Yeshiva World News

President Reuven Rivlin used his address on Tuesday evening the eve of 4 Kislev to address the controversial Jewish Nation Bill, the bill that seeks to define the character of the State of Israel. There is a coalition crisis over the bill, which was passed in cabinet this week, for the ministers are divided on placing the emphasis on the Jewish character of the state or place the emphasis on the democratic nature of the state. Following are the president’s remarks to the annual gathering of the State Attorney’s Office, in Eilat. The conference also included an address by Justice Minister Tzipi Livni, Attorney General Yehuda Weinstein, Justice Ministry Director-General Amy Palmer, and State Attorney Shai Nitzan.

The following is the English translation of the President’s address.

Honored friends, at the height of the tensions between the Jewish and Arab citizens of Israel, and amidst a wave of murderous terrorism, you have bravely chosen to dedicate this year’s conference to the issue of the relationship between minorities and the majority in our land.

Moreover, the headline of the conference, ‘To be a minority in our country’, alludes strongly to the idea, (as stated in the national anthem), ‘To be a free people in our land’, juxtaposed with ‘to be of a minority in our land.’ The title of the conference, demands of us to take the bull by the horns and not to avoid the question – is there really a contradiction? Does being a part of a minority in the State of Israel, mean that one is not a free citizen of the state?

Firstly, allow me to offer a critique of the conference’s title. Not because I think the question posed is inappropriate, but because for the simple reason that the Arab community of Israel, is not a minority, at least not in the conventional sense. In the same way as the Ultra-Orthodox community is not a minority. When close to quarter of the children in first grade are Arab, and close to a fifth are Ultra-Orthodox, the usage of the term ‘minority’ in relation to these communities is false and flawed.

Indeed this level of preciseness is not merely a matter of linguistics, nor of semantics, but strikes at the core of the matter. Because, when we raise the issue of the relationship between Israel’s Arab and Jewish communities, we must understand that we are seeking to clarify the matrix of the relationship between the State of Israel, and over one-fifth of its citizens. Citizens who are part and parcel of this country, and for whom this land is their homeland. Citizens for whom the discussion about their rights and obligations, does not only address their equality as individuals in the State of Israel, but as a population with a collective and cohesive cultural and religious identity.

And now, we return to the question with which we opened. That being, is there a contradiction between the vision of Jewish independence and sovereignty in the State of Israel, and the freedoms of non-Jewish groups within it?

It occurs to me that this question is nothing but another way of asking; can the Jewish State, be a democratic state? Against a background of a range of efforts to enact a ‘national law’, attempting to set in law the Jewish character of the Jewish State, it seems that this question has become more relevant than ever.

Friends, the Declaration of Independence – accepted as a basic charter, and meriting of declarative constitutional status by a Supreme Court ruling – emphatically states the Jewish and democratic nature of the State of Israel.

The formulators of the Declaration of Independence, with much wisdom, insisted that, the Arab communities in Israel, as well as other groups, should not feel as the Jews had felt in exile.

Therefore, the declaration not only determines the complete equality of social rights for all its citizens, but religious, language, educational and cultural rights. The founding fathers of the State of Israel, envisioned a state whose Jewish nature and democratic nature, were as one.

Moreover, ‘social and political equality’ was for them in keeping with the vision of the Prophets of Israel. For them, it was an obvious outcome of the Jewish vision rooted in the values of freedom, peace and justice.

In the seventh decade of our independence, Jewish citizens of the state enjoy a strong and wonderful national home. We must always remember what has for our young men and women, already become taken for granted. Citizens of Israel speak Hebrew, and are creating a rich and diverse in their own language. Israel’s holidays are celebrated publically. The Israeli public education provides a rich, Jewish and nationalist education. The flag and national anthem of Israel are seen and heard at sports competitions across the world. The symbol of the state, the Jewish Menorah is emblazoned on the pages of the Israeli passport, with which Israeli citizens can enter 144 countries without a visa. The State of Israel is the national state of the Jewish people, ‘a free people in our land’.

A small, abhorred minority, undermine this fact, both from within our own and from outside, and so, we must ask ourselves seriously, what is the point of the proposed law – Israel: The National State of the Jewish People.

Does the promotion of this law, not in fact, question the success of the Zionist enterprise in which we are fortunate to live?

Does this proposal, not in fact encourage us to seek contradiction between the Jewish and democratic characters of the state?

Does this bill not in fact play into the hands of those who seek to slander us? Into the very hands of those who wish to show, that even within us, there are those who see contradiction between our being a free people in our land, and the freedoms of the non-Jewish communities amongst us?

