer and ordered it to begin April 15. If the date holds, it will be the first criminal trial of a former president.

“Given that the eve of trial is upon us, it is without question that the imminency of the risk of harm is now paramount,” Merchan wrote in a four-page decision granting the prosecution’s request for what it deemed a “narrowly tailored” gag order.

The judge said the presumptive Republican presidential nominee’s statements have induced fear.

Trump’s lawyers fought a gag order, warning it would amount to unconstitutional and unlawful prior restraint on his free speech rights. Merchan, who had long resisted imposing a gag order, said his obligation to ensuring the integrity of the trial outweighed First Amendment concerns.

“President Trump’s political opponents have, and will continue to, attack him based on this case,” Trump lawyers Todd Blanche and Susan Necheles said in a recent court filing.

(AP)

The IRS Helps UNRWA Fund Hamas

0
UNRWA USA’s report claims that it was able to provide $3.8 million to UNRWA in 2022. That money and previous funds raised by UNRWA USA could have bolstered Hamas before Oct 7. Credit: AP

While nations drop support for UNRWA over terror funding, the IRS lets the cash flow.

By: Daniel Greenfield

Before Ismail Haniyeh became the leader of Hamas, he was a teacher at UNRWA.

The UN agency dedicated welfare agency for the Arab Muslim colonists who call themselves “Palestinians” had long since become a terrorist front.

“I am sure that there are Hamas members on the UNRWA payroll,” a former UNRWA Commissioner General said, “and I don’t see that as a crime.”

A former official boasted “that UNRWA was raising thousands and thousands of cadres” and “first and foremost, we can mention Ismail Haniyeh, who was an UNRWA teacher, and so was Dr. Talal Naji, Secretary-General of the PFLP-GC.” The PFLP is also a terrorist group.

The UNRWA’s Gaza staff has its own union. In a 2012 election, a pro-Hamas bloc won the support of most of the union with 25 out of 27 seats on a union board. When there was talk of reforming the UNRWA by removing Hamas members from its ranks, the editor of a Hamas paper wrote that, “they are all members of the ‘resistance,’ in its various forms.”

How true is that? Israeli intelligence estimates that 1 in 4 male UNRWA employees had ties to Hamas and 1 in 2 employees had family ties to terrorists.

On Oct 7, multiple UNRWA employees took part in the attack. One UNRWA teacher was recorded boasting “I’m inside, I’m inside with the Jews! We have female hostages, I captured one!” while using the Islamic term for sex slave. At least 30 UNRWA employees took part in other parts of the attack, running an ops room, carrying antitank missiles and invading Israel.

Within a group of 3,000 UNRWA staff members, there was widespread celebration on Oct 7.

Hamas kept key assets, including a data and command center, under UNRWA’s headquarters and has regularly deployed its rockets at UNRWA sites and hidden in UNRWA supplies. Hamas has taken UNRWA supplies so that aid and funding for it supplies the Islamic terror group.

As a result of these revelations and more, a number of nations paused their funding to UNRWA.

But despite evidence of Hamas ties, UNRWA USA continues to retain nonprofit status in the U.S. Providing material aid to Hamas, a sanctioned terrorist group on the State Department’s Foreign Terrorist Organization list, is illegal, and illegal acts violate tax code regulations.

Survivors of the Oct 7 attacks including Lishay Lavi, who had to watch along with her daughters while Hamas kidnapped her husband, David Bromberg, who hid for 7 hours while watching others at the Nova music festival being massacred by the terrorists, and Natalie Sanandaji, an American woman who had been in Israel for a wedding and then had to run for her life, along with other survivors have sued UNRWA USA.

The lawsuit alleges that “UNRWA USA collects donations in the United States and then transfers nearly all its funds to UNRWA” which “redistributes those funds to Hamas members on their payroll, some of whom are directly engaged in acts of terrorism, including but not limited to, the October 7th atrocities.”

The United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA) depends heavily on two international NGOs, UNRWA USA and another in Spain. UNRWA USA, despite cultivating an image as an aid group, features veteran anti-Israel activists on its board, including Nadia Saah, Lara Friedman, and Shibley Telhami. The latter took part in an event with a Hamas apologist.

UNRWA USA’s report claims that it was able to provide $3.8 million to UNRWA in 2022. That money and previous funds raised by UNRWA USA could have bolstered Hamas before Oct 7.

While survivors and their families are entitled to sue UNRWA USA, the IRS has failed to act.

This is in sharp contrast to the IRS pursuit of pro-Israel groups under the Obama administration.

Z Street, one of those groups, launched a legal battle that exposed the administration’s targeting of political opponents.

Z Street’s founder, Lori Lowenthal Marcus, told Front Page Magazine that, “One of the excuses given to Z Street by an IRS official was that the IRS had to make sure we were not ‘engaged in terrorism’ because we mentioned ‘terror’ in our mission statement. The part of Z Street’s mission that mentioned terror? ‘We will not engage with, negotiate with or appease terrorists.’”

The IRS however appears to have a different position on terrorism. And that may explain its actions.

Among the more recent targets of the IRS has been the David Horowitz Freedom Center which spent 5 years battling the federal agency because we reported on Hillary Clinton’s emails.

Front Page Magazine had previously exposed the role that the IRS has played in enabling the funding and political support for Hamas in the United States by 501(c)(3) charity nonprofits.

But UNRWA may be the single large beneficiary of the IRS’ willful blindness to Islamic terrorism.

What is true of UNRWA is also true of much of the United Nations.

“Hamas is not a terrorist group for us, as you know, it is a political movement,” UN Under-Secretary-General for Humanitarian Affairs Martin Griffiths recently argued.

But UNRWA is unique as a UN agency that functions as an employment agency for Hamas, provides it with facilities and aid, and political cover for its campaign to kill Jews.

The lawsuit by the survivors of the Hamas attacks states that, “UNRWA USA was fully aware that UNRWA employees supported, engaged in, and celebrated the terrorist attacks on October 7, but Defendant continued to fund UNRWA and its terrorist activities before, during, and after the October 7 terrorist attack.”

Even as the investigation of UNRWA goes on, the IRS has expressed no interest in examining the nonprofit status of UNRWA USA as they did Z Street, the David Horowitz Freedom Center and other conservative and pro-Israel groups who have been targeted for political reasons.

The Freedom Center and Front Page Magazine will not stop holding the IRS and those organizations, like UNRWA, that aid and abet terrorism against America and Israel accountable.

(FrontPageMag.com)

Daniel Greenfield, a Shillman Journalism Fellow at the David Horowitz Freedom Center, is an investigative journalist and writer focusing on the radical Left and Islamic terrorism.

Israeli Officials’ Attire Conveys ‘Urgency’ Amid War, Experts Say

0
(From left) Chairman of the U.S. Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. C.Q. Brown, U.S. Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin, Israeli Minister of Defense Yoav Gallant and Israeli Chief of the General Staff Herzi Halevi in Tel Aviv on Dec. 18, 2023. Credit: Chad McNeeley/U.S. Department of Defense.

“Gallant and Netanyahu should wear the suit and tie in official meetings and keep the all-black casual look for when they’re on the ground,” Beverly Hallberg, of District Media Group, told JNS.

By: Menachem Wecker

Volodymyr Zelenskyy, the Ukrainian president, has tended to appear in public in a green or other military-style uniform since Russia attacked his country in February 2022. Just as his attire often contrasts starkly with more formally attired Western counterparts, senior Israeli officials have often appeared dressed down compared to U.S. colleagues.

Standing alongside Lloyd Austin, the U.S. secretary of defense, who was clad in a suit and tie during a Dec. 18 meeting in Tel Aviv, Yoav Gallant, Israeli minister of defense, wore a black button-down shirt, tucked into black pants with a black belt. He did the same during a Dec. 14 meeting in Israel with U.S. National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has also gone with a black button-down shirt in meetings with U.K. Prime Minister Rishi Sunak and with U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken, and he went tieless alongside U.S. President Joe Biden. In all three instances, the U.S. and British politicians wore suits and ties.

“There is a time-honored manner of dress for American male politicians seeking to show urgency and concern,” political commentator Chris Stirewalt, a senior fellow at the American Enterprise Institute, and contributing editor and weekly columnist at The Dispatch, told JNS.

Sometimes, U.S. officials have donned “a branded windbreaker, pullover or vest. Oftentimes, it is a dress shirt, open at the collar, with the sleeves rolled up” when meeting with law-enforcement officials at disaster scenes, or other times “it would be helpful to indicate activity and engagement,” added Stirewalt, a former Fox News Channel political editor who also co-hosts the podcast Ink Stained Wretches.

Stirewalt thinks that Zelenskyy’s attire is the sort “we would call a military uniform, not unlike what Winston Churchill and other foreign wartime allies have worn on U.S. visits, but the messaging is similar.”

“Israeli leaders fall closer to the U.S. norm, but I think it all falls into the same effort to show urgency and engagement,” he said.

U.S. President Joe Biden and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu in Tel Aviv, Oct. 18, 2023. Photo by Avi Ohayon/GPO.

On a recent, unsanctioned visit to Washington, Benny Gantz, a member of the Israeli War Cabinet, wore a suit and tie during a meeting with Blinken, although he went without a tie during a Tel Aviv meeting on March 22 with the U.S. secretary of state and a meeting with Blinken last month.

Beverly Hallberg, founder and president of District Media Group, trains politicians and others to appear on camera, among other interactions with journalists.

“I’m a firm believer that one should dress for the occasion and setting matters. For example, when a candidate is running for office, it would be disorienting if he or she wore a suit to the state fair,” Hallberg told JNS. “But once that same candidate goes from the state fair to a town hall meeting, he or she would need to wear more professional attire.”

A polo shirt or casual attire is appropriate for a journalist covering the U.S. border, “but we would expect that same reporter to wear business professional attire when he or she goes into the studio for an interview,” added Hallberg, a senior fellow at the Independent Women’s Forum.

She was “more comfortable” with Zelenskyy’s casual “wartime” look when he met with the U.S. Congress virtually, “since he was live from a war zone.”

“But even then, a collared shirt would have been more appropriate given his audience,” Hallberg said. “When he came to the United States and met with Congress in person, his casual wartime wardrobe no longer made sense, and it seemed disrespectful that he didn’t wear a suit.”

“Setting matters and one should dress appropriately,” she said.

Gallant and Netanyahu appear to be making “a concerted effort to dress in all-black—no jacket and no tie,” noted Hallberg. “I think the black understandably symbolizes the tragedy of lives lost and the dire situation.”

She doesn’t see that attire as more casual European or Middle Eastern attire than U.S. fashion. “Americans are notorious for wearing jeans and tennis shoes while on vacation,” said Hallberg. “Americans can be embarrassingly inappropriate with their casualness.”

She likes the jacket-less and tie-less look “when on the ground.”

“I don’t like it in professional meetings. For example, it was appropriate that when George W. Bush spoke at ground zero he wore a windbreaker. It would have looked completely wrong for him to wear a suit,” Hallberg said. “Gallant and Netanyahu should wear the suit and tie in official meetings and keep the all-black casual look for when they’re on the ground.”

“You never want to be more casual than the people you are leading,” she added.

Bradley Bowman, senior director of the Center on Military and Political Power at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, told JNS that he focuses on foreign and defense policy—and not on leaders’ fashion choices.

