Chutzpah Online

Arthur Goldreich 1929 – 2011 An appreciation by Denis Goldberg

2011-07-03T13:27:00.000-07:00

I have read many obituaries on the internet about Arthur Goldreich. Some of what follows is well known, but I have added details that others have not talked about, mostly from personal contact with him.

When I met Arthur in May 1963 he appeared to be a well off, handsome, strongly built 40 year old with a certain self confident swagger. He liked to wear jodhpurs and riding boots with a well fitting tweed jacket and open weave riding gloves with leather palms and fingers, all colour coordinated in shades of brown and tan. He drove what was then a seemingly exotic Citroen DS19 car with an avant garde shape. He was a designer for one of the large department chain stores. He was also a prize winning artist and dressed the part. He had designed and constructed the sets of the hit South African musical King Kong. That was in itself an indicator of his character for it was a theatre piece with story, music and lyrics written by black South Africans about black South Africans at a time of ever deepening apartheid repression. His social contacts were with musicians, artists and performers. He was consciously opposed to the apartheid policies of the time.
In part, I believe his opposition was shaped by growing up in Pietersburg (Now Polokwane) in the then Northern Transvaal (now Limpopo Province) near to an asbestos mine and his family being of Jewish origin faced open anti-Semitism from the predominantly Afrikaner mining and farming community. Experience of discrimination can make one oppose the dominant forms of discrimination even though the majority of whites simply went along with apartheid racism and benefited from it.
Arthur told me he had been a soldier in the Palmach and fought against Arabs and Palestinians for the independence of the State of Israel, newly formed by UN resolution as a way to compensate European Jews for the decimation of the holocaust. He learnt soldiering during that time but like so many Jews of left wing political persuasion came to oppose the militaristic oppression of the Arab and Palestinian people by the Zionist state. All of this helped to shape his active opposition to apartheid.

In later life, while living in Israel he became a vocal founder member of the anti apartheid movement opposed to Israel’s pro-apartheid South Africa policy. He also became vocal in his opposition to the Israeli repression of the Palestinian people. He insisted that architecture, the design and building of illegal fortress-like Jewish settlements on Palestinian land was itself not abstract design, but fundamentally political. He railed against this trying to get his students at the Bezalel Design Institute to understand their role in the oppression.
My personal connection to Arthur started in May 1963 when Joe Slovo, Central Committee Member of the South African Communist Party as I then (correctly) assumed, and a co-founder with Nelson Mandela of Umkhonto we Sizwe introduced me to Arthur who lived with his wife Hazel and two sons Nicholas and Paul on a large small holding called Liliesleaf Farm on the outskirts of Johannesburg in the semirural area of Rivonia. The house and 25 Acres (12 hectares) of grounds were for their time palatial, or at least like a country manor. Though the outbuildings were somewhat dilapidated, the lawns around the manor house were beautifully manicured. The rooms were large with hardwood parquet floors and the Goldreich family maintained the façade beautifully. They appeared to be part of the huntin’, ridin’, and shootin’ set. Clearly nothing untoward appeared to be happening there. Behind the façade however, everything was not as it seemed to be. The property was in fact owned by the SACP through a front company and was used as the underground headquarters of the SACP. One of the outbuildings had been the home of one ‘David Matsumayi’ in reality Nelson Rolihlahla Mandela, who posed as a farm worker and ‘house boy.’ The whole family was at risk for sheltering the Black Pimpernel as he was known in the media at that time. To the Security Police he was the ‘most wanted person’, and like Alexander Dumas’ Scarlet Pimpernel’ it was said: “they seek him here, they seek him there, they seek him everywhere.”

When I realised that Liliesleaf was also the underground headquarters of the African National Congress and UmKhonto we Sizwe, the Spear of the Nation, the growing armed wing of the liberation movement, I admired the courage and commitment of Arthur and Hazel even more for they were sitting on a barrel of dynamite that could destroy their lives and those of their children if the security police should discover where we were hiding out - Ahmed Kathrada, Walter Sisulu, Govan Mbeki, Raymond Mhlaba, Wilton Mquayi, and me too. But in addition Bram Fischer, the famous advocate, Joe Slovo also an advocate, Bob Hepple an academic lawyer, Rusty Bernstein and others would arrive there for meetings of their various organisational committees.
Arthur was the convenor of our Logistics Committee of the High Command and he passed to me the designs for home made military weapons such as hand grenades and landmines he had brought back from China where he had been sent by the MK leadership.
Arthur designed and executed my disguise which turned me into a rather rabbinical looking character with small wire rimmed glasses and a full beard. He disguised Ahmed Kathrada rather well using his swarthy skin and hair bleached to make him look quite different on casual inspection. Arthur revelled in the clandestine activity. Indeed we all did, feeling we were on the verge of momentous events when we would overthrow the apartheid state.

Our security was seriously compromised by the number of openly politically active comrades who visited Liliesleaf Farm. I was instructed to buy a new small holding at Travallyn Agricultural Holdings in Krugersdorp and we moved there leaving Arthur and his family and Ahmed Kathrada behind. Because a new alternative secure venue had not yet been found, one last meeting of the MK High Command was to take place on 11 July 1963 in the afternoon. The meeting started and then the Security Police raided the farm arresting all of us, including Arthur and Hazel when they returned home from work. Under 90 days detention the police interrogators sought to turn Hazel against Arthur and the movement by showing her love letters to him from a lover. He had kept them in his desk at work. She resisted the police. Arthur and Harold Wolpe were detained in police cells where Mosie Moolla and Abdulhay (Charlie) Jassat were also detained. They successfully bribed a young policeman to allow the four of them to escape. As it happens, Hazel was also detained there and so was my wife.
My story is of Arthur, and he and Harold having left the prison in the evening and found that their getaway car was not awaiting them. They walked towards Hillbrow in the dark and by chance the famous theatre director Barney Simon happened to stop at a traffic light near them. Arthur persuaded him to drive them to safety. He took them to his own flat and at their suggestion went off to Denis and Hillary Kuny, waking them up at two in the morning to ask for help. Denis asked their neighbour Ivan Schermbrucker, a leading communist activist, to ask for help to hide them. In the meantime Hillary made a packet of sandwiches for Barney to take back home for the escapees instructing Barney to make coffee for them. Hillary told me that Ivan took over and Arthur and Barney were taken into hiding. They spent a short time in the garden cottage of Leon and Maureen Kreel in Mountain View where they were disguised as priests in long cassocks and driven to Swaziland where they crossed the border on foot. I believe they were given asylum by the Rev Hooper until a chartered flight took them to Botswana where, for their safety, the British colonial authorities locked them up in a prison. Charlie Jassat and Mosie Moolla also successfully escaped but because of the nature of our media with its biases, their key role in the escape has always been neglected.
In Botswana, a plane sent from Tanzania by President Nyerere to fetch them was blown up on the runway by South African agents. The threat to Arthur and Harold was very real. A second plane was chartered and they were flown to Dar es Salaam with other South African political refugees.

Arthur and Hazel were divorced and Arthur moved to Israel where he became a Professor of Design and Architecture. I referred earlier to Arthur’s stand against the Israeli oppression and domination of the Middle East in alliance mainly with the USA but the Western powers in general. At the time of the Israeli invasion of Lebanon in 1982 in which the notorious massacres took place in the Sabra and Shatilla refugee camps, Arthur led a mutiny by several reserve officers of the Israeli Defence Force who refused to participate in the invasion. They could have been tried by a military court but in the authorities did not prosecute them. The additional publicity would have done the military even more harm. Arthur was consistent in his opposition to racism and oppression whether in South Africa or Israel or elsewhere.
My personal contact with Arthur was renewed when I was released from prison in 1985 and went to Israel to visit my daughter who lived on a kibbutz at that time. On arriving in Israel I was driven away from the airport and found myself at Arthur’s home in Herzliya, near Tel aviv. On arrival he remarked with pride that the last house I had been in when we were arrested was his home, and the first house I was entering after my release was also his home. I responded with a question: Is it safe this time?

I had sporadic contact with Arthur thereafter. One notable event was in Helsinki at a meeting of anti apartheid movements organised by the Cairo based Afro Asian Peoples Solidarity Organisation. Arthur represented the Israeli AAM and I spoke for the ANC and also as an independent expert. He made a brilliant speech and most delegates said that he and I made the politics of oppression easy to understand and set out logical steps to destroy it. Of course, we had the solid policies of our liberation movement to rely upon and our own years of experience.
Other contacts followed through the mutual support we gave to the antiapartheid movements. My last real contact with Arthur was at Liliesleaf Farm in December 2001, when then President Mbeki launched the Liliesleaf Trust which was given the task of turning the farm into a museum to the determination of committed freedom fighters to achieve the end of apartheid and the building of a democratic, non racist, non-sexist state. The Trust and its Liliesleaf Museum has a distinguished board to back up the dedicated and highly successful work of Nicholas Wolpe, the son of the late Harold Wolpe, Arthur’s comrade in politics and in arms.

I enjoyed knowing Arthur, a larger than life character who was a marvellous raconteur. Sometimes one wondered if there was a touch of poetic licence in his telling of essentially true stories of the life and times of a political activist. His passing leaves an emptiness in our lives.
My deepest sympathies go to his sons, Nichols, Paul, Amos and Eden, and to Hazel who played such an important part in his life and our struggle for freedom in South Africa.

Check out our website

2011-05-10T06:14:00.000-07:00

http://saujs.co.za/index.php?option=com_content&view=category&layout=blog&id=3&Itemid=3&limitstart=12

Israeli-Arab Actor Juliano Mer-Khamis Shot Dead in Jenin

2011-04-14T15:44:00.001-07:00

Israeli-Arab Actor Juliano Mer-Khamis Shot Dead in Jenin

Israeli-Arab Peace activist, actor, director and filmmaker Juliano Mer-Khamis, was assassinated this week in Jenin by masked militants. Mer-Khamis was born in Nazareth to a Jewish mother and Christian-Palestinian father. After serving in the Israeli army, Mer-Khamis decided to devote his life to peace between the Israelis and Palestinians. In a later stage in his life he moved to Jenin, where he established the Freedom Theatre, a theatre intended to provide the children of Jenin with entertainment and recreational activity. Juliano Mer-Khamis was well known in the region and received many international awards for his work. Mer-Khamis and his assistant were targeted in a drive – by shooting after leaving his theatre in Jenin,. President Abbas condemned the “hideous attack” saying that “this hateful crime cannot be overlooked and constitutes a dangerous violation of all our rules and human principles and it contradicts all our customs and morals of coexistence.” Different reports state that either a Hamas member, or an al-Aqsa Brigades militant called Qunayri, are suspects and have been held in custody since the event. Juliano has been threatened in the past by Hamas militants who object to his work. Thousands of Palestinians and Israelis participated in his funeral march. Friends of Juliano declared that the perpetrator was participating in an internecine feud, and the murderers were “insiders” who are here to harm their fellow Palestinians.

Goldstone’s retraction

2011-04-14T15:10:00.001-07:00

Goldstone’s retraction should be a watershed for the world and Israel

By Ronald S. Lauder

Better late than never, but not much better. How else can one respond to the belated retraction by Judge Richard Goldstone of the key allegations in the outrageous report he authored into Israel’s Operation Cast Lead against Hamas terrorists in Gaza in December 2008 and January 2009? Blatantly dishonest and biased, what became known as the Goldstone Report served as the most vicious instrument of defamation and de-legitimization against the Jewish state for decades. It gave heart to terrorists; it gave hope to anti-Semites; and it gave every twisted calumny against the State of Israel a new lease of life.

So now we find that even its author can no longer stomach it. Writing in the Washington Post last week, we learn that he now knows that its central allegation was a lie: “…civilians were not intentionally targeted as a matter of policy,” he says. Referring to evidence provided by Israel, he adds: “I regret that our fact-finding mission did not have such evidence explaining the circumstances in which we said civilians in Gaza were targeted, because it probably would have influenced our findings about intentionality and war crimes”.

Well, this is better late than never. But a mere statement of regret is surely not enough. Let us recall that the Goldstone Report has served as a pretext for “war crimes” charges leveled against Israeli officials across the world. The least Goldstone can now do is issue a public statement calling on his report to be withdrawn from the United Nations, through whose institutions it is still making its passage. He should do it at the UN itself, and he should encourage the head of the UN Human Rights Council – where the report originated – to do likewise.

But there are even bigger issues to consider, and they go far wider than the pangs of conscience of a partially repentant judge. After all, Goldstone’s retraction tells us nothing that decent, honest and objective observers didn’t know already. That “civilians were not intentionally targeted as a matter of policy”? But Israel never targets civilians as a matter of policy. It is not that kind of country. It is a humane, liberal-democracy. It is governed by the rule of law. It is a normal western country whose people, and soldiers, abide by normal western values.

So, why were so many governments around the world so willing to jump on board the anti-Israeli bandwagon that the Goldstone Report represented? Why did so many countries in Europe, countries that call themselves allies of Israel and friends of the Jewish people, give it credence at the United Nations, many in the last ballot at the General Assembly voting in favor of its continued passage?

Why were so many of Israel’s nominal friends so willing to believe the worst about her? Why were transparently obvious lies and libels not instantly dismissed with the contempt that they so richly deserved? Why was Israel put on the same footing, perhaps even a lower footing, as Hamas, an organization committed to the obliteration of the Jewish state, an organization for which the notorious anti-Semitic forgery, the Protocols of Zion, functions as the inspiration for its founding charter?

Surely, it is not just Goldstone who should be apologizing, but every government and international body that gave his report the time of day.

In short, if anything good at all can come out of this affair, despite all the damage that has been done, despite all the pain and humiliation that has been suffered, then let it be this. Let this be a watershed moment in the way the world deals with the Jewish state. Let Israel now be treated by a common standard, and not by a double standard. Let it be a moment of true catharsis. Let it be a new beginning where truth, honor and decency reassert themselves and where reflexive hostility to the State of Israel is finally put to rest.

The Jewish people do not ask for much from the world, but we do ask for this: Treat us as you would like to be treated yourselves. Is that really too much to ask?

Ronald S. Lauder is President of the World Jewish Congress

Pesach another meaningless Jewish ritual or a time to reignite our sense of social conscience

2011-04-11T09:03:00.000-07:00

I love Pesach it’s my favourite Festival, I enjoy everything about it I think it just oozes

coolness. I mean you get to spend time with friends and family in an intimate setting around

the Seder table, I know in my house we often invite people we don’t see to often so its really

a special time. Look I think the whole preparation for the festival isn’t always that great i.e.

all the cleaning out and change over stuff but it all adds to the sanctity of the festival I guess.

Rabbi’s have an absolute field day at this time of the year. Pesach is filled with symbolisms.

Take for instance the dry and unleavened bread we eat i.e. matzah. I’m sure we all know the

teaching which says that Chometz (normal risen bread and bread based products) is a symbol

of arrogance because it’s risen and filled out like the Yetzer Harah (Or Evil Inclination)

which is bloated through its arrogance of joy when people do wrong. On the other hand

Matzah is lowly bread which symbolizes piety and simpleness. This lowly bread symbolizes

the Jewish people when they left Egypt according to our Sages, and is called a bread of our

affliction. The broader understanding of this period is a time of national introspection and

remembrance. We go into depth about our suffering and the miraculous redemption from

bondage in Egypt. However as Jews we do not just kvetch about our suffering and pain, we

also give praise for our redemption and also look forward to a final future redemption.