Friends, I remember like yesterday, the unparalleled pride we felt, my friends and I, on November 10th, 1975, when we saw the Israeli ambassador to the United Nations, who of course later became President of Israel, Chaim Herzog, when from the podium at the United Nations, he tore up the resolution equating Zionism with racism. Herzog ripped up an improper and distorted decision, which sought to attribute to the Zionist enterprise the very injustices which Zionism itself had righted.

And yet, even then, as Chaim Herzog was speaking out against those who dared to question the moral basis for our right to self-determination, the leaders of Israel did not see fit to respond to the authors of the shameful UN resolution with attempts to pass laws regarding the superiority of the Jewish nature of the state. The thought did not even cross their minds, specifically, because Israel’s being the national home of the Jewish people was self-evident.

With a heavy heart, while still Speaker in the Knesset, I read the opinion of the Knesset’s legal advisor, regarding the original proposal of the Basic Law of Israel as the nation state of the Jewish People.

“This proposal seeks to establish a new and different hierarchy, between the State of Israel being the national state of the Jewish People, and between being a democratic state.” He continued, “No longer would there be a horizontal balance between the two parts, but instead a disconnect between the two, and the creation of a vertical balance, so that following the acceptance of this proposal, at the top of the constitutional hierarchy would be placed the principle of the State of Israel as a the nation state of the Jewish People, and only beneath it on the constitutional hierarchy would be placed the principle of a democratic state.”

Ladies and gentlemen, such a hierarchical approach, which places Jewishness before democracy, misses the great significance of the Declaration of Independence, which combined the two elements together – without separating them.

Judaism and democracy, democracy and Judaism, said as one utterance, are combined, and continue to be so. These are not merely words. This is the beating heart of the State of Israel. A state established on two solid foundations; nationhood on the one hand, and democracy on the other. The removal of one will bring the whole building down.

Even if another law would eventually pass through the current Knesset, I am afraid that the atmosphere which led to the formation and proposal of this law will not quickly pass through either the Knesset of the Israeli public.

When considering the possibility of changing the constitutional foundations of the State of Israel, it would be fitting to hold a full and comprehensive referendum, to consider the ramifications. Such a deliberation must be undertaken with the necessary level of seriousness, and with long term considerations.

We must understand the deep connection between the Jewish and democratic components is not artificial. Those who see the proposal of a Basic Law which cements Israel as a Jewish state, to be a counterweight to Basic Law: Human Dignity and Liberty are simply mistaken.

Moreover, one who thinks that Basic Law: Human Dignity and Liberty in some way contradicts the Jewishness of the state, not only does not understand what a democratic state is, but fails to understand what a Jewish state is.

Indeed, I ask you, is there a more ‘Jewish law’ than Basic Law: Human Dignity and Liberty?

In each and every legal text, this is the law that states most clearly the greatest assertion that the Jewish perspective brought to the world; ‘Beloved is man, for he is made in God’s image’. And so I fear that the original text of the law, whilst trying to avoid a conflict between Judaism and democracy, ended up stuck in a conflict a between the Jewish State and Judaism.

Every law which weakens the greatest of Jewish laws – that of human dignity – not only weakens the Jewish character of the State of Israel, but at the end of the day, will also weaken our national home.

I call on all Members of Knesset, on all citizens of Israel, Jews and non-Jews. Our combined efforts must be invested not in drawing differences between Judaism and democracy, but in the mutual development and empowerment to be found where they meet.

Friends. Amongst those who promote this law in its hierarchical version, there are those who state that the aim of this law is to force the Supreme Court to prefer in its rulings Jewish considerations over democratic ones.

It must be stated clearly, the relationship between the courts on one hand and the legislature on the other, has yet to reach a desired balance. For twenty years, the Supreme Court and the Knesset have been on a chronic collision course, whereby judicial activism has sought to cause the Knesset’s activities to spill over into the realm of the courts.

I supported in the past, and I continue to support the vital need for a ‘Basic Law on Legislation.’ A law, that even without a constitution, will at least codify the rules of the game between the different authorities. A law which, for the first time, will regulate the status of the Basic Laws, and legislate for a judicial review. A law which will allow for a limited period, the renewal of laws which did not pass such a judicial review, with a special majority of 65 MKs.

