Yeshiva World News

[By Rabbi Y. Eisenman ]

All of us, – Jew and Gentile – have been traumatized by the events of this past week.

Personally, I feel as if I have been hurt and violated in a way that I cannot recall in my entire life.

So many of the ‘assumptions and truths’ which allowed me to function with a degree of sanity and security have been pulled out from under me.

I do not (and would never) claim that the following words represent Dass Torah and do not claim they are anything more than my own humble opinion.

I certainly cannot explain why little Leiby was chosen by Hashem to be destroyed by this ‘creature’.

However, since as believing Jews, we are of the opinion that nothing (and we mean nothing) can occur in this world without Hashem ‘signing off’ on it, then we must grapple with the theological issue of ‘Why did G-d allow this to happen?’

Meaning, if G-d is in charge than how could He allow this to happen? And if G-d is not in charge….Well, I will not even go there.

Therefore, for most people reading these words, we have to grapple with the question of ‘why?’

Why did Leiby get killed and why did it happen by the hands of a fellow Jew?

Why was his death so horrific and so brutal?

What lesson could Hashem be imparting to us through this horrible and bloodthirstily merciless murder?

We believe that everything is for a reason and nothing happens without Hashem allowing it to occur.

This is in contradiction to New York police commissioner, Raymond W. Kelly, who “said it was “happenstance” that the boy had asked directions from Levi Aron, 35, a supply-store clerk and former security guard who lives less than two miles from the Kletzkys.” [NY Times 7/13/11]

Therefore, it behooves all of us to attempt to comprehend that which is incomprehensible.

This, therefore, is an attempt to offer some measure of understanding and perhaps (better said) an attempt to offer a reaction to the brutal events of this week.

Hashem in His ultimate wisdom wanted man to be able to be creative and feel safe and secure in the world.

However, if man becomes cavalier and condescending and lives life with a sense of entitlement, then Hashem has to do something to wake us up and jar us from our self-imposed stupor.

Why Hashem has chosen Leiby I will never know.

Why Hashem had to send us this message in such a grotesque and brutal wrapper is also beyond my understanding.

Nevertheless, there is a message and this message is something we must take to heart.

There is one thought I have not heard expressed in all of the discourse; one thought which has given me no rest; one thought which compels me at this moment to write and to write.

Although the hour is late, the heart aches; I must discharge my duty.

I must speak, for no other reason than Leiby can no longer speak.

Friends, do you know what thought precludes me from sleeping?

Do you know which thought constantly haunts me and prevents me from arriving at any sense of peace or sense of stability?

I keep thinking to myself how can it be that thousands of people from all over the Jewish world were willing to disrupt their normal daily endeavors to help find Leiby once he was missing- however, not one, and I mean not one person was willing to look down and see a lost little boy wondering far from home and bend down and ask “Mine teire kiind (my dear child) you are lost, let me help you get home.”

This thought allows me no rest and precludes me from sleeping!

Leiby must have passed well over 100 frum men and women as he walked his death-walk of approximately one mile from 44^th Street and 12^th Ave. until 18^th Ave.

How is it that not one person saw the frightened lost little boy?

How is it possible that Leiby stood on 18^th Ave. in the heart of frum Borough Park for 7-10 minutes while the ‘creature’ went into a dentist’s office to pay a bill and no one noticed and asked him, “Mine teire kiind (my dear child) you are lost, let me help you get home.”

How can that be?

Friends, yesterday when I went to the Levaya I walked around Borough Park for three hours before the Levaya.

Do you know what I saw?

I saw most people in the street talking on their cell phones and absorbed in their own worlds.

Do you know why Levi Aron (the cursed creature) was the one chosen to be asked by little Leiby for directions?

Very simple, he was available to be asked!

Everyone else was preoccupied with their own stuff.

If one person had volunteered and asked to help little Leiby during his one mile walk to death on Monday, thousands of people would never have had to ‘volunteer’ on Tuesday.

Friends, have we become numb and callous to the people and especially the children around us that we no longer even see who is lost and who is in pain right in front of us?

Have we become so wrapped up in ourselves and our blackberries, our smart phones and most importantly- ourselves, that we no longer notice a lost Jewish boy who is standing right there in front of us?

Can this be the wake-up call which Hashem is sending us through Leiby?

How often do we go into the local grocery and we see an old friend chatting away to what appears to be a container of milk?

How often do you see friends, rabbis and acquaintances on the phone in animated conversations as they walk down the street?

Levi Aron had the time.

He was not on the phone.

He was willing and waiting to be approached and to be asked by little Leiby.

Perhaps the message Hashem is sending us is that it’s time to look around and see which children are lost right in front of our faces.

However, it does not end here.

Its not only time to look around and see the little boys who are lost as they are walking right by us, its time to listen to their painful screams of pain.

Leiby had no one to ask except Levi Aron and that is tragic.

However, even more so, Leiby had no one to listen to his cries for help except Levi Aron.

This is horrific.

This must change.

Leiby is a wake up call for all of us to see who is lost and to hear who is calling out in pain.

There are many more Liebys’ out there who are lost.

We must open our eyes and see them.

And there are many Liebys’ out there who are calling out for us in their pain and they are not being heard.

I have a friend.

He is one of my dearest and closest friends.

He was hurt as a child and he cried out.

He called out and begged those he trusted the most in the world to hear his cry; to listen to his pain.

No one listened.

My friend has one of the holiest and finest Neshomos (souls) that Hashem ever created.

He is sensitive and kind; caring and compassionate.

However, my friend no longer associates with the ways and people of his old neighborhood.

He called out when he was hurt; he screamed for help when he was in pain.

However, no one heard his scream; no one believed he was in pain.

They told him he was bad when he was really good.

They told him he should stop crying while he was convulsing in pain.

My friend finally escaped; however, not before being scarred and traumatized.

No one heard his cry; no one listened to his scream.

I see my friend almost daily.

He is my friend.

And even though he has left the ways of the old neighborhood He still waits daily for someone to come over and say, “Mine teire kiind (my dear child) you are lost, let me help you get home.”

Who is listening to his cries?

Who is looking to see the next lost Leiby?

Rabbi Y. Eisenman is the Rabbi of Congregation Ahavas Israel in Passaic, NJ.

NOTE: The views expressed here are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent or reflect the views of YWN.

DO YOU HAVE AN OPINION YOU WOULD LIKE TO SEE POSTED ON YWN? SEND IT TO US FOR REVIEW http://www.theyeshivaworld.com/contact.php

[By Bracha Goetz]

Our children all over the world were praying for Leiby to be protected.  Instead Leiby is now able to help all these same children be more protected. 

The children were asked to daven, and so afterward they asked what happened.  Our pure and innocent korbon is finally enabling many other innocent children to learn that predators are among us.

This week one secular newspaper made the following comment about the insular nature of our communities: “The gates that keep the crazies out might actually be keeping them in.”  These words should not be so easily dismissed.  Rabbi Yakov Horowitz has written about our situation repeatedly, and it is highlighted in his article, “The Monster Inside.” 

In just one paragraph from this important piece, he writes: A close friend of mine runs a shelter/group home for charedi runaway kids. I recently ran into him at a wedding and asked him what his thoughts were on the correlation between abuse and the off-the-derech phenomenon. His immediate response was, “Yankie, all I deal with is abuse [victims]…”

Rabbi Yitzchok Alderstein wrote these words on Cross-Currents this week: It is natural and good that many people were not eager to rush to modes of address that themselves could be too sweeping and harsh, with terrible consequences to people and their families. They thought that various types of modus vivendi were possible. By now they should realize that this is not true. Rabbonim cannot handle the issue. We have enough evidence of this. Failure to take notice of this could have been said, figuratively, to be shefichas damim / bloodshed.

Abuse exists among all peoples.  It is how we respond to the predators in our midst, though, that can enable us to become the shining lights we are meant to be in this world.  If we continue to be complacent and cover up for them, no matter how frum they may appear, and no matter what their status in our communities, we show that we care more about the dangerous evildoers than about their innocent victims. 

Our rodfim need to be quarantined.  And our Rabbonim, as much as they may want to and as much as they may have tried, do not have the ability to monitor the predators in our midst.  This form of response has resulted in our sweet way of life becoming a far too ideal breeding ground for abusers.   

Religious trappings have always been great to hide behind.  And the purest of all ways of life can, therefore, provide the greatest hiding place of all.

In Pirkei Avot, 4:13, we learn that “One who performs a mitzva earns a defense counsel, and one who transgresses earns a prosecutor; teshuva and good actions are a shield against calamity.”  Throughout the Torah, we see that this insight into spiritual cause and effect, corresponds to what has happened to our people throughout history.

We can do teshuva as we begin to teach all of our unprotected children about personal safety through calm and clear prevention education, as a shield against torment.  We can do teshuva and begin to report all of our rodfim (those who are a danger to safety) directly to the police, as a shield against cruelty.  And we can do teshuva by listening and providing much-needed support to all the survivors of rodfim that are still with us.