This being said I think that a fundamental part of this festival and especially the Seder part

have become drowned in petty worrying about measurements and sizes of this thing or that.

Many Haggadah’s have pages on the fluid ounce requirements for the cups of wines, the

amount of inches of matzah and maror that one requires. I am in no way saying these should

be ignored or dismissed but I feel that the emphasis is being misplaced with ritual over

meaning.

The Seder has the potential to be the most spiritually and emotionally up lifting experience

not only for the little kids who get to sing the Manishitana section of the Seder but for the

adults as well. I know in certain sects they dress up and put on plays to live up the Seder

experience. This is fantastic but again it’s all symbolic for me the essence of Pesach is the

concept of justice and dignity. The Hebrew people’s who originally fled to Egypt due to

the drought in Canaan and the difficult living conditions, were refugees seeking a better life

for themselves and their families. They were in later generations oppressed and turned into

slaves. Their dignity was undermined in many ways as the Haggadah says.

The essential message which I think we should gain from Pesach – besides the pounds from

some of those measurements especially those of the Chazon Ish – is the central importance

of human dignity and the fact that the Jewish people should be ultra-sensitive to the plight of

others especially those who have become refugees due to circumstances in their own country.

South African Jews have an obligation to highlight the suffering of the oppressed people of

Zimbabwe, Swaziland, the Democratic Republic of the Congo, and the like who have fled

despotic tyrannical regimes in some cases and others who have just fled to find a better life

for themselves and their families.

It is no co-incidence that soon after Pesach we will be Commemorating Yom HaShoah –

Holocaust Memorial Day – we see that in the not too distant past the Jewish people suffered

the most egregious systematic mass murdering in recorded history. We rightly ask where

the world was. We are rightly given no definitive answer. We however need to ask where

our voices today when thousands of African Refugees are fleeing Darfur, Zimbabwe, Libya,

Ivory Coast , Libya, and so on. It is not our task alone to raise these issues but I feel that

South African Jews should be highlighting the plight of fellow Africans in any way we can.

I feel that Moroccan Jews although small should be highlighting the plight of the people of

the Occupied Western Sahara which is illegally and brutally Occupied by the Moroccans

for more than 30 years, Jews in Europe should be arguing strenuously for the rights of

refugees that have fled to Europe especially those fleeing the crisis now that has engulfed

large swathes of North Africa. We the children of the freed slaves of ancient Egypt and the

children of those survived years of discrimination, anti-Semitism, pogroms and the Holocaust

of Nazi Europe should be aware and vocal on ensuring the rights and dignities of others.

This for me is the real message which we should take out of Pesach and one which too often

is overlooked or totally misunderstood by us and more so by many of our Rabbi’s!

I wish you all Chag Kasher VeSameich and meaningful Sedorim.

By Ilan Solomons

SAUJS National African Affairs Liaison Officer

1 million Israelis are asking why?

2011-02-24T07:43:00.000-08:00

Last night, Wednesday the 23rd of March, was the first time since Operation Cast Lead that an Iranian Grad missile exploded in Be'er Sheba, 40km from Gaza.

Arriving at the scene of the rocket strike Thursday morning, in the Northern neighborhoods of Be'er Sheba, brought me back to the terror scenes in Sderot of the past few years. For several years, rocket attacks were part of my daily routine living and working at the Sderot Media Center. When the Tzeva Adom sounded, I would go to the neighborhoods where the rocket exploded and film the scene. The next day, I would return, documenting the 'the day after, listening to the stories of residents on what occurred to them the day before.

Video: Noam Bedein, Sderot Media Center

In Be'er Sheba, I saw the same scenes I'd witnessed in Sderot: shattered car windshields; the shrapnel holes making "windows" on the homes; the radius of damage from where the missile exploded; the 'cover up' of the missile hole; like nothing happened and expecting the people to go back to normal; the holes in the iron doors; the Shabbat candles standing among shattered glasses; pictures of Rabbis hanging untouched on what remained of the walls; frightened and excited residents of the damaged or destroyed homes who just want to share their personal experience with the world; hearing story, counting the amount of times I heard the words; Luck, coincidence, and miracles.

Be'er Sheba resident Chen Saban, a Sapir College student in her early twenties whose house was hit, described how she and her family were lucky enough to reach the secured room on time, saying she never expected her home to be hit. She said it was ironic because she goes to Sapir College, which is only a few km away from Gaza. Chen, who is supposed to get married in the next 3 weeks, is no longer certain about her future in Be'er Sheba and how she ill be able to plan her life living there.

It was amazing to hear all this because it took me 45 minutes to drive from Sderot to Be'er Sheba, which is 40km from Gaza, with residents having 60 seconds to run for the shelter once the siren goes off. And still the same reaction and comments of the frightened and traumatized people.

Today, the more than 1 million Israelis who live in the range of 40km from Gaza are not feeling as secure as they did yesterday, asking themselves "who is next?"

Yitchak Akli a resident of the Be'er Sheba neighborhood said: "We should learn from the experience of 'cast lead'' that this would happen, they have (missiles) and hiding them, to launch and fire them at the right time, on any target in Be'er Sheba. It's a matter of time. They've learned our capabilities and they've learned us".

Since the last "cease fire" 530 rockets and missiles have been fired towards the SouthWestern, past of Israel.

The Iranian Grad missile exploding in Bair-Sheba is a reminder how that a few months ago the Shin-Bet reported that there's a stack of over 5,000 Iranian missiles in Gaza, all of them having a range of 40 KM.

This is especially troubling because, in November 2009, Hamas test-fired a missile test towards the Mediterranean, reaching 60 KM, which is the distance from Northern Gaza to Tel-Aviv.

In November 2010, the ITIC reported that Hamas has missiles with an 80km range.

Almost everyone in the Western Negev knows not it's not "if'" but "when"' the next missile escalation starts, leading to the next Gaza war.

After living in Sderot for the past 5 years, watching the construction of 5,000 new bomb shelters, you don’t have to be a prophet to understand that the highest authorities in Israel know there has not been a permanent end to the rocket fire. Being realistic, Israel has to be prepared for many more years of conflict on the Gaza border.

While Iran is certainly a threat for Israel, the biggest delegitimization threat for Israel, is with no doubt Gaza. Add to this the uprisings in Egypt and North Africa, bringing to power groups that have already declared they will end the "peace treaty" with Israel.

The harsh response that Israel received from the world media and many governments during and after Cast Lead, after the Flotilla incident, and right up to today is actually a modern-day version of a very old demonization of Jews and Israel. A tremendous effort is being made to delegitimize Israel, with the goal of eliminating the Jewish state. How Israel will deal with this threat?

Photos: Noam Bedein, Sderot Media Center

Breaking News - New Media officer in town!

2011-01-25T04:35:00.000-08:00

Hi

I am dani, just want to let all you good people out there, know that I am now queen of the blog. Look forward to awesome debate all round.

lots of love
Dani

Jews im South Africa - Dani Freiduis

2010-09-06T04:12:00.000-07:00

Many proponents of the Jewish religion often appear insular and introverted. They seem to possess an air of superiority arising from the decidedly non-Jewish notion of the Jews being G-d's 'Chosen People'; a phraseology remarkably absent from traditional Jewish texts. It is my belief that this mistaken perception is a result of a type of religious fanaticism which, possibly found in other faiths, is totally foreign to Judaism. The truth of the matter is that both a national and universal outlook can be found within Jewish writings.

First, a little background is necessary. Judaism is unique from other religions in that it is based on the idea of a covenant (bris) – a working agreement between two parties. G-d made two covenants with the Jewish people, one with Abraham and another at Mt. Sinai. However, prior to this, He made a covenant with Noah, applicable to all mankind. In this, He set out seven basic laws (from which many more may be derived) as to how man should live his life. The laws, commonly referred to as the Noahide laws, are a prohibition from murder, idolatry, sexual immorality, theft, eating the limb from a living animal and cursing G-d and the positive instruction to establish a court justice system.

Consequently, Judaism, unlike many other religions, does not require one to be a Jew in order to be a recipient of reward (or to be saved from eternal damnation). This is clearly stated in the tosefta: “the righteous of the nations have a share in the world to come”. Who is considered to be amongst the “righteous of the nations”? All who accept upon themselves the Noahide laws and adhere to them. In fact, the Talmud states that “A non-Jew who engages in Torah [the seven laws] is compared to the high priest.”

So what of today's Gentiles? In particular, how do we view the adherents to the major religions of our time?

The sources that I have brought to this point have basically found universal acceptance in today's Judaism. However, my aim in what follows is to show a legitimate view within the Torah landscape; it should be known that there are other opinions on the matter.

The Meiri (1249-1310) writes:

“All who hold to the seven Mitzvot are treated equally in the law with us and there is no favouritism for us. It goes without saying that this is so for the nations who are disciplined in the ways of religions or civilization.”

If the Meiri had such a favourable opinion of the nations in the 13th century, I find it obvious that the nations of today, who grant rights and freedoms that have never been seen before, should certainly be regarded as favourably. However, there is no need to take it from me, as the Maharatz Chayes (1805-1855) has explicitly stated:

“The seven Mitzvot are the natural laws which both Christians and Mohommedans apply in their courts.”

Similarly, Rabbi Yosef Eliyahu Henkin a modern day authority (1881-1973) claims that:

“The overwhelming majority [of people today] are in the category of a resident alien [an even higher category than a Noahide].”

The question as to the level of our involvement in the wider world still needs answering. I posed this question while in yeshiva to Rabbi Aharon Lichtenstein, one of the world's leading halachick decisors. He told me that Moses stopped a fight between a Jew and an Egyptian, he stopped a fight between two Jews and he also stopped a fight between two non-Jews. The issues of broader society are clearly something in which we must participate. He obviously didn't tell me the exact balance one should have between internal and external issues.

Maimonides (1135-1204) deals directly with this question, he states:

“It appears to me that in regard to respect and honour and also, in regard to charity, a resident alien is to be treated as a Jew … our Sages commanded us to visit the Gentiles when ill, to bury their dead in addition to the Jewish dead, and support their poor in addition to the Jewish poor, for the sake of peace. For behold, it is said: (Psalms 145:9) 'God is good to all and His mercies extend over all His works,' and it is further stated (Proverbs 3:17) : 'Its [the Torah's] ways are ways of pleasantness and all its paths are those of peace.'”

In conclusion, the introverted ways of many Jews appear to be in contradiction with traditional Jewish sources. While not sacrificing our unique and rich identity and culture we should still play an active role in the bettering of society. To ignore the large problems, especially in this country, that do not necessarily plague the Jewish community, would simply be wrong, in my opinion.

Dani Freiduis writes in personal capacity his views do not necessarily reflect those of SAUJS or its members.

Yet another view of our Israeli/Palestian guests - Benji Shulman

2010-08-24T16:09:00.000-07:00

The last two blog posts on the visit by Benjamin Pogrund and the Palestinian ambassador have caused much controversy. However they both suffer from common deficiencies that tend to plague debate on the Middle East. Reading the one blog you might think that Mosiach had arrived at Wits, signed the Oslo accords and implemented them all in one hour. Reading the other there is desperate nihilism about the whole thing that is very hard to stomach. It almost suggests that somehow not only does everybody hate us all the time, but that they will continue to do so forever.

Between these two poles messianism and depression there has to be something missing. I would argue that if we are going to be really Zionist about the whole thing than we need to add a solid dose of pragmatism, something that has sustained the Zionist movement pretty much since the enterprise began.
By way of example let’s look at the most enduring peace event in the Middle East, peace between Egypt and Israel. This was not achieved between some liberal hippy Egyptian and his pinko Jew friend. Anwar Sadat was an extreme Egyptian nationalist with solid anti-Zionist background and uncomfortable support for the Nazis. Menacham Begin was a militaristic right wing Zionist who was survivor of the holocaust. Now how does this work?

After Egypt’s third failure to wipe Israel off the map, Sadat realised that he had two options. He could either piss the rest of his GDP against an Israeli tank column or he could make peace with the Jews. He chose the latter. It wasn’t pretty, it wasn’t warm and it was not out of love but it has held and it has held in a region where things like this often don’t.

But Begin was no roll over. Although overjoyed at the opportunity was the process extremely difficult. He didn’t get wrapped in whose land it actually was but rather focused on the prize. Peace and recognition. Sadat’s wife records extreme frustration saying that Begin went on and on about the Holocaust. For even inch of Sinai that Begin gave away so Sadat learnt every psychological twist to being a Jew.
This has something to teach as Jews. On the one hand we can’t be hypocrites, for years we have bemoaned the fact that no one on the other side will talk to us. The Palestinian ambassador is prepared to speak to us we should let him and we should engage and learn from him. I promise you now this is not great PR for him. A less brave man in his condition could easily have ignored the Jews or just met them in private. He did not as the one blog suggested come out in the favour of a one state solution. He said he would prefer it but that he sees two states as being the only option right now. This Ambassador has a long history of being moderate and I pray that we see more voices like him. However the PA itself is suddenly more inclined to talk. Not because they love us but because they are running out of options. They have tried terror, suicide bombings, support from the Arab states and denunciations in the UN. But they are losing ground, they are not so welcome in the west who see them as corrupt, the Islamic fundamentalists see them as only step above Zionists, as usual they are being betrayed but their Arab neighbours and they have lost control of their leftist solidarity allies.

Like Sadat before, peace with the Jews and their own state next door is looking like the only option that they have left. We daren’t miss this opportunity to help them out with their problem. But as Begin showed us and the Palestinian ambassador reminded we don’t need to lose ourselves over this. We don’t need to be more Palestinian than the Palestinians, the PSC do a good enough job as it is. Israel is thankfully the more powerful player these days. But make no mistake, the people who got us into this mess were rejectionist Arab leaders and they need to be reminded at every opportunity that we get. We have rights to that land also and floating them out onto the Mediterranean will not help our cause.

To describe Israeli policies in such draconian terms as the one blog has done and then say it is to support Israel, is not only counterproductive, it is ridiculous. It does nothing to inform proper debate and erodes our ability as Jews to make the careful and dangerous decisions that we will need to secure our rights as citizens of the world.

Benji Shulman writes in personal capacity and these views do not neccesarily reflect those of SAUJS

Ya ma se Boycott - Josh Schewitz

2010-08-24T09:47:00.000-07:00

The proposed boycott of Ahava Dead Sea Products is based on hatful assumptions. Open Shahadah Street is an extreme fringe organisation that is not concerned with peace so much as it is concerned with the destruction of the Jewish state. The Boycott campaign or BDS of Israel is not by any stretch concerned with a peaceful resumption to the Palestinian/Israeli conflict. By its actions and words the BDS campaign has been shown to be a proponent of the destruction of the Jewish State. Boycotts of Israel are aimed at the delegitimization of the Jewish State as a whole. The boycott campaign aims at anything Israeli and in some cases anything Jewish. Organisation such as Open Shahadah street`s request for divestment and boycott of the Israeli company Ahava should be opposed in the strongest terms.