I thought then as I do now, that the citizens of Israel are the sovereigns of the state, and thus, the Knesset as their representatives holds the last word. Is there anyone in the Knesset that fears the Supreme Court would suddenly annul the ‘Law of Return’? Or that it would suddenly find legal issue with the settlement of Jews in the Galilee or the Negev? If so, they should support and respect a Basic Law on legislation.

Passing such a law would not require harming the Jewish or democratic essence of the State of Israel, by showing preference to one component over the other. Make no mistake – a sovereign and independent Knesset in no way makes for a more Jewish and less democratic Israel.

In any event, the issues with which we begun have brought into focus – that our ambition to live as a free people in our land, in our national home, requires the empowerment and reinforcement of the strong, democratic foundations upon which the State of Israel was established.

The strengthening of these democratic foundations will of course not be realized by handing over power of attorney to the Supreme Court, nor by the weakening of the Knesset, the representative of sovereignty.

Furthermore, the strengthening of the Knesset not only safeguards the freedom for which we waited generation upon generation, but distinctly preserves the magnificent Jewish heritage, in whose name we established the State of Israel.

And so, my friends, what does it mean to be a free, non-Jewish, citizen in our land?

If we are dealing with the freedom of the Arab public, and their equal rights in the State of Israel, then we must address, and correct the ongoing discrimination which they endure.

And when we are dealing with Judaism and democracy, we must state clearly. The severe discrimination toward the Arab community as far as resources (in education, infrastructure, building and development) is inconsistent with the democratic nature of the state, as it is inconsistent with the Jewish nature of the state.

And yet, even if we succeed to narrow these inequalities, and to eradicate this discrimination from within us – we will yet to have realized the vision, and we will yet to have fulfilled the promises of the Declaration of Independence, if we still seek to cement into law the Jewish nature of the state, in a way that places it above the democratic nature of the state.

Specifically, during these days, when brutal and murderous terrorism seeks to drive us apart, we must reiterate to ourselves, (here, in the Knesset, in schools, in academia and in the halls of Torah study,) that Jewish is democratic and democracy is Jewish. Only thus can we know that this external, brutal terrorism, will not only not break us physically, but neither will it break our spirit.”

Former President Shimon Peres concurs with President Rivlin, adding David Ben-Gurion would not have backed such a law.

(YWN – Israel Desk, Jerusalem)

MK Moshe Gafne announced during an interview with Radio Galei Yisrael that he is not ruling out the possibility of entering into a future coalition that include the Bayit Yehudi party. “I can spit on a ballot from Bayit Yehudi and sit with them [in a coalition] for I am a practical person. As he acts towards the United States I will act towards him”.

Gafne referred to the leaders of the coalition as irresponsible, mentioning Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu, Justice Minister Tzipi Livni, Finance Minister Yair Lapid and Economy Minister Naftali Bennett, insisting they were not interested in what is best for the nation when they assembled the current coalition. Gafne explains all of the parties that are part of the coalition knew from the get go the coalition could not survive because the coalition partners have nothing to unite them, no common ground.

He added the difference between the current coalition and its predecessor is that the latter almost completed its entire term and had many accomplishments and coalition leaders did not get up and make daily announcements if they managed to accomplish something.

(YWN – Israel Desk, Jerusalem)

Ferguson Police Officer Darren Wilson says he “never wanted to take anybody’s life” and feels sorry about the death of Michael Brown.

But Wilson says in an interview with ABC’s “Good Morning America” that aired Wednesday that he followed his training when he shot the unarmed black teenager. During their confrontation, he says, “The only emotion I ever felt was fear and then it was survival and training.”

Wilson says he only fired at Brown when Brown was facing him, and never when his back was turned. And he says he saw in the teenager a high level of aggression and anger that was “almost unfathomable.”

Wilson says he understands Wilson’s parents’ anger because they are grieving their son. He says, “I’m sorry that their son lost his life.”

(AP)

[COMMUNICATED CONTENT] 

Yiddish was the vernacular language of most Jews in Eastern and Central Europe before World War II. Today, it is spoken by descendants of those Jews living in the United States, Israel, and other parts of the world. Yiddish is today enjoying a  resurgence.

Some say because there are two generations of Yeshiva Students who today are not familiar with Yiddish while their Teachers use Yiddish in many of their classes and Talks. Others say, people don’t want to lose touch with their roots. But whatever the reason Yiddish was part of the Jewish scene for centuries and is coming back strong. Check out the best Yiddish Course on the web. http://www.jewishsoftware.com/products/Yiddish_in_10_Lesson_2_CDs_+_Workbook_3117.asp

The revival of interest in Yiddish…. has spurred the development of a course that can help anyone learn Yiddish in 10 easy lessons. The basic grammar and vocabulary of Yiddish, which is written in the Hebrew alphabet, is Germanic.