Through stepping up to protect and provide needed safety for our children, those who are the purest and the most vulnerable, may Our Father provide us with the safety and protection we need. 

Courage is required in order to fulfill our mission so that we can become a light to the nations in the most base area of all, the defilement of our innocent children.    May our teshuva through these good actions bring us, and consequentially the whole world, to a place of the greatest spiritual refinement. 

We have all gotten lost.  We are all responsible for the saddest ending.  Now we can begin to return Home.

Bracha Goetz coordinates a Jewish Big Brothers and Big Sisters Program in Baltimore, Maryland and is the Harvard-educated author of fifteen children’s books, including Remarkable Park , What Do You See in Your Neighborhood?  and The Invisible Book.  You can reach Bracha Goetz at bgoetzster@gmail.com

NOTE: The views expressed here are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent or reflect the views of YWN.

DO YOU HAVE AN OPINION YOU WOULD LIKE TO SEE POSTED ON YWN? SEND IT TO US FOR REVIEW http://www.theyeshivaworld.com/contact.php

[By Asher E. Taub, Esq.]

This September 13, 2011, an election of historic proportion will take place in the 9th Congressional District of New York. The 9th CD is the most Jewish district in the entire United States. Approximately 50% of the district is Jewish.  30% of the registered voters are religious Jews. The district includes the Jewish neighborhoods of Kew Gardens, Kew Garden Hills, Forest Hills, Hillcrest,  Midwood, Flatbush and parts of Boro Park, just to name a few. Due to the 2010 census, New York State is slated to lose two congressional seats. The politicians in Albany have decided that if a democrat wins the 9th CD, the seat will be eliminated, further reducing the clout of the Jewish and in particular the religious Jewish influence in Congress. If a republican wins the seat, then one of the present democratic congressman from a neighboring district will lose their seat.

The Republicans have chosen Bob Turner as their candidate. The Democrats chose David Weprin. I personally know Bob Turner and know him to be an honorable non-political, who will fight for Israel and Jewish interests including making private school tuition tax deductible.  Bob will hold the line on taxes, fight to balance the budget and revoke Obamacare.

David Weprin is a career politician. He craves politics to such an extent, that when he was supposed to be forced out of his job as a city councilman due to term limits, he switched jobs with his brother Mark who was then the New York State Assemblyman for that district.  Mark became the City Councilman and David became the New York State Assemblyman.

David Weprin does not even live in the 9th congressional district.  He is an opportunist carpetbagger who the democratic establishment chose on the belief that a religious Jew would be able to hold the seat.  That his win would mean the loss of the most Jewish seat in the United States is of no consequence to David Weprin.  He is only interested in being a good democrat.

David Weprin who boasts that he is religious not only voted for the Gay Marriage bill, but was one of the sponsors.  How a religious Jew can not only vote but sponsor a law which perverts the fabric of our society and the Torah is beyond any lame political excuse.  Dov Hikind a fellow democrat together with many other non-Jewish democrats voted against the bill.  The reason why David Weprin voted for the bill is simple, politics is more important than his religion and his fellow Jews.

David Weprin is a liberal democrat who would support every Obama program.  Given his devotion to his party which supersedes his religious believes and his co-religionists needs and interests, Weprin will undoubtably become Obama with a Yarmulka.  Israel is at a very dangerous crossroads.  We need a congressman who will stand up to Obama,  who is the most anti-Israel President since Jimmy Carter.  David Weprin will not only fail to stand up to Obama, but will support his anti-Israel policies in the name of party loyalty.  Even former Mayor Ed Koch recognizes the Obama threat and has refused to endorse David Weprin.  As the former Mayor, a liberal democrat has said, a Turner win will send shockwaves through the Obama administration and make them think twice on harming Israel.

I urge my fellow Jews to vote for Bob Turner.  Do it for the sake of decency, do it for Israel, do it for the Jewish people.

Asher E. Taub, Esq. is a former congressional candidate and aide to Bob Turner.

NOTE: The views expressed here are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent or reflect the views of YWN.

DO YOU HAVE AN OPINION YOU WOULD LIKE TO SEE POSTED ON YWN? SEND IT TO US FOR REVIEW http://www.theyeshivaworld.com/contact.php

The Levaya is over. The lights have been turned off. There was an eerie moonlight glow over the cemetery. The feeling of knowing I was standing only a few feet from Leiby A”H who just yesterday we were all searching for is gut wrenching.

At first I thought it was because of the crowds that I would be ashamed to cry. Then I thought it was out of pride and the “tough guy” attitude there is about men. But then as the crowds dispersed I just stood there, staring, staring at a plot of earth with a marker. And then it struck me why I couldn’t cry. Part of me was Happy, Happy you may ask? Yes happy indeed. I was B’simcha knowing that this young child Leib’le A’H was able to create a sense of achdus amongst us.

I don’t think anyone can put an exact # of people that were searching for him. The news estimated that there were over 10 thousand people at Leiby’s levaya. Thousands of people were searching for Leiby A”H – and nobody stopped anyone to see which Bobov, Satmar, or Skvere you were from. Nobody said hey you aren’t wearing a velvet yarmulka you can’t help us. Perhaps we now see what can accomplish when we are ONE!

The cries continue to ring in my ears LEIBY LEIBY DID ANYONE SEE LEIBY?

I did!! I saw him in every one of the thousands of people that came out to search for him. I saw him in everyone’s face at the levaya. I see that his story had an impact on every one of us in some way.

We are one people with a tremendous drive to help one another. Please if there is at least one lesson from this story is that we should stick together always & not let petty things get in the way. Life is too short to fill it with fights.

In this Zechus may we be zoche to see the coming of moshiach b’karov mamish!

Boruch Dayan Emes Leiby A”H You should be a malitz yosher for all of us.
 
Y. Cohen
Brooklyn NY.

[By: Yaakov Gold]

The last few days have felt as if a blur, Monday blended into Tuesday, and tonight, after paying my respects at the Levaya, I realized with a startle that it was already Wednesday evening – the week had passed by, and the sleepless nights and search-filled days all merged into one extended nightmare.

After the adrenaline and caffeine fueled hours of searching came to a close, and after struggling today to make sense of it all, I have come to the conclusion that there are several stories that can be told here, and only one that actually should be told.

There is the story of Leiby, the story of his killer, the story of each one’s respective families, and the story of a community that came together in an unprecedented display of Kiddush Shaim Shomaim.

There was a horrific incident, that is certain, but the horrors and nightmarish details that have been haunting us for the past 15 hours are not the story of Leiby Kletzky.

They are the story of a sociopath, a malformed personality, a murderer – and certainly that is not a story worth repeating, nor is it a story worth hearing.

The story of Leiby on the other hand, is an inspiring one.  It is the story of the Frum communities of the 5 boroughs and beyond coming together in a show of Achdus and sense of duty that is at once inspiring and humbling – it has a tragic ending, but the story itself is a story of love and dedication the likes of which are not often seen on this scale.

The main search efforts were based out of several locations in Boro Park, and as the numerous news sites and photos online attest, they were orders of magnitude larger than any community effort in recent memory – but for a few hours last night, a search was mounted in Flatbush as well, it’s command post set up in the parking lot on East 12th and Ave M.

Midwood Chapel and Glatt Mart graciously arranged to allow access to the lot for organizing a Flatbush-based search, Hatzolah of Flatbush supplied an ambulance to use as a base of operations, Amazing Savings supplied flashlights, food came from numerous sources, Pomegranate dropped off cases of water – the support for the effort was astounding.

At 9 PM YWN put out a call to action, requesting volunteers to proceed to the lot.

At 9:05 we assigned our first search grid.  As I gave instructions to the first pair of volunteers – I wondered to myself how we will ever get enough people together to cover Flatbush, a very large geographical area.

By 9:30 there were 50 people lining up to request search grids.  By 10:00 that number had swelled to over 300.  Reinforcements were needed for crowd control and grid assignments, and the dozen Flatbush Shomrim volunteers who showed up took up the challenge with quiet efficiency.

All told, we assigned over 300 grids to an estimated 1,300 volunteers.  These included driving grids, walking grids, parks, transportation hubs, Shuls and school yards, boardwalks, 24 hour stores, subway stations, Avenues and side streets.

After assigning the grids, I drove through Flatbush, and was astounded by what I saw.  Every pole and streetlight had a poster prominently mounted on it, there were groups of searchers to be found on nearly every block – their bobbing flashlight beams a testimony to the dedication of the volunteers who came out.

All told 15,000 flyers were distributed and taped to every surface imaginable, searching parties covered every street from Ocean Parkway to Ocean Ave, from Church Ave to Oriental Boulevard in Manhattan Beach.

I am still in awe of the response that the community showed, I am still humbled by the outpouring of support and concern, that Leiby inspired.

And this folks, is the story of Leiby Kletzky.