Here are some statements by BDS campaigners: Ronnie Kasrils, a former anti-apartheid activist turned anti-Israel activist, has made the objectiveclear: "BDS represents three words that will help bring about the defeat of Zionist Israel and victory for Palestine." Ahmed Moor, another prominent BDS activist has it even clearer: "So BDS does mean the end of the Jewish state". ( i am not going to expand on the basic Human right that Zionism encompasses. It is the subject of a essay in the future.)
Boycotts of Israel go against the actions and needs of the Palestinians themselves. Currently the Palestinian Authority does approximately 3 billion dollars worth of trade each year with Israel. The Palestinian Ambassador to South Africa recently spoke at a South African Union of Jewish Students Event. This is contrary to the education boycott that organisation that claim to represent the Palestinian people impose internationally. The Palestinian lobby in South Africa urged the Palestinian Ambassador not to accept the saujs invitation to a debate based on the same accusation that are being used to try manipulate your company. Israel is the only functioning democracy in the Middle East. Women and minorities have more rights in Israel than in any other middle east state. Israel has the freest media and the most open political system in the middle east. In Israel women have exactly the same rights as men, something foreign to the region. Kalid Abu Tomoe, an Arab Israeli journalist works for the Jerusalem post because he cant work as a journalist in any other middle east nation without being subject to anti-freedom restrictions on his writting. He has said on many occasions that he would rather live in the Jewish
Israel than in any other Middle East nation.

Ismail Khalid a Bedouin Israeli diplomat says that he is proud of the achievements of his young country. He says there are problems but for a country that is only 60 years old Israel has done tremendously well. Especially taken in light of the type of regimes that populate the Middle East at the moment. Ismail Khalid says Israel can be proud of its democracy, human rights record, technological advances as well as many other achievements.

The accusations of apartheid are totally unfounded and based on irrational hate rather than proper intellectual discourse. Both Khalid Abu Tomoe and Ismail kalidi will vigorously fight the irrational claim of apartheid. Israel is committed to a peaceful negotiated settlement between Israel and the Arabs. Israel is currently sitting at the negotiating table waiting for the Palestinians to sit down and discuss a peaceful resolution. Israel has time and again made concrete steps to end the conflict and live in peace. These include, among others, the 1968 appeal for a land for peace deal. The Arabs rejected with the infamous three no`s of Khartoum. Israel faithfully signed the Oslo accords of 1993 and kept its part of the deal. Israel removed its soldiers and began the process of handing over control of the western bank of the Hashemite kingdom to the Palestinian authority. The response from the PA was vastly increased terrorism, further hate education of Palestinian youth and continued promotion of armed resistance. Again in 2000 Prime Minster Barak offer 97% of the west bank and land transfers to make up the other 3%. Yassir Arafat declined and initiated the 2nd intifada. The current situation of check points and restrictions of entry to Israel for Arabs is a direct result of the terror campaign launched in 2001. Israel has shown time and again its willingness to dismantle checkpoints and easy restrictions is proved by the removal of checkpoints as soon as security situations improve. The recent activities in Gilo are a real indication of Israel’s willingness to remove security barriers when security situations improve. There is a direct relationship between terrorism directed as Israeli civilians and security measures that are restrictive.

Israel desperately wants peace. Israel understands the requirements to achieve peace but is at this time unable to find a partner for peace. Israel will continue to sue for peace in the hope that a Palestinian leader will emerge with the courage to make peace with the Jews.

Josh Schewitz writes in his individual capacity and does not neccesarily represent views of SAUJS

Another view of our Israeli/Palestinian guest - Rafi Eliasov

2010-08-23T08:24:00.000-07:00

Recently SAUJS hosted the Palestinian ambassador in a discussion panel on recent events in the Middle East and prospects for peace. I will firstly begin by analyzing the broad deficiencies of the event and then analyze the content of each speaker.
Broadly speaking, essentially I think SAUJS was hosting a speaker in favour of a one state solution, counter to its mandate and constitution as a Zionist organization. While the event has been labeled, by some SAUJS members as ‘assisting in highlighting the plight of the Palestinian people and the hurdles that need to be overcome in-order to ensure that peace is achieved’, I think the event did not represent the ethos of SAUJS and failed to provide a balanced perspective on the issues. While it is essential that SAUJS as an organization empathize with the plight of the Palestinians, their plight is continually emphasized both by the national media and by on campus organizations such as Amnesty International and the Palestine Solidarity Committee. It is therefore, in my opinion, our responsibility to add balance to this aberration.
According to Mr Pogrund both parties agreed to negotiations without pre-conditions and then immediately set numerous conditions that must be fulfilled in order for negotiations to begin. While this is indeed true for the Palestinians who demanded a recognition that the 67’ borders would be the basis of the negotiations and a freeze of settlement building, this is untrue of Israel . Not only did Israel repeatedly agree to immediate and unconditional negotiations, but it imposed a moratorium in order to appease the Palestinians , this unprecedented step yielded little in return. Additionally Mr Pogrund repeatedly identified settlements as the major obstacle to peace. While settlements are no doubt unhelpful to the situation, as stated above Israel discontinued their expansion. What Mr Pogrund failed to address was the anti-Semitism created by the Palestinian national movement that precipitated a segmented society. This stigma, which condemned Palestinians to death for merely associating with Jews, has existed since the days of Haj Amin Al Husseini. Palestinian organizations such as the ‘Black Hand’ and ‘the Lightning’, executed Palestinians with ties to the Yishuv this served as an example, with the goal of creating an utter state of segregation between Jews and no-Jews. This ideology is the basis on which no Jew can live in a future Palestinian state and Israel is forced to withdraw its civilians and dismantle settlements.
Ultimately the perception that Arafat was a visionary, portrayed by his Excellency the Palestinian ambassador is undermined by fact. Not only did Arafat reject the Clinton Parameters (a far reaching proposal that encompassed massive compromises by Israel), but he also pillaged and horded international funds intended for the Palestinian people . Likewise the portrayal of Netanyahu as an uncompromising peace partner is similarly false. It was Netanyahu who concluded the Hebron protocols, which led to autonomy for the PA in this controversial city. Additionally the Wye River-Memorandum, which gave the PA additional territory in the West Bank was condoned by Netanyahu. Netanyahu has continued that trend, to the possible disgruntlement of his consistency by lifting road block , improving the Palestinian economy and stopping settlements.
While dialogue is indeed useful, I would rather SAUJS ensure that its constituency receives a balanced education on these issues. While the Palestinian Ambassador should be applauded for attending the event, it is the base racism of those who condemned him for speaking to Jews that is the root of the Middle East conflict. In future if we host a speaker whose views are contentious, we as an organization should endeavor to ensure that two divergent opinions are expressed as appose to two similar and contentious opinions as was the case at this event. This is true when an event is portrayed as a debate or where speakers are portrayed as representing the two sides of the issue.

Rafi Eliasov writes in his personal capacity. This article does not represent the views of SAUJS.

A view of our Palestinian Israeli guest- By Ilan Solomons

2010-08-18T13:14:00.000-07:00

It’s not often that an event hosted by the South African Union of Jewish Students (SAUJS) makes it onto websites like Al-Jazeera.net Arabic, Electronic Intifada and Maan News to name just a few. Well our recent event made headlines on these sites. SAUJS is an organization which seeks to constructively engage on a range of issues whether they are relating to Jewish identity, South African and African Affairs, or even the Arab-Israeli conflict. This is because SAUJS is founded on 3 core values Jewish Identity, South Africa and Zionism. The last principle is something which makes our connection to this conflict that exists thousands of miles away from South Africa such an important part of daily SAUJS activities.

SAUJS is defined as broadly as an apolitical organization but this does not by any means make us politically naïve or unconscious. We send tours to Israel every year, we have our leadership training there, our highest values are to make Aliya and become a part of Israeli society. We have a close relationship with the Israeli Embassy in South Africa and all of the above is generally regarded as common knowledge. What is not such common knowledge are our relationships with the Palestinian people and their diplomatic missions.

Before I go into this topic let me just also state that SAUJS also has relationships with Israeli human rights organizations which are generally very critical of policies and practices of the State of Israel. The most famous one being Benjamin Pogrund who is the former editor of the Rand Daily Mail and who moved to Israel and founded the Yakar Centre for Social Concern in Jerusalem. He is a veteran of the Zionist-Left and is very much critical of the Israeli Occupation of the Palestinian territories and the human rights abuses that occur in the Territories, and other policies which infringe upon the rights of Arab-Israeli’s, which is why he has been so involved in Israeli-Palestinian and Jordanian dialogue through the Yakar Centre. He is devote Zionist but just as devoutly anti-Occupation

Now back to the issue of our relationship with the Palestinians. SAUJS has been engaged in meeting with Palestinian peace activists in the territories, SAUJS has hosted Bassim Eid and Benjamin Pogrund on a previous occasion. We have unfortunately only very recently begun engaging directly with the local Palestinian Diplomatic Mission in South Africa. Although this is viewed as contraversial move by some to meet the PLO/PA SAUJS realized that we had found someone in Palestinian Ambassador who shared our view of creating meaningful dialogue between the Jewish community and the Palestinian people.

That we have major differences it goes without saying that the Ambassador is not in favour of Zionism or the concept of a Jewish State – as apposed to the existence of State called Israel where Jews, Muslims, Christians and others live together as equals – this goes without saying, I just am stating this because many of the internet sites have labelled him a ‘Zionist collaborator’ and ‘an agent of Zionism and of the Zionist entity AKA Israel’, this is incredibly insulting to any Palestinian no-less to a Palestinian diplomat, who views Zionism as the reason for them being without a state and many still languishing in refugee camps throughout the middle-east. What we do agree on is the need for dialogue and as the Ambassador has said many times he would rather us to shout at one another than shoot at one other.
I have personally arranged for the Ambassador to speak to Jewish Youth groupings, and have helped facilitate a special relationship between our movement and parts of the Jewish community. I truly hope this will help bring balanced view of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict from an official Palestinian view point – that is opposed to the radical views espoused by groups like the PSC, Afro-Middle Centre(AMEC) and the like!

The actual discussion between the Ambassador and Pogrund which was held in the Dorothy Susskind Hall in John Moffat building on Wits Campus was entitled “ Assessing Current Diplomacy towards building Peace in the Middle East”. It was moderated by Professor Larry Benjamin from the School of International Relations. What both participants agreed on was that the growth illegal settlements in the Occupied Palestinian Territories were destoying efforts to establish a viable independent Palestinian State along side the State of Israel. They also agreed that America was not doing enough to bring a peace settlement and that it was important for both the Palestinian Authority and the Israeli government, to take bold and courageous steps to bring about a just and equitable solution!

I believe that as a movement we should be committed to seeking a fair and broad understanding of the tragedy that has befallen the people of Palestine and Israel. I think that we have too often been guilty of responding to groups like the Palestinian Solidarity Committee (PSC), by countering their propaganda with our own form of Hasbara. I believe that we should be committed to defending Israel from unfair criticism and liable, but I also believe that through initiatives like the discussion between an imminent Israeli human rights activist and a representative of the Palestinian Authority we are assisting in highlighting the plight of the Palestinian people and the hurdles that need to be overcome in-order to ensure that peace is achieved.

In conclusion I just would like to state that the PSC was approached to co-host this event but they refused to do so. SAUJS however will continue to engage them in the hopes that we can work together to show a fuller picture of situation and co-operate in the interests of peace between the State of Israel and the Future State of Palestine. We welcome partnerships with various groups and organizations and look forward to expanding dialogue with all campus groupings, civil society and other institutions!

If you would like to know more about the event or SAUJS or anything that was mentioned in this article please feel free to contact me at liaison@saujs.co.za.

Ilan Solomons writes this blog in his personal capacity and does not represent the views of the organisation.

Chutzpahonline is a forum for debate of individual SAUJS members. Please see our terms of use for more information. If you would like to contribute on this or any other topic please email media@saujs.co.za

Jewish students protest recall

2010-06-08T00:31:00.000-07:00

Jewish Students to hand over memorandum to Deputy Minister Ebrahim Ebrahim over decision to recall Ambassador to Israel at the Department of International Relations and Cooperation (DIRCO)

Meeting convenes at 13:00

The recent activities regarding the Flotilla from Turkey that attempted to breach the Israeli blockade on Gaza have caused worldwide condemnation and criticism directed at the State of Israel. The ramifications of this incident for Israel have been dire and cannot be underestimated. The situation was made worse by the recent decision of the South African government, in a form of protest, to recall our ambassador to the State of Israel – the only country to do so since Turkey.

While we regret the deplorable loss of life that occurred during the incident – we fully recognise Israel’s right to defend her borders and citizens. Much debate has arisen surrounding Israel’s decision to intercept the ship, however we feel that the decision made by our government to recall Ambassador Ismail Coovadia is of an extreme nature, premature and biased.

We hereby call on the South African government to retract its decision and to respect Israel’s right to defend herself and treat any decisions towards the State with the same fairness and judgment that is awarded to any other country.

It is in light of the above that we, the South African Union of Jewish Students, cannot remain silent in the face of such severe hypocrisy and injustice. We call on the South African Jewish community as well as all concerned citizens who disagree with the actions taken by our government to join us in protest outside the Department of International Relations and Cooperation on Tuesday 8 June at 13:00, 460 Soutpansberg Road, Rietondale, Pretoria.

Joining us in solidarity will be members of the following groups:

African Christian Democratic Party (ACDP) represented by MP Steve Swart

Movement for Democratic Change (MDC)

Congo For Peace

Christian Friends For Israel

Rabbis of various congregations

The Biafran National Congress

Bridges for Peace

The Rwandan Students Survivors of Genocide of South Africa (RSSGSA)

The Redeemed Christian Church of God

The Zionist Youth Council of South Africa

Independent Churches from various ministries

For more information contact either Benji Shulman (SAUJS National Media Officer) 084 499 6411 or Stephanie Hodes (SAUJS National Chairperson) 083 435 2498

www.saujs.co.za

More from the AJC

2010-06-08T00:26:00.000-07:00

To the Free Gaza Movement

David Harris, AJC Executive Director
June 6, 2010

According to your website, you describe yourselves as a "human rights movement."

You proclaim: "We respect the human rights of everyone, regardless of race, tribe, religion, ethnicity, nationality, citizenship or language."

And yet nowhere is there evidence of your respect for the human rights of Israelis, who've been the targets of massive human rights violations by Hamas and other terror groups operating freely in Gaza.

Are human rights indivisible, or only permitted for the groups you preselect?

Actually, you answer that question at a deeper level when you assert that: "We recognize the right of all Palestinian refugees and exiles and their heirs to return to their homes in Israel and the occupied Palestinian territories.... This is an individual and not a collective right, and cannot be negotiated except by the individual."

In other words, not only do Israelis, who want nothing more than to live free of missile and mortar attacks from Gaza, have no such right, but the country in which they live has no right to exist. That's precisely what your formula means.

So much for being a "human rights movement" and respecting "the human rights of everyone."

Clearly, if it's not about pointing the finger at Israel – or, should I say, giving Israel the finger – then you're simply not interested.

When Egypt occupied Gaza until 1967 and imposed draconian military rule, where were you to protest and organize flotillas and "humanitarian convoys"?

When in 2005 Israel left Gaza to determine its own destiny – for the first time in its history, I might add – where were you to encourage investment and job creation?

When Hamas violently ousted the Palestinian Authority from Gaza in 2007, where were you to express support for the PA?

When Hamas opted to follow a dead-end strategy to turn Gaza into a pariah state and terrorist redoubt, where were you to press for a truly "free Gaza"?

When Christians were attacked in Gaza by jihadists, where were you to demonstrate solidarity with the victims?

When Egypt sealed its border with Gaza and, later, announced the construction of a steel wall along the frontier, where were you?

And when officials today live lavishly in Gaza and humanitarian supplies are siphoned off to privileged groups and gangs, where are you?