“Helping Ukrainians defeat Putin’s unprovoked invasion and helping Israelis defend themselves against a murderous terrorist enemy is a wise investment for Americans,” he said. “Those who get distracted by questions related to the clothing of foreign leaders are missing the main point.”

(JNS.org)

Protecting American Data: Why the TikTok Divestment Bill is Essential

0
TikTok, the popular social media platform is to sever ties with its parent company, ByteDance, based in Beijing, Photo Credit: AP

In a resounding victory for American data security, the House of Representatives took a decisive step last week by passing a bill that demands TikTok, the popular social media platform, to sever ties with its parent company, ByteDance, based in Beijing, as was recently reported in The Wall Street Journal.  The overwhelming 352-65 vote in favor of this bill marks a crucial moment in safeguarding our nation’s digital sovereignty.

This legislative action reflects a necessary response to the undeniable threat posed by TikTok, an app that has long deceived users regarding the privacy and security of their data. Despite assurances from TikTok that U.S. user data remains beyond the reach of the Chinese Communist Party, recent revelations have shattered this illusion. Leaked recordings and investigative reports have exposed TikTok’s egregious data collection practices, revealing that sensitive information, including user locations, browsing histories, and biometrics, are not only accessible but actively exploited by ByteDance and its affiliates.

The admission by ByteDance in December 2022 that some of its employees clandestinely spied on American journalists underscores the urgent need for action. Despite promises to isolate U.S. data, subsequent reports have shown continued data sharing among TikTok staff and ByteDance, raising alarming concerns about the extent of Chinese government influence within the company.

To protect our national security and uphold the integrity of our digital infrastructure, it is imperative to implement measures that sever TikTok’s ties with China. The divestment bill represents a prudent and necessary step towards achieving this goal. By mandating TikTok’s separation from ByteDance, the bill ensures that American user data remains free from foreign interference and exploitation.

TikTok CEO Shou Zi Chew testifies during a hearing for the House Energy & Commerce Committee on Capitol Hill in Washington. Credit: AP/Jacquelyn Martin

Critics may argue that such measures are unprecedented or overly restrictive. However, it is crucial to recognize that the United States has a long history of safeguarding its communications infrastructure from foreign control. The Federal Communications Commission’s ban on telecom carriers and equipment from companies such as China Mobile and Huawei exemplifies our commitment to protecting national interests in the digital realm. Moreover, existing federal laws already prohibit foreign governments from holding broadcast licenses, reflecting a consistent stance on safeguarding our sovereignty.

In light of these precedents and the clear evidence of TikTok’s complicity in data exploitation, the divestment bill is a prudent and proportionate response. It is not about stifling innovation or impeding international cooperation but about safeguarding American interests and ensuring that our digital landscape remains free from foreign influence.

As the Senate deliberates over the TikTok divestment bill, it is crucial to dispel any misconceptions regarding its constitutionality. Despite claims to the contrary, requiring TikTok to sever ties with the Communist Party does not violate the First Amendment. On the contrary, it represents a necessary step in safeguarding national security and preserving the integrity of our democratic institutions.

Critics of the bill often invoke the First Amendment, arguing that it protects TikTok’s right to free speech. However, this argument overlooks a crucial distinction made by the Supreme Court between laws targeting the content of speech and those regulating conduct. The TikTok divestment bill squarely falls into the latter category, as it addresses TikTok’s actions, which pose a significant national security threat, rather than the content of its users’ speech.

The landmark Supreme Court case of Arcara v. Cloud Books (1986) provides clear precedent for the constitutionality of laws targeting conduct rather than speech. In Arcara, the court upheld a New York state public-health nuisance statute aimed at closing a bookstore being used for prostitution. Despite objections from the owners citing First Amendment protections, the court recognized that the statute targeted unlawful conduct unrelated to expressive activity.

Similarly, the TikTok divestment bill is directed at addressing espionage and national security concerns, not restricting speech. The Constitution does not require the government to turn a blind eye to threats posed by foreign adversaries simply because a platform also facilitates speech. Just as the government can prosecute individuals for using a pen to commit theft, it can regulate platforms like TikTok when they engage in conduct detrimental to national security.

It is essential to understand that the bill does not infringe on the freedom of speech or expression. Americans remain free to engage in any form of speech, including on platforms like TikTok. However, when such platforms are exploited by foreign actors to undermine our national security, it is the government’s responsibility to take appropriate action.

View of the new logo of ByteDance at the headquarters of Beijing ByteDance Technology Co, owner of Chinese personalized news aggregator Jinri Toutiao and short video platform TikTok, in Beijing, China, 6 August 2018. Credit: Imaginechina via AP Images

The TikTok divestment bill aligns with both the letter and spirit of the Constitution and reflects our longstanding commitment to protecting against foreign adversary control. By addressing the conduct of TikTok and its ties to the Communist Party, the bill prioritizes national security while upholding the fundamental principles of democracy and free speech.

Letters to the Editor

0

The Origins of the Arab-Israeli Conflict

Dear Editor:

The Arab-Israeli conflict is intractable.

From the Israeli perspective, it is the right to live in its ancestral homeland.

For Muslims, it is a religious war. Jews and Christians are Dhimmi. They are to be dominated and humiliated. The Arab term for blacks is Abeed, meaning slave.

The first Arab-Jewish conflict occurred in Medina in 622, where the Prophet Mohammed found shelter among the Quraysh Jews after being rejected in Mecca. The Jews operated camel caravans and were prosperous. They signed the Constitution of Medina, ensuring co-operation and laying the foundation for a Muslim community.

In 629, the Prophet abrogated his agreement, beheaded the Jewish men and boys and took the women captive.

The principal of lying to the Infidel to gain an advantage is called Taqiyya.

The Arabs spread out of Arabia, conquering and colonizing much of the known world, from Asia through southern Euro and North Africa. They believe any land, once Muslim, is Muslim forever.

In World War One the allies defeated Germany and the Ottoman Empire. The San Remo Accords established mandates for Palestine, Lebanon, Syria and Iraq.

The 1920s saw the founding of the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt and the rise of Nazism in Europe. The Brotherhood’s aim is to replace the West with a Caliphate.

The leader of the mandates’ Arabs was Nazi war criminal Haj Amin al-Husseini, Grand Mufti of Jerusalem. He instigated pogroms against Middle East Jews from the 1920s. In Germany during WWII, he formed the Bosnian Muslim 13th Waffen Mountain Division of the SS Handschar.

Following the defeat of Germany and its Arab partners in World War Two, the United Nations suggested splitting the British mandate, promised the Jews by the League of Nations and Article 80 of the UN Charter, into Arab and Jewish states. The Jews agreed. The Arabs did not and launched the Nakba to ‘drive the Jews into the sea’.

Before 1964, only Jews were called Palestinians. In 1964, the Soviet KGB created the Palestine Liberation Army to thwart America influence. They called Israel, ‘Palestine’ and non-Jews, ‘Palestinians’. Terrorism was their tool to focus attention on the ‘Palestine’ narrative.

Seventy-five years after the establishment of the state, Islamo-fascists still have not accepted that Israel is a permanent part of the Middle East. It is the 10th most powerful country in the world and the 5th happiest. It is a liberal democracy with robust political parties. It’s per-capita GDP exceeds that of Canada, New Zealand, Australia or the UK. Its hospitals have Jewish and Arab staffs and patients.

It’s time for Islamists and the useful idiots who support them, to face reality and to solve the horrible refugee problem created by corrupt Arabs and the United Nations.

Israel is not the problem. Radical Islam is.

Sincerely
Len Bennett, Author of ‘Unfinished Work’


 

A Warning to the Wise & United Call to Action

Dear Editor:

As of the writing of this open letter, it’s been 170 days since 10/7. The war in Gaza and here at

home—on social media, college campuses, the streets, and in places of public assembly—has

never been more pivotal and perilous. As we fend off our adversaries abroad, we are confronted

with the stark reality that our grasp on public support for Israel is gradually slipping away. And

while we confront this daunting reality, we also face an unprecedented surge in

anti-Semitism—all because Israel dared to defend herself from barbaric terrorists.

I could readily expound on all the significant arguments for why Israel merits international

support, but alas, those have been exhausted to memory for most that are reading this. What I

will emphasize is that as a Jewish people, we bear a profound responsibility to take more

decisive action. Presently, the most prominent anti-Israel, arguably pro-Hamas, political force

that has successfully elected surrogates to Congress and local office is the Democratic

Socialists of America (DSA).  DSA, whose primary mission is addressing social justice issues,

has fervently embraced this cause. Since the days following 10/7, before IDF troops even set

foot into Gaza, DSA chapters and their affiliates vehemently protested in support of the brutal

attack, justifying the savagery as ‘resistance by any means necessary against an apartheid

country’.

DSA, which is a far-left organization with over 90,000 members in NYC alone, has successfully

framed the Palestinian-Israeli conflict as one rooted in race—a notion utterly divorced from

reality. In doing so, they frequently employ terms like ‘colonizers’ for Israel, likening Israelis, and

in many cases Jews, to ruthless white Europeans endeavoring to seize the land and homes of

people of color. Clearly, the geopolitical conflict between the Palestinians and Israelis has

absolutely nothing to do with race, yet this strategy is remarkably effective in recruiting

individuals deeply sympathetic to racial inequality in America. In fact, as recently as a couple of

weeks ago, Rep. Jamaal Bowman, a black DSA surrogate Congressman representing

Westchester, tweeted about a personal fundraiser to challenge AIPAC, which is supporting his

opponent. In the race baited tweet he insinuated that AIPAC is opposed to black men serving in

Congress.

The court of public opinion is in session, and we are losing ground. Thankfully, the

overwhelming majority of Democrats in Congress remain supportive of Israel and endorsed the

recent budget, allocating over $3 billion in unconditional aid to Israel. However, this support is

starting to wane at the fringes of both ends of the political spectrum. While left-wing social

justice warriors oppose Israel due to their moral stance on the conflict, an increasing number on

the right seek to withhold funding from Israel on fiscal grounds, labeling foreign aid to Israel as

incompatible with an ‘America First’ stance.

Let us be unequivocal—America is Israel’s foremost ally and defender outside of the Almighty.

While other nations are retreating, we must not allow America, the home to more Jews outside

of Israel, to fall into the trap laid by Israel’s primary adversaries abroad and at home. As a proud

Modern Orthodox Jew, Zionist, and Democrat, I am deeply concerned that fringe DSA agitators

are garnering attention and support from mainstream Democrats who may otherwise be

indifferent or even supportive of Israel. We must remember that, while we may be surrounded

by like-minded individuals on this issue, we as Jews constitute only a fraction of America’s

population. If public sentiment turns against us, there will be little incentive for our

representatives, whether Democrat or Republican, to continue championing our interests.

Sincerely
An anonymous contributor and staffer to a NYC Congress Member

The Bitter Truth About Anti-Zionism

0
A person holds a sign reading “Another Jew Against Zionism, Colonialism, Apartheid, Occupation, Genocide” at a protest at the Alberta Legislature in Edmonton, Canada, on Oct. 18, 2023. Credit: Jenari/Shutterstock.

When it collides with anti-Semitism, it’s anything but an accident.

By: Ben Cohen

Collisions are often unintentional. Bumping into someone as you walk down a busy thoroughfare with one eye on your cell phone or scraping a parked car as you reverse along a narrow street are experiences most of us have had at one time or another. And generally speaking, because these events are accidents, reasonable people can reach an understanding in their aftermath.