It’s the story of community volunteering   on a staggering scale.  Its the story of an extraordinary power, the power that drives one Jew to feel concern and pain for another, a power that provided the momentum for a search that saturated the streets of Flatbush with people whose motivation was pure, whose intentions were pure, and who were driven by the unrelenting engine of Ahavas Yisroel.

And despite its tragic ending, it remains a beautiful story.

Leiby, was a humble and pure child, the Hespedim at his funeral attested to his warm and holy nature – and to the extraordinary Ahavas Hashem that his parents have.

But humble and shy does not make a child weak.  Leiby had the strength to unite a Kehila in a way that no other cause ever has.  Chassidim and Litfish, Sefardim and every other walk of Jewish life were represented in Flatbush last night.  There were groups of teens on bikes, and older couples on foot.  There were car loads of students, professionals, husband and wife teams, the demographic that showed up included everybody.  United everybody.

There you have the story of Leiby Kletzky, a pure Neshama who gave Klal Yisroel a chance to shine.

And that’s the only story worth telling.

DO YOU HAVE AN OPINION YOU WOULD LIKE TO SEE POSTED ON YWN? SEND IT TO US FOR REVIEW http://www.theyeshivaworld.com/contact.php

I saw a rebuttal here at YWN to my article of late last week which pointed out that Mr. David Weprin wants to run under a Jewish banner, yet he proudly voted in favor of the Marriage Bill — something that is against Orthodox Jewish values.

My general point regarding Weprin’s Jewishness is that (Orthodox) Jewish voters get excited when an (Orthodox) Jew runs for office. I therefore made the case to voters that a Jew in office does not necessarily represent their values or their interests.

Some examples: Weprin “proudly” voted against Jewish values in the Marriage Bill. Senator Charles Schumer – also a Jew – doesn’t seem to care much about his Jewishness; not on policy nor in specific cases when “extra” help is needed. Weprin again, easily voted last year to raise tax on Tobacco, which means he will do it on any other product or on income too.

So dear voter: Are you ready to pay more tax just because the guy who voted for the increase is Jewish? Do you want someone who thinks of himself as an Orthodox Jew to announce repeatedly that he “proudly” voted in favor of things that you don’t proudly back (or perhaps strongly oppose)?

At no time did I suggest that a Jew in office shall vote one way or another. He can do what he wants. I am however saying to Jewish politicians: If you vote against Jewish values, don’t discover your Jewishness on Election Day. And to Jewish voters am saying: don’t vote for someone based on his religion (or ethnic background) if that person’s policies do not serve you well.

For Jews in New York Nine to elect Weprin will mean an outcome as expected by the establishment media – a Democrat winning. But if Jews vote for Bob Turner, it will be an upset victory, with massive benefits for the Jewish Community. We in New York have this experience every time we fully back a Republican for public office since NY Republicans cannot afford to take our vote for granted as Democrats do. We should not deprive ourselves from such potential benefit just because someone is running under the Jewish banner.

Yossi Gestetner is a New York-Based Writer and Marketing Consultant in the Orthodox Jewish/Hasidic Communities. His Firm “Gestetner & Co” Serves Political, Charitable and Corporate accounts. Yossi can be reached via yossi@yossigestetner.com

NOTE: The views expressed here are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent or reflect the views of YWN.

DO YOU HAVE AN OPINION YOU WOULD LIKE TO SEE POSTED ON YWN? SEND IT TO US FOR REVIEW http://www.theyeshivaworld.com/contact.php

[By Andy Branower]

The Op-Ed piece by Yossi Gestetner, posted on Yeshiva World News on July 8, 2011, questions the “Jewishness” of David Weprin but brushes over a fundamental notion that is essential to understanding Mr. Gestetner’s opinion:  what should frum (or any other) Jews expect from an elected Jewish member of a legislature (state, federal or local) in the American democracy.  Mr. Wepner is currently a member of the New York State Assembly and is the Democratic party’s nominee for a runoff election to fill the vacancy in New York’s Ninth Congressional District, a vacancy that resulted from the resignation of Anthony Weiner, which you may have heard about.  The district is heavily Jewish, though I do not know what portion of the district is frum-Jewish.  (If Mr. Gestetner knows, he did not reveal it in his piece.)

Mr. Gestetner sites only two examples of “unJewish” voting by Mr. Weprin as a State Assemblyman:  (i) for same-gender marriage, and (ii) for an increase in cigarette taxes.  From these two examples, Mr. Gestetner declares that “Assemblyman Weprin legislated as a non-observant Jew.”  Putting aside the inadequacy of two votes to determine the political viewpoint of any legislator, Mr. Gestetner presumes that (A) there is a “Jewish way” for a Jew to legislate when participating in a pluralist, non-sectarian secular society’s legislature, and (B) the 2 votes sited by Mr. Gestetner were “unJewish”.  I presume that Mr. Gestetner believes (as I do) that the “Jewish way” to legislate in a non-Jewish, democratic, pluralistic society is revealed in the Torah – but like so many other mitzvahs revealed in the Torah, it takes careful study and thought to discern them, and Mr. Gestetner’s piece did not contain or cite any such evaluation, study or thought, or refer to any particular gadol or other Torahic authority to support his belief that voting for same-gender marriage or an increase in cigarette taxes in not the Torah way.

Let’s dispose of the cigarette tax question first.  I do not know why Mr. Gestetner considers a tax on cigarettes “unJewish”, and he explains his objection to Mr. Weprin’s vote as a threat to tax liquor and an offense to the 20% (his number) of the population (frum-Jewish, Jewish and all others) who do smoke.  According to Mr. Gestetner, this tax increase will make Mr. Gestetner unpopular with frum Jews and discourage them from voting for him.  This is not a Torahic objection, it is a purely secular, politically strategic objection, and (for what my opinion is worth), probably wrong.  Torah is not anti-tax.

That leaves us with Mr. Weprin’s vote for same-gender marriage.  Accepting that same-gender marriage is prohibited by Torah, does that tell us that a Jewish legislator in a pluralistic, democratic society must absolutely vote against a statute that authorizes conduct prohibited by the Torah?  Torah requires that we must be a light unto the nations, and it also requires chesed and justice.  How shall we balance these competing, possibly conflicting, commandments?  Mr. Gestetner does not tell us, and he cites no Torahic authority to support his view.  Ironically, one of Mr. Gestetner’s stated reasons in opposition to Mr. Weprin’s vote is that it is “dismissive of his heritage”.  “Heritage” is not Torah.  Jewish heritage includes lox and bagels, borscht-belt comedians and the voice of Bugs Bunny.  Torah was given to us Jews by Hashem.  I like lox, but lox is not part of His Torah.  And I would not be “unJewish” if I did not like lox.

I do not know why Mr. Weprin voted for same-gender marriage.  He might have done so out of a belief (which is my belief) that chesed and justice require it.  He might have done so as an act of legislative logrolling or horse-trading, which are tools of every effective legislator.  Let me emphasize:  I am not endorsing Mr. Weprin, as I know little about his record and do not live in his district.  But from reading Mr. Gestetner’s piece about him, I have no reason to believe he is any “less” Jewish than any other Jewish politician, or that his voting was not consistent with the requirements of Torah.

Mr. Branower is an uncredentialed political analyst who is a registered Democrat.  He voted for Bob Dole in 1996, and for John B. Anderson, a Republican who ran as an independent for president in 1980.  He considered voting for George W. Bush in 2000, but his wife would not let him.

NOTE: The views expressed here are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent or reflect the views of YWN.

DO YOU HAVE AN OPINION YOU WOULD LIKE TO SEE POSTED ON YWN? SEND IT TO US FOR REVIEW http://www.theyeshivaworld.com/contact.php

The following is an Op-Ed by Howard Beigelman of the OU, and appears in the Indianapolis Star:

Bringing the school voucher case to the state’s top court after having lost in the legislature is the democratic right and privilege of the Indiana State Teachers Association. It’s as American as high school basketball, but it’s time to tell the union to take their ball and go home. A court challenge to vouchers shouldn’t have a chance.

The case begins and ends on shaky legal grounds. The U.S. Supreme Court already has ruled on similar voucher programs in Ohio, and they’ve found it fully consistent with the U.S. Constitution. So there ends any federal challenge.

The teachers and their allies now are betting on either one of two provisions in the Indiana Constitution. The first requires the legislature to fund a common school system.

To suggest, as ISTA is, that the legislature is constitutionally bound to fund only public schools doesn’t pass the red-faced test every first-year law student is taught: only make arguments in court that won’t make you blush with embarrassment.

The state constitution’s Article 8 is dedicated to education and begins by declaring the duty of the legislature to encourage education by “all suitable means.” After that, it states the legislature will also “provide” for a system of common (or public) schools. And Article 9 elevates to a state constitutional duty, the support of “institutions for the education of the deaf, the mute, and the blind.”

With “common schools” sandwiched between “all suitable” means and particularly the special needs of certain types of students, it will be hard to argue that providing support to schools other than public — common — ones violates the constitution.