No, it's only about Israel. Nothing else matters. Your agenda is obvious. Your motives are transparent. And surrounding yourselves with a few convenient Jews doesn't make you any more credible.

But if you still want to persuade the world that you're a "human rights movement," here's an idea.

June 12th is the first anniversary of the rigged Iranian elections.

Here's what one human rights group had to say on Iran: "Iran's latest presidential election on June 12, 2009, took place against a backdrop of discrimination, worsening repression of dissent and violent unrest. Amnesty International continues to document serious human rights violations, including detention of human rights defenders and other prisoners of conscience, unfair trials, torture and mistreatment in detention, deaths in custody and the application of the death penalty. Iran has one of the highest number of recorded executions of any country in the world.... Furthermore, Iran executes more people than any other country in the world except for China. Iran is also the only country in the world that continues to execute juvenile offenders."

Moreover, the group reported: "Iran is now witnessing sweeping restrictions on the use of communications technology, including telecommunications, satellite broadcasts and internet access, a ban on peaceful demonstrations, armed attacks on students in university premises, as well as the arbitrary arrest of political activists, students, journalists, and human rights defenders, many – if not all – of whom are prisoners of conscience."

There will be a global day of action on June 12th demanding an end to human rights abuses in Iran. You're missing from the sponsoring groups. How could that be? After all, you define yourselves as a "human rights movement."

Surely, the fact that human rights defenders in Iran – your presumed compatriots – are in jail should mobilize you, not to mention state-sanctioned murder of minors.

Oops, I forgot. Israel isn't involved. That disqualifies Iran from consideration.

In fact, if you truly were a human rights movement, and based on your well-honed methods, you'd be organizing another flotilla as we speak.

You'd recruit your "activists" to be on board. You'd proclaim your solidarity with the dissidents, the prisoners of conscience, and those on death row. And, come what may, you'd head for the Iranian coast. Luckily for you, you'd discover that Iran has 1100 miles of shoreline along the Persian (or is it Arabian?) Gulf and the Gulf of Oman.

Actually, you've got another option as well – logistically easier and cheaper to boot.

Lo and behold, Turkey shares a 310-mile land border with Iran. Given your cozy ties with the Turkish government and Turkish "humanitarian" groups (who, by the way, could use some education about Gandhi before being deployed again), why not plan to cross the frontier in convoys loaded with supplies for Iran's human rights activists? And don't forget to bring the signs to unfurl in front of the media you'll invite: "Free Iran," "End human rights oppression in Iran," "Women deserve equality," "Gays have rights," "Stop capital punishment," "We remember Neda," "Ballots, not bullets," "No more torture," "Persecution of Baha'i must end."

But you don't give a hoot about the well-being of millions of Iranians, whose human rights are being massively violated. You wouldn't take a single day off from your relentless anti-Israel campaign to assist the Iranian people.

Why is it that a self-proclaimed "human rights movement" doesn't care about the fate of Iranians desperately in need of outside support? Why would you never think about taking your show on the road to Iran, whatever risks might await you? Why is that you and your Turkish friends wouldn't spend a moment on the subject?

Alas, the reason is obvious. Israel isn't involved. You can't pin the blame on Jerusalem. Those waiting for you on the border don't wear an Israeli uniform (and don't abide by the same strict code of military conduct, either).

So what does that make you?

Nothing more than a Hamas booster club seeking Israel's disappearance, while posing as a "human rights movement."

David Harris on the Gaza issue

2010-06-02T04:31:00.000-07:00

Strutting from Tehran to Damascus, from Beirut to Gaza

You can practically picture them strutting.

In Tehran, for example.

Initially shaken by the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq in 2003 and the awesome display of military prowess, Iran, with American soldiers on its border, had to wonder if it might be the next target.

Seven years later, the Iranians believe they've turned the tables on Washington.

Seven years of more and more centrifuges. Seven years of nuclear deception. Seven years defying UN Security Council and International Atomic Energy Agency resolutions and reports. Seven years of dividing the international community. Seven years of buying time. Seven years of business as usual with much of the world. Seven years of unrestricted participation in the UN, Olympic Games, World Cup, World Economic Forum, and, this year, the Munich Security Conference. Seven years of calling for a world without Israel, interfering in Iraqi affairs, and baiting the United States. Seven years of trampling on the human rights of its own people.

And in Damascus, too.

Like Iran, Syria in 2003 had to be sweating bullets. After all, U.S.-led coalition troops were just across the border in Iraq and the possibility of active measures against Syria must have crossed the mind of President Assad and his handlers at least once or twice.

Not long ago, Syria faced isolation for the murder of former Lebanese Prime Minister Rafik Hariri in Beirut, and for allowing jihadist mercenaries to cross the border into Iraq to wage war against U.S. troops, conspiring with North Korea to build a secret nuclear plant, cozying up to Tehran, providing hospitality for Hamas, and shipping arms - its own and Iranian - to Hezbollah.

Today, by contrast, Syria can't find enough hotel space for all the Western guests rushing to engage the Assad regime. Of course, each of those guests proclaims an earnest desire to "turn" Syria from hostile to harmonious behavior, even as business deals are being discussed. But the lack of success until now - other than the "apparent" willingness, at long last, of Damascus to acknowledge Lebanon's sovereign independence - hasn't put a brake on the traffic.

And in south Beirut, home of Hezbollah.

Things didn't look so good in 2006. Hezbollah triggered a war with Israel. But when the war ended, Hezbollah was still on its feet, despite the battering it took.

Since then, UNIFIL forces notwithstanding, Hezbollah has not only rebuilt its military arsenal and then some, but has also worked its way back into the Lebanese government, with a virtual veto on decision-making. So, Hezbollah gets to be an integral part of the state, while, simultaneously, running a state-within-a-state, threatening Israel at every turn and operating its sleeper cells throughout Latin America and beyond. And it has avoided inclusion on the EU terrorism list, thanks to certain European countries that argued such a move would be counterproductive (to what?).

Add to that Lebanon's current seat on the UN Security Council, where it deals with issues like Iran and the Arab-Israeli conflict. It simply boggles the mind to think about Iranian-backed Hezbollah's direct and indirect influence on the exercise of power.

Yet, as with Iran and Syria, there are those infinitely hopeful Westerners who believe that engaging Hezbollah can yield benefits. To date, however, the only beneficiary is Hezbollah, which acquires legitimacy from such contacts without earning it.

And, not least, in Gaza.

As I write these words, several members of the "Free Gaza Movement" have been killed on the high seas after provoking a violent confrontation with Israelis seeking to board one of the six ships. It was tragic. Families and friends are mourning their deaths. It was also entirely avoidable.

By its own admission, the flotilla was making a political, not a humanitarian, statement. Israel had offered to transport the supplies over land, but that didn't serve the organizers' purpose. Nor did a request to carry a message to kidnapped Israeli soldier Gilad Shalit, held by his captors in Gaza for nearly four years. Nor, it turns out, were all the passengers exactly Mother Teresa wannabes or Gandhi's disciples.

The goal was to break the Israeli blockade and thereby enable the free shipment of anything - yes, anything, including weapons - to the terrorist enclave.

For ruthless, cynical Hamas, the more bloodshed, the better. There may be crocodile tears in public from Hamas leaders for the fatalities, but down deep it's something else. After all, once again the situation puts Israel, not Hamas, in the hot seat.

Think about it.

Here is Hamas, an Iranian-funded, jihadist group anchored in the Muslim Brotherhood. Through its blood-curdling Charter, available for anyone to read, it calls for the destruction of Israel and its replacement by an Islamic, Shari'a-based state.

Hamas has been declared a terrorist group by the United States and the European Union. Apropos, FBI director Robert Mueller testified before Congress about its active - and dangerous - presence in the United States.

Hamas poses a clear menace to Egypt, which has closed its own border with Gaza and is now building a 10-kilometer steel wall there.

Hamas ousted the Palestinian Authority from Gaza in June 2007, after bloody clashes then, and earlier, resulted in several hundred fatalities.

It runs summer camps for children that teach jihad, martyrdom, and martial skills, and condemns UN-run summer camps for mixing boys and girls and allegedly allowing kids, well, to be kids.

That very same Hamas, which brought isolation to Gaza by sticking to its guns, so to speak, and refusing the three conditions for engagement set by the Quartet, has now become the object of sympathy and concern, as evidenced by the flotilla and its admiring backers, including, most notably, Turkey.

And yet it is Israel, seeking to exercise its right of self-defense against a group bent on its destruction, and not the group itself, which today provokes howls of protest. This is also precisely what happened after Israel's patience wore thin in December 2008, and it decided it could no longer accept daily missile and mortar strikes from Hamas-controlled Gaza.

A world gone wobbly at the knees - increasingly incapable, it seems, of distinguishing between the arsonist and the fireman, the despot and the democrat, the provocateur and the victim, or simply fearful of the consequences of obvious truths - once again reveals itself.

Where is the Winston Churchill for our time - the leader who, with clarity and courage, lifts the fog, shines the spotlight, defines the stakes, and summons us to our senses?

A Credit card: Is it worth it? - Hugue Nkoutchou CFP®

2010-06-02T04:14:00.000-07:00

An increasing number of South Africans have credit cards. These include: bank’s credit cards and insurance company’s credit cards. This fact can partly be attributed to financial difficulties. There is a multiple of possible companies that offer credit card. Lastly a vast number of South African’s employees earn very little: A recent study showed that approximately 45 percent of South African’s employees aged 16 and above, in 2007, earned less than R2500 per month. However, for the credit card holders, this means more debts plus interests to be repaid in the future. Although the NCR (National Credit Regulator) is doing a great deal in protecting South Africans by preventing financial service providers to give consumers more credit if they cannot afford to repay; many individuals manage to find themselves in such a situation where they have accumulated a high amount of debts. The later is usually associated with a poor saving behaviour and can partly be contributed to individuals tend to leave beyond their means. A question that arises is whether or not an individual needs credit card? If yes, in which case?

An individual should take a credit to invest in something that increases in value. For example an insurance broker may take credit to buy a car as the car will add value to his life due to the fact that he or she can meet clients easily and thus makes more money. The car in such a situation is considered to be a “working tool”. An employee who earns a fixed salary can take a credit to buy a house as this usually increases in value with time, but should save to buy a car. The idea behind the discussion above is: when one takes a credit, one should make sure the return on the investment (or the money spent) is above the interest paid on the money borrowed. Thus, it is evident that a credit card should only be needed if one should invest that money in something that adds value or for emergency needs (for example, hospital fees) and not for daily expenditures as it is usually the case, for example to purchase groceries and airtime. Rather use a debit card or a cheque account.

Financial fitness - Hugue Nkoutchou

2010-04-21T02:04:00.000-07:00

Fitness of all kinds is crucial in this day and age. But with a recession on and students well known for not being the most thrifty, financial fitness is increasingly high on the agenda. Hugue Nkoutchou is a SAUJS member at UJ doing his masters in finance and is a certified financial planner. This the first of a series of articles where we will examine this topic.

Planning your monthly budget: what you should know

To budget is to balance one’s income and expenditures. This is usually done on a monthly basis. Budget planning, properly done, can prevent an individual from living beyond his/her means. It is associated with monitoring one’s expenses. The reality is, many individuals are not planning their monthly budget nor keeping track of their expenditures. This fact can partly be attributed to the time and constraints involved in budget planning; individuals’ tendency to mentally keep record of financial activities and lastly the lack of motivation to plan. The latter is a very important factor as the motivation to plan is needed in order to start the process of budgeting. An increased number of individuals are acknowledging the fact that budget planning is vital. The question that arises is why are they not budgeting?

Budget planning usually follows an individual desire to save money for a purpose. Alternatively, an individual may track down expenditures in order to save money for something that really matters to him or her. From the above discussion, it is evident that one should have a goal to create the motivation to plan. But this should be a medium to long-term goal for the motivation to be enough to encourage one to start a budget. For example, a student may plan his or her monthly budget to save money to buy a car in two years time; a salaried person may start a budget plan in order to track down expenditures in order to provide for their children’s education, and so forth.

In practice, budget planning can be done following several steps. Typical budget planning can be summarized as follows:

Step one: Historical data is needed to have a good estimation of what your average monthly expenditures are. Track all expenditures for, at least, the past 3 months. This tracking can be done by keeping all invoices or writing down money spent without having an invoice in return. If one wants to work things out quickly, it will be a very good idea to use an Excel spreadsheet. If this is the case one should first use two columns: item name and current expenditure.

Step two: determine your average monthly expenditure and compare it with your monthly income. Even if the latter is more that the former, this does not mean that one is spending wisely. If the monthly expenditure is more than the monthly income, it means one should do more to reduce their expenditures. A way of doing this is to only spend on things that you need (thing that are adding value to your life) and save on things that you want (things that are not adding any value to your life).
Step three: Add a third column for the maximum expenditure per item for the following month. Some items may be fixed or some may be not applicable to that particular month. For others, set a maximum spending for that particular month depending on your monthly income and your saving goal (this is very important as you may wish to save for example 10 percent of your monthly income for retirement).
Step four: track your future monthly expenditures and make changes where necessary. It is also important to make provision for unforeseen, miscellaneous events.

The Failure of Never Again - Daniel Schay

2010-04-21T02:03:00.001-07:00

Hi All

Below is the next in the series for Yom Hashoa.

On Yom Hashoa 2005 18,000 people from differing backgrounds stood together united in Auschwits-Birkeneu. In front of them stood a stage with guest speakers ranging from the Prime Minister of Poland to Former Chief Rabbi of Israel, Rabbi Lau and also included Elie Wiesel. Scattered throughout the crowd were big screens emblazoned with a candle and the words “Never Again”. I was privileged enough to be one of those individuals there on that day.

The words “Never Again” have become synonymous with Holocaust Remembrance but have we ever really thought what does “Never Again” mean? I think now’s the time to do so.

Does “Never Again” refer to just the Holocaust of Jews or genocide in general. If we say it refers to genocide generally than we don’t have to look very far to understand its failure. Since the Holocaust we’ve seen genocide in Rwanda and continue to see genocide in Darfur and furthermore I dare say that we may be seeing the first seeds of genocide developing in Nigeria. With all these examples what has been done to prevent any of them, nothing. The United Nations continues to fail at one of its core duties and is almost unwilling to attempt to rectify that.

If we’re still searching for a success of “Never Again” we’re going to have to define it specifically deal with Jews. Now we need to decide whether it applies to Jewish lives or Jewish souls. If we say Jewish Souls than the majority of us have all heard by now of the Silent Holocaust which is the loss of millions of Jewish Souls to assimilation all over the world. While once this problem was considered to be monopolised by American Jewry, it is no longer the case today. In South Africa the figures are higher than anyone dares to disclose and can longer be ignored. With this said “Never Again” has failed with reference to Jewish Souls.

We’ll continue our search for a success of “Never Again” by defining it to Jewish lives only. Whilst you may propose that we have yet to experience a loss of Jewish lives on the scale of the Holocaust since the World War II and therefore in this definition of “Never Again” we have a success, I’m going to differ. I differ as the fact that we haven’t lost 6 million of our brethren since the Holocaust is not enough for me, for the potential for a nation to stand by and allow elements from within it to commit genocide against Jews is still in existence. This potential exists throughout the Palestinian Territories; we need not to look further than Palestinian Media to understand this. Whilst not every Palestinian Citizen is a willing murderer, there are elements within their population that will be, and for as for the rest of the population there’s been very little evidence shown (through their inability to control terrorist groups within their midst) that leads me to believe that they will try stop these elements if the opportunity was presented to them. The Holocaust was perpetrated by the Nazi’s and their collaborators but it was those who stood by and turned a blind eye that allowed it to occur. Given the opportunity Hamas and other terrorist groups would happily commit a Holocaust and the rest of the Palestinian population wouldn’t so much lift a finger to stop them. So as you can see within the Palestinian population we have a potential Holocaust and for me that is enough to say the “Never Again” has failed in reference to Jewish Lives as well.