So my concern when I saw the headline above a March 11 opinion piece in The New York Times by columnist Michelle Goldberg—“Where Anti-Semitism and Anti-Zionism Collide”—was that readers would interpret the word “collide” here as an indicating an unintentional accident, thereby reinforcing the widely held view that while anti-Semitism is an unacceptable, intolerable phenomenon, anti-Zionism is a legitimate, morally founded viewpoint that deserves to be engaged.

Hatred of Zionism isn’t a self-contained phenomenon that just happens to collide on occasion with hatred of Jews: That would amount to an unfortunate accident. But anti-Zionism and anti-Semitism are intimately related. Like non-identical twins, they have a handful of unique features, but fundamentally, they are the same. Hatred of Zionism is a natural outgrowth of the hatred of Jews. Of course, not all of those who define themselves as anti-Zionists see it that way, but that’s because they lack the historical and intellectual grounding to make that determination. When anti-Zionism collides with anti-Semitism, it’s anything but an accident.

Goldberg, it should be said, doesn’t belong to that crowd. While there was much to disagree with in her piece, I respected her frankness in admitting that as a secular Jew enjoying “the great privilege of an American passport,” she doesn’t feel much of a personal connection to the State of Israel. What she does understand is that the core fixations of anti-Zionism—and particularly its goal of dismantling the Jewish state and replacing it with an Arab one “from the river to the sea”—sound discordantly anti-Semitic in the ears of the vast majority of Jews in America and around the world.

“I can’t fault Jews who see, in the mounting demonization of Zionism, the replay of an old and terrifying story,” she wrote. “After all, anti-Zionism isn’t always anti-Semitism, but sometimes it is. And right now, some opponents of Israel seem to be trying to prove that the mainstream Jewish community is right to conflate them.”

This statement is basically true, but it doesn’t reveal the deeper, underlying truth, which is why Goldberg’s piece is fundamentally unsatisfying.

I’ve written in past columns about what I regard as the critical difference between “anti-Zionism” with a hyphen and “antizionism” without one. In historical terms, “anti-Zionism” was a phenomenon of the late 19th and early 20th centuries that commanded the loyalty of many Jews, who mistakenly if honestly believed that a separate Jewish state was not the answer to centuries of Jewish persecution. Not all the early generations of anti-Zionists were free of anti-Semitism—the Bolshevik ban on Zionist organizations and the study of Hebrew in the aftermath of the Russian Revolution was clearly anti-Semitic, for example—but there was a greater willingness to critique Zionism on the basis of its claim to be the national liberation movement of the Jewish people, and less reliance on the conspiracy theories and crude memes that pass for critique on social media today.

“Antizionism” without the hyphen marks a new and far more dangerous phase, however. Essentially, it involves tearing up a complex reality in favor of an ideologically blinkered, implacably hostile caricature of what Zionism actually is.

Today’s “antizionists” have made their hatred of Israel’s sovereign existence the main focus of their anti-Semitism, which then uncomplicatedly imports older themes—Jews as disloyal to the countries where they are citizens, Jews as engaged in well-funded conspiracy to mask the malign effects of their actions—into its discourse. This explains, as Goldberg seems to realize, how a Lyft driver in San Francisco is moved to punch a passenger in the face upon realizing that he is Jew from Israel, or how a literary magazine in Brooklyn can abruptly remove an essay on Israel and cancel its Jewish author solely because of the pressure of a fanatical mob.

The other overarching issue that troubles Goldberg is the unresolved Palestinian question. Again correctly, she understands that a binational state is a pipe dream, arguing that if the Walloon and Flemish nationalities in Belgium can’t get along, how could Israelis and Palestinians possibly do so? Yet what she seems unable to perceive is that the Palestinian vision of what such a state would look like for its Jewish citizens was provided on Oct. 7 last year, when Hamas terrorists executed a bestial pogrom against defenseless Israelis and opinion polls in its immediate wake indicated overwhelming support for the atrocities among ordinary Palestinians.

Indeed, it made a mockery of the notion of a binational state. From the river to the sea, a “free” Palestine will be a place where Jews are brutally subjugated as a prelude to their eventual expulsion or even elimination. The stream of statements from Palestinian politicians—not just Hamas, but also Fatah, and notably Palestinian Authority chief Mahmoud Abbas—describing Israel as a colonial interloper, the Holocaust as a fabrication and the Oct. 7 pogrom as an act of noble resistance are all the evidence we need here.

Acknowledging this ugly reality doesn’t, it is true, automatically suggest how the Palestinian question can be resolved humanely. And for most Israelis, frankly, that is not a priority right now, as they understandably are more concerned with preventing another Oct. 7 from occurring. If that outcome could be secured through a political solution, then few would object. But such a solution is only possible if two conditions are satisfied: Firstly, that the Palestinians recognize Israelis as human beings with a right to self-determination in their historic homeland; and secondly, that any solution focuses on the physical separation of the two peoples, rather than attempts to bring them closer together.

For American liberals and progressives, among them many Jews, such a viewpoint is distasteful and jarring, to say the least. For Israelis, though, this is literally a matter of survival. Stop trying to kill us, let us live in peace, they are saying, and our guns will fall silent, and we’ll make a deal. That is the message the Palestinians refuse to hear, in large part because their political culture is saturated with anti-Semitism. For as long as the outside world mollifies them in this regard, nothing will change for the better.

(JNS.org)

Ben Cohen writes a weekly column for JNS on Jewish affairs and Middle Eastern politics. His writings have been published in the New York Post, The Wall Street Journal, Commentary, Haaretz and many other publications.

Biden’s UN Betrayal of Israel is a Victory for Hamas

0
The U.N. Security Council adopts Resolution 2728 (2024) 14-0, demanding an immediate ceasefire to Israel’s war with Hamas in the Gaza Strip during Ramadan and immediate release of all hostages taken from Israel and being held in Gaza, with Washington abstaining, March 25, 2024. Credit: Loey Felipe/U.N. Photo.

The terrorists were certain that the West would save them from defeat in Gaza. The administration has now confirmed that they were right.

By: Jonathan S. Tobin

Don’t believe the Biden administration’s claim that it hasn’t changed its stance on Israel’s war on Hamas. The U.S. abstention on the vote in the U.N. Security Council for an “immediate ceasefire” in Gaza isn’t just a routine political or diplomatic maneuver. It’s a fundamental betrayal of the U.S.-Israel alliance, whose consequences go far beyond the immediate circumstances in which the White House believes that its political interests require it to force the Jewish state to give up its goal of eliminating Hamas from the Gaza Strip.

Rather than merely sacrificing Israel’s security, it is also handing a major victory to both Hamas and its Iranian allies. With the United Nations demanding an end to the war, there is no reason for Hamas to stop trying to hold onto those parts of Gaza it still controls. Nor is there any reason for it to release the hostages it still holds captive except for a deal that will force Israel to acquiesce to a return, in one form or another, to the pre-Oct. 7 status quo. That will ensure that it gets away with having committed the largest mass slaughter of Jews since the Holocaust, as well as asserting its primacy over Palestinian politics in the foreseeable future.

That doesn’t just expose the administration’s supposed quest for Middle East peace as a sham, since it is essentially anointing an organization pledged to Israel’s destruction and Jewish genocide as the primary voice of Palestinian nationalism. It also sends a signal to the region and the rest of the world that the United States is no longer interested in defeating Islamist terrorism or in keeping faith with allies.

 

A two-faced strategy

Security Council resolutions have the force of international law, and if Israel continues its operations to eliminate Hamas—as its government has rightly said it must—this resolution could be used as a basis for international sanctions against the Jewish state. Yet the Biden administration claimed that the resolution, which called for a cessation of fighting for the remaining two weeks of the Muslim holy month of Ramadan (though the world body had nothing to say about Muslim attacks on Jewish holidays like Simchat Torah, the day of the Oct. 7 atrocities), as well as the release of the hostages and for the free flow of aid into Gaza, is “non-binding.” In this way, it continues to try and talk out of both sides of its mouth about the war—on the one hand seeking to stop Israel from winning while claiming on the other that it’s still a faithful ally.

Given that Hamas has not ceased its violence and continues to hold Israeli hostages, it can be argued that Israel has a legal right to continue its battle. But Israel’s enemies around the world—at the United Nations and in the United States—aren’t interested in the fine points of international law. What they want is for the fighting to conclude with Hamas still standing with the ability to regroup and rearm, and make good on its promises to keep killing Jews.

While the U.N. vote must be considered a turning point in the history of relations between the United States and Israel, it cannot be considered a surprise. President Joe Biden has been steadily walking away from his initial pledges of support for Israel after the Oct. 7 massacre. At the time, Biden didn’t just condemn the barbaric terrorist attacks on 22 Israeli communities in southern Israel that left more than 1,200 Israelis dead, with thousands wounded and more than 250 others dragged into captivity in Gaza. He agreed with Israel’s government that Hamas, which had governed Gaza as an independent Palestinian state in all but name since 2007, must be eliminated.

 

Letting Hamas get away with murder

Ever since then, Biden and his foreign-policy team have shown themselves to be more worried about conforming to a narrative in which the suffering that the Palestinians brought upon themselves by starting a war that included rape, torture and firebombing homes, in addition to killing and kidnapping, invalidates Israel’s right of self-defense or any accountability for barbaric crimes.

The notion that Israel’s counter-offensive into Gaza was “over the top,” as Biden mischaracterized it (let alone the big lie put forward by Hamas propagandists and their Western dupes that it was “genocide”) remains contrary to the facts. Though many Palestinians have died, Israel’s efforts have been more measured than those of any other modern army faced with similar issues related to urban warfare and resulted in historically low levels of civilian casualties relative to those of enemy combatants.

If Hamas is to be defeated—and it must be if justice is to be served and the security of Israelis assured—then the Israel Defense Forces must be allowed to finish the job it started after Oct. 7. The Israeli government is right to assert that it has a moral obligation to root it out of its remaining stronghold in Rafah, as well as guarantee that it doesn’t use its tunnel network to reassert control in other parts of Gaza.

But unlike any other war that has been waged by Western forces against Islamist terrorists, the international community appears to be unwilling to tolerate an Israeli victory if it means the elimination of Hamas. The reason why Israel is treated in this way has nothing to do with the graphic pictures of Palestinian suffering or even the inflated statistics about deaths in Gaza supplied by Hamas to its willing accomplices in the corporate media.

At the heart of this betrayal is a belief that Israel and its genocidal Islamist opponents are somehow morally equivalent. Were Biden trying to maintain the alliance with Israel, then he would have continued to assert that Hamas must be defeated before any ceasefire and that any aid going into Gaza—most of which has been stolen by Hamas for use by its remaining forces hidden in the tunnels with the hostages they are holding—must be kept out of its hands.

A morally serious American government would assert that any and all casualties in Gaza are the responsibility of Hamas, not Israel, and that the only way to save the Palestinian people from more suffering is the immediate and unconditional surrender of the terrorists. But for Biden, Vice President Kamala Harris and the rest of the chorus of Democrat officeholders and liberal media outlets clamoring for a ceasefire are not interested in Hamas’s surrender. They insist that the impact of the war on the Palestinians is more important than ensuring that Gaza is no longer controlled by people who are intent on using it as a platform to carry on a century-old war on the Jews.