Any attack on the voucher proposal on the grounds of establishment of religion is even shakier. Indiana’s state constitution does include a “no aid” provision — meaning no state funds can go to the aid of a sectarian institution. These provisions, sadly too common in state constitutions are known as Blaine Amendments, after a 19th-century Maine congressman, James G. Blaine, who tried to ride an anti-Catholic wave to the White House and tried unsuccessfully to amend the U.S. Constitution to forbid tax dollars to religious schools, hospitals and the like, even for completely secular purposes.

While Blaine failed at the federal level, many states — 39 in total, plus the District of Columbia — have similar provisions.

Indiana’s version states: No money shall be drawn from the treasury, for the benefit of any religious or theological institution. But the benefit here is to the student. Directly. The school, even if it is parochial, isn’t benefiting. In fact, if the student leaves the school, the money leaves with him, even if that causes harm, damage or penalty to the school. Hardly a benefit.

In addition, the same Supreme Court reviewing the voucher program already reviewed the state’s Blaine Amendment, and found, as recently as 2003, that the state could pay for secular studies for “dual enrolled” students, meaning public schools get extra state funds to teach secular subjects to students in a parochial school. If that’s not a benefit to the school, neither is this. And, it seems it’s not; rather the funds benefit the child, as is true with the voucher case.

We’re supporters of education reform, but we agree with the ISTA on this: They were smart to put their money on the legislative battle. Courts of law look strongly upon precedent. In the case at hand, a victory by ISTA would be, legally speaking, unprecedented.

Beigelman is deputy director of public policy for the Orthodox Union, the nation’s largest Orthodox Jewish umbrella organization, representing hundreds of synagogues across North America, including in Indiana.

The following is an Op-Ed from the Daily News:

New Yorkers in the congressional district once represented by Anthony Weiner, meet your new man in D.C.: David Weprin. He’s a special kind of guy.

The Democratic bosses of Brooklyn and Queens, who each have part of the district, chose Weprin as the sole person on the Democratic line in September.

Joe Crowley of Queens and Vito Lopez of Brooklyn made the pick because Gov. Cuomo wrongheadedly gave them the power under New York’s special elections rules.

In a special election, voters are denied the chance to choose nominees, as they would in an open primary. And, because the district is overwhelmingly Democratic, hand-picked candidates like Weprin romp in a special election without true public scrutiny or competition.

He and his family are masters at getting themselves appointed to office. Consider:

Weprin’s father, Saul Weprin, was a product of the Queens machine who rose to be Assembly speaker. When he died in 1994, the party anointed David’s brother Mark in a special election.

In 2001, David ran for City Council. He faced opposition in a primary, but the machine made his only real rival a judge. David won in a walk.

In 2009, David entered the only competitive election of his career, running for city controller. He finished fourth out of four in the primary.

A campaign highlight: Asked by this page what the controller’s budget was, he said: “What office? The controller’s office? Ummm. Good question. The controller’s office budget. Ummm . . .”

Since David’s Council seat was then open and he was jobless, brother Mark came to the rescue by running for Council. Mark won, creating an Assembly vacancy, which the party boss filled, you guessed it, by making David the candidate in a special election.

And now, barring a GOP miracle, he will be off to Congress, never having won a true election in his entire career.

By the way, Crowley – who won his own seat in Congress by bypassing a primary – will then fill Weprin’s vacated Assembly seat in yet another uncompetitive special election.

The voters be damned.

(Source: NY Daily News)

The Jewish Vote is considered the largest of all the ethnic groups in NY Congressional District Number Nine. This explains why Democrats nominated Jewish State Assemblyman David Weprin to run for that seat in the September 13′th Special Election.
 Here are some thoughts about it: 

A – Assemblyman Weprin legislated as a non-observant Jew, yet wants to campaign now for Weiner’s Congressional seat as a devout one. For example, Weprin proudly proclaimed that he would vote for same-gender marriage, despite the fact that he is a Jew. Jewish voters in the district — including those who don’t care one way or another about the marriage bill — will not be happy to learn that Weprin was utterly dismissive of his heritage yet wants to discover it now for votes.
 
B – Senator Schumer is Jewish too, but he very often ignores the needs of his Jewish brothers. He therefore does not have much support from Orthodox Jewish voters. In fact, during the 2010 election, he received only 500 more votes than the non-candidate Gerry Bernstein in Assembly District 48 (Dov Hikind’s district), where more than 15,000 people voted.   So Weprin’s ”Jewishness“ isn’t a free pass to allow him to swallow up Jewish votes in NY-9. We have been burned more than once by people who tout their Judaism for Election Day and then behave differently when securely in office.
 
C – Weprin voted “yes” to increase the cigarette tax last summer by $1.60 per pack. Twenty percent of the population smokes, and the many more who don’t still don’t like the idea of “taxing people out of their habit.” They feel that the same lawmaker who taxes cigarettes will tax liquor and many other products that large segments of the population use regularly. His “yes” vote and many other votes may turn Jewish voters off the idea of sending Weprin to Congress, even if he starts wearing a huge yarmulke on his head.
 
D – The reason Democratic politicians in New York often ignore Jewish voters is the math — they can win without the Jewish vote. Republicans in New York, however (think of Pataki, Gilman and Morahan), were and are more in need of Jewish voters. As a result, they are more inclined to give us a helping hand.
 
In summary, Jews won’t gain much by backing Weprin for Congress.
 
Yossi Gestetner is a New York-Based Writer and Marketing Consultant in the Orthodox Jewish/Hasidic Communities. His Firm “Gestetner & Co” Serves Political, Charitable and Corporate accounts. Yossi can be reached via yossi@yossigestetner.com

NOTE: The views expressed here are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent or reflect the views of YWN.

DO YOU HAVE AN OPINION YOU WOULD LIKE TO SEE POSTED ON YWN? SEND IT TO US FOR REVIEW http://www.theyeshivaworld.com/contact.php

On July 6, 2011, Yeshiva World News posted an article by Dick Morris, headlined “Dick Morris:  Obama Losing Jewish Vote.”  Putting aside the source of this story – Dick Morris, Fox News talking head and Republican political consultant – there is a lot in the article that does not add up. 

For starters, Mr. Morris tells us that Jews would give President Obama only 56% of their votes if he were to run – today – against a generic Republican.  Of course, the election ain’t today, and when there is an election, the candidate won’t be generic.  The real candidate will have his or her own set of warts, not to mention whatever bruises may be inflicted by his/her fellow Republicans in the primaries.  That is unfortunate for the Republicans, since most other surveys indicate that Mr. Obama does significantly better – today – against all other Republicans than the generic one.  Surveys 15 months in advance of an election have little predictive value.

The article claims that Mr. Morris interviewed 1,000 Jews in 7 days (assuming he observed Shabbos).  That means he interviewed 143 Jews per day.  Assuming he worked an 8-hour day, that’s 19 Jews per hour, with three minutes for a glass of water or a bathroom break.  Either Mr. Morris had some unacknowledged help, or he set a world record in several bizarre categories, including being able to interview a Jew in only 3 minutes.

But here’s the part that clearly undermines the results of the survey.  The article states in 3rd paragraph:  “After asking basic questions of the entire sample, I proceeded to drill down with more detailed questions for the Jews in the sample who identified themselves as Democrats.”  Mr. Morris does not define “drilling down” for his readers, and if there was not a set script, capable of independent evaluation, and a set of protocols for the interviewer to follow when “drilling down,” then there can be no assurance that the interviewer did not “drill down” in a way that, intentionally or not, elicited answers that the interviewer was looking for.  In that same paragraph, Mr. Morris states:  “The overall survey has a 95 percent confidence of a margin of error of plus or minus 3 percent.”  Mr. Morris does not tell us the difference, if any, between the “overall survey” and the findings he highlights or the conclusions he reaches based on the raw data he “drilled down to”.  He also does not explain why he discloses the margin-of-error measure in an upside down way:  it is usually stated as a margin of error followed by a statement about the percentage by which the margin of error itself is repeatable.

Mr. Morris then jumps to a conclusion about which he asked only one question – who would you vote for if the election is held today and the Republican candidate is unknown.  That is scant support for his conclusion that Jews will not in the future vote for or support Mr. Obama.  Instead, Mr. Morris tells us:  “Given the importance of Israel to the Jewish Democratic voters of the United States, it is clear that Obama is playing with fire as he toughens the American foreign policy toward Israel and banks his credibility on the idea that peace is possible simply through Israeli territorial concessions. American Jews — Democrats included — reject the very foundation of Obama’s efforts to achieve peace in the Middle East as ‘naïve.’ ”  There is little basis in the survey – as reported in Mr. Morris’s article – for this conclusion.  Mr. Morris did not ask his sample about the “importance of Israel to the Jewish Democratic voters of the United States”;  instead, he takes it as a given.  And Mr. Morris’s conclusion overlooks the fact, among others, that Mr. Obama has not yet begun his campaign.  Even Mr. Morris would concede that Mr. Obama is a pretty good campaigner.