Yiddish, however, is not a dialect of German but a complete language—one of a family of Western Germanic languages, that includes English, Dutch, and Afrikaans.  Yiddish words often have meanings that are different from similar words in German.

The term “Yiddish” is derived from the German word for “Jewish.” The most accepted (but not the only) theory of the origin of Yiddish is that it began to take shape by the 10th century as Jews from France and Italy migrated to the German Rhine Valley. They developed a language that included elements of Hebrew, Jewish-French, Jewish-Italian, and various German dialects.

CLICK HERE FOR MORE INFO

In the late Middle Ages, when Jews settled in Eastern Europe, Slavic elements were incorporated into Yiddish. Now if you would like to speak and understand Yiddish you can.

With our exclusive Yiddish in 10 Lessons all you need to do is spend 20 minutes a day and that is all it takes to learn to read, understand and speak Yiddish.

With our Yiddish course, you will master the Yiddish language in 10 weeks. Join 2 million Yiddish speakers now – and connect with your past and build for the future.

Look around on the web, on Amazon and you will find no one can offer a quality Yiddish Course for less and with a Money Back Guarantee.

Our Yiddish in 10 Lessons is the same famous course offered by Universities and cost over $1,000. Now you can get that same course for under $90. To view the course click link below. CLICK HERE FOR MORE INFO

What do our students say…?

“I would like to thank you for your book/cds entitled, 10 Lessons in Yiddish. Learning Yiddish through 10 Lessons in Yiddish was a very rewarding experience for me!”

Here are just a few reasons why I am so thankful for your work:  It helped me acquire the basics and fundamentals in all aspects of the Yiddish language. I find that I have a better knowledge of Yiddish rules than many who have been speaking Yiddish for years. It also helped me increase my Yiddish vocabulary immensely. This was accomplished in the way you grouped words by category, while teaching other new words through familiar stories and exercises.

I really appreciated the style of your book with the DVDs which adds a FLAVOR to learning Yiddish that is unmatched in a typical language book. You bring the Yiddish language to life making it a much more enjoyable learning experience. I was excited to keep developing further.

MOST IMPORTANTLY, I am extremely grateful to you because all of the above led me to my goal of passing an advanced Yiddish language test towards earning me

college credits!! Can I recommend this course – OF COURSE ! For the cost of UNDER $100 and effort I definitely got my money’s worth.

Thanks again.
- Yoni S., New York

“I have been learning Yiddish the past 2 years here in Montreal and I can honestly say that I have learned more in these past few weeks with you than in the 2 years.

For one thing I was not able to ‘say’ a sentence, I could sort of read and kind of understand but not speak – I am now speaking BH and thanks to you I am also reading and understanding much better. Regards and Thank You.”

- Pam C., Montreal, Quebec

“The Yiddish course brought back fond memories of my childhood and hearing Yiddish spoken in our house. The personal attention in each class was very helpful. It was both fun & educational. I highly recommend this class to anyone who wants to be able to start speaking Yiddish fluently.”

- Yisrael M., Far Rockaway, NY

“As a past student of Conversational Yiddish class, I recommend it to anyone serious about learning Yiddish. The classes are methodical and geared towards real life practical Yiddish speaking (with a touch of humor), making the sessions flow well from one week to the next.  – Akiva W., Far Rockaway, NY

Thank you so much for your great Yiddish class.  To answer your questions, I took the class because I work in an office with people whose first language is Yiddish,

and it is used a lot, and I wanted to be able to better understand what was being said.  Your class definitely helped in that regard.  During the 10 weeks, I found myself understanding more and more the Yiddish that was spoken in my office.  The class was fun, with interesting stories, beautiful songs, and conversations, and you are a very patient teacher. -Danielle Z., Lakewood, NJ

I looked into taking a Yiddish course for 2 reasons actually a) I’ve always wanted to know how to speak Yiddish being that I come from a home where my grandparents, aunts, uncles and parents all spoke/speak Yiddish and I want to be able to understand the conversations or even the speeches at simchos etc. b) As a speech therapist I taught children whose first language was Yiddish and I realized it would be much easier for both the child and myself if I knew their language. So I figured it was a good time to try and learn the language.  I thought the classes were organized and taught very well and that we were given a really good start to learning the language. Thank you very much for giving me this opportunity. I really enjoyed it. -Goldie A., Toronto, Canada

If you are looking for some more good Jewish Downloads on Sale – click link below.
http://www.jewishsoftware.com/default.asp?aid=134&page=category&id=720

[VIDEO IN EXTENDED ARTICLE]

It has been a stormy 24 hours as the first significant winter storm is upon us. The heavy rains which began on Tuesday of 3 Kislev continued through the night and Wednesday. They are expected to taper off on Thursday morning. The unseasonably cold temperatures will continue through Shabbos, but the rainfall and sporadic thundershowers are expected to end by noon on Thursday, 5 Kislev.