 

Escalating pressure on Israel

Nor is this resolution the end point of a pressure campaign not on the Palestinian murderers who remain in Rafah, but on Israel to cease a war of self-defense. As The New York Times reported, the abandonment of Israel in the United Nations is just one prong of a multifaceted plan of action being employed by the White House to force Israel to tolerate a Hamas victory in the war. It is prepared, as the Times aptly put it, to “coerce” Israel to give up the war by starting to stop weapons shipments that enable Israel to continue fighting effectively. If that doesn’t work, the article, based on calculated leaks from the administration, said that Biden will then proceed to enact sanctions on Israeli officials.

In plain terms, Biden is contemplating applying measures to Israel that it has used against Russia for its invasion of Ukraine. And it is thinking of doing that at the same time that it continues to waive sanctions on the world’s leading state sponsor of terror in Iran, in which it has gifted Tehran billions of dollars of much-needed aid to that despotic regime.

This turn against Israel won’t help the Palestinians. Allowing the ceasefire resolution to pass will only deepen Hamas’s resolve to keep fighting and to hold onto the hostages. They deliberately created a situation in which their human shields are being killed or enduring privations precisely in order to orchestrate international pressure against Israel. The more the Palestinians are hurt by the war, the better it is for Hamas.

Nor will it speed the release of the hostages since the resolution encourages Hamas to refuse to give in, secure in the knowledge that support from the international community gives them the leverage to hold them in captivity indefinitely until Israel not only pays an exorbitant price in ransom but also acknowledges that Gaza will remain in the terrorists’ hands.

 

Biden’s political motives

A rational U.S. policy would have been one in which the U.N. Security Council would not be allowed to become a forum in which Hamas terrorism was effectively endorsed and Israeli self-defense treated as a war crime. It would have continued to insist that any resolution about a ceasefire must be dependent on the release of hostages and the demand that Hamas be labeled as a terrorist group that must lay down its arms.

But Biden and his advisers are obsessed with the idea that criticism of his early support for the war will cost him the election because left-wing activists and Arab-Americans—cheered on by liberal media—think that Israel, and not Hamas, is the villain of the war. They have tried to have it both ways for months, simultaneously genuflecting to leftist critics of Israel by validating the smears of its conduct in Gaza while maintaining both support in the United Nations and the flow of arms. They orchestrated a campaign of defamation of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu as if he were continuing the war for his own purposes rather than following the will of the Israeli people to ensure their security and rights.

This development can be considered worse than the similar betrayal of the Obama administration at the United Nations during its last days in office in 2016, when it let the Security Council pass a resolution that essentially labeled the presence of every Jew in Judea and Samaria, and eastern Jerusalem, as illegal. That happened only weeks before everyone knew that the incoming administration led by Donald Trump would reverse this stand, as it did.

This vote happened at a moment when Biden has, at a minimum, another 10 months left in office during which he can implement his plan to render Israel defenseless and to acquiesce in a U.N. campaign of delegitimization that could have a devastating impact on the Jewish state’s ability to go on functioning in the world economy. This shift in policy means that if Israel is to defeat Hamas, it will have to do so alone with its sole superpower ally increasingly determined to force it to give up and let the terrorists reconstitute their state.

 

Liberal Jews fail to speak up

This is also a moment when friends of Israel throughout the American political spectrum ought to be working together to apply the sort of pressure on Biden that will cause him to return to a position of support for Israel’s war of survival. But Democrats like Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer regard solidifying the liberal base behind Biden’s re-election campaign as a priority. Mainstream liberal Jewish organizations are equally unwilling to use their political capital with the same ruthless determination that Israel’s intersectional leftist foes have employed to force Biden to bend to their will.

If Jewish Democrats and liberal Jewish groups are prepared to tolerate this betrayal or are willing to endorse the administration’s gaslighting about it all being Israel’s fault, then that will be just one more nail in the coffin of the bipartisan consensus that they have long touted. Biden will not unreasonably conclude that he will pay no political price for undermining the Jewish state’s security. Or at least none until he finds that there are more votes to be lost in the political center by abandoning Israel to the jackals at the United Nations than on the left from those who think he was insufficiently hostile to the Jewish state.

This is one more signal to America’s Arab allies that they are kidding themselves if they think that Washington would ever defend them against Iran. Worse than that, a world in which Hamas is allowed to win the war it started with atrocities on Oct. 7 is one in which no one, including Americans, should consider themselves safe from terrorism.

Yet as ominous as those consequences may be, the singling out of Israel in this manner must also be viewed as part of the surge in antisemitism since the war began. Jew-hatred from the left has been legitimized in ways that right-wing antisemitism never has been. A policy that lets a terrorist movement bent on Jewish genocide win can only be seen as part of this.

Biden’s feckless behavior has created a long list of disasters, including out-of-control inflation, the rout in Afghanistan and the collapse of the border that let in as many as 10 million illegal immigrants. But by extending a lifeline to one of the planet’s most vicious terrorist groups, the president has set in motion a series of events that could undermine American security just as much as he is harming Israel.

(JNS.org)

Jonathan S. Tobin is editor-in-chief of JNS (Jewish News Syndicate). Follow him at: @jonathans_tobin.

The Shochet: An Unparalleled Autobiographical Account of Life in the Shtetl – Part 1

0
Volume I of The Schochet was published in October 2023. Volume II will be published in September 2024.

Pinkhes-Dov Goldenshteyn’s enduring faith amidst suffering and loss

By: Yaakov Ort

Every author needs to have a primary audience in mind before setting out to write. The ultimate test of the effectiveness of the work, regardless of the genre, is whether or not the writing was an agency for change in the lives of his or her target readers. Whether the work is short or long, fiction or nonfiction, poetry or polemic; whether it is meant to educate or entertain, inform or inspire, or achieve some combination of all the above, the work must result in some kind of shift in readers’ feelings, knowledge or perspective to be deemed a success.

In the very first page of his autobiography, Pinkhes-Dov Goldenshteyn (1848-1930) tells us who his primary audience is and what he hopes to achieve.

I wrote this book for my children and relatives who are spread throughout numerous countries … I wanted them to be able to understand what their father endured during his lifetime and how G‑d always helped him and never abandoned him. I also want those who plagued and tormented me and are currently in Russia to read this in order to learn the moral lesson that there is a G‑d in the world who protects the harassed and oppressed and repays everyone according to his deeds.

May they repent.

The Shochet—A Memoir of Jewish Life in Ukraine and Crimea— is an unparalleled autobiographical account of faith and piety amid poverty, suffering and loss experienced by a smart, rambunctious and traumatized orphan living in the fast-disappearing traditional Jewish communities in late 19th-century Eastern Europe. As a child, adolescent and even as a young adult, Goldenshteyn, known as Pinye-Ber, was tossed between a succession of families and communities that didn’t know how to handle him.

For the story of Goldenshteyn’s life to serve as a role model and inspiration for teshuvah—repentance—by his descendants and and his tormentors, the first requirement is for him to simply tell the truth about what he went through without embellishment or exaggeration, and he does that convincingly.

Thanks to Michoel Rotenfeld’s scholarly and deeply engaging translation—the memoir was originally written in Yiddish and published in the Land of Israel in 1928-29—and introduction, Goldenshteyn comes across as someone without guile or pretense, a person who has neither the desire to highlight the faults of others nor the need to hide his own shortcomings and mistakes.

But his life was not just any life. It is the life of the archetypal orphan who, almost a century after his passing, arouses feelings of love, protection and compassion.

His life was a heroic journey in which he finally found his identity far from home in the village of Lubavitch, in the ideology of Chabad and the courts of the third and fourth Chabad Rebbes, the Tzemach Tzedek and the Rebbe Maharash (Rabbi Shmuel of Lubavitch). He found his occupation as a shochet (a ritual slaughterer) and spent many of his adult years practicing his trade and raising a large Jewish family in Crimea, a place seen as a Jewish backwater and thus a center of assimilation that negatively impacted his own children’s Jewish observance. He then tried to find refuge in immigration to Ottoman-controlled Palestine before World War I, but his difficulties only increased, as did his trust and faith in G‑d.

A Tragic Childhood

Born in 1848 in Tiraspol in the Tsarist Russian province of Kherson—a part of historical Ukraine—Pinye-Ber was the youngest of eight siblings who were born to a poor, pious, loving Jewish family of Bersheder Chassidim, who instilled in their children a desire to above all to live a G‑dly life immersed in Torah and Chassidic traditions. But his mother died when he was 5 years old, his father passed away less than two years later, and the children found themselves living in abject poverty. As Pinye-Ber recalls:

The orphaned children all lived together in a tiny, little dwelling … Understandably their expenses could barely be met. More than once they did without food or drink to at least have money for heating so they would not freeze; but even so, there was not enough money for heating.

One by one, Pinye-Ber’s older siblings died, or settled for unhappy marriages and then died, leaving the young boy alone in the world. The succession of tragedies in his life is so remarkable that if this was a work of fiction, it would be proper to admonish the author: “Enough tragedy already. You’ve made your point.”

With no close relatives to care for him, the boy was taken into foster care by distant relatives—a wealthy, childless merchant called Reb Elye the Vinegar Maker, and his cruel, shrewish wife. As bad as it was at home, school was worse.

By nature I was happy; if I chuckled or simply had a happy expression on my face, I was given a blow of the strap across my face or back. It made no difference where the strap struck as long as it hit me well. I was never beaten on account of my learning, because I knew the sections of Talmud and khimesh with Rashi’s commentary as soon as I reviewed them once on Monday. So I was left with nothing to do all week except listen to the others constantly reviewing Sunday’s lessons and still not mastering them by Thursday. Naturally, I had to laugh at them. But since they were children of the well-to-do, I was slapped because they were blockheads. I was slapped so much that I became disgusted with the kheyder and melamed. If only things would have gone well at home, but things were no good there either.

Desperate to escape from school after a particularly severe beating from his teacher, Pinye-Ber leaped out the window and ran off to the cemetery where his parents were buried.

Here was where my sisters would come during difficult times of loneliness and hardship to cry out their hearts to our parents. Here I too had come to plead and cry for my parents to somehow help me and make my life easier. And I was then all of eight years old.

Although he was found after a short while and returned to his sisters’ home, the next two decades of Pinye-Ber’s life are highlighted by stories about his running away: running away from foster families who first gave him hope, fleeing yeshivahs where he briefly felt he could make his mark as a scholar, running away from promises of matrimony, and along with it, a comfortable income of a young scholar from a good family supported by his in-laws; even running away from a wife he loved and respected and children he adored for the sake of imagined material or spiritual benefits that he would find someplace other than where he was.

Each of these attempted escapes from the reality of his life provides rich details in the tableaus of time and place, as well as insights into the daily and religious lives of Jews and Jewish communities bound to tradition and oblivious to the tectonic shifts going on around them. – Chabad.org

(To Be Continued Next Week)

The Media Aids Hamas

0
Aid deliveries being inspected before crossing from Israel into Gaza on March 14th, 2024. Photo Credit: Coordinator of Government Activities in the Territories

By: Sean Durns

Hamas is losing on the battlefield. And its allies in the Western press are doing everything that they can to save the terrorist group. Their efforts are already bearing fruit.

On March 7, 2024, President Joe Biden announced the construction of a “temporary pier [that] would enable a massive increase in the amount of humanitarian assistance getting into Gaza every day.” The President added: “Israel must do its part. Israel must allow more aid into Gaza and ensure that humanitarian workers aren’t caught in the crossfire.”