Mr. Morris gets very sloppy when discussing – with his sample and in his article – a return to the ’67 borders.  President Obama never proposed a return to the ’67 borders.  He proposed the ’67 borders as a starting point for negotiations, with mutually acceptable adjustments, for final borders of the State of Israel and a Palestinian state.  If the Israeli government wants the ’67 borders plus 100% of the West Bank, or 95% or 50% of the West Bank, or just the existing Israeli settlements plus a protective security or buffer zone, President Obama made it clear that that is for negotiation between the Israeli government and the representatives of the Palestinian people, not for proclamation by the United States, nor – significantly – by the United Nations or anybody else.  That is no different than US policy since the end of the ’67 war.  Mr. Morris’s survey question presents “both sides” of an issue on which the President clearly took a position on the side of Israel, i.e., that Israel should not return to the ’67 borders.  The 82% vs. 8% response to the 2-sided question, contrary to Mr. Morris’s assertion, has 82% of respondents agreeing with President Obama’s position that the final (but pre-Moshiach) borders of the State of Israel should be determined by negotiations between the State of Israel and representatives of the Palestinian people.

Mr. Morris concludes by getting his history wrong –Jewish voters’ preference for the Democratic party goes back considerably before Eleanor and Franklin Roosevelt in the 1930′s, and has continued long after the 20th-century increases in Jewish educational, occupational and income levels would predict their switch to the Republican party.  I think that Jewish adherence to the Democratic party when their American success would otherwise put them in the Republican party is a testament to the fundamental Jewish values of chesed and tzedakah.  I do not have a poll to support that notion, but Mr. Morris does not have a poll – at least not a scientific one – that reliably predicts that Jewish support for President Obama will materially erode 15 months from now.

Andy Branower is an uncredentialed political analyst and registered Democrat who voted for Bob Dole for President in 1996 and John B. Anderson, a Republican who ran for President as an independent, in 1980.

NOTE: The views expressed here are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent or reflect the views of YWN.

DO YOU HAVE AN OPINION YOU WOULD LIKE TO SEE POSTED ON YWN? SEND IT TO US FOR REVIEW http://www.theyeshivaworld.com/contact.php

Toeiva marriage is legal in New York State. Governor Cuomo, a strong proponent of “equality,” stalwartly pursued its passage, making it his signature legislative achievement. Unlike Assemblyman Dov Hikind’s false assumptions that the New York Assembly doesn’t have the votes, it passed the Democratic-led Assembly by a large margin, and the Republican-led Senate didn’t do anything to stop the bill. The bill still faces many hurdles, and we should not yet surrender; however, as the headlines proclaimed, New York now became the beacon of darkness for the entire nation regarding this matter.

Orthodox Jews vehemently opposed the bill. Agudath Israel of America issued a statement declaring a must to defeat a “bill [that] is both morally and legally unacceptable, and [one which can] (could) lead to serious negative consequences”. The Orthodox Union released a declaration clarifying Jewish stance on this issue. “[Immoral] behavior between males or between females is absolutely forbidden by Jewish law, beginning with the biblical imperative, alluded to numerous times in the Talmud and codified in the Shulchan Aruch,” it stated.

Family values have always taken center stage in Judaism, as it is one of the Ten Commandments. The Torah classifies Toeiva-marriage as an abomination and strictly punishes one who violates the prohibition with the severe penalty of death. Furthermore, the Midrash states that legalizing such repulsive acts can endanger the entire society. “The generation of the Flood was not wiped out until they wrote the marriage documents for the union of a man to a male or to an animal,” declares the Midrash.

Yet, as the Toeiva community trumpets the “victory,” some in the Jewish community fail to realize the effect a redefined marriage will have on their personal lives. They believe that as long as Jews obey the laws of the Torah and don’t engage in such acts, it is acceptable to permit it. They’re afraid that such “discrimination” will eventually be used against them to undo much of the human rights that Jews and minorities enjoy nowadays.

Theodore Olson, a former solicitor general under George W. Bush, sued California over Proposition 8 – a ballot measure banning gay marriage in the state constitution. In his opening statement he declared: “… the right to marriage as one of the most vital personal rights essential to the orderly pursuit of happiness, a basic civil right, a component of the constitutional rights to liberty, privacy, association, an intimate choice, an expression of emotional support and public commitment, the exercise of spiritual unity, and the fulfillment of one’s self.” Thus, the question lingers: should we look the other way. All they really want is just some liberty and freedom, right?

Wrong.

An infamous circumcision ban is currently brewing for San Francisco. According to reports, Lloyd Schofield – the man behind the initiative – became interested in the topic after seeing the Bay Area Intactivists marching in the Pride Parade a few years back and has since become an “intactivist” himself. His pretense, of course, is “equal protection,” but his objective is obvious: if he’s truly for liberty, why would he restrict people from performing religious duties and customs?

The Jewish community ought to lament about a bill that purely rejected religion. There’s a connection between the marriage bill and the circumcision ban; they both offend religion. If it is freedom that they are seeking, why don’t they lobby for polygamy? Is zoophilia next? Marriage is between a man and a woman and the “activists” know it. They are simply anti-religion, hence their efforts. As Sen. Ruben Diaz righteously declared, “God, not Albany, settled the issue of marriage a long time ago.” The bill is a direct assault on religion and the religious. Although religious exceptions were placed in the bill, it is a matter of years until it will be challenged. We should ask ourselves: “should we wait until a circumcision ban is introduced in New York?”

Dave Hirsch is a political analyst and columnist. He can be reached at davehrsch@gmail.com

NOTE: The views expressed here are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent or reflect the views of YWN.

DO YOU HAVE AN OPINION YOU WOULD LIKE TO SEE POSTED ON YWN? SEND IT TO US FOR REVIEW http://www.theyeshivaworld.com/contact.php

[By Karl Rove]

President Barack Obama is likely to be defeated in 2012. The reason is that he faces four serious threats. The economy is very weak and unlikely to experience a robust recovery by Election Day. Key voter groups have soured on him. He’s defending unpopular policies. And he’s made bad strategic decisions.

Let’s start with the economy. Unemployment is at 9.1%, with almost 14 million Americans out of work. Nearly half the jobless have been without work for more than six months. Mr. Obama promised much better, declaring that his February 2009 stimulus would cause unemployment to peak at 8% by the end of summer 2009 and drop to roughly 6.8% today.

After boasting in June 2010 that “Our economy . . . is now growing at a good clip,” he laughingly admitted last week, “Shovel-ready was not as shovel-ready as we expected.” The humor will be lost on most. In Wednesday’s Bloomberg poll, Americans believe they are worse off than when Mr. Obama took office by a 44% to 34% margin.

The last president re-elected with unemployment over 7.2% was FDR in 1936. Ronald Reagan overcame 7.2% unemployment because the rate was dropping dramatically (it had been over 10%) as the economy grew very rapidly in 1983 and 1984. Today, in contrast, the Federal Reserve says growth will be less than 3% this year and less than 3.8% next year, with unemployment between 7.8% and 8.2% by Election Day.

Mr. Obama also has problems with his base. For example, Jewish voters are upset with his policy toward Israel, and left-wing bloggers at last week’s NetRoots conference were angry over Mr. Obama’s failure to deliver a leftist utopia. Weak Jewish support could significantly narrow Mr. Obama’s margin in states like Florida, while a disappointed left could deprive him of the volunteers so critical to his success in 2008.

Mr. Obama’s standing has declined among other, larger groups. Gallup reported his job approval rating Tuesday at 45%, down from 67% at his inaugural. Among the groups showing a larger-than-average decline since 2009 are whites (down 25 points); older voters (down 24); independents and college graduates (both down 23), those with a high-school education or less, men, and Southerners (all down 22); women (down 21 points); married couples and those making $2,000-$4,000 a month (down 20). This all points to severe trouble in suburbs and midsized cities in states likes Colorado, Indiana, Ohio, Pennsylvania and Nevada.

There’s more. Approval among younger voters has dropped 22 points, and it’s dropped 20 points among Latinos. Even African-American voters are less excited about Mr. Obama than they were—and than he needs them to be. For example, if their share of the turnout drops just one point in North Carolina, Mr. Obama’s 2008 winning margin there is wiped out two and a half times over.

While many voters still personally like Mr. Obama, they deeply oppose his policies, and he tends to be weakest on issues voters consider most important. In the June 13 NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll, 56% disapprove of Mr. Obama’s handling of the economy. Fifty-nine percent in the Economist/YouGov poll of June 14 disapprove of how he’s dealt with the deficit.

And his health-care reform still holds its unique place as the only major piece of social legislation that became less popular after it was passed. According to yesterday’s Pollster.com average of recent surveys, 38% approve of ObamaCare, while its survey average when the bill was passed in March 2010 showed that 41% approved.