To understand the true extent of the failure of “Never Again” we also have to understand that the Silent Holocaust and Potential Holocaust are 2 forces that are rapidly merging thus creating a much larger and more urgent threat to world Jewry. All over the world we are beginning to see victims of the Silent Holocaust who have lost connection to who they are and where they come from, that they no longer can or want to feel any connection to their people, to Judaism or the Global Jewish Experience. For these people it is easier to align to sympathise and to side with the Palestinian cause without really understanding either side of the conflict. By these “Jews” showing their support for the Pro-Palestinian / Anti-Israel Camp they give this side legitimacy to continue behaving as they currently are, the legitimise the hate-mongering that is spread through the media and they legitimise the terror used against innocent civilians. Whilst they continue to legitimise the Anti-Israel cause they also delegitimize Israel and therefore limit its ability to respond to legitimate threats against her sovereignty. These “Jew’s” actions give legitimacy, at least according to the world media, for terror to continue against Israel and the Jewish population within it. Furthermore this gives legitimacy to the Potential Holocaust. Thus due to the combination of these two forces we are rapidly approaching a situation very similar situation to the Evian Les Baines conference where the Holocaust could be committed and no one would lift a finger, the only difference is that the world refuse to help, not because they don’t want, but rather because they would believe that the cause of this Holocaust would be legitimate and therefore no action needs to be taken. With these 2 forces merging we find ourselves almost back in 1939 with a single exception, that exception being that world Jewry relies on the very State that is being used as a stick to beat it with, for its protection.

The pamphlets for this year’s Yom Hashoa service read “The Next Generation Remembers the Six Million”, but do they really? Remembering the Holocaust does not mean going to a ceremony once a year. Remembering the Holocaust means actively preventing the perpetuation of the cycle that World Jewry finds itself in. It means doing whatever you can to hold on whatever aspects of Judaism you currently perform and maybe even adding to them. It means teaching your descendants about the importance of a strong Jewish Identity and instilling that identity upon them. For it is up to the current generation to stall the Silent Holocaust and thereby retarding the Potential Holocaust, for without legitimisation the Palestinian Cause will need to rethink their policies on education and media. The fate of World Jewry lies in the hands of the current generation, and it’s a responsibility that we should not take lightly.

Holocaust survivor speaks to SAUJS

2010-04-08T03:41:00.000-07:00

Hi All

With the on set of Yom Hashoa we will be having some pieces on the blog relating to the subject. The first is a letter sent to us by Holocaust survivor and Clinical Psychologist who will be visiting South Africa in the coming days.

Dr. Nathan Durst Clinical Psychologist Herzlyah Israel.

Dear Friends of the South African Union of Jewish students

I am writing these lines during the Chol Hamo'ed days of Pesach.

You feel the mood of the holyday in the street, everywhere.

I do suppose, that also in your country, the majority of the Jews are in someway or another, participating in this chag. Here in Israel, even the most liberal-ones visit each other, have a festive and meal and sing songs about Freedom. Together with Yom Kippur, Pesach belongs to that part of our calendar, which makes sense. All of us understand the deeper meaning of the saying: "We have been slaves in Egypt" The yearning of being a free person is deep seated in all of humankind.

But why, or where-for, do we still need to remember Yom Hashoah?

For the few survivors, those who are still among us, for them, remembering their family members who were killed will be a natural act. A kind of "yohrzeit"

But who the heck needs another day of atonement, another mourning day in the Jewish calendar? We have enough of them, don't we?

The point is that throughout history, there have been wars, all over the place, and in our long Jewish history, we had many occasions when Jews were massacred. That is not new.

What is new is the way, the scale of, where and how it was done. Nowhere in history have we encountered a people being so persecuted, despite living thousands of miles from the perpetrator, and with such enthusiastic

cooperation by so many other civilized nations.

And this was done by so called "humane, cultured, enlightened people".

As a consequence of this tragedy, we should be alert for, and take action, when we encounter, racism, antisemitism or xenophobia.

Humankind, should learn to take responsibility for what happens to the "other", and take action if necessary

No more Auschwitz means: To give an answer to the question that God posed to Adam: "Adam Ayeka" – Man, where are you? No more being a passive bystander: be alert, be involved, and become responsible.

Chag Sameach. I do hope to meet you.

Nathan Durst.

E-mail: durstnatan@gmail.com

Business Day on Naom Bedien

2010-03-25T03:50:00.000-07:00

Alistair Anderson

Contributing Writer Business Day

In response to International Anti-Israel Apartheid week that took place last week, the South African Union of Jewish Students (SAUJS) has sent an activist and leader of a non-profit media organisation to South Africa.

Director of the Sderot Media Centre, Noam Bedein, has spoken around the world, often conveying arguments for the country Israel that many government bodies may not be able to because of his organisation’s non-political affiliation.

After the Congress of South African Trade Unions (Cosatu) joined South Africa’s Palestinian Solidarity Alliance (PSA) in its promotion of the international week against alleged Israeli Apartheid, Beiden was invited by SAUJS to give some clarity on the Israeli point of view.

The PSA has condemned Israel for it allegedly maltreating Palestinians in its country and in the disputed Gaza Strip area that it occupies. The group which includes people who “work to promote a free Palestinian state” organised a march on the Israeli embassy, which took place last Friday, and was joined by Cosatu.

Bedein, a 27-year-old student from Spir College in Southern Israel, explained that he has been in South Africa to highlight what he alleges to be a media imbalance that the Palestinian Authority enjoys against the Israeli side, in the conflict over the middle-eastern area of the Gaza Strip, which lies on the Eastern coast of the Mediterranean Sea. It borders Egypt on the southwest and Israel on the south, east and north.

Bedein who has spoken at colleges around the world and Capitol Hill before the US Congress, explained that Sderot, his hometown in small Southern Israel has borne the brunt of rocket fire directed towards Israel from Gaza but the world has not been told about the people there’s plight.

“It’s incredible that this town is the only town in the world that has rockets directed at its Jewish population. The problem is that the Palestinian authority gets money from Muslim fundamentalist groups like Hamas and Hezbollah to fund huge media television and radio broadcasts, while the twenty-thousand people of Sderot have to rely on government money just to keep the town in one piece.”

Bedein said that “the town is the world’s biggest bomb shelter”. He said that about $125 million had been spent on building bomb shelters in Sderot.

“In fact, in Israel there are about 500 million shelters and at least half a billion dollars has been invested into Israel’s security budget for a country that is about as big as your (South Africa’s) Kruger National Park.”

The Palestinian Solidarity Alliance has said that Israel is an Apartheid state where Israelis treat Palestinians as second-class citizens but Bedein said the opposite is true.

“There are Muslim families living in my neighbourhood. We have Africans, Iranians, all kinds of people and we integrate. Israel is the only Western democracy in the Middle East and we allow Palestinians to voice their beliefs, which can include a want to have the state destroyed,” Bedein said.

"People need to understand that the issue over Israel is not about land, it's about the human right to exist," Bedein said.

Choca Challah Pudding for Shabbos - Guest Blog

2010-03-19T05:36:00.000-07:00

SAUJS is not all about serious stuff. In todays guest blog we bring you a recipe from Tracy and Georgie of www.thejewishprincess.com. They are the top Kosher, Cooking, Kugels in the UK. This is one of their favorite and funkiest recipes. Enjoy and good Shabbos.

Unsalted butter, for greasing
8 Slices of large challah 1.5cm thick (one day old)
200g dark chocolate (the 70% cocoa type)
200ml double cream
300ml skimmed milk
115g unsalted butter
150g caster sugar
4 medium eggs
for decoration

icing sugar
Butter a medium ovenproof dish (I always use an oval one that's 35cm x 24cm x 6cm)

Remove the crusts the challah. If the slices are very large, cut them in half.

Place the chocolate, cream, milk, butter and sugar into a double saucepan (bain-marie) over a low heat, stirring all the time, until the mixture is melted and smooth. If you haven't got a double saucepan, then just use a saucepan of boiling water with a heatproof bowl over it and put the ingredients in the bowl.

Remove the bowl from the heat and leave it to cool.

Beat the eggs and stir them slowly into the chocolate mixture.

Pour half the sauce into teh bottom of the ovenproof dish.

Place the sliced challah into the liquid, pressing down with the back of a tablespoon to allow the bread to begin to saturate.

Pour the remaining liquid n top and press down again to allow the sauce to saturate the bread and completely cover the challah.

Cover the dish and leave to cool, then refrigerate it for a minimum of two hours.

Preheat the oven to 180ºC/350ºF/gas mark 4.

Bake in a bain-marie (I do this by putting the dish in a roasting pan and filling it with water until it reaches halfway up the outside of the dis) in the preheated oven for about 20 minutes.

Dust with icing sugar to decorate and serve warm.

A fantastic way of using leftover challah – and a wonderfully chocolicious dessert. If you would like to see more just go onto the to their website or subscribe to their newsletter.

Guest Blog- Jewish in Germany

2010-03-17T05:33:00.000-07:00

Jamie Snow is currently living in the German capital of Berlin, what follows is a her interactions with and feelings about the city.

As I walk down the street from our current residence to the subway, I could be pretty much anywhere in Europe. Well actually, I have only ever visited a few European cities outside of Germany: Salzburg, Madrid, Toledo, Bern, Zurich, and the Rheinfall in Switzerland. But, I imagine other big European cities to be very similar to München. Exploring our new Stadt, I pass hundreds of cafes, shops, churches, and old buildings:

Old Town Hall, Munich
(Built in 1474)

"New" Town Hall, Munich
(Built between 1867-1908)

However, every once in a while, I pass something that looks eerily familiar that stops me in my tracks. Sights like the Feldherrenhalle, where Hitler gave a speech during the “Beer Hall Putsch” bring back memories from Holocaust courses:

Odeonsplatz, Munich
(It was at Odeonsplatz on November 9, 1923, that Hitler attempted to bring down the Weimar Republic. Hitler's attempt was unsuccessful and he was sentenced to five years in jail. However, he only ended up serving nine months and it was in that time that he wrote Mein Kampf.)

Hmmm. I think to myself, “How am I reacting to this place or thing? How am I supposed to react to it? Should I be angry, sad, scared, upset? All of the above? Or, none of the above?”

When I first met my husband, Steve, and learned that he had studied abroad in Germany during his senior year of high school, I thought he was crazy. I did not understand how someone who is half-Jewish could live in a country that, at that time, I solely associated with the Holocaust. Nevertheless, we moved away from Seattle, where we met as AmeriCorps members, so that Steve could enter a PhD program in German history and study the development of the German Green Party. “Not even the Holocaust!” I lamented. But my love for Steve continued to grow and after we got engaged I found myself agreeing to spend this year abroad with him in Germany…the country that once tried to wipe out my ancestors.

I never had a desire to live in Germany, let alone visit. I was not against the idea of Germany; there were just so many other places that I wanted to explore instead. Still, unlike many of the more conservative Jews that I grew up with, I was never against buying a German car or spending money on anything German-crafted. Strangely, I thought that made me a better and more accepting person; I thought that I had no prejudices.

When Steve and I first traveled to Germany two summers ago, it was nothing like I imagined. Before our trip, the only pictures I had seen of Germany were from Holocaust books and films. On the plane I imagined landing in a country painted in black and white. Literally.

However, traveling to Sulzheim, a tiny village and home of my husband’s high school host family, from the Frankfurt airport was a wake-up call. In fact, Germany was not black and white, but painted all the colors of the rainbow. On our drive we saw skyscrapers and fast trains, gorgeous fields of sunflowers and small, red-roofed villages:

Sunflower Field
(Somewhere on the way from Frankfurt to Sulzheim.)

It was clear: Germany was working to recover from its past. But was I?

Inspired by the unexpected, I spent visits the next two summers trekking from Holocaust memorials to Jewish museums, from old, burned-down synagogue sites to newly renovated synagogue replicas, and from mass graveyards to new Jewish cemeteries, trying to come to terms with everything. Steve even pointed out gold plaques thrust between the sidewalk cement in Freiburg marking where Jews had once lived and sadly stating what happened to them during the War.

Through my journey I was able to look beyond the Germany of yesterday and transition into a mind-set where I felt comfortable moving forward to learn more about present-day German society. I came to understand that Germany has not yet fully come to terms with its history. Yet, Germany is working to recreate its image as well as physically rebuild itself from the destruction of war by attempting to preserve old culture and simultaneously develop a fresh new identity.

Today, I do not feel my former aversion to Germany. After making friends here and working to learn the language, I feel comfortable living in Munich and discovering more about the Germany of today. At the beginning of our time in Munich, Steve and I attended Yom Kippur services. For me, walking into a synagogue here and being part of the community was the perfect transition from dwelling, to remembering and moving forward.

By Photos and article by Jamie Snow

Debate from blog post "Putting SA in SAUJS"

2010-03-15T09:35:00.001-07:00

Hi all

Some very naughty people decided to carry on this debate on facebook and not on the blog (smack). So I have put all the exchanges below so everyone can see them and not just those of us with fb accounts.

Daniel Alexander Mackintosh Hi Ilan

The real challenge is to join the real future struggles of this country, for young Jews to be a part of creating a decent society. In SA, with our systematic inequality, we need the youth of our community to seek to engage poor people and join the variety of struggles for basic education, health, housing and sanitation.

What that really means is to move ourselves out of the mindset of 'being a good person and helping out' to becoming a part of the struggle for equality.... See More
March 10 at 4:33pm

Mukovhe Morris Masutha DANIEL MAN, I'M PROUD OF YOU , YOU TOOK ALL THE WORDS FROM MY MOUTH AND THIS IS THE REASON WHY THE SOUTH AFRICAN STUDENTS CONGRESS RECOGNIZES AND APPRECIATES THE EXISTANCE OF SAUJS IN OUR WITS CAMPUS AND OUR SOCIETY IN GENERAL..

THE CHIEF RABBI STATED IT CLEARLY THAT WE HAVE A HUGE SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY AS CHILDREN OF THE SOUTH AFRICAN SOILS AND ... See More
March 10 at 8:56pm

Mukovhe Morris Masutha VERY INFORMATIVE Ilan...Would you suggest any book on the history of Jews in south africa?
March 10 at 10:17pm

Ilan Strauss An important discussion to start Mr Solomons (so I dont feel like I am speaking to myself).
SAUJS have tough choices about their identity and values (they cannot be seperated in this case), which effect how they interact with both SA and Israel.
Jews were one of the most visible victims of rising ethnic nationalism in Europe in the 19th century. This ethnically centred state posed problems for democratic and pluralistic values which were becoming more prominant at the time (i.e. how to deal with minorities if citizenship is defined by ethnicity).

The ethnic Jewish identity which exists in South Africa today fosters good and bad in Jews' approach to the 'non-Jewish' world and people. ... See More
The bad (always more interesting): the Jewish mission of making the world 'more human' while still being a Jew currently seems lost in the current ethnic configuration of some Jews' identity.