Details of the plan remain vague. On March 9, 2024, the U.S. Army Vessel General Frank S. Besson, a logistics support vessel, departed Joint Base Langley-Eustis for the Eastern Mediterranean “carrying the first equipment to establish a temporary pier to deliver vital humanitarian supplies,” the U.S. Central Command noted. More than 1,000 U.S. military personnel will take part in the mission.

Yet the day before, at a press conference, when a reporter asked Pentagon spokesman Maj. Gen. Pat Ryder if they thought Hamas would fire at U.S. troops, Ryder said: “that’s certainly a risk…but if Hamas does truly care about the Palestinian people, then again, one would hope that this international mission to deliver aid to people who need it would be able to happen unhindered.”

But Hamas doesn’t care about the Palestinian people. Indeed, its entire strategy is to sacrifice them in the name of murdering Jews. This includes using civilian population centers, such as hospitals, schools, and playgrounds, to plot and launch attacks. But it’s also evident in the terrorist group’s strategy of hoarding aid from Gazans—a fact that has been amply documented, but often ignored by major media outlets.

Indeed, if some Western policymakers are blaming Israel for Gazans not getting aid, they’re but regurgitating a narrative pushed by many in the press.

Unsurprisingly, the Washington Post is foremost among them. CAMERA has documented the newspaper’s anti-Israel bias, which includes promoting blood-libels and parroting casualty statistics supplied by Hamas. The Post’s coverage of Gaza aid has been similarly lackluster.

At seemingly every turn, the Post has downplayed or ignored Israel’s efforts to get aid to the Gaza people while simultaneously ignoring the root of the problem: Hamas. The problem with aid flowing to Gazans isn’t the Israelis. It’s not a supply problem. Rather, it’s a distribution problem. Hamas steals aid.

Yet the Post has pretended otherwise. Take, for example, a March 1, 2024 dispatch by David Ignatius (“Food convoy carnage distills what’s gone terribly wrong in Gaza”). The Post columnist asserts that “Israel’s war aim is to destroy Hamas, but sadly, it is also destroying any vestige of orderly life in Gaza.”

This, of course, is nonsense. Would Ignatius claim that the Islamic State presided over an “orderly” rule? That those living under its authoritarian fist had an “orderly” life? Would he blame the Allies for the conditions that Germans dealt with in the closing days of World War II? Somehow Hamas is judged by a different standard.

Indeed, Ignatius writes that “Palestinian civilians have been bombed out of their homes, driven into refugee camps, deprived of food and sanitation, and now this: clawing at [aid] trucks in their struggle to survive—while Hamas hides underground, and Israel protects its own troops but not the civilian population.”

This is risible. As John Spencer, the chair of urban war studies at West Point and a combat veteran, pointed out “Israel has taken more measures to avoid needless civilian harm than virtually any other nation that’s fought an urban war.” In his Jan. 31, 2024 Newsweek Op-Ed, Spencer catalogues the extensive efforts employed by the Israeli Defense Forces (IDF) to limit civilian deaths, including the use of certain munitions, advance warning to evacuate urban areas, and other methods. Israel, he notes, “has taken precautionary measures even the United States did not do during its recent wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.”

All this information is open-source and was readily available to Ignatius. He just chose to ignore it, preferring to put the onus on an American ally instead of a genocidal U.S.-designated terrorist group whose strategy is to encourage civilian casualties.

Ignatius insists on blaming the Jewish state for issues with aid distribution in Gaza, even claiming that aid distribution was going “smoothly” until Israel started targeted Gazan police who were supposedly preventing rioting and looting from “armed gangs.” The police, he asserts, were but “affiliated” with Hamas.

This too is inaccurate. The police are run by Hamas. They report to Hamas. Just as it was under the Islamic State. Or, for that matter, the police in Nazi Germany. This is a fact detailed in numerous studies on Hamas. It is also odd to draw sharp distinctions between terrorist groups and armed gangs. Ignatius’s claim that aid distribution was going “smoothly” is also suspect. Israeli forces have—for months—found copious aid, including fuel, food, and medical supplies, being hoarded in tunnels and headquarters used by Hamas.

A March 3, 2024 dispatch by Cairo bureau chief Claire Parker repeated many of Ignatius’s mistakes, but characteristically added more of her own. Parker previously claimed that Hamas perpetrated the October 7th massacre—the largest slaughter of Jewish civilians since the Holocaust—because Israel was “stroking tensions” with a counterterrorist raid on al-Asqa mosque.

As CAMERA documented, this was literally a regurgitation of Hamas propaganda, and it also overlooked obvious facts, including that such an attack required months, perhaps even years, of planning. Indeed, it was later revealed that the attack had been planned for years and that it was approved by Hamas’s benefactor, Iran. This itself was obvious to those who closely study the region and follow its developments—but such people seem to be in short supply at the Post.

Like Ignatius and other Post colleagues, including Ishaan Tharoor, Shadi Hami, and Karen Attiah, Parker puts the onus for aid not getting to Gazans on Israel as opposed to the terrorist group that is stealing and hoarding it. Notably, Tharoor, Hamid, Attiah and Ignatius are opinion columnists, whereas Parker is supposed to be engaged in strait-laced reporting as opposed to editorializing. But at today’s Washington Post such lines are so thoroughly blurred as to be meaningless.

In contrast to the Post, a March 6, 2024 Newsweek op-ed by Spencer, entitled “I Have Delivered Aid in War Zones. They Were the Missions We Feared Most,” provides essential facts and context. Spencer points out that Hamas, like other terrorists, targets aid convoys, seeking to disrupt distribution in active war zones. “We know Hamas dressed in civilian clothes have been walking up to armored vehicles to place magnet bombs and fire into the crowd during aid distribution,” he writes. Such details are not reported in the Post.

Nor were they noted in a Feb. 18, 2023 Post guest column by U.S. Senators Elizabeth Warren (D-MA), Chris Van Hollen (D-MD), Jeff Merkley (D-OR), Dick Durbin (D-IL), and Peter Welch (D-VT) entitled “The U.S. Should Go It Alone on Humanitarian Relief in Gaza.” Regrettably, the Senators also put the onus for aid not getting into Gaza on Israel, as opposed to their Hamas oppressors. Notably, several of these Senators have also recently stated their support for restoring funding to the United Nations Relief and Works Agency (UNRWA), an agency that has been caught collaborating with—even employing—Hamas operatives. In fact, UNRWA supplies—funded by American taxpayers—have routinely been found in Hamas headquarters.

Another Washington Post report, “Israel faces crisis of its own making as chaos and hunger engulf Gaza,” also blamed the Jewish state. Indeed, its very headline was taken from an anonymous White House source who asserted that Gaza “was the chaos of Israel’s own making.” Using an anonymous source to craft a headline is questionable journalism. But this is par for the course for one of the Post reporters involved. As CAMERA has highlighted, Yasmeen Abutaleb has previously engaged in soft denial of the mass rapes perpetrated by Hamas on October 7.

Other news outlets have also provided inaccurate and incomplete coverage of the aid situation in Gaza. Politico and USA Today, among others, have blamed the Jewish state while minimizing both Hamas’s role and the difficultly in supplying aid to an active war zone. Notably, all of these outlets have ignored recent events, including Gazan terrorists hijacking six aid trucks and Israel reportedly taking out a top Hamas commander, Mohammad Abu Hasna, who was responsible for seizing humanitarian aid and distributing it to Hamas fighters.

Israel seems to be the only country in history that is expected to effectively aid, feed, and empower the very enemy that it is fighting against. This double standard is revealed in press coverage that is short on details and context and replete with omissions. And it has very real policy implications.

(CAMERA.org)

The Committee for Accuracy in Middle East Reporting and Analysis (CAMERA) is an international media-monitoring and educational organization founded in 1982 to promote accurate and unbiased coverage of Israel and the Middle East. CAMERA is a non-profit, tax-exempt, and non-partisan organization under section 501 (c)(3) of the United States Internal Revenue Code. To learn more or receive our newsletters please visit CAMERA.org.

What Is Passover (Pesach)?

0
The eight-day Jewish holiday of Passover is celebrated in the early spring, from the 15th through the 22nd of the Hebrew month of Nissan, April 22 - 30, 2024. Passover (Pesach) commemorates the emancipation of the Israelites from slavery in ancient Egypt. Credit: Art by Sefira Lightstone

Passover 2024 will be celebrated from April 22-30

By: Chabad.org

What Is Passover?

The eight-day Jewish holiday of Passover is celebrated in the early spring, from the 15th through the 22nd of the Hebrew month of Nissan, April 22 – 30, 2024. Passover (Pesach) commemorates the emancipation of the Israelites from slavery in ancient Egypt. Pesach is observed by avoiding leaven, and highlighted by the Seder meals that include four cups of wine, eating matzah and bitter herbs, and retelling the story of the Exodus.

In Hebrew it is known as Pesach (which means “to pass over”), because G‑d passed over the Jewish homes when killing the Egyptian firstborn on the very first Passover eve.

 

Passover History in a Nutshell

As told in the Bible, after many decades of slavery to the Egyptian pharaohs, during which time the Israelites were subjected to backbreaking labor and unbearable horrors, G‑d saw the people’s distress and sent Moses to Pharaoh with a message: “Send forth My people, so that they may serve Me.” But despite numerous warnings, Pharaoh refused to heed G‑d’s command. G‑d then sent upon Egypt ten devastating plagues, afflicting them and destroying everything from their livestock to their crops.

The Israelites left in such a hurry, in fact, that the bread they baked as provisions for the way did not have time to rise. Six hundred thousand adult males, plus many more women and children, left Egypt on that day and began the trek to Mount Sinai and their birth as G‑d’s chosen people. Credit: Art by Sefira Lightstone

At the stroke of midnight of 15 Nissan in the year 2448 from creation (1313 BCE), G‑d visited the last of the ten plagues on the Egyptians, killing all their firstborn. While doing so, G‑d spared the children of Israel, “passing over” their homes—hence the name of the holiday. Pharaoh’s resistance was broken, and he virtually chased his former slaves out of the land. The Israelites left in such a hurry, in fact, that the bread they baked as provisions for the way did not have time to rise. Six hundred thousand adult males, plus many more women and children, left Egypt on that day and began the trek to Mount Sinai and their birth as G‑d’s chosen people.

In ancient times the Passover observance included the sacrifice of the paschal lamb, which was roasted and eaten at the Seder on the first night of the holiday. This was the case until the Temple in Jerusalem was destroyed in the 1st century.

 

How Is Passover Celebrated?

Passover is divided into two parts:

The first two days and last two days (the latter commemorating the splitting of the Red Sea) are full-fledged holidays. Holiday candles are lit at night, and kiddush and sumptuous holiday meals are enjoyed on both nights and days. We don’t go to work, drive, write, or switch on or off electric devices. We are permitted to cook and to carry outdoors.

The middle four days are called Chol Hamoed, semi-festive “intermediate days,” when most forms of work are permitted.

 

No Chametz

To commemorate the unleavened bread that the Israelites ate when they left Egypt, we don’t eat—or even retain in our possession—any chametz from midday of the day before Passover until the conclusion of the holiday. Photo Credit: Art by Sefira Lightstone

To commemorate the unleavened bread that the Israelites ate when they left Egypt, we don’t eat—or even retain in our possession—any chametz from midday of the day before Passover until the conclusion of the holiday. Chametz means leavened grain—any food or drink that contains even a trace of wheat, barley, rye, oats, spelt or their derivatives, and which wasn’t guarded from leavening or fermentation. This includes bread, cake, cookies, cereal, pasta, and most alcoholic beverages. Moreover, almost any processed food or drink can be assumed to be chametz unless certified otherwise.