Finally, Mr. Obama has made a strategic blunder. While he needs to raise money and organize, he decided to be a candidate this year rather than president. He has thus unnecessarily abandoned one of incumbency’s great strengths, which is the opportunity to govern and distance himself from partisan politics until next spring. Instead, Team Obama has attacked potential GOP opponents and slandered Republican proposals with abandon. This is not what the public is looking for from the former apostle of hope and change.

In politics, 17 months can constitute several geological ages. Political fortunes can wax and wane. And weak incumbents can defeat even weaker challengers.

At the same time, objective circumstances like an anemic economy and bad decisions not only matter; they become very nearly dispositive. Mr. Obama is now at the mercy of policies and events he has set in motion. He can’t escape accountability, especially on the economy. He’s not done yet, but it will be tough to recover. More in a future column.

This article originally appeared on WSJ.com on Wednesday, June 23, 2011.

[By Yossi Gestetner]

Reports and analysis in recent days suggest that it would be a long-shot for Republicans to win Anthony Weiner’s House seat; New York’s 9′Th Congressional District which covers sections of Queens and Brooklyn.

Well, if Republicans do not reach out directly to some voters in the district addressing the issues they care most, then indeed it is a long shot for Republicans to win that seat. If Republicans fail to reach out directly to the mass amount of Jewish voters in Weiner’s district – as Republican Jane Corwin of NY 26 failed to do in a district that has enough Jewish votes to flip the outcome of the just held special election – then indeed, winning NY-9 would be a long shot.

Main stream political consultants go with the long-standing belief that “Jews Vote for Democrats,” and as such, campaigns don’t bother reaching out to this community in an effective way. Indeed, if one looks at overall Jewish voting patterns in the USA, the above quote holds true. But in many recent elections, Orthodox Jewish and Hasidic voters in New York and elsewhere (masses of them residing in Weiner’s district), have taken a pattern of their own: In some cases, 70% of them vote Republican on State-wide and Federal-level seats!

Senator John McCain in 2008 and Governor Chris Christie in New Jersey a year later are two most notable examples of Republican candidates who won large percentages of the Orthodox Jewish and Hasidic Vote. In New York’s Assembly District 48 – the Orthodox/Hasidic stronghold of Borough Park, Brooklyn – Republican Gubernatorial candidate Carl Paladino with all his failings won a similar amount of votes than the incumbent Jewish NY Senator Charles Schumer who ran against an unknown, non-campaigner Jay Townsend. In that AD, Paladino came in considerably weaker than other State-wide Republican candidates who actively sought the Jewish Vote: Don Donovan for Attorney General and Joe DioGuardi for U.S. Senate (I worked for the latter during the Primary and the General elections).

It is not a done deal that Orthodox and Hasidic Jews will vote to the Right in State-wide or Federal elections. A Federal-level incumbent such as Weiner, who receives on average a total of 67,000 votes in off year elections, may retain in his district a larger percent of the Jewish Vote than other candidates. However, many Jewish voters, thinking that the Democrat will ‘anyway win,’ don’t participate in the election. This presents a large pool of untapped voters that Republicans can try and reach, in addition to chip away at a large number of current Jewish Weiner’s voters for the following reason:

Orthodox Jewish and Hasidic voters are extremely tuned in to the political discourse of this country. This holds especially true by those who are age 18 through 35. Many if not most of them grew up in immigrant households who voted Democrat in order to support politicians that hand out social programs, but these 18-35′ers see that the Democrats’ agenda has failed to provide them or their parents a reputable and independent living. In addition, it is a Democrat – New York Governor Cuomo – who is cutting social programs, which in turns shows to the Jewish Communality that relying on Government is not a sustainable thing.

These voters – many still in need of Government Assistance due to the system being rigged against those who try growing on their own, such as my self – want the pro-growth, pro-business, pro-family, pro-strong defense agenda of the Conservative Republicans. As a result, Orthodox Jewish and Hasidic voters flock to Republicans, and many more are fans of Conservative Talk Show Hosts.

Jewish voters in America – of all stripes – have more on their mind than just Israel, Israel and Israel. While being pro-Israel is important to many Jews, these communities have concerns that are closer to home and closer to their pocket than Israel. In fact, the history of Democrats being weak on foreign relations and defense is a minus to Israel, yet Jews still vote for Democrats. Why? Because other issues obviously matter more. As such, Republicans who want the support of Jewish voters should address issues beyond a focus on Israel. By doing so, Republican candidates – specially candidates in swing states where a mere 5,000 Jewish voters can swing the election – will find an ever-growing community that is welcome to these ideas and ready to vote Republican in larger numbers.

Yossi Gestetner is a New York-Based PR Consultant in the Orthodox Jewish/Hasidic Communities. He can be reached yossi@yossigestetner.com

DO YOU HAVE AN OPINION YOU WOULD LIKE TO SEE POSTED ON YWN? SEND IT TO US FOR REVIEW http://www.theyeshivaworld.com/contact.php

(YWN World Headquarters – NYC)

Days into my tenure as mayor of Chicago, with my focus on keeping our city’s streets safe, our schools strong and our finances stabilized, I expected my attention to be in the Midwest, not in the Middle East. But as an American and the son of an Israeli immigrant, I have a deep, abiding commitment to the survival, security and success of the state of Israel.

I am among the many who know that the Israeli people yearn for peace. They have taken risks for peace in spite of dangers. They will again, when they have a viable partner in the process and a region that recognizes a Jewish state of Israel with secure and defensible borders.

President Obama, like every student of the Middle East, understands that the shifting sands of demography in that volatile region are working against the two-state solution needed to end generations of bloodshed. The fragile stasis that exists today cannot hold.

Israel’s survival as a Jewish, democratic state is at stake because of many factors, including uncertainty brought by the Arab Spring, growth in the Palestinian population, unilateral efforts to create a recognized state of Palestine and technological advances in weaponry.

That is why, from his first days in office, the president has invested so much in encouraging meaningful negotiations between Israel and the Palestinian Authority. His goal has been one shared by a succession of Israeli and American leaders: two nations, the Jewish state of Israel and Palestine for the Palestinian people, living side by side, in peace and security.

As I listened to the president’s speech on the Middle East, I heard him reaffirm his strong commitment to Israel’s safety, security and prosperity. He said the U.S. relationship with Israel is unshakable. He said that the conflict cannot be resolved through unilateral actions or a U.N. vote establishing a Palestinian state but only through negotiations between the parties.

The president said that Israel cannot be expected to negotiate with a Palestinian Authority that embraces Hamas, a terrorist organization sworn to Israel’s destruction, and he reaffirmed his commitment to Israel’s qualitative military edge. He said that an independent Palestine must be a non-militarized state and that Israel’s security should be demonstrated before phased Israeli withdrawals are completed. No peace can take place, he said, that does not provide Israel with the ability to defend itself.

One sentence that he uttered received the most attention: “The borders of Israel and Palestine should be based on the 1967 lines with mutually agreed swaps, so that secure and recognized borders are established for both states.”

There, the president stated a concept that has been the basis of every serious attempt at resolution since the negotiations President Bill Clinton held at Camp David in 2000. He reminded us that every president and many Israeli elected leaders have recognized that the borders are one starting point for negotiations, not the end point.

That statement does not mean a return to 1967 borders. No workable solution envisions that. Land swaps offer the flexibility necessary to ensure secure and defensible borders and address the issue of settlements.

As the president said at the annual American Israel Public Affairs Committee conference, “it means that the parties themselves — Israelis and Palestinians — will negotiate a border that is different than the one that existed on June 4, 1967.”

Those are the messages the president carried to our allies in Europe last week, as they contemplated events in the Middle East and the prospect of a U.N. resolution. At a time when Israel is increasingly isolated in the world, our president is fighting efforts to weaken and delegitimize the Jewish state in the international arena.

The president I know and worked for is deeply committed to the peace and security of a Jewish state of Israel. I have seen him make unprecedented commitments to guarantee the continued qualitative military edge essential to Israel’s security in a dangerous neighborhood.

I saw him withdraw the United States from the Durban II conference when it became clear the conference’s purpose would be to slander Israel. Through sanctions and other means, he has worked tirelessly to rally the world against Iran and deter its nuclear program, the single greatest threat to Israel. He stood up to the skewed Goldstone report and other efforts to undercut Israel at the United Nations. And he has spent time, effort and political currency to breathe life into a peace process that holds out the best hope for Israel’s long-term security.

No American president can or should attempt to dictate to our staunch ally Israel the terms of peace. Only Israel can determine that, a principle that the president also reaffirmed.

Israel needs a partner in the peace process. To be certain, if during the two years I served in the Obama White House the Palestinians had spent as much time working for peace as they did avoiding the table, the process would be much farther along.

As an American and a Jew, however, I am grateful that this president has not given up trying to find a path that would bring the parties back to the negotiating table. I applaud his continued effort to work on and invest himself in this increasingly vexing and dangerous conflict. All who care about a safe and secure Jewish state of Israel should as well.