- Making Jews interact (as Jews) with other South Africans is difficult, not only because of our previous largely oppresive and entirely removed relationship with black people in this country, but because of current race and class boundaries, and all other cultural, geographic and other barriers whic stems from class, race and a history of opression and division. Working through these present and historical barriers in SA, as well as blatent and latent insensitivity - at best - displayed by some Jews towards non-Jews is challenging.
This insensitivity is fostered by how Israel advises Jews to properly interact with minorities internally as well as those who one occupies. This stems from its ethnic centred citizenship and all the unfreedoms which stem from it (i.e. no constitution to ensure the state promotes the liberty and prosperity of all citizens living within its enlarged borders etc).

If we want to interact more and 'better' with SA society, why not explore: a radical rethink of the school syllabus in jewish schools regarding South Africa, and Jews in South Africa; a fresh approach to living in a multicultural society and reassessment of the value of this type of citizenship; and a decision about the degree of risk (real and phsycological) we are willing to take in order to explore other geographical parts of this country which are inhabited by the, still exploited, majority. They represent the SA which was seperated from white Jews during Apartheid and which still remains largely seperate from wealthy peoples today.
March 10 at 10:21pm

Ilan Solomons Morris two excellent books about Jews in SA is one entitled " The Jews of South Africa" by Gideon Shimoni and the other is " Cutting Through the Mountain" by Prof Raymond Suttner, their great books which give a detailed history of Jewish involvement in south african society!
March 11 at 6:26am

Ilan Solomons Guys thanks for the post so far, just one thing. Please can you all post your comments on the blog directly in future as it makes it more accessable to others.

Interesting discussions so far, this is exactly the reason we created the blog, in-order to foster productive discussion and critical thought. So far so good! thanks guys keep it up :-)
March 11 at 6:34am

Rafael Etan Eliasov @ Daniel, i agree with many of your points, SAUJS remains committed to combating inequality within South African society, it is a cornerstone of our very existence.

However to say that Zionism is incompatible with this is completely unfounded, in fact the opposite is true. The reason i joined the SAUJS committee was because someone told me what i can and cannot believe - 'Zionists are not tolerated on this campus', this fundamentally contradicts our constitution which entitles the people of South Africa to their beliefs. Therefore by taking up the fight against those who seek to dictate beliefs we are taking up the fight to protect our constitution and South African values.

We have and always will support the rights of any person anywhere in the world be they black, white, Jewish, Muslim, Christian, Palestinian or Israeli etc. This is why we continue the struggle to emancipate the Palestinians from the likes of Hamas, who continue to abuse human rights in the Gaza Strip - indeed they are the main obstacle to peace in the Middle East. This has been recognized over and over again in every part of the globe. In the 2008 Doha debate the house passed a resolution by 70.9 to 29.1 recognizing that 'Palestinians risk becoming their own worst enemy'. However since the infighting between Haj Amin Al Husseini and the Nashashibi clan this has been true. That being said any Israeli action which is against the fundamental rights of the Palestinians should be equally condemned.

You continually condemn the two state solution as reactionary yet this is the solution adopted by the United Nations, resolution 242 and the ICC and it receives, according to many polls, more support than any other solution. Yet you portray this solution as symptomatic of right-wing Jewish leadership. The reality is that it is you who is trying to stifle democracy and impose a solution.

Looking forward to helping to make Wits and South Africa a better place for all.
March 11 at 9:49am

Daniel Alexander Mackintosh Rafael

I actually never said 'However to say that Zionism is incompatible with this is completely unfounded, in fact the opposite is true.' It is a very strange attempt to put words in my mouth.

I would call myself a spiritual Zionist, in the tradition of Buber and Achad Ha'am. Neither of these two necessarily advocated for a Jewish state in law but wanted a Jewish cultural home. That means that their vision could have been created through Israel being a real democracy (ie not just a state for its Jewish citizens, as it is defined in law at the moment).

But I condemn the occupation without question and call for Israel to become a real democracy.

The problem is that a blanket statement of 'we are Zionist' means something very different in today's world. Through your silence, you become identified with the most violent, racist, aggressive interpreters of Zionism today - the settlers.

If SAUJ's Zionism means, as religious zionism does, the belief that the whole of the land of Israel (and the Occupied Palestinian Territories) belongs to Jews, then that is a justification of the colonialism that is currently going on there (see the current Biden/Clinton v Bibi row going on now). By not separating itself from this truly radical (and violent) form of ideological belief, SAUJS become a mechanism for justifying it and the entire colonial project in the OPT.

I never said that a two state solution is a reactionary position. Rafael, please read my posts more carefully.

I said that it was parev, meaningless and totally un-progressive.It is a statement without any meaningful moral content. While SAUJS said some important things during Apartheid on the moral bankrupcy of white supremacist rule, its ability to speak ethically on the occupation, colonialism, violation of Palestinian rights and the continued breakdown of Israel's democracy, SAUJS is today silent. You only restate what the SAZF or SAJBD says. That is fine, but then be honest about it.

And, if you really want to be a part of fighting for justice for Israelis and Palestinians, then start to read about Sheikh Jerrach, Hebron, go and visit the colonial settlement projects in the OPT (which if you have already done and still you continue to not speak out, it simply boggles my mind) and learn about how the law operates to dispossess Palestinians of their homes and lands.

Here is a good website to start:

http://theonlydemocracy.org/2010/03/why-were-concerned-about-sheikh-jarrah-and-why-you-should-be-too/

If SAUJS does not start to speak out, the time will come when history will judge SAUJS for playing a role diametrically opposite to that which it played during Apartheid when the Board and SAZF wanted it to just shut up and batten down the hatches. At that point, people will look to its leadership and wonder whether they lacked courage, did not know what was actually going on (which I have no doubt people will use as an excuse when the time comes) or actually agreed with the colonial project (and hence did not recognise Palestinians as human beings worthy of equal human rights).

That choice is yours to make.
Yesterday at 12:41pm

Rafael Etan Eliasov Daniel you categorize my comments as a 'very strange attempt to put words in my [your] mouth.' Yet you do the very same thing to SAUJS:

'By not separating itself from this truly radical (and violent) form of ideological belief, SAUJS become a mechanism for justifying it and the entire colonial project in the OPT.' I reiterate SAUJS supports no radical or ideological belief, we have demonstrated this time and time again by hosting speakers from all sides of the political spectrum and a host of different religions. Indeed I wander if you are even familiar with the positions of SAUJS which are constantly being assessed and redefined?

'un-progressive' ,'reactionary', this is semantics - i simply wished to understand the logic behind these accusations (which remain unanswered, indeed sweeping statements are made with very little reasoning). I think both words indicate a certain negativity towards the two state solution.

SAUJS does very little 'without question' as you so revealingly state of yourself. We are constantly questioning our positions and beliefs. You on the other hand seem to have made up your mind.

Many may see your cultural or 'spiritual' Zionism as a mere guise for anti-Zionism (I will expand upon this later). The fact that people misinterpret what Zionism means is purely due to ignorance, and we should not be forced to our beliefs in order to appease the ignorant. I can garuntee that SAUJS does not see the entirety of what was the Palestinian mandate as belonging to Israel. Furthermore you dangerously stereotype religious Zionism as dangerous and radical. This is incorrect and based on ignorance about the concept of religious Zionism and Torah law. Indeed many rabbi's have agreed to concessions for peace.

Your implied insult that SAUJS simply re-state the SAJBD and the Zionist Fed's position belittles our organization (and my own intelligence, having produced many of SAUJS articles on the issues). I do not wish to make this personal and will not adopt the same tactic. Indeed the 'attack the man not the argument' tactic is often used when one has a weak argument (produce any factual evidence of your claim whatsoever). I have read all forms of literature ranging from Neve Gordon's 'Israeli Occupation', Lisa Hajjar's 'Courting Conflict' to Dershowitz's 'the Case for Israel', however out of the countless total books on the conflict I have read less than a tiny portion and will strive to continue to expand my knowledge.

I have been to Hebron (and Shuhada Street), and seen disgusting things on the part of the settlers, indeed the 'death to Arab' graffiti was a true horror to see. However the hatred I saw in the eyes of the Palestinians was even more horrifying, they have implemented an apartheid system in which no Jew (one merely has to look at the declining Christian population in the West Bank to see that it is not exclusively Jewish) may enter H-1 under pain of death. I have met Palestinian activists and Breaking the Silence. I have written to Btselem and Yesh Din. I have debated with hundreds of people representing the entire political spectrum and I look forward to continuing to expand my knowledge. I know that the Palestinians have suffered and continue to suffer, I know that Israel constantly commits acts I disagree with. But I believe that Palestinians suffer most from bad leadership. However that being said I do not simply attempt to condemn one party blindly and unilaterally (I infer this from the fact that you have not once condemned the Palestinians in the above two posts).

You point a finger to specific events and places, while ironically ignoring many others. I could full volumes with the wrongs the Palestinians have done to Israel and each other. Your condemnation of a human rights violation on the part of Israel, does not necessitate an equal condemnation of the Palestinians but when one disproportionally focuses on one party, one's objectivity may come into question. I think that this is the characteristic distinction in our views - I attempt condemn human rights violations on both sides. I have no problem condemning any violations on the part of the settlers (and Israeli government), while you seem to focus on a single party as if hypnotized. (this is based on all your articles I have seen in the Jewish Report and your comments here. I don't think I once saw an article on the killing of collaborators, the abuses of Hamas, nor have you once mentioned Palestinian human rights abuses in our current conversation).

It is strange this culture of accusation, I am constantly told of the dangers (as, if i may be so bold as to summarize, you seem to do) to SAUJS (and myself) of not changing some of our values and beliefs with respect to Israel. Yet I wander if there is anyone that has informed you of the dangers of false accusations? Something you seem to have done a lot in your previous post (most of your claims about SAUJS were blatantly false or lacking in any evidence). Accusing someone falsely of immoral actions is one of the worst actions a man can do, indeed you may just shrug your shoulders and say 'oops I was wrong' but in reality the crime you would be committing has the potential of devastating effects.

Now lets talk about actions. You have cooperated with the PSC - bringing to Wits the Shministim in cooperation with the PSC. Just the other day I called the head of the PSC to discuss how we can create a more conducive environment to learning about the conflict - I was told that they would not meet me until I condemn my Zionist beliefs. They have been involved in numerous hate crimes over the years including hosting Mr. Masuku, drawing swastikas on the graffiti wall, I personally was told by the head of the PSC that he would make Zionists life on campus a 'hell'. They have distributed an article entitled 'Jewish anti-semitism is the real problem'. While I am not inferring their actions onto you, your claims of Zionism seem to ring hollow - why would a Zionist host an event with such an organization?

I wander if you would be willing to stand for my rights on campus? In my SAUJS tenure I have been called 'a vampire that drinks the blood of butchered Palestininians' for my condemnation of the rocket fire into Sderot. I have been told that 'Hitler should have finished the job'. I have been called a racist a Nazi and a 'fucking Jew', I have been attacked verbally and physically.

Daniel, in reality it is Open Shuhada that supports radicalism, by promoting a completely one-sided narrative of the conflict that breeds ignorance, Open Shuhada Street's actions prolong the conflict (and induces Antisemitism). By labeling the two state solution as 'meaningless', it is you who are denying Palestinians the right to self-determination.

ps. I would most happily discuss the state of Israeli democracy with you. Although, due to more pressing issues I have omitted it. Suffice to briefly state Freedom House (an NGO which monitors countries and their systems), rates Israel ( only applies to Israel proper - although somewhere in the region of 90% of Palestinians in the occupied territories are under the control of the PA) as one of the freest countries in the world.
Yesterday at 8:59pm

Rafael Etan Eliasov oh and thank you for your link to that website. Clearly the 'good Jews', understand the situation much better than I or Freedom House do (a well respected NGO as appose to an organization with a clear political agenda).
Yesterday at 9:00pm

Daniel Alexander Mackintosh
Raphael

Please furnish me with statements where SAUJS calls for an end to the occupation. I would be only too happy to be shown to be wrong on this issue and proved to be someone who has made terrible statements of an accusatory manner.

Zionism is not a single ideological belief and in the world today the term has been captured by the settlers. Arthur Hertzberg, in the Zionist Idea, talks about some of the varieties thereof including Socialist Zionism, Revisionist Zionism, Religious Zionism, Cultural Zionism etc. Today, the only form of Zionism that is a driving ideology for settlement in the OPT is religious Zionism with the active (although quite) encouragement of the Israeli state (how else would streetpoles, plumbing and roads suddenly appear in the West Bank).

I have not actually attacked you as a person Rafael. I do however, criticise SAUJS and you should accept this criticism being in your position. In fact, you should welcome it - this is what it means to live in a democratic society. I would like to see examples where SAUJS dares to ever speak with a different voice to the SAZF/SAJBD on one of the of the following issues:

• The Shministim – where despite my best efforts, an event with SAUJS was vetoed as people tried to silence their message.

• Israel’s gaza war – where the joint statement of the SAZF/SAJBD justified Israel’s attack and did not condemn the killing of 1400 Palestinians, the deliberate attack on civilian infrastructure or the unofficial but used policy IDF policy of human shields (see Breaking the Silence Report).

• Shuhada Street – what could be more simple than calling for a ‘Jew only’ road (read Apartheid road) to be open to Palestinians and Israelis?

• The real implosion of Israeli democracy – as seen by Supreme Court decisions that are not carried out and attacks on human rights organisations and activists. Talk to Israeli human rights activists on the ground and see how scared they are about death threats coming from within Israeli society and the way that the state is starting to shut down protests and monitor them.

I could keep going, but it will become tedious. The point is that on matters of substance, SAUJS will tow the part line.

How many Jews do you know who lived in H1 in houses with Palestinians? I know a couple, and in fact, one of them is working with me in OSS right now. She stayed for a month in H1 with a family with no problem whatsoever.

Are you saying that the Palestinians suffer the occupation (the 500 000 settlers who live over the green line as a result of Israeli violations of the 4th Geneva convention and the IDF’s strict divide and rule tactics throughout the West Bank) because of bad leadership? Is that a serious statement? You are saying that had the Palestinians had good leadership then Israel would not have:

• Expropriated their private land
• Created settlements and brought in settlers to live throughout the West Bank
• Keep the Palestinians living under lock and key as they have for over 43 years since the occupation began

No serious person who knows anything about the history of the occupation could possible subscribe to your view.

In addition, I feel no need to defend the Palestinian leadership and I agree with you that they have been ineffective, corrupt and many of them have supported terror attacks against Israelis.

However, bad Palestinian leadership does not justify occupation, because that is what the logical conclusion of your statement suggests.

Antisemitism and violent rhetoric is exactly what OSS is seeking to combat. By building on a basis of human rights, I have no time for racists who engage in horrible slander like that which you have been subjected to on Wits campus. Members of OSS have been attacked thus far by Jews for being anti-Semitic and by anti-Semites for some of our members (including myself) for being spiritual Zionists - so I think that we are getting the message right. No quarter for antisemitism/islamaphobia and a renewed focus on the human rights abuses.

My point about a two state solution (I think I have said this so many times already) is that it is merely a restatement of the current consensus. Hence, SAUJS, by reiterating what everyone is already saying, is not saying anything of meaningful moral content. My issue is that SAUJS is not speaking out about the myriad of human rights abuses, implemented by the Israeli state and the settlers, against Palestinian human rights.