Ridding our homes of chametz is an intensive process. It involves a full-out spring-cleaning search-and-destroy mission during the weeks before Passover, and culminates with a ceremonial search for chametz on the night before Passover, and then a burning of the chametz ceremony on the morning before the holiday. Chametz that cannot be disposed of can be sold to a non-Jew (and bought back after the holiday).

 

Matzah

Instead of chametz, we eat matzah—flat unleavened bread. It is a mitzvah to partake of matzah on the two Seder nights (see below for more on this), and during the rest of the holiday it is optional. Photo Credit: Art by Sefira Lightstone

Instead of chametz, we eat matzah—flat unleavened bread. It is a mitzvah to partake of matzah on the two Seder nights (see below for more on this), and during the rest of the holiday it is optional.

It is ideal to use handmade shmurah matzah, which has been zealously guarded against moisture from the moment of the harvest. You can purchase shmurah matzah here.

 

The Seders

The highlight of Passover is the Seder, observed on each of the first two nights of the holiday. The Seder is a fifteen-step family-oriented tradition and ritual-packed feast.

The focal points of the Seder are:

 

Eating matzah.

Eating bitter herbs—to commemorate the bitter slavery endured by the Israelites.

Drinking four cups of wine or grape juice—a royal drink to celebrate our newfound freedom.

The recitation of the Haggadah, a liturgy that describes in detail the story of the Exodus from Egypt. The Haggadah is the fulfillment of the biblical obligation to recount to our children the story of the Exodus on the night of Passover. It begins with a child asking the traditional “Four Questions.”

 

Why Passover Is Important

Passover, celebrating the greatest series of miracles ever experienced in history, is a time to reach above nature to the miraculous. But how are miracles achieved? Photo Credit: Art by Sefira Lightstone

Passover, celebrating the greatest series of miracles ever experienced in history, is a time to reach above nature to the miraculous. But how are miracles achieved? Let’s take our cue from the matzah. Flat and unflavored, it embodies humility. Through ridding ourselves of inflated egos, we are able to tap into the miraculous well of divine energy we all have within our souls.

 

Passover FAQ

Passover, also known as Pesach, is the 8-day Jewish holiday celebrated in the early spring that commemorates the Israelites’ emancipation from slavery in ancient Egypt.

 

What is the history of Passover?

After decades of slavery to the Egyptian pharaohs, G‑d saw the Israelites’ distress and sent Moses to Pharaoh to demand their release. Despite numerous warnings, Pharaoh refused to heed G‑d’s command. G‑d then wrought upon Egypt 10 devastating plagues. By the last, Pharaoh’s resistance was broken and he virtually chased his former slaves out of the land.

 

Why is it called Passover?

During the last of the 10 plagues, death of the Egyptian firstborns, G‑d spared the children of Israel, “passing over” their homes—hence the name of the holiday.

 

How is Passover celebrated?

During Passover, chametz (leavened bread) is strictly avoided, and matzah is consumed instead. The highlight is the Seder, a ritual-packed feast conducted on the first two nights, during which we eat matzah, drink four cups of wine, recline, and recount the story of our freedom.

 

What is chametz?

Chametz refers to any food or drink that contains leavened grain, such as wheat, barley, rye, oats, or spelt. It includes bread, cake, cookies, cereal, pasta, and most alcoholic beverages. Chametz must be completely removed from possession or sold to a non-Jew before Passover.

 

How can I sell my chametz?

Ideally one should sell their chametz by contacting their local orthodox Rabbi. If that isn’t an option, you can sell your chametz online.

 

What is matzah?

Eating matzah—flat, unleavened bread—is a central component of Passover. Handmade shemurah matzah is considered ideal. It is eaten during the Seder and can be consumed throughout the holiday.

 

What is the Seder?

The Seder is a 15-step ritual-packed feast held on the first two nights of Passover. It involves eating matzah and bitter herbs, drinking four cups of wine or grape juice, and having the children ask the Four Questions. The Haggadah, a liturgy detailing the story of the Exodus, is the guidebook.

 

Why is Passover important?

Passover commemorates the miraculous liberation of the Israelites from slavery in Egypt. It is a time to reflect on humility, Divine energy, and the potential for miracles.

(Chabad.org)

Parshas Tzav –  JUST DO IT!

0
Everything Rebbetzin Jungreis, a’h, did was with zerizus, coupled with enthusiasm. If there was something that needed to be done, it was done now. Procrastination was not part of her vocabulary.

By: Chaya Sora Jungreis-Gertzulin

Did morning ever come too early, and you gave yourself “just five more minutes”? You close your eyes… and somehow five minutes turns into thirty.

Maybe you had a friend, an acquaintance, who was feeling under the weather. You make a mental note to call tomorrow. But tomorrow never happens. Nor does the next day. Life gets busy. And then, your friend feels better. You missed out on the opportunity to do bikur cholim.

How often does that little voice inside us say, you can do it later, there’s always tomorrow… only to leave us with missed opportunities.

This week’s parsha, Tzav, opens with HaShem instructing Moshe “Tzav es Aaron, Command Aaron”. Not “speak to”, or “tell Aaron”, but “tzav, command”. Rashi comments that tzav is “lashon zerizus”, an expression denoting urgency, alacrity, and a spirit of enthusiasm. Rashi continues with a powerful message to us, “mi’yad u’l’doros, for now and for future generations.” A message for all time. To be both passionate and prompt about our adherence to mitzvos.

We are the children of Avrohom Avinu. We carry his spiritual DNA. The Torah tells us that Avrohom was a man of zerizus. When the three angels appeared to Avrohom in the guise of nomadic travelers, he ran to greet them. “V’yorotz likrosam, He ran towards them.” It was an extremely hot day. Avrohom was elderly and recuperating from his bris. Despite all this, Avrohom ran to do the mitzva of hachnossas orchim, welcoming guests. He felt the urgency to do the mitzva and was determined not to lose the opportunity.

We also find, that when Avrohom was readying himself to go with Yitzchak to the Akeidah, the Chumash tells us “Vayashkeim Avrohom baboker, And Avrohom rose early in the morning”. No hitting the snooze button, no turning over for some extra shut-eye, but jumping out of bed to get going to do the mitzva.

Avrohom infused himself with the midah, the trait of zerizus. A strong desire to follow HaShem’s words with alacrity.

Oftentimes, I am asked how did my mother a”h accomplish so much. Mother, grandmother, shul rebbetzin, teacher, world-wide speaker, author, columnist, shadchan, and mentor. Always available for family and klal.

My answer is always the same. Everything she did was with zerizus, coupled with enthusiasm. If there was something that needed to be done, it was done now. Procrastination was not part of her vocabulary.

I remember my mother raising us children with the message of “Kumu l’avodas haBoray, Get up to do the work of HaShem.” What a wonderful way to be awakened! Wake up to accomplish your tafkid, your life mission.

In the biography of my mother, The Rebbetzin, by Rabbi Nachman Seltzer, he relates a story from Jennifer Gross:

“My husband and I were honored at one of the Hineni dinners. Since we were the honorees that evening, many of my friends were in attendance, and I had gone on and on about the Rebbetzin’s incredible speaking abilities and how they were about to hear the speech of their lives.

I was somewhat taken aback, however, when the Rebbetzin rose and took her place at the podium. Because for whatever reason, her speech that night was about the rooster and its greatness! At that point in time, I was still not familiar with the blessing we say in morning prayers — “Asher nasan lasechvi vinah, Who gives understanding to the rooster” — and I couldn’t fathom why the Rebbetzin had chosen this topic as the theme of her speech.

“It is very important to be like a rooster,” she said, in her charismatic way, as my friends stared at her blankly, not comprehending why it was so important to be like a rooster, of all things.

The Rebbetzin went on.

“The rooster knows that he has to wake up every morning to crow like he’s supposed to. You will never see the rooster waking up and asking himself, ‘Am I too tired to crow right now?’ He’ll never say, ‘You know something, I’m just not in the mood to crow today!’

“The rooster does what the rooster is supposed to do, and that’s how a Jew is supposed to live his life!

“You don’t wake up and say, ‘I’m not in the mood to keep kosher’ — we keep kosher! We don’t wake up and question the Sabbath or all the other things we do that make us different from everybody else!”

Not being familiar with the blessing she was referring to, I was confused and found myself asking, “What’s with the rooster? I don’t understand why the Rebbetzin is making such a big deal about roosters!”

It was pretty ironic: I was being honored at the dinner, yet had no real idea of what the Rebbetzin was talking about!

But the speech was the speech.

When I finally learned the blessing of the rooster, I suddenly realized what an important message the Rebbetzin had delivered at the dinner — a message I had missed at the time, and only grasped later on — that Jews have to be the best roosters they can possibly be, every single day of their lives!

In my mind, the Rebbetzin’s speech at the dinner ended up ranking among the most important lessons I ever learned! We are Jews, and as Jews, we need to be the best roosters in the world! When I recite the morning blessings these days, I remember the Rebbetzin and how there are no excuses. Basically, I remember the lesson of the rooster and how it changed my life.”

I find that each time I turn to Tehillim, the words of Dovid HaMelech resonate with me. “Chashti v’lo his’ma’hemoti, I hurried, I did not delay.” (Tehillim 119:60) The message of zerizus, alacrity, is one that our sages have transmitted to us throughout the ages.

Pirkei Avos teaches “V’im lo achshav, eimasai, If not now, when.” Rabbi Moshe Lieber shares a story about Rav Dov Ber of Radoshitz. When traveling, he would awaken fellow lodgers by saying, “Wake up my brothers, a guest you have never seen has arrived. Once he leaves, you will never see him again.”

“Who is the guest”, they would ask. Rav Dov Ber answered, “Today.”

Tzav. A command to live one’s life with zerizus. To act quickly, and not squander the gift of time. And, like the rooster who never tarries, be ready to do Avodas HaShem and value today.

As the Nike slogan reminds us: JUST DO IT!

Shabbat Shalom!

Chaya Sora

Chaya Sora can be reached at [email protected]

This article was written L’zecher Nishmas/In Memory Of HaRav Meshulem ben HaRav Osher Anshil HaLevi, zt”l and Rebbetzin Esther bas HaRav Avraham HaLevi, zt”l

Parshat Tzav:  Memories and Dreams

0
The first was the mitzvah of terumas hadeshen, the ˜separation of the ashes’ from the fire that was burning on the mizbayach. Each day, the kohen began the avodah by taking a shovelful of the ashes and placing them on the floor of the chatzer (outer courtyard) near the mizbayach.

By: Rabbi Yaakov Horowitz

Parshas Tzav begins with a discussion of two mitzvos related to the removal of the ashes that accumulated on the mizbayach (altar).

The first was the mitzvah of terumas hadeshen, the ˜separation of the ashes’ from the fire that was burning on the mizbayach. Each day, the kohen began the avodah by taking a shovelful of the ashes and placing them on the floor of the chatzer (outer courtyard) near the mizbayach.

The second mitzvah related to the removal of the ashes was hotza’as hadeshen, the ˜removal of the ashes’. This was a more comprehensive removal of the ashes that accumulated on the mizbayach. Since this was a more involved effort, the kohen changed into older, used bigdei kehunah, and removed all of the excess ashes which were carried outside the camp of the b’nei Yisroel.