The writer is mayor of Chicago and former chief of staff to President Obama.

(Source: Washington Post)

Every Memorial Day we say the same things. Conservatives issue praise for our troops as flags fly high.  Disaffected Americans treat today as a three day weekend and a time for barbecue.

Liberals will “talk” about how they support the troops but despise the missions when a Republican is President.

Unlike liberals, at least the far left is honest. Leftist anti-war protesters could do their thing 363 days per year and take off Veterans Day and Memorial Day. Instead they decide to use these important days to ratchet up their disgusting behavior of attacking those who defend them.

Yet this Memorial Day is different.

May of 2011 ends with our honoring the fallen. Yet it began by celebrating our heroes – the Seals and support military for taking down Osama bin Laden — permanently. The Navy Seals put the fatal bullets into bin Laden, but they were just continuing a trend that has begun since the Founding of America. American Seals are American Soldiers. They get the job done, and they get it done right.

So to all of the anti-war protesters and mushy-headed liberals who offer fairweather support, let’s provide some clarity on this day of honor.

American soldiers, the Army, Navy, Air Force, Marines, and Coast Guard, are the good guys. These people help feed, clothe, protect and defend the world, not just America. They are there for us when we are faced with disasters – both man made and natural.

Anti-war protesters all forget one very important fact.  They have the right to protest solely because our soldiers give them this right. Ask anti-war protesters what happens to them in Syria. Ask them what happened this week to those trying to assemble in Russia, including the families of the two anti-government protesters found dead in Georgia. It did not, and usually does not, end well for them.

So to all of those people at Code Pink, Moveon.org, the Daily Kos, and the Huffington Post who despise our troops, the door is wide open for you to leave for greener pastures.

War is hell, but not waging war can be far more hellish. Evil does exist, and not confronting it makes one morally culpable for its spread.

From the Revolutionary War to the War of 1812 to the Civil War, World Wars I and II, and Korea, this was understood. Our soldiers defeated slavery and preserved our union, and later on defeated Communism and Nazism.

Vietnam was won on the battlefield, then lost by the leftist media that wanted us to lose. The worst newspaper in America today offering all the news unfit to print is run by a man who openly admits to having cheered against American troops in Vietnam.

The backlash against the anti-war movement was so severe that even those politicos undermining our troops at every turn by threatening to cut their funding still publicly offer lip service of support.

Through a pair of Gulf Wars in Iraq in addition to Afghanistan and Libya, our soldiers have remained honorable and proud. There are dark spots from time to time, but even when an aberration such as Abu Gharaib occurs, America apologizes and investigates.

People are held accountable. The military has a code of honor.

While we live in our comfortable homes, our soldiers travel far and wide under low pay and sometimes perilous conditions. War is a long, hard slog, but in the end the American military gets it right. It took an entire decade, but our troops killed bin Laden.

This was not vengeance or bloodlust. It was justice.

From 1776 until today, our military has played a vital role in keeping America the greatest experiment in the history of any nation. Many have shed blood and lost their lives to keep us free. So for those who have always honored the fallen, continue to do so.

For the apathetic wolfing down hot dogs and hamburgers, just take a moment to remember that this weekend is more than a day off from work to get deals at the shopping malls. For those publicly praising the troops in an insincere manner, stop trying to undermine them at every turn.

For the anti-war protesters, we would all be better off if you quit entirely and did something productive with your lives. You have the freedom to protest, but freedom comes with responsibility. At the very least, take Memorial Day off. Our fallen soldiers are forever silent. You could practice silence for one day.

May God bless every fallen soldier in Heaven, and their families still among us.

There has never been a single American soldier who ever died in vain…not one.

May God bless the USA, and to those who gave their lives…thank you forever.

Brooklyn born, Long Island raised and now living in Los Angeles, Eric Golub is a politically conservative columnist, blogger, author, public speaker, satirist and comedian.  Read more from Eric at his TYGRRRR EXPRESS blog.

The above Op-Ed was originally published in the Washington Times.

NOTE: The views expressed here are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent or reflect the views of YWN.

DO YOU HAVE AN OPINION YOU WOULD LIKE TO SEE POSTED ON YWN? SEND IT TO US FOR REVIEW http://www.theyeshivaworld.com/contact.php

(YWN World Headquarters – NYC)

[The following Op-Ed was written by Tevi Troy]

Cliff May is right about the Netanyahu speech. It was a strong speech, and Congress warmly, even rapturously received Netanyahu, with 30 standing ovations by my count sitting in the House Gallery. The recent disagreement with the White House over President Obama’s Thursday speech if anything made the congressional welcome even friendlier than it would have been otherwise. 

Netanyahu’s speech was the capstone on the complex five-act play that took place in Washington this past week, one in which Netanyahu scored a decisive 4–1 victory. Act One took place last Thursday, in the form of Obama’s speech at the State Department. If Obama was expecting huzzahs from the Arab world for his speech, he certainly didn’t get them, and the president himself seemed to have been caught by surprise by the strong negative reaction from the pro-Israel side. Still, the Obama speech hit Netanyahu & Co. hard, and has to be seen as a loss for Netanyahu.

But Obama inexplicably chose to give the speech on the eve of Netanyahu’s visit to Washington, which gave Netanyahu an opportunity to reply at their joint press appearance on Friday. In the tense, on-camera exchange of views, Netanyahu seemed to take Obama on a visit to Hebrew school, telling him the basic realities of existence in the tough neighborhood of the Middle East.

On Sunday, Obama spoke to the pro-Israel group AIPAC, and while he did not quite walk back his remarks, he clearly tailored them to avoid restating his most controversial points in order to forestall the very real possibility that he would be booed. He was not, but the cheers were not quite at the level that a president who won almost 80 percent of the Jewish vote would expect. Furthermore, the fact that he appeared to have softened things for the AIPAC audience was a sign of weakness in his apparent effort to stage a confrontation with Israel.

Monday night, both Senate Majority Leader Reid and House Speaker John Boehner gave forceful pro-Israel remarks to 12,000 people at AIPAC, and Politico characterized Reid’s speech as an intraparty “rebuke” to the president. The two speeches constituted a bipartisan statement that Obama is out of step with both parties and with both houses of Congress on this issue.

And then this morning came Netanyahu’s impressive speech to a joint assembly of Congress. Unlike Obama, he did not wiggle or waver, but instead gave a powerful defense of Israel as a vibrant democracy and steadfast ally of the U.S. Even an interruption from a Jewish, pro-Palestinian protester gave Netanyahu a chance to shine, as he noted that such protests are allowed in free countries like Israel or the U.S., in contrast to what he called the “farcical parliaments in Tehran or Tripoli.” The ad-lib earned him another one of his many standing ovations.

All of this should have been fairly predictable to the Obama administration when they started this process last week. They knew Netanyahu was coming; that Obama would have to speak to a potentially skeptical if not hostile crowd at AIPAC; and that Netanyahu would likely hit it out of the park in front of the friendly audience in Congress. The only potentially unpredictable element was the Reid speech, as the Senate majority leader might have had some hesitation about rebuking his party’s leader. But even without Reid’s reproach, the events were not aligned in President Obama’s favor as he embarked upon this course of action with last Thursday’s speech. There was no action-forcing event dictating that he give that kind of speech right before Netanyahu’s arrival. Presumably his own State Department would have invited him whenever he wanted to appear. 

The policy Obama laid out last Thursday remains worrisome. But the lack of strategic sense that led him to give the speech when he did is truly baffling.

Tevi Troy is a visiting senior fellow at the Hudson Institute. A former senior White House aide and deputy secretary of Health and Human Services in the Bush administration, he also served as the White House Jewish Liaison.

The above Op-Ed was originally published in NationalReview, and submitted to YWN by the author.

DO YOU HAVE AN OPINION YOU WOULD LIKE TO SEE POSTED ON YWN? SEND IT TO US FOR REVIEW http://www.theyeshivaworld.com/contact.php

(YWN World Headquarters – NYC)

Peace in the Middle East is vital for Israel’s security. It would be beneficial for Israel to sign a long-lasting peace agreement with the Palestinians and the Arab nations around the world. The ongoing conflict is detrimental for the State of Israel and places its future in danger. The cost of constant war places a burden on the Israeli government, and has cost it too many lives thus far.

Israeli citizens live in constant fear of yet another attack that might be perpetrated by cruel and heartless monsters. The horror of a new malicious terror attack relentlessly disrupts their daily lives. People dread to board busses, businessmen are frightened to frequent restaurants, and children are scared to go to school. Women fret over the notion to go shopping in a mall, parents of Israeli soldiers continuously fear that they won’t see their children ever again, and students cannot learn serenely in their own Yeshiva’s study halls. Israeli citizens are not even safe in their own homes; terror overtakes them as they’re peacefully asleep at night due to their constant nightmares. Pictures of slashed throats, scorched limbs and shrapnel filled bodies hover in their minds, while images of bombed buses, schools wrecked by rockets, and bullet-ridden cars are vividly displayed before their eyes. Peace truthfully seems to be the only option and solution.