As is generally the case, it was not all winter fun for many, especially residents of flood prone area like southern Tel Aviv residents. Israel Police reported some roads flooded because drainage systems were not cleaned ahead of the storm. Some communities received their monthly rainfall in the past 24 hours as the rains backed by strong winds hit hard. There were reports of power outages in some areas as well.

According to the experts, the communities with the most rainfall were Karnei Shomron and Kevutzat Yavne, measuring 72mm (2.83 inches) until 08:00 on Wednesday morning. Shaare Tikvah received 70mm, followed by Beit Dagan with 62mm, and Tel Aviv with 23mm (0.90 inches).

In Yerushalayim, rainfall measured 40mm (1.57 inches). The southern Negev reported 47mm (1.85 inches) and 26mm (1.02 inches) over the Kinneret which measured -212.83 on Wednesday morning.

Temperatures around Israel for Wednesday, 4 Kislev:

· Yerushalayim: 7C (44.5F) at night to 10C (50F) during the day.

· Tel Aviv: 14-16 (57-60.5)

· Haifa: 11-16 (52-60.5)

· Tzfas: 5-9 (41-48.2)

· Katzrin: 9-14 (48.2-57)

· Modi’in: 11-15 (52-59)

· Ashdod: 15-17 (52-62.5)

· Beersheva: 11-15 (52-59)

· Mitzpei Ramon: 7-11 (44.5-52)

· Eilat: 14-20 57-68)

(YWN – Israel Desk, Jerusalem)

06:30

IDF soldiers taking part in counter-terrorism operations throughout Yehuda and Shomron during the night arrested 13 suspects.

06:40

Heavy rainfall accompanied with strong winds were reported throughout the country during the night resulting in power outages and flooding. The rain is expected to dissipate today.

09:00

The Kinneret has risen 3.5cm (1.3 inches) from the last 24 hours of rainfall. Now measuring -212.83.

09:09:

A pedestrian was struck and killed by a bus on Uziel Street in Bat Yam.

09:14

Bezeq union officials have declared a ‘work dispute’ in protest over industry reforms.

09:40

Due to a police error, an 18-year-old burglar who was found with stolen goods in his home was released after the Hadera Magistrate Court ruled the search leading to the arrest was illegal.

10:00

Egypt is permitting passage into and out of Gaza via the Rafiach Crossing on Wednesday and Thursday.

10:30

Explosions in the Beersheva area are the result of military industry activity.

11:00

Ten employees have been released from the Kiryat Gat gas mask production factory as the Defense Ministry has ordered slowing down production.

11:17

A vehicle is in flames on the Jerusalem – Tel Aviv Highway near Shar HaGai traveling to Tel Aviv.

11:39:

Hospitals in N. Israel today taking part in major biological warfare training exercise.

12:11

Fire reported on a passenger train from Beersheva to Dimona.

12:12

MDA is freezing a planned reduction of services to communities in Yehuda & Shomron pending a session of the Knesset Health Committee.

12:20

An electric pole fell in the Kiryat Menachem neighborhood of Yerushalayim earlier due to inclement weather.

(YWN – Israel Desk, Jerusalem)

[VIDEO IN EXTENDED ARTICLE]

In other countries, you may be asked to give a push to a car stuck in the mud. In Russia, passengers in the Arctic came out of an airliner to the bitter cold to help it move to the runway.

A Russian-made Tu-134 with 74 oil workers and seven crew members onboard was due to fly from the town of Igarka on Tuesday to Krasnoyarsk 800 miles (nearly 1,300 kilometers) to the south when the plane’s chassis breaks literally got frozen to the ground. It was -52 C (-61 F) outside and the passengers seemed desperate to get home.

Eager to help, several dozen men were seen in an amateur video pushing the plane by leaning on both wings.

Russian authorities, however, weren’t amused by the incident, and prosecutors launched an investigation into a possible breach of safety regulations.