Rashi and the Rambam offer differing views regarding the performance of the removal of the ashes, the second avodah mentioned. Rashi notes that this avodah was not done on a daily basis, only when the ashes accumulated to the point that they cluttered the mizbayach and needed to be removed. The Rambam (Hilchos Temidin Umusafin 2:12) disagrees, and maintains that the ash-removal service was performed each day.

Upon reflection, several questions come to mind:

First of all, why would the removal of the ashes constitute one mitzvah, let alone two? The removal of the ashes would seem to be part of the necessary housekeeping of the mizbayach, not a sacred act. Surely much care was needed to maintain the cleanliness of the Mishkan with so many people and korbonos coming to the Mishkan on a daily basis. There is little mention if any of the other myriad tasks necessary to accomplish this. Why is the removal of the ashes given such significance as opposed to any of the other components of the maintenance of the Mishkan?

Secondly, why was the removal of the ashes divided into two distinct services, terumas hadeshen and hotzoa’as hadeshen? Why were the ashes simply not all taken out at once? (This question is more pronounced according to the interpretation of the Rambam who maintains that both mitzvos were performed on a daily basis.)

Rabbi Samson Rafael Hirsch zt”l offers a profound and moving illumination into these two mitzvos that addresses the questions raised above.

He explains that we must begin the avodah of each day with the knowledge and understanding that we are building upon the service of the previous day. As our chazal (sages) teach us, we are compared to midgets upon the shoulders of giants. Our actions and mindsets are predicated on our mesorah (tradition) as we look to the past for direction and guidance. We perform terumas hadeshen as a symbolic gesture to publicly declare that yesterday’s service is of utmost and everlasting holiness, as we set out to commence today’s avodah. I would like to add that this might explain the placement of the small pile of the terumas hadeshen ashes near the ramp leading up to the mizbayach – within the view of each kohen who would be mounting the ramp to serve Hashem.

After this public display of reverence for tradition, says Rav Hirsch z’tl, it was time to cleanse the Mizbayach of yesterday’s ashes. We must build on – and have respect for – the past, but we cannot spend most of our time and energy looking in the rear-view mirror. We cannot and should not rely on our previous accomplishments, or the deeds and yichus of our ancestors. Each day brings its new challenges, obligations and opportunities.

The kohein therefore removed all of the ashes that had accumulated and took them outside of the living area of the Jews where they could no longer be seen. This was not an act of housekeeping, but a sacred and public display of our eternal values.

“WHEN MEMORIES EXCEED DREAMS, THE END IS NEAR”

This was one of the favorite sayings of the dynamic President and leader of Agudath Israel for nearly fifty years, Rabbi Moshe Sherer z’tl. He personified this blend of memories and dreams. He had the utmost respect for tradition and humbly deferred to Gedolei Yisroel at every turn. However, day after day, he set aside his monumental past accomplishments and addressed the issues of the day with burning passion and boundless energy.

One week after the Siyum Hashas, in Elul 5757/September 1997, I faxed Rabbi Sherer a memo requesting a meeting with him to discuss the issue of at-risk teens. This topic was just coming to the public consciousness and there were few avenues to which parents and mechanchim could turn. I pleaded with him to harness the resources of Agudath Israel to address this pressing issue.

At that time, he was well past retirement age, and silently battling with the ravages of the illness that would take his life in the not-too-distant future. He must have been basking in the glow of the beautiful Siyum Hashas one week earlier, when he spoke to 70,000 Jews in 35 cities across the country on a video-hookup, the first time this technology had been used for k’vod shamayim on this scale. He would have been well within his rights to take a two-week vacation and disconnect his phone.

But his dreams – and the responsibilities of leadership – would not be put on hold. I am forever grateful for the time he took to meet with me that week, and for his involvement in the founding and growth of Project Y.E.S. over the following months – almost until the week of his petirah. (Please visit my website, www.rabbihorowitz.com, under “Published Articles,” for my tribute to Rabbi Sherer, “Basic Training,” published in the Jewish Observer in 1998).

Thank you Rabbi Sherer. I still miss your wisdom and guidance; your encouragement and support. May we, your talmidim, be worthy of standing on your shoulders – and continuing to dream.

(Torah.org)

Columbia University Task Force Grapples with Definition of Anti-Semitism Amid Campus Debate

0
Columbia University in the Morningside Heights section of Manhattan. Credit: Columbia.edu

Edited by: Fern Sidman

In the aftermath of the October 7th Hamas brutal massacre of 1200 Israelis and others, Columbia University in the Morningside Heights section of Manhattan has taken decisive action to address the issue of anti-Semitism on its campus. However, according to a recently published report in the New York Times, the university’s task force charged with combating this pervasive issue has encountered a major hurdle: the inability to settle on a clear definition of what anti-Semitism actually is.

The debate within the task force reflects broader tensions within the university community and beyond, where competing factions advocate for divergent definitions of anti-Semitism, as was reported in the NYT.  At the heart of the issue is the question of whether criticism of the state of Israel should be considered anti-Semitic. This debate pits two distinct viewpoints against each other.

The first definition, favored by the U.S. State Department and many supporters of Israel, broadens the scope of anti-Semitism to include the “targeting of the state of Israel.” This expansive definition could potentially label much of the pro-Palestinian activism sweeping Columbia’s campus as anti-Semitic, sparking controversy and division among students and faculty alike.

Shai Davidai, a Columbia professor and advocate for the broader definition, expressed his frustration, stating, “If you don’t diagnose the problem, you don’t have to deal with it. Saying we don’t want to define it so we don’t have a problem, that’s copping out.” Photo Credit: shaidavidai.com

Conversely, the NYT report indicated that the second definition takes a narrower approach, distinguishing between anti-Zionism and anti-Semitism. Advocates of this definition argue that conflating criticism of Israeli policies with anti-Semitism undermines legitimate discourse and could lead to accusations of the university not taking anti-Semitism seriously enough.

The task force’s refusal to settle on a specific definition has drawn sharp criticism from both sides of the debate. According to the information provided in the NYT report, Shai Davidai, a Columbia professor and advocate for the broader definition, expressed his frustration, stating, “If you don’t diagnose the problem, you don’t have to deal with it. Saying we don’t want to define it so we don’t have a problem, that’s copping out.”

On the other hand, the report in the NYT noted that pro-Palestinian and anti-Zionist faculty and students, many of whom are Jewish themselves, fear that without a clear definition, the task force’s efforts to combat anti-Semitism could inadvertently stifle free speech and activism on campus.

The pressure on universities to address anti-Semitism has intensified in recent months, with Columbia’s president, Nemat Shafik, and the co-chairs of its board of directors called to testify at a congressional hearing on April 17. Credit: news.columbia.edu

Columbia University’s dilemma underscores the broader challenge faced by universities across the country as they grapple with protecting free speech while also addressing instances of discrimination and harassment, particularly against Jewish students. The task force’s mandate to understand how anti-Semitism manifests on campus and improve the climate for Jewish faculty and students is further complicated by the contentious nature of the debate over definitions.

The pressure on universities to address anti-Semitism has intensified in recent months, with Columbia’s president, Nemat Shafik, and the co-chairs of its board of directors called to testify at a congressional hearing on April 17, as was mentioned in the NYT report.  This congressional scrutiny follows a contentious hearing in December, where presidents of other prestigious universities struggled to address questions regarding school policies on anti-Semitism, particularly in the context of calls for genocide against Jews.

Columbia’s legal woes further complicate its response to anti-Semitism allegations. The university is currently embroiled in a federal civil rights lawsuit filed by over a dozen Jewish students. According to the NYT report, the lawsuit paints a grim picture of Columbia as an institution where “mobs of pro-Hamas students and faculty march by the hundreds shouting vile anti-Semitic slogans, including calls to genocide.”

However, the characterization of certain slogans and chants as anti-Semitic remains a point of contention. The information in the NYT report explained that pro-Palestinian demonstrators have argued that slogans such as “By any means necessary” and “There is only one solution, intifada, revolution” do not constitute calls to genocide but are merely expressions of political activism.

Led by co-chair Nicholas Lemann, a former dean of the journalism school, the task force is confronted with the daunting task of listening to the grievances of students and faculty while navigating the complex terrain of defining and addressing anti-Semitism. Credit: journalism.columbia.edu

In response to mounting pressure and legal challenges, Columbia formed a task force to address anti-Semitism on campus. The university appointed three Jewish professors as co-chairs of the task force, citing their experience and understanding of Columbia’s workings, as per the NYT report. While these professors may not be experts in anti-Semitism research, they bring a nuanced understanding of the university’s dynamics to the table.

The co-chairs of the task force emphasize that their goal is not to define anti-Semitism but rather to address the concerns of Jewish students and faculty and seek practical solutions to improve their sense of security and well-being on campus, the NYT reported. They argue that labeling incidents as anti-Semitic or not is not within the purview of the task force, which instead focuses on fostering a supportive environment for the Jewish community.

Led by co-chair Nicholas Lemann, a former dean of the journalism school, the task force is confronted with the daunting task of listening to the grievances of students and faculty while navigating the complex terrain of defining and addressing anti-Semitism.

Lemann, in an interview with the NYT highlighted the urgency of the situation, stating, “I get letters from parents every single day, just regular people, students… ‘Why aren’t you listening? Why aren’t you doing anything?’” He emphasized that the task force’s primary objective is not to define anti-Semitism but rather to lend a sympathetic ear to the concerns of the Columbia community and explore avenues to alleviate the discomfort and distress experienced by Jewish students and faculty.

The debate over the definition of anti-Semitism adds another layer of complexity to the task force’s mandate. According to the NYT report, pro-Israel Jewish advocacy groups have long advocated for the adoption of the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) definition, which encompasses anti-Zionist speech within its scope. Endorsed by over 40 countries, including Israel, since 2016, the IHRA definition frames anti-Semitism as a perception of Jews that may manifest as hatred, but its examples regarding Israel have sparked controversy, the report added.

Pro-Hamas demonstrators gather for a protest at Columbia University, Thursday, Oct. 12, 2023, in New York. Photo Credit: AP Photo/Yuki Iwamura

Critics argue that the IHRA definition’s examples, particularly regarding the denial of Israel’s right to self-determination, could stifle legitimate political criticism of the Israeli government’s policies. As indicated in the NYT report, left-wing Jewish groups, on the other hand, advocate for alternative definitions, such as the Jerusalem Declaration, which adopt a more lenient stance on criticism of Israel, including support for boycotts and sanctions against the Jewish state.

Similar tensions have been observed at other prestigious institutions such as Harvard and Stanford, where task force members have faced criticism for not endorsing a more expansive definition of anti-Semitism. The report in the NYT said that at Stanford, this tension led to the resignation of a task force co-chair, highlighting the challenges universities face in navigating this sensitive issue.

At Columbia, the task force co-chairs are wary of falling into a similar predicament. However, the reluctance to define anti-Semitism poses significant challenges. Speaking to the NYT, Dov Waxman, an expert on anti-Semitism at UCLA, emphasized the importance of understanding the issue to effectively combat it, stating, “If you want to understand any issue and any problem, you need to have an understanding of what it is.”

Waxman suggested that the Columbia task force consider referencing multiple definitions, a strategy adopted by the Biden administration in its anti-Semitism strategy, as was explained in the NYT report. While the task force has not ruled out this approach, Lemann acknowledged the complexity of the issue.