Will SAUJS release a substantive statement on Sheik Jerrach for instance and how racist Israeli property law only allows Jews to recover property while denying Palestinians that same right? See

http://fr.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1263147932330&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FPrinter

Lastly, thank you for pointing out Freedom House’s characterisation of Israel. While Freedom House does have a tendency not to criticise US strategic allies (a whole other discussion but they do have a political agenda), and it is completely inconsistent that the country implementing the world's longest occupation is put on par with Western democracies which do not keep millions of people under lock and key, I definitely think that they are a decent source of information.

Did you know that Freedom House highlighted that Israel, after the Gaza War in 2009, fell on its journalistic freedom rating, from ‘free’ to ‘partly free’ on the Freedom House score sheet (below that of Kuwait, the UAE and Lebanon)?
17 hours ago

Rafael Etan Eliasov Daniel, on numerous occasions SAUJS has called for an end to the occupation through a negotiated settlement. Our positions are rarely published (except in the Jewish Report), I would be quite happy to write a statement condemning the expansion of settlements and calling for a negotiated settlement (I do not believe that a unilateral withdrawal will be in any way helpful as the Gaza disengagement so aptly proves). Our new blog has provided a space for us to provide our stances (and I recommend you read my article on the stalled peace process which will be up soon). What is more important and what I have continually emphasized is that we have become a forum for diverse views, (I will not restate the list of personalities we have hosted again), providing a space for our students to derive a real education.

Categorizing Zionism into neat little boxes and then blaming one for all the wrongdoings is not only unhelpful but completely incorrect. One just has to look at the diversity of Israeli settlers to understand this, look at the positions of Yisrael Bieteinu and Betar (a revisionist Zionist movement), to see that your stereotype is based on a fallacy. Your original statement was categorizing religious Zionism as a whole as, 'truly radical (and violent) form of ideological belief'. I merely wished to point out that this is a stereotype, you seem extremely displeased by someone stereotyping your Zionist beliefs - don't do it to others. (Again you have at no point disproved my statement but only tried to divert the debate - even if I accept your flimsy premise that ideological Zionism drives settlement building, the settlers are not representative of religious Zionism and I again, although somewhat redundantly, point out that there are religious Zionists who support the Palestinians right to self-determination and autonomy. Within religious Zionism there are a plethora of political positions.)

Accusing SAUJS and by extension me of 'only restat[ing] what the SAZF or SAJBD says', would be tantamount to me accusing you of only restating Doron Isaac's position. Although your positions are no doubt similar on some issues, this is something I would not do, as I respect you as a free thinking individual with enough intellect to come up with your own positions (and because I am only familiar with a few of your and Mr. Isaacs positions - comparable to the familiarity you have with SAUJS' positions).

Before I deal with your list of 'positions', I would just like to explain the reality of SAUJS' work with regards to Israel. Organizations on campus question Israel's right to exist, I have seen students attempt to justify suicide bombings and rocket attacks. I point this out to illustrate that on campus the very substance of debate is different, we therefore focus our energies and efforts on proving Israel's right to exist.

You have given me an extensive list of positions however you have not given me the full press release and I therefore cannot comment on any of their positions without further details (nor do i claim to be an expert on SAZF positions). That being said I will address my understanding (which may be erroneous as SAUJS is a democratic institution - we had the highest voter turnout in our last election than any other SAUJS elections in the last ten years) of SAUJS positions:

With regard to the Shministim, I can truly confirm that SAUJS can offer them no platform, this was a democratic decision. While this is not a position taken lightly, as a prerequisite we require that a speaker actually knows something about the issue he (or she) is speaking on.

SAUJS condemns any deliberate attack on civillians. (just as SAUJS condemns the use of human shields by Hamas).

SAUJS condemns the actions of the Palestinians that necessitated ethnically separate roads. Palestinian terrorist organizations attacking anyone of a certain religious orientation, is a gross form of racism. Make no mistake Daniel, it was the racism and brutality of organisations such as Hamas and Fatah that lead to the ethnically separate roads. When Palestinian organizations threaten genocide against Jews it is they who cause the separation, your gripe should therefore be with these organizations. Your' severing the necessary implications of cause and effect are unhelpful. That being said when any lesser measure could have been taken to protect Jews traveling to visit thousand year old holy sites, SAUJS would condemn Israeli action (ie. the adopting of an unnecessarily severe measure).

That being said and I would like to redundantly state this again SAUJS condemns the apartheid that the Palestinian organizations are perpetrating against Christians and Jews in their areas of control.

Finally we condemn any Israeli action which ignores a procedurally and substantively correct Israeli court ruling. We condemn death threats to any individual.

Again I see you are guilty of putting words into other peoples mouth - I highly doubt that these are the positions of any Jewish body, although I'm happy to get the Zionist Fed's opinion if you disagree.

I met the Jews living in H-2 (actually they were living in a Palestinian home in H-2, but semantics aside, although unlikely, you could have met a different set), firstly the Jews living there are such a tiny portion of the population. Secondly the Palestinian apartheid regime necessitates that they adopt certain political radically anti-Israel stances in order to be accepted. I was warned on leaving not to go into H-1 without a Palestinian guide by these very people (and the breaking the silence representative), why? because I was a Jew. Visions of a burning Joseph's tomb, visions of Palestinians proudly displaying the blood of lynched soldiers for the world to see flashed before my eyes.

I believe that the Palestinians suffer from the occupation due to bad leadership and I think that this is obvious (your disdain towards this logical conclusion in no way detracts from it). This in no way justifies the settlements nor does it mean that the settlements are helpful - which they are not, they are in fact in many respects independent from the errors of Palestinian leadership. This is most evident in the fact that the first time settlements become part of the peace process was only in 2002, one must than wander at the ever increasing importance of the settlements and their true implications.

If there had been good Palestinian leadership the Palestinians would have a state today, it would therefore be impossible for Israel to do the things you mentioned (although this in no way means that they are justified as you claim is the logical conclusion of my statement which it is not - again you attempt to put words into my mouth). The Palestinians have been offered a state countless times in every shape and form (I can go through them if you like). Please don't use emotional and generic statements like 'No serious person who knows anything about the history of the occupation could possible subscribe to your view.' and 'Is that a serious statement?', Instead bring facts to prove your statement (facts remain sparse). Please don't belittle my intelligence with such statements.

And yes I do believe that bad leadership can (notice and use the word 'can' instead of 'does') justify occupation - where occupation is the only means to stop twelve thousand rockets being fired at civilian populations - every single time the Israeli's have withdrawn they have received devastating attacks against civilian targets. If the Palestinians had a good, effective and moderate leadership it would allow Israel to withdraw from the occupied territories without this effect.

Open Shuhada is not achieving its objective by promoting a one sided narrative - quite the opposite in fact.
7 hours ago

Rafael Etan Eliasov With regards to the two-state solution - your assumption is based on a faulty premise; that anything the majority says lacks 'meaningful moral content', quite the contrary many times the majority is indeed correct (in fact your premise is contrary to democratic values). Your basis for denying the two state solution is that this is that this is a position that the majority has adopted - which is no basis at all. Do you support the two state solution, which in my opinion is the basis for a moderate solution that does not completely ignore international law and human rights? Please don't use SAUJS other positions to attack it's support of the two state solution - if you want to attack the two state solution, attack the two state solution.

Regarding your request for a statement, I will look into the situation further and consult the committee, if we democratically decide to do so then we will do this. Would you be willing to release a statement condemning Hamas and its incitement, xenophobia, violations of human rights and supporting the two state solution? (by the way your article is an analysis as appose to an actual news article; just a point, although this does not invalidate it)

Yes I happened to notice that - that is however a different index (Israel's rating remains 'free' in the political and civil rights indexes).
7 hours ago

Rafael Etan Eliasov Daniel, it is time that Open Shuhada Street adopts moderate positions, it's radical positions threaten to corrupt what we as a community and country stand for. If you are radicals that is fine but at least be honest about it and don't champion your cause under the guise of human rights and tolerance. History probably won't judge Open Shuhada Street, as once the conflict ends it will quickly be forgotten. However, the time will come when people will question whether Open Shuhada Street actually intended to divide and brainwash our community. I have no doubt people in the organization will at no point be accountable to the false accusations that they make. However if they were they will claim that they thought they were helping the Palestinians and not silencing their democratic will. Or some will claim that they supported the apartheid of the Palestinian terror organizations (and therefore do not see Jews and Christians as human beings).

The choice is yours to make.
6 hours ago

Daniel Alexander Mackintosh Hi Rafael

I need to reply to you on the facts and I will do so with detailed sources.

However, for the moment, 2 points are worth mentioning:

1 - OSS is not a Jewish organisation. Our membership has a diverse array of people, so the charge of dividing the Jewish community is a nonsensical one. I know that there are many Jews who care about Palestinian and Israeli human rights and who will not be kept quiet by the accusations of breaking ranks. That is what SAUJS seemed to be willing to do under Apartheid but would not dare do today.

2 - Your statement below is one of the most important I have read coming from SAUJS in many years and I thank you for being so honest:

'And yes I do believe that bad leadership can (notice and use the word 'can' instead of 'does') justify occupation - where occupation is the only means to stop twelve thousand rockets being fired at civilian populations - every single time the Israeli's have withdrawn they have received devastating attacks against civilian targets.'

A justification for the violation of international law through occupation. The International Court of Justice in its 2004 advisory opinion stated very clearly that it all territories conquered by Israel are occupied. And occupation combined with settlement of your own country's citizens in that territory violates the 4th Geneva convention.

A proper response will follow in due course.
5 hours ago

Rafael Etan Eliasov Daniel before you go further, you have again tried to put words into my mouth I refer to 'community' and not 'Jewish community' referring to a wider South African community.
5 hours ago

Stalled Peace Process - The Blame game, by Rafi Eliasov

2010-03-15T09:30:00.000-07:00

I’d like to reminisce on the path towards the current impasse in the peace negotiations between Israel and the Palestinians and the chance of future success.

The process began with two stances the Israeli stance – peace talks must begin immediately and unconditionally. On the other hand Abbas wanted a complete freeze in settlement construction in both the West Bank and East Jerusalem. This lead to a complete stall in the peace process, with Israel eventually conceding to a halt in construction in the West Bank. Thereafter the demands racked up, Abbas demanding recognition of a Palestinian state within the 67’ borders. After weeks of non-decision Abbas, with the backing of the Arab league, decided to accept indirect negotiations. Finally with the announcement of new settlements in East Jerusalem, hopes of a resumed negotiation have been dashed.

Abbas and the Arab league are now claiming that Israel is the catalyst for this failure. I will now attempt to deconstruct this allegation.

Abbas’ initial demand of a complete halt in settlements, would have been an unprecedented step in Israel’s history. Indeed every single Israeli government – whether left or right - built settlements and Israel’s offer of a West Bank freeze remains a unique step. Settlements are unambiguously illegal under international law. However right and fact tend to differ on a practical level and Abbas failed to recognize that the best and permanent way to end settlements was to reach a final status agreement.

Abbas then demanded a state within the 67’ borders, implicitly saying, ‘give me everything I demand before we negotiate’. Again one may argue that the Palestinians have a right to a state as per resolution 242 and therefore Abbas was merely demanding what was rightfully his. Yet it is Israel’s right as a sovereign country to be free from terror attacks, if international law was adhered to there would be no need for negotiations – Israel would be at peace and the Palestinians would have their state. In actual fact Hamas continues to shower rockets into Sderot and the incitement by the PA and Hamas continues – brainwashing children to hate. Furthermore the purpose of negotiations is to transform ‘rights’ into ‘facts’ with each party making concessions in order to achieve more in their particular area of interested. While legal systems around the world remain imperfect, there will be a dichotomy between right and fact.

The final step to the breakdown was Israel’s recent announcement of new settlements. Let me make this clear, this was an illogical and illegal (while there was doubt of the legal status of East Jerusalem due to the ambiguous wording of resolution 242, this was solved by the ICC’s ruling on the issue) move on the part of the Israeli government. That being said Abbas’ surprise at this ’betrayal’ is equally illogical. The Israelis did what they said they would do – built settlements in East Jerusalem and as illegal as it is Abbas entered into the negotiations knowing that Israel had promised only to stop settlements outside of East Jerusalem. Indeed the Israelis made no attempt to hide their intention having built settlements in Gilo (East Jerusalem) mere months before.

One may argue that this is what the Road Map to Peace dictates, yet the Palestinians remain to fulfill many of the requirements on their side of the bargain.

When analyzing the negotiations one must take into account a number of factors – Bibi is attempting to balance the needs of his right wing support base with what is required for peace negotiations. There are two diametrically opposed goals. On the one hand Bibi must make enough concessions to satisfy the Palestinians that he is serious about peace. On the other hand if he makes too many concessions it could result in a breakdown of the coalition, leaving him in no place to negotiate peace.

On the other side of the fence can Abbas offer a real peace, what will peace with the PA achieve in Hamas run Gaza? Will a peace with Abbas end the rocket barrage on Sderot? Furthermore the PA have become viewed by many Palestinians as a tool of the Israeli system, Abbas therefore needed to prove to the Palestinian street that he could play ‘hard ball’ or risk his credibility, this was exasperated by his initial rejection of the Goldstone findings in the Human Rights Council. Again this current impasse is a message to those more radical elements of Palestinian society that Abbas can stand up to the Israelis. Abbas’ ‘joker up his sleeve’ is violence, he now stands at a forke – either wait for Israeli concessions, soften his approach and lose credibility or force Israel to accept his conditions through violence as was done by Arafat after Camp David. The recent East Jerusalem riots are an indication and a warning sign to Israel.

Ultimately the question remains what are the chances of success for negotiations? One needs to look back at the annals of history in order to determine the answer to this question.

The history of Palestinian-Israeli negotiations is a long and bumpy road, beginning with the Yishuv’s relationship with the Nashashibi family, who used the Jewish settlements for money and supplies to fight their foes however according to renowned historian Benny Morris at no point did this clan accept their rights to the land. In 1925, a small Jewish organization called Brit Shalom approached notable Arabs and Jews proposing a bi-national state; this was summarily rejected by both sides. Since then the Palestinians would be offered a state in every shape and form and they would reject them all. Two notable exceptions (the Geneva Accord does not count as it was extra-governmental) are the Taba summit – however this summit was doomed to failure from the start as there was inadequate time till Israeli elections and the lack of the heads of state (who is the only person able to make the hardest concessions according to Dennis Ross). The other instance is the Arab Peace Initiative – which required unilateral steps on the part of the Israelis with no reciprocal steps on the part of the Palestinians and a rigid refusal on the part of the Arab nations to alter any elements but may constitute a missed opportunity for Israel. Even this initiative failed to recognize Israel as a Jewish state.

In conclusion, when the Palestinians sit down to negotiate they see themselves conceding seventy percent of what was mandatory Palestine before the negotiations have even begun. While the Palestinians continue to instill in their children the right of return and the right to the entirety of ‘Palestine’, in contradiction to international law, negotiations can never succeed. At the same time the Israelis need to give up on dreams, dreams of the West Bank. Peace remains as elusive as ever most due to a lack in the fundamentals required before peace can be achieved – most glaringly so on the Palestinian side. While marches for a Palestinian state exist in Tel Aviv and other parts of Israel, this is not so in respect to Israel in Ramallah or Nablus – indeed no Palestinian faction has ever recognized Israel as a Jewish homeland. Instead memories of a burning Joseph’s Tomb, of the blood of Israeli soldiers on Palestinian hand proudly displayed for the world to see remind Israel of the horrors that await if peace is not achieved.