“It would be funny if it didn’t pose a horrendous threat. People could have damaged the aircraft skin and the flaps,” Oksana Gorbunova, senior adviser to the West Siberian transportation prosecutor, told the Tass news agency.

Gorbunova said the passengers were asked to leave the plane when it got stuck. When a tractor began towing the airliner, some of the passengers left a bus and tried to help move it.

“The plane was towed, of course, because it would be physically impossible for people (to move it),” Gorbunova said.

(AP)

The following is an unedited AP article:

More than a thousand people trekked across Iran this past week to visit a shrine in this ancient Persian city, a pilgrimage like many others in the Islamic Republic — until you notice men there wearing yarmulkes.

Iran, a home for Jews for more than 3,000 years, has the Middle East’s largest Jewish population outside of Israel, a perennial foe of the country. But while Iran’s Jews in recent years had their faith continually criticized by the country’s previous governments, they’ve found new acceptance under moderate President Hassan Rouhani.

“The government has listened to our grievances and requests. That we are being consulted is an important step forward,” said Homayoun Samiah, leader of the Tehran Jewish Association. “Under former President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, nobody was listening to us. Our requests fell on deaf ears.”

Most of Iran’s 77 million people are Shiite Muslims and its ruling establishment is led by hard-line clerics who preach a strict version of Islam. Many Jews fled the country after the 1979 Islamic Revolution. Jews linked to Israel afterward were targeted. Today, estimates suggest some 20,000 Jews remain in the country.

Tensions grew under Ahmadinejad, who repeatedly called the Holocaust “a myth” and even sponsored an international conference in 2006 to debate whether the World War II genocide of Jews took place. Vice President Mohammad Reza Rahimi once accused Jews as whole of being drug dealers.

But since Rouhani took office last year, Jews say they have been heartened by the support they’ve received. His government agreed to allow Jewish schools to be closed on Saturdays to mark Shabbat, the day of rest. Rouhani also allocated the equivalent of $400,000 to a Jewish charity hospital in Tehran and invited the country’s only Jewish lawmaker to accompany him to the United Nations General Assembly in New York last year.

“We were fearful in the ’80s. We were feeling the pressure. Now, we are not concerned anymore. We feel secure and enjoy freedoms,” said Mahvash Kohan, a female Jewish pilgrim who came to Yazd from Shiraz. “In the past, Israel and others were providing incentives such as housing that lured some Jews. Now, it’s not like that. And Iranian Jews have better living and working conditions in Iran. So, no one is willing to leave now.”

Still, human rights groups say Jews and other minorities in Iran face discrimination. Last year, officials in Iran’s presidency denied that Rouhani had a Twitter account after a tweet that appeared to be from the leader offered a greeting for Rosh Hashana, the Jewish New Year. Iranian state television also has aired anti-Semitic programming.

Those taking part in the recent Yazd pilgrimage to the tomb of a famed Jewish scholar, however, praised the Iranian government’s new outreach.

“We’ve gathered here to pray and celebrate our Jewishness,” Kohan said. “We are proud that we freely practice our religion.”

(AP)

He criticized the media. He talked about witness testimony that didn’t match physical evidence. And he did it at night, as a city already on edge waited to learn if a grand jury would indict a white Ferguson police officer in the shooting death of an unarmed black 18-year-old.

St. Louis County Prosecutor Bob McCulloch – whose impartiality has been questioned since soon after Michael Brown was killed by Officer Darren Wilson on Aug. 9 – has come under renewed scrutiny since he appeared before television cameras to announce that the grand jury would not indict Wilson. A defensive McCulloch repeatedly cited what he said were inconsistencies and erroneous witness accounts. He never mentioned that Brown was unarmed.

Attorneys for Brown’s family and activists said Tuesday that everything from how evidence was presented to the grand jury to the way McCulloch delivered the news of its decision bolstered their belief that the outcome was predetermined by McCulloch, who has deep family roots and relationships with police.

“This grand jury decision, we feel, is a reflection of the sentiment of those that presented the evidence,” Anthony Gray, an attorney for Brown’s family, said at a news conference.

Gray questioned, for example, why prosecutors presented testimony of witnesses who clearly did not see the shootings, rather than make a case for some type of charges. He also said it was unclear how the evidence was presented.

Activists and Brown family attorneys had asked McCulloch – whose father, a police officer, was killed while responding to a call involving a black suspect – to appoint a special prosecutor.