Tensions have escalated during task force listening sessions on campus, with some sessions turning confrontational. During a session with graduate students, several anti-Zionist Jews questioned the definition of anti-Semitism and voiced concerns about their views being included in it. The report in the NYT said that this led to a heated exchange, with accusations of hostility leveled against task force co-chair Ester Fuchs.

Fuchs defended the purpose of the listening sessions amidst criticism from students, stating, “attempted to disrupt the session and ignore its purpose — to listen to students’ concerns and experiences with anti-Semitism on campus.”

In response to the incident, four students penned a letter to Columbia administrators calling for Fuchs’s replacement on the task force by an anti-Zionist representative. Noted in the NYT were the comments of Caitlin Liss, a Jewish graduate student who signed the letter. She emphasized the diversity of Jewish perspectives on Zionism and expressed frustration with the administration’s handling of the issue.

However, the task force’s efforts have not been without challenges. The NYT report said that Joseph Howley, a Jewish classics professor and supporter of Columbia’s pro-Palestinian movement, expressed skepticism about the effectiveness of the listening sessions, stating, “I have no reason to believe I’ll be taken seriously.” Despite invitations extended to faculty members, only a few critics of Israel attended the sessions, reflecting the deep divisions within the university community on the issue.

Dov Waxman, an expert on anti-Semitism at UCLA, emphasized the importance of understanding the issue to effectively combat it, stating, “If you want to understand any issue and any problem, you need to have an understanding of what it is.” Credit: C-SPAN.org

In one session, tensions flared when Amy Werman, a professor at the School of Social Work who supports Israel, questioned the task force’s efficacy, suggesting it might be mere “window dressing” to appease Congress. According to the NYT report, Professor Fuchs’s response to Werman’s inquiry was met with discomfort, with Werman recalling, “I felt like she was attacking me.” However, Fuchs disputed this characterization, affirming the task force’s commitment to its mandate.

Despite the contentious atmosphere, some Jewish students have found the listening sessions to be valuable platforms for expressing their concerns. Rebecca Massel, a sophomore covering anti-Semitism for The Columbia Spectator, noted that the sessions provided an outlet for students to voice their grievances and engage in constructive dialogue on the issue, the NYT report observed.

Looking ahead, the task force is taking steps to further its research and recommendations on anti-Semitism at Columbia. By hiring a research director to develop a comprehensive study on anti-Semitism and recommend training materials for the university, the task force aims to enhance its understanding of the issue and implement effective strategies to address it.

Columbia University’s task force on anti-Semitism has released its inaugural report in the form of a 24-page document that emphasizes the need for additional limits on protests and better enforcement of existing rules to tackle the virulent Jew hatred on campus.

Professor Fuchs highlighted the impact of protests on campus life, stating, “Protests are the most overtly disruptive to life on campus and make people feel like they’re unsafe, like they’re unwelcome and they should find another place to go to school,” according to the NYT report.

Addressing the issue of anti-Israel protest chants, such as “Death to the Zionist State,” the report refrained from making definitive conclusions, leaving the question of whether such chants constitute discriminatory harassment to legal experts, as was highlighted in the information contained in the NYT report. However, the task force urged the university to provide more guidance on the meaning of “discriminatory harassment,” including anti-Semitic harassment, to better address the concerns of Jewish and Israeli students.

Also speaking to the NYT was David M. Schizer, another co-chair of the task force and former dean of Columbia’s law school. He explained the rationale behind the decision not to define anti-Semitism within the context of discriminatory harassment. He emphasized the importance of maintaining a general policy definition to ensure compliance with federal law and prevent differential treatment of protected classes, the NYT report added.

United Airlines Beset with String of Safety Incidents: What Travelers Need to Know

0
Among the recent incidents reported, an engine fire sparked by plastic packaging wrap, a lost tire shortly after takeoff, and a plane veering off the runway have grabbed headlines, underscoring the challenges faced by the airline in ensuring the safety of its operations. Credit: nbcnews.com

Edited by: TJVNews.com

In recent weeks, United Airlines has found itself grappling with a series of safety incidents, sparking concerns among federal officials and passengers alike, as was recently reported in The New York Times. From engine fires to runway mishaps, these incidents have raised questions about aviation safety and put the spotlight on both United Airlines and aircraft manufacturers like Boeing.

Among the recent incidents reported, an engine fire sparked by plastic packaging wrap, a lost tire shortly after takeoff, and a plane veering off the runway have grabbed headlines, underscoring the challenges faced by the airline in ensuring the safety of its operations, according to the information provided in the NYT report. While no injuries have been reported in any of these incidents, the occurrences have nevertheless heightened anxiety among passengers and regulators.

“All of the incidents happened on flights that took off from or were headed to airports in the United States, and five involved airplanes made by Boeing, a manufacturer already under intense scrutiny,” revealed a spokesperson for United Airlines, the report in the NYT said. This concentration of incidents involving Boeing aircraft further amplifies concerns about the safety and reliability of these planes.

As United Airlines navigates this challenging period, passengers are left wondering about the implications for their travel plans and overall safety. Here’s what travelers need to know about the latest developments in aviation safety:

The aircraft manufacturer Boeing has been under scrutiny as of late of their models 737-900, 777 & 737 Max 8, among others have been involved in accidents due to plane malfunctions. Photo Credit: AP

Heightened Vigilance: Passengers can expect heightened vigilance and scrutiny of safety procedures and protocols in response to recent incidents. United Airlines, along with federal regulators, is likely to implement additional measures to ensure the safety and well-being of passengers.

Ongoing Reviews: The airline is conducting comprehensive reviews of each incident, examining factors contributing to the mishaps and identifying areas for improvement. These reviews will inform future safety protocols and training initiatives.

Manufacturer Accountability: With several incidents involving Boeing aircraft, scrutiny is likely to intensify on the manufacturer’s quality control and safety standards. Boeing, already under scrutiny for past incidents, faces increased pressure to address any underlying issues.

Passenger Assurance: United Airlines is committed to maintaining open communication with passengers, providing updates on safety measures and addressing concerns promptly. Passengers are encouraged to stay informed and reach out to the airline with any questions or inquiries.

Most of the aforementioned incidents have necessitated emergency landings or diversions, underscoring the seriousness of the situations faced by the airline and its passengers, the NYT report said.

On March 4, a Boeing 737-900 departing from George Bush Intercontinental Airport in Houston was forced to return to the airport for an emergency landing after one of its engines ingested and burned plastic wrap, causing a potentially dangerous situation mid-flight.

As was indicated in the NYT report, three days later, on March 7, a Boeing 777 departing from San Francisco for Osaka, Japan, was compelled to make an emergency landing at Los Angeles International Airport after the aircraft lost a tire shortly after takeoff, highlighting the critical nature of the issue that prompted the diversion.

The following day, on March 8, a Boeing 737 Max 8 experienced a frightening incident as it veered off the runway upon landing at George Bush Airport in Houston, ultimately tilting onto the grass, raising questions about the factors contributing to the mishap, the report in the NYT noted.

Robert Sumwalt, former chairman of the National Transportation Safety Board and current head of an aviation safety center at Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University, offered insight into the situation. “Some of these issues are things that happen occasionally but often don’t get reported in the media,” he explained. Credit: Linkedin

Simultaneously, another United Airlines flight departing from San Francisco for Mexico City, operated by an Airbus A320, encountered issues with its hydraulic system, compelling the aircraft to be diverted to Los Angeles for further assessment and ensuring passenger safety.

The incidents continued to unfold on March 9, according to the NYT report, when an Airbus A320 en route to Salt Lake City was forced to return to Chicago O’Hare International Airport due to reported maintenance issues, highlighting the importance of proactive measures in addressing potential safety concerns mid-flight.

The report in the NYT also added that just two days later, on March 11, a Boeing 777 flying from Sydney, Australia, to San Francisco was compelled to turn back shortly after takeoff due to a hydraulic leak, emphasizing the critical role of regular maintenance checks in preventing potentially catastrophic incidents.

The string of incidents culminated on March 14, when an Airbus A320 departing from Dallas Fort Worth International Airport experienced a hydraulic leak shortly before landing at its scheduled destination in San Francisco, the NYT report pointed out.

In a separate incident on the same day, a Boeing 737-800 departing from San Francisco landed at Rogue Valley International Medford Airport in Oregon missing an external panel, highlighting potential issues with aircraft integrity and maintenance oversight.

While United Airlines finds itself under scrutiny that have prompted questions about the airline’s safety protocols and overall reliability, experts caution against overreaction, emphasizing that the recent mishaps are not indicative of systemic problems within the airline industry.

Robert Sumwalt, former chairman of the National Transportation Safety Board and current head of an aviation safety center at Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University, offered insight into the situation. “Some of these issues are things that happen occasionally but often don’t get reported in the media,” he explained to the NYT. He also stressed that while these incidents are concerning, they are not necessarily uncommon in the aviation industry.

Kyra Dempsey, who specializes in aviation accidents and writes for the blog Admiral Cloudberg, echoes Sumwalt’s sentiment. Speaking to the NYT, she asserted that United’s recent issues should not be erroneously linked to broader challenges faced by aircraft manufacturers such as Boeing. “While it’s bad luck that United had so many incidents in such a short period, in general, such incidents happen frequently around the world, and they aren’t on the rise overall,” Dempsey affirmed to the NYT.

In response to the spate of incidents, United Airlines’ Chief Executive, Scott Kirby, took steps to reassure customers, acknowledging the seriousness of the situation and emphasizing the airline’s commitment to safety. “These incidents have our attention and have sharpened our focus,” Kirby stated in an email sent to customers on Monday, the NYT reported. He assured passengers that each incident was under thorough review by the airline, with findings influencing safety training and procedures moving forward.

In the message, Kirby outlined several measures aimed at enhancing safety protocols within the airline. Notably, starting in May, United pilots will undergo an additional day of in-person training, a change that was already in the pipeline prior to the recent incidents, as per the information in the NYT report.  Additionally, the airline will implement a centralized training curriculum for new maintenance technicians and allocate additional resources to bolster the carrier’s supply chain.

As concerns mount over recent safety incidents in the aviation industry, government agencies tasked with oversight and investigation are stepping up to address the issues at hand, as was indicated in the NYT report. The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) and the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) play critical roles in ensuring the safety and integrity of the nation’s aviation system, with each agency handling specific aspects of safety regulation and investigation.

“The FAA regulates the country’s aviation system and investigates safety incidents on U.S. airlines,” explained Sumwalt when he spoke with the NYT.  “Meanwhile, the NTSB investigates the causes of accidents, collisions, and crashes involving planes flown by U.S. carriers, among other incidents involving commercial and mass transit operators.”

Sumwalt also highlighted the discretionary nature of investigations conducted by both agencies, indicating that not all incidents necessarily warrant formal inquiries. “Both agencies have discretion on what they investigate,” he added, according to the NYT report, as he underscored the need for prioritization and strategic allocation of resources.

Currently, the NTSB is actively investigating the incident that occurred on March 8 in Houston, where a plane veered off the runway during landing. Additionally, the NYT report said that the agency is looking into a February 10 flight from Los Angeles to Newark, operated by United Airlines, which experienced severe turbulence resulting in injuries among passengers.

According to safety experts, some issues may not reach the threshold for formal investigation by either agency. Also speaking to the NYT was Michael McCormick, an assistant professor at Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University and former FAA control tower operator, who shed light on this aspect. “Partial loss of some of an airplane’s multiple hydraulics systems is common,” McCormick noted. “The FAA may or may not get involved for this kind of issue unless there’s a pattern.”