Middle East Conflict Revisited - Yanai Klawansky

2010-03-11T02:30:00.000-08:00

After reading recent articles in Vuvuzela I felt compelled to shed some light on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, particularly from a perspective that the average witsie is unfamiliar with. Given the nature and intensity of the PSC’s ‘apartheid Israel’ agenda on campus, coupled with SAUJS’s ardent defence of Israel, it is of little surprise that the notion of a “divided campus” surrounds this issue. In addition the Bongani Masuku hate speech comments followed by the HRC’s ruling have only served to exacerbate this divide.

In order to understand the intricacies of the conflict in a wider sense that is not informed by the polarised environment on campus, it is necessary to deconstruct the PSC’s position as well as place its agenda among the commonly accepted schools of thought surrounding the conflict. The Israel-Apartheid analogy, which gained momentum around the time of the now infamous Durban UN Anti-racism conference in 2001, has been opportunistically utilised in the South African context to promote international condemnation and boycott of Israel. Despite its ostensible appeal (on the simplest of levels), the analogy remains an indefensible one. Not only does it fail to consider the fundamental differences between the South African and Israeli situations, the analogy’s use is inappropriate and serves to cheapen the meaning of apartheid which resulted in the persecution of millions of South Africans. As Benjamin Pogrund, former anti-apartheid activist and founding director of Yakar's Center for Social Concern in Jerusalem has noted, use of the label is “at best ignorant and naive and at worst cynical and manipulative”.

What then are these fundamental differences that are ignored by proponents of the apartheid analogy? While this involves a lengthy analysis which I am unable to carry out in this forum, the core consideration is this: the Israeli state, despite its many failings, human rights concerns, and questionable acts in terms of international law, remains a vibrant functioning democracy in which the Arab minority are afforded an array of rights including that of franchise.

If one still considers use of the analogy as an accurate and appropriate one, consider this. By taking the apartheid analogy to its logical end we would be required to entertain the following argument: South Africa emerged from apartheid as a unitary state, therefore because blacks were oppressed under apartheid and Palestinians are oppressed by Israel, the same one-state solution should apply.

Why then does this proposed one-state solution enjoy virtually no support among the international community, academics, writers, and concerned civil society at large? Apart from radical groups like the PSC and various minority voices, no significant support exists because the solution is widely regarded as untenable, unrealistic and insensitive to the regional and historical complexities of the conflict. Essentially the idealistic appeal of the one-state proposition is undone by its defective underpinning – the apartheid analogy.

It is regrettable that the Israeli-Palestinian narrative on campus is so heavily driven by a group as radical and out of touch with the realities of the conflict as the PSC, and consequentially by SAUJS’s reactionary defence of Israel, which in light of the apartheid accusations is often is unwilling to accept wrong doing on Israel’s part. Debate around this issue remains intense for the simple fact that there are valid arguments to be made by either side. On the one hand, calls are rightly made for denouncement and ending of terrorist activity and fanatical ideology, and demanding a credible Palestinian leadership that is committed to negotiation and able to effectively nullify the radical elements which oppose negotiation. While on the other, there is cessation of settlement activity, calls for proportionality in military response, and compliance with international law standards.

Our campus should be a forum in which level-headed intelligent debate surrounding the middle-east is conducted, rather than an environment characterised by agenda driven rhetoric and viewpoints which owe more to their malicious motives than to the realities of the conflict.

Originally printed in Vuvuzela

Thank you

2010-03-11T01:29:00.000-08:00

We are already receiving a number of interesting posts on topics. Thanks so much to all of you who have submitted. Our policy is that any SAUJS member can write for this blog as long as it has to do with out three pillars of Jewish Identity, South Africa and the promotion of Zionism. Whilst we want to have as much discussion as possible we are also not interested in promoting hate speech. Please see our policy on this in our profile. We will be having interesting guest bloggers who are not SAUJS members from time to time, so look out.

This blog does not reflect the views of SAUJS unless otherwise stated.

Any comments please send to media@saujs.co.za

Putting in the SA in SAUJS - Ilan Solomons

2010-03-10T01:39:00.000-08:00

The South African in SAUJS 2010

The South African Union of Jewish Students or SAUJS stands on three pillars Judaism, Zionism/Israel and South African affairs. These values are what hold us together as a student movement on and off campuses across the country. It is often a difficult and complex balancing act but these core values have held us together for many years and will be our guiding principles for the foreseeable future as well.

SAUJS has been in the recent past mainly associated with its first two pillars, which are without doubt two vital aspects of our culture and tradition. The third principle, i.e. South Africa has to some extent been overshadowed since the end of the days of Apartheid when SAUJS was one of the few ‘white’( as we were classified by the NATS) organizations that openly opposed the unjust and inhumane system that oppressed the overwhelming majority of the country. There have been various books and articles written on this particular subject and SAUJS is actually in the process of compiling its own history into a book, which should be ready some time this year hopefully.

The issue now is what is SAUJS’s vision for how to reignite the spark of patriotism and South African activism for which it was once known? Last year we were able to co-host with the Progressive Youth Alliance – which consists of the South African Students Congress (SASCO), the African National Congress Youth League (ANCYL), and the Young Communist League (YCL) – an event where prominent Jewish South Africans like Janet Love and Howard Sackstein, spoke about their involvement in the struggle both as Jews and as humanitarians. It was a fantastic and enlightening discussion which showed the important role Jewish activists played in the struggle, and even how SAUJS leaders like Howie Sackstein took brave decisions to stand up to members of his own constituency including the Board of Deputies and the Sydenham Highlands North Shul committee who hosted PW Botha on one occasion when he was involved and responsible for some of the most egregious acts of Apartheid oppression. These are the types of Jews that make us proud and I hope that if Heaven Forbid the current leadership of the Jewish community had to be associated or even supportive of oppressive racist elements that we as SAUJS would stand up to them.

Just this past week we co – hosted Moeletsi Mbeki with the Association of Black Securities and Investments Professionals Wits Chapter(ABSIP), Mr Mbeki is the brother of the former President of South Africa – Thabo Mbeki. He is a leading Economist, Journalist and Political Analysis. He is also a major critic of the government namely on its policy towards the economy, HIV/AIDS and Zimbabwe. He spoke about the release of his latest book and some of the important issues that the book mentions. It is important that South African students are always made aware from a plurality of views about the challenges that our country faces and how best we can overcome them and turn them into opportunities for a better South Africa.

It is my sincere hope that the campus committees of SAUJS ensure that events like the Jewish Anti-Apartheid Hero week happens this year, and that more collaboration between various organizations of different faiths, creeds, backgrounds and the like occur. As the National committee of SAUJS we are committed to improving ties with our Non-Jewish friends and exploring the loads of diverse cultures that this country has blessed us with. Opening up avenues of communication and dialogue with members of the Islamic faith is another challenge which we hope to tackle in some shape or form during the course of this year.

We truly hope that this year in which we host the Soccer World Cup that not only Bafana Bafana will put in a respectable performance, but that the message of fair play and tolerance is embedded in the minds and souls of all our countryman during and after the tournament itself.

Please feel free to contact me or any member of the SAUJS National Committee about interesting initiatives or suggestions for projects we can do to help further strengthen our South African - or any other aspect of the movement for that matter – affairs portfolio.

Am Yisrael Chai, Ayoba 2010 Ayoba!!!!

Feel free just to leave comment on the blog or contact Ilan on Liaison@saujs.co.za

SAUJS Wits gets busy- Dina Hendler

2010-03-09T04:02:00.000-08:00

South African Union of Jewish Students has commenced the year of 2010 with a resounding bang. The movement has relaunched and rebranded sporting a funky new logo and a commitment to renewing Jewish activity across South African campuses, including religious, social, political, outreach and Zionist events and initiatives.

The vibrancy and enthusiasm of the team has already manifested in an array of events on Wits campus. The SAUJS welcoming braai held on the library lawns on main campus saw over 180 SAUJS members gather to socialise and meet fellow Jewish students while enjoying delicious wors rolls and a brilliant selection of music. The positive atmosphere at the braai was reflected by students who expressed excitement about SAUJS 2010 and enquired about upcoming events on the organisation’s calendar.

The successful braai was followed by the long-awaited Wits Beis Medrash opening, which was brilliantly organised by the National committee who have been working on the project since last year. The event was attended by students and prominent community members who were treated to a typically thought provoking and eloquent address by Chief Rabbi Warren Goldstein as well as the inspiring words of Rabbi Holzberg, father of murdered Chabad emissary to India.

Not long after, SAUJS celebrated purim at the happening Ohrsom purim party, offering discounted rates to members. The very next day a follow-up party on the lawns was held, with delectable hammanstachen, shalach monos from Chabad, refreshing appeltizers on offer, all accompanied by pumping music; in an enjoyable social gathering reminiscent of the phenomenal opening braai.

The very same week, SAUJS hosted Moeletsi Mbeki, brother of President Tahbo Mbeki, a foremost intellectual and critic of South African economic policy who spoke on his recently publsiehd book ‘Architects of Poverty”. This popular speaker attracted a huge crowd and provided food for thought for the large number of students and intellectuals who attended his talk.

The next day, SAUJS hosted yet another well-attended talk by human rights activist and international speaker Noam Bedein who spoke harrowingly about the humanitarian crisis in Sderot and the murder of civilians by Hamas rockets.

In all, SAUJS 2010 has launched with an unforgettable range of social events, political speakers and offers a wide variety of religious services weekly on campus.

To hear about upcoming events, join the SAUJS Wits facebook group and listen to Chaifm for updates on the amazing happening of the only Jewish students movement in South Africa.

The beginning of advocacy or the fall of Zion

2010-02-28T07:52:00.000-08:00

By Ariel Shapiro

Many people sit in history classes and wonder. Sometimes they reach conclusions, but more often they do not. Most Jews are perplexed by the predicament that their minds have presented before them. For some it reached a point of utter disbelief. The question I am building up is the following: How did people, fellow citizens of Germany, Poland, Austria and others sit around and watch the holocaust happen before their eyes? How did they allow such proceedings to take place in their backyard? Yes, indeed, there were a number whom risked their lives for an unbelievable display of humanitarianism, but for the most part- they were indifferent!

Let’s make this a more compelling ordeal.

How could men, moral men, teachers and doctors, but most confusingly- fathers be Hitler-serving Nazis? How could these normal individuals go about the task of raping thousands and murdering 6,000,000 human being, Jews- included among them 1,500,000 children – often right in front of their eyes? Often with their own hands? And then return to their daily chores and loving family each evening?

This compelling query stands most tall in the glimmer of belief that people have an inherent good in them. That we are created in the image of G-d whom is all merciful. Surely we merited receiving a remnant of that mercy, one that should cause an exclusion of such a horrid history in dark, dark Europe? How could it be?

I think there is a man whom may have the answer. Not only that- he may also be one of the few appropriate candidates to finding such a solution. In Mein Kampf, Adolf Hitler says: ‘by means of shrewd lies, unremittingly repeated, it is possible to make people believe that heaven is hell- and that hell is heaven’. And he proved it. Through the Nazi-constructed propaganda machine, the high command managed to convince almost every soldier that the ‘hell’ they were seeing was truly ‘heaven’.

By the time the final solution was decided upon, the S.S. and Einzatsgruppen didn’t see a human being standing before his self-dug grave but rather as a rat- vermin that needed to be exterminated. Not as a contradiction to human mercy and morality, but rather as a service to the human race. He was saving the world from a terrible imposter named the Jew. And to murder such a being became an elementary act of service to his people and his race.

When one enters the holocaust centre in Cape Town, the first inscription on the wall states: ‘discrimination does not always lead to genocide, but it always precedes it’. That is to say that a mass murder of a people will not sit well unless there is a reason for it to happen. There has to be some motive for such an act to take place- a justification, if you will, for such a tragic action.

On the 27th of January 2010, 65 years after the crematoria of Auschwitz were closed; having completed their job- a meeting took place. In this meeting, the Ayatollah Ali Khameinei of Iran, the man who wields the nuclear power of Iran threatened to open those crematoria again. He, along with his president Achmadinejad and puppeteer Hashemi Rafsanjani have called a spade a spade. They have done little to sow confusion as to their intentions.

Israel must be wiped off the map.1
‘in a nuclear exchange with Israel [Iran] might lose 15 million people, which would be a small ‘sacrifice’ from among the one billion Muslims worldwide in exchange for the lives of five million Israeli Jews.’2
‘The region will soon be free of the Zionist regime’ 3
Now let’s be clear. This is not the 1930’s. We do not speak of an empire that seeks the destruction of a small part of its citizens, nomads to the world. We speak of a state, a democratic state and a member of the United Nations- One that gives more to the world relatively than any other country. This state has been more than a refuge for a lost people. It is a miracle of the 20th century and a country to take pride in like no other.

So we have a question. I will refrain from the stamping of the anti-Semitism card to explain the world’s apathy to such threats. And to be true- some have responded with fire. We did see some dignitaries turn their backs on Mahmoud as he took the stand in Geneva. Not to mention the striking BDS campaign that a single figure of countries have subscribed to.

But! Hardly an apt response to a country we promised not to lend the earth to again.

So how can it be? How can it continue to be? Why is the world standing by while the red lights ‘genocide’, ‘hypocrisy’ and dare I say- ‘never again’ flash ever so bright?

To go back to the one man who played this game before, who won this game before. Hitler said it. Heaven has become hell. ???

To the world. Yes- even to the western world- there is a shift taking place. The Anti-Zionist card is thrown freely and it is legal. But world- do be careful. The hatred of a people with an ideology stands well within the reach of a hatred of a religion or a race. Especially when this ideology was/is a necessity for them. And, over time, the hatred is built. We are no longer a small nation seeking a homeland. Not a skeleton a bones finding a body. We are seen as a regime. Often as a regime that is as harsh as the one that almost destroyed us. An oppressive people. An apartheid state. A genocide loving, ethnic cleansing power.

From this point- it is not hard to practice prophecy. From here- it almost seems too simple. The world has learnt. The world is ready to fight against the enemy. They will not stand by as human beings are turned into ash. In fact this time they are on top of their game- they will not wait until D-day. They will act now.

Let me make this as clear as crystal. After the Ayatollah explained carefully his intentions to rid the world of this hell, his opposite, the president of Mauritania praised Iran’s efforts ‘to establish peace and tranquillity in the region’4- of creating a heaven.

But how can it be? Surely the same words were heard by us as were by him? Yes, indeed. In his mind, in his country’s mind, and in the mind of 59% of the world5- peace will come when the Israelis are gone. No longer will there be instability. No longer will an oppressed people remain occupied and beaten. No longer will Israel ‘expand its infiltration and dominance in the region’6. Soon help will arrive. Soon the world will be successful in getting rid of this vermin, this hell.

But, world, one question, and this is crucial.

For every Jew reading- here is your point of protest. Your task at hand.

Are the vermin you speak of not really just human? Is the hell you seek to destroy not really the heaven you love? One thing will spell the fall of Zion. After this point, prophecy is a game. When the world sees an Israeli as a rat. The heaven of Zion as the hell of apartheid. Then, we know, the end is near.

First past the post

2010-02-01T06:50:00.000-08:00

Welcome to our readers. SAUJS members will know the Chutzpah Online for many years as an internal news service to our members. Well now you can be a part of making the news. We hope that through this blog will help members will be able to voice their opinions while at the same time enjoying first rate content from our guest bloggers