He instead asked a grand jury to decide if there was enough evidence to bring charges, and assigned prosecutors in his office to present the evidence because he was “fully aware of unfounded but growing concern that the investigation might not be fair,” he said Monday.

McCulloch said the jury of nine whites and three blacks met on 25 separate days over three months, hearing more than 70 hours of testimony from about 60 witnesses, including three medical examiners and experts on blood, toxicology and firearms and other issues.

“The duty of the grand jury is to separate fact from fiction,” McCulloch said, adding that the panelists were “the only people that have heard and examined every witness and every piece of evidence.”

Convening a grand jury was a somewhat unusual move but not necessarily wrong, experts said.

“Ordinarily a prosecutor uses the grand jury as a rubber stamp, and people complain about that. This time, he went to the grand jury because he wanted them to take the political heat for a difficult decision, and he gave the grand jurors an overload of information,” said Laurie Levenson, a former federal prosecutor who teaches criminal law at Loyola University in Los Angeles. “So now people are criticizing that because the prosecutor’s not taking responsibility for the decision.”

David Sklansky, a criminal-law professor at Stanford University Law School, said the case in some ways underscores weaknesses in the grand jury system: “Grand juries don’t do a terrific job as a check on overzealous prosecutors, but they’re even worse as an independent check on a prosecutor who might be under-zealous,” he said, adding he was not saying that necessarily was the case with McCulloch’s office.

But some in Ferguson also were angry about how McCulloch handled the announcement of the grand jury decision – including his timing, his emphasis on witnesses whose memories did not match physical evidence and his claim that the media reports helped fan the flames of distrust back in August, when the shooting sparked widespread rioting and looting. The city erupted again Monday night after McCulloch spoke, with protesters smashing windows, looting and setting buildings and cars on fire.

“The way (McCulloch) just read off the whole speech was kind of like he was making a mockery of the whole situation,” said 20-year-old Darnesha Tabor if Hazelwood, who handed out bottled water on Tuesday in Ferguson.

She also said announcing the decision just before 8:30 p.m. Monday, when many protesters already had gathered in Ferguson, was a mistake. McCulloch spokesman Ed Magee said that gave schools time to get children home and businesses time to let employees leave.

(AP)

Hillary Rodham Clinton offered praise for President Barack Obama’s executive actions to stave off deportation for millions of immigrants living in the U.S. illegally. But the Democrats’ favored presidential hopeful has been less forthcoming on other issues in these early days of the 2016 contest.

Clinton is not, so far, a candidate, and she’s limiting her commentary about the daily news cycle confronting Obama — a strategy that could keep down chatter about where she and the unpopular president agree and where they diverge.

The former secretary of state, senator and first lady is not talking about the Keystone XL pipeline, rejected by one vote in the final weeks of the Democrat-led Senate. She has yet to speak publicly about a sweeping climate change agreement between the U.S. and China, an extension of talks over Iran’s nuclear program or the Senate’s move to block a bill to end bulk collection of Americans’ phone records by the National Security Agency.

When Obama announced his moves to prevent the deportations for nearly 5 million immigrants living in the U.S. illegally, Clinton quickly embraced the decision on Twitter. The president, she wrote, was “taking action on immigration in the face of inaction” in Congress. In doing so, she signaled that as a candidate, she would run against the Republican-led House and Senate that convenes next year. Clinton also drew a distinction from her would-be GOP opponents who have spoken of immigration reform in large part as a border security problem.

On other weighty policy matters, however, Clinton is mum.

“You’ve got to make choices if you’re not a candidate,” said Lanny Davis, a White House special counsel during the Clinton administration who attended law school with Bill and Hillary Clinton. “She is not a candidate for president. When she becomes a candidate, she has to start answering questions.”

Nick Merrill, a Clinton spokesman, declined to comment.

Clinton is expected to make her political intentions known in the coming weeks, likely in early 2015. Her speeches are closely watched for signs of how she might offer a rationale for her candidacy.

Clinton campaigned for Democratic candidates during the fall, often pointing to pocketbook issues like equal pay for women, raising the minimum wage and expanded family leave policies. “A 20th century economy will not work for 21st century families,” she said at an October rally.

Since then, Clinton has taken a more circumspect posture in public events, appearing at charity events and voicing support for issues related to her work at the Clinton Foundation. That approach allows her to stay above the political fray in the aftermath of Democrats’ poor showing during the midterm elections.

Clinton has stayed close to Obama on immigration, releasing a statement that noted that previous presidents of both parties had taken similar steps.