Israel wants peace, yet at every attempt it met resistance along the way. Israel wants to live in harmony with its neighbors; however, its quest for tranquility is constantly wedged by obstacles that persistently surfaces anew.

 Israel merely sought freedom and independence in 1948 when they were invaded by neighboring Arab countries – the first conflict threatening its survival erupted. It was victorious and pushed back while “occupying” land that it conquered during the war — essentially to maintain its security. Israel made concessions for peace; it returned much of the land for a peace agreement and signed the 1949 Armistice Agreements; Israel sought tranquility.

It didn’t serve it well; the barrier still blocked its quest for peace. In 1956, Egypt violated the agreement and closed the Straits of Tiran and the Suez Canal for Israeli shipping instigating the Sinai War. Israel, with help from France and Britain, was triumphant once more, and captured the Gaza Strip and the Sinai Peninsula. Yet after enormous pressure, Israel compromised once more and handed the area back to Egypt; it wanted tranquility.

This too proved Israel wrong when another obstacle emerged. In 1967, Egypt once again dishonored the ceasefire they signed with Israel and militarized the peninsula. It was joined in its effort to annihilate Israel by Jordan and Syria and was aided by Iraq, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, Sudan and Algeria. Israeli forces emerged victorious yet again and delivered a devastating blow to their enemies. They pounced hard and withheld strategic locations critical to the defense of their nation. Israel wanted peace; however, it hit a cul-de-sac with the signing of the Khartoum Resolution.

The Arab nations were still bloodthirsty and stood in the way of peace. In 1973, they surprised Israel with an attack on multiple fronts. Israel courageously fought the bitter battle, and its forces advanced deep into Syrian and Egyptian territory — just about reaching Cairo and Damascus. However, Israel was thirsty for peace and came to the negotiation table to sign an agreement.

In 1978, Camp David Accords were signed between Israel and Egypt. Israel was to evacuate Sinai in return for peace. Egypt got billions of dollars in aid in addition to acres of land in exchange for peace. Israel evacuated Sinai along with Yamit – a settlement built for security purposes – with all its habitants. It resulted in a “cold peace.” Egypt still turned a blind eye to terrorists infiltrating Israel and still regarded it as its enemy. Recently – with the aftermath of the Egyptian uprising – the “Muslim Brotherhood” further threatens stability in the region.

The PLO was one impediment in a series of hurdles to Israeli peace. Under the auspices of master terrorist Yasser Arafat, the PLO carried out terror attacks against Israeli civilians. The Israeli military surged into Lebanon to stave off attacks. The IDF reached the tactical location of the Litani River only to withdraw – merely leaving a buffer zone — for the promise of peace. Its withdrawal resulted in a barrage of rocket attacks on the Galilee.

In the nineties, Israel signed a series of agreements including the Oslo Accords and the Wye River Memorandum. It handed over control to the Palestinian Authority and recognized their request for a Palestinian state. In 1998, then-Prime Minister Ehud Barack was ready to return 98% of the land to the Palestinians, but the Palestinian response was an unequivocal no. They opted for the Intifada instead – unpityingly killing thousands of innocent civilians. Horror whacked the nation daily as its citizens became immune to pictures of death and destruction. It was yet another blockade in the path to peace.

In 2000, Israel completely pulled out of Lebanon. It was yet another concession for peace. However, as in the past, it met with resistance once more. Hezbollah became its hostile backyard neighbor and stocked up on rockets and missiles. The Second Lebanon War occurred after terrorists infiltrated Israel and kidnapped soldiers that merely wanted to protect their fellow countrymen. The war ended with a ceasefire, but Hezbollah has yet to stop building missiles. It remains a threat to Israel’s security and calmness in the region.

Israel unilaterally evacuated Gaza in 2005. The appeasement was quite an expensive one. Approximately 55,000 Israel Defense Forces troops painstakingly evacuated 8,100 Israelis from their homes. It became a painful chapter in Israeli history. Homes were uprooted, cemeteries were dismantled and Shuls were scorched; yet, its aftermath did not bring along peace. Hamas is now controlling Gaza and oversees constant rocket attacks; terror attacks, mortar shells and a war in 2008 were received in return.

The latest obstacle to peace came from an unexpected place. After years of steadfast support from the United States, Israel now encountered its latest obstruction to tranquility in Washington. Israel trusted its friend and ally to stand up for them, as it did in the past, and assist it in their quest to peace. Israeli diplomats knew that America will ensure a secure Jewish state and will let them negotiate on their own. They were on familiar terms with regards to its borders, settlements, Jerusalem, Palestinian right to return, among other vital details essential to Israel’s survival. They placed trust in Washington that it would let them make the decisions vital for their security.

However, the United States President, Barack Obama, didn’t just throw Israel under the bus, he impeded the entire peace process for years to come. He became the latest hurdle in the Israeli-Palestinian peace process. What was perceived as the standard until now became nullified; its essence in danger once more. Palestinians simply gained bargaining chips from a president who is sympathetic to the Palestinian cause. After the President “demanded” Israel to stop construction, he went further and required Israel to return to its pre-1967 ceasefire borders and establish these defenseless lines as permanent border – with limited swaps of land. While Israel’s borders and its settlements were part of the negotiations until now, it is no longer part of the peace talks — it has now become a precondition. The naïve President who persistently seeks to appease the Muslims around the world handed the Palestinians more leverage to their agenda; they are now out to gain and with U.S. support.

Israel cannot base their borders on the Green Line; it is indefensible and dangerous. The 1949 Armistice Lines were never perceived to be future borders – it was merely a “Road Map” to peace. Now, along with the precondition of halting Israeli construction, Palestinians will demand the impossible from Israel and peace will stall again. Israel cannot afford to make another concession in return for nothing on the expense of its citizens’  lives. They cannot agree to such preconditions any longer – especially without the promise of return for Palestinian refugees and after a Hamas-Fatah unity deal. President Obama made peace in the Middle East impossible; he simply placed Israel on defense once again in a world that’s seeks its destruction. He is not another Carter who paved the way to tranquility on the southern border for three decades; he hampered Israel’s peace efforts and ruined it for them for years to come.

Dave Hirsch is a political analyst and columnist. He can be reached at davehrsch@gmail.com

NOTE: The views expressed here are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent or reflect the views of YWN.

DO YOU HAVE AN OPINION YOU WOULD LIKE TO SEE POSTED ON YWN? SEND IT TO US FOR REVIEW http://www.theyeshivaworld.com/contact.php

[The following Op-Ed was written by Tevi Troy]

The most surprising thing about President Obama’s press appearance with Israeli prime minister Netanyahu Friday was the way in which Netanyahu kept returning to first principles in his discussion with Obama.

Obama went first, and largely went over the ground he covered in Thursday’s speech, while noting that “obviously, there are some differences” between his views and those of Netanyahu. Netanyahu, in contrast, took Obama back to the basics of the Israeli–Palestinian conflict. He explained that the 1967 borders were indefensible and that they were the “boundaries of repeated conflicts.” While Obama merely acknowledged that that “Hamas is an organization that has resorted to terror,” Bibi made the statement more starkly and tried to fold Obama’s views in with his own: “Hamas, as the president said, is a terrorist organization, committed to Israel’s destruction.” He also highlighted a specific and recent act of terror, Hamas’s anti-tank-weapon attack on a school bus. Netanyahu then brought Hamas’s hostility to the U.S. home to Obama, pointedly saying that “Hamas attacked you, Mr. President, and the United States, for ridding the world of bin Laden.”

Netanyahu further explained that the Arab attack on Israel in 1948 created two refugee problems, of equivalent numbers. In addition to the Palestinian refugees, Israel’s Arab neighbors expelled their Jewish residents during the 1948 Arab–Israeli War. The difference, Netanyahu said, was that “tiny Israel” absorbed their refugees, while the Arab countries refused to do the same with the Palestinians. Finally, he brought out his trump card, 4,000 years of Jewish tragedies, including pogroms, expulsions, and massacres.

None of what Netanyahu said was new, but what was striking was the way in which he felt the need to provide this kind of a history lesson when discussing Israel’s situation with an American president. After 60-plus years of friendship between the two countries, one would think that we were past that point. Obama’s speech yesterday evidently showed Bibi that with this president, he feels the need to return to square one.

Tevi Troy is a visiting senior fellow at the Hudson Institute. A former senior White House aide and deputy secretary of Health and Human Services in the Bush administration, he also served as the White House Jewish Liaison.

The above Op-Ed was originally published in NationalReview, and submitted to YWN by the author.

DO YOU HAVE AN OPINION YOU WOULD LIKE TO SEE POSTED ON YWN? SEND IT TO US FOR REVIEW http://www.theyeshivaworld.com/contact.php

(YWN World Headquarters – NYC)