The following night, in an interview at a New York Historical Society event, Clinton reiterated the need for Congress to act on a comprehensive immigration bill. She also put the issue in the context of families, saying the decision probably affected wait staff who were serving the dinner.

“There is probably no more pressing issue at this time than to fix this immigration system,” said Alex Padilla, California’s secretary of state-elect. “As a leader, it was right for her to speak up. A lot of people wanted to know what she thought.”

Other policy issues carry more political risk.

Clinton has avoided weighing in on the Keystone XL pipeline, saying it wouldn’t be appropriate for her since the environmental review by the State Department happened during her watch. The issue is tricky for Democrats because labor unions have supported the plan but environmentalists adamantly oppose it.

Clinton has called climate change the nation’s “most consequential” issue but has yet to weigh in on the agreement Obama reached with China to set new targets for cutting emissions. The deal was negotiated by John Podesta, a Clinton White House chief of staff who is expected to play a prominent role in a Clinton presidential campaign.

Both issues could receive attention from Clinton on Monday, when she is scheduled to address the League of Conservation Voters in New York.

On NSA surveillance, Clinton has talked broadly about the need to balance the need for security without infringing upon Americans’ privacy amid a debate over the government’s collection of data. But she has kept a low profile on the issue.

Republicans contend Clinton is being overly political in the lead-up to a presidential campaign.

“Everything Hillary does is for political purposes,” said Republican National Committee spokeswoman Kirsten Kukowski, “which includes taking positions for political expediency and not answering tough questions for political reasons.”

(AP)

A White House veto threat appears to have put on ice a congressional effort to permanently renew a handful of generous tax breaks for businesses and individuals. Officials say that the plan, brewing behind closed doors on Capitol Hill, favored corporations over the working class.

The unusual veto threat came before the parameters of a potential agreement were even revealed.

Speculation on Capitol Hill on Tuesday focused on a potential agreement to permanently enact tax breaks on business investments in new equipment and research and development as part of a plan that would renew dozens of expired tax breaks for businesses and individuals both.

The White House immediately weighed in with a veto threat, saying Congress should also make permanent a top Obama administration priority: extending more generous tax credits for the working poor and people with children. They were left out of the potential pact and expire at the end of 2017. Democrats fear they won’t be renewed if Republicans control Congress or retake the White House.

“The president would veto the proposed deal because it would provide permanent tax breaks to help well-connected corporations while neglecting working families,” deputy White House press secretary Jennifer Friedman said. A senior White House official said the president was personally working the phones to try to kill the plan.

Negotiations on renewing the expired tax breaks were expected to continue.

At issue are dozen of expired tax breaks, known as “extenders” in Washington parlance. They are generally renewed every year or two and have broad political backing from both Democrats and Republicans. They expired last year and action now would extend them retroactively in time for individuals and businesses to claim them in the upcoming filing season.

In trade-offs that angered the administration but gave political wins to top Senate Democrats, the emerging pact would also have made permanent tax breaks for college tuition, parking and transit subsidies, and a deduction for state and local sales taxes.

“The president has consistently stated his opposition to giving hundreds of billions of dollars of tax cuts primarily geared toward corporations while leaving middle-class families and those struggling to get into the middle class behind,” said Jason Furman, chairman of the White House Council of Economic Advisers.

The possible agreement, Democratic aides said, was being negotiated between House Republicans and top Senate Democrats like outgoing Majority Leader Harry Reid, whose state of Nevada benefits from the state and local sales tax deduction. Senate Democrats were seeking the best deal they could while retaining leverage, but the emerging outline infuriated the White House because it was so favorable to businesses.

The aides insisted on anonymity to discuss ongoing talks.

The cost of the outline under consideration could have reached $450 billion over the coming decade and would have been financed entirely by adding to the $17.9 trillion national debt.

“The price tag is a result of irresponsible horse trading whereby each side got to claim its favorite tax break without paying for it,” said Maya MacGuineas, president of the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget, which advocates for lower deficits.

Dozens of other tax perks would have been extended through the end of next year, including breaks for race horse owners, manufacturers of electric motorcycles and improvements at NASCAR tracks. Other extenders include tax credits for biodiesel, for coal produced in Indian country, and breaks for energy-efficient homes and commercial buildings.

Many of the breaks have been criticized as wasteful, inefficient and archaic, but their collective weight has always powered them through Congress. Critics did claim one casualty: a much-criticized tax credit for wind power, which would phase out in three years. Some of the biggest supporters of the credit, however, have been Midwestern Republicans.

(AP)