Blood Libels and Antisemitism in the UK

This is the top half of a cartoon by Gerald Scarfe that was printed in the Sunday Times newspaper last weekend, 27th January. The Israeli Prime Minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, is pictured building a wall that imprisons people - presumably Palestinians - between the bricks. The mortar he is using appears to be made from blood. The caption at the bottom read, "Will cementing the peace continue?"

This is a country that still believes in freedom of the press, and one doesn't have to agree with Scarfe's perspective. However, to have published this on International Holocaust Memorial Day seems at best utterly bad taste. At worst some have accused him of antisemitism. News International mogul Rupert Murdoch apologised via his Twitter account saying that a "major apology for grotesque, offensive cartoon" was owed. Scarfe apologised for the "very unfortunate timing" of the publication, and insisted that he was not antisemitic. In an interview with the Jewish Chronicle, he said that his drawing "was a criticism of Netanyahu, and not of the Jewish people:  there was no slight whatsoever intended against them."

I am inclined to believe that this is what he believes. I do think, however, that there is a bit of a problem with the imagery he used. The bloody mortar evokes imagery of the blood libel that has haunted Jewish communities across the world since medieval times. It originated with the false claim of Jewish guilt for the crucifixion of Jesus; and developed into the even more false belief that Jews used the blood of murdered Xians (especially children) in their rituals, e.g., that it is a vital part of the recipe for Passover matzah or the filling for the hamantaschen pastries eaten at the festival of Purim. This blood libel has been the excuse for premeditated physical attacks on Jewish communities for centuries, and is thus a somewhat sensitive subject. To use blood imagery and expect it to be seen outside that context is ingenuous. Nevertheless, this does not automatically make it antisemitic.

Roy Greenslade has a good article in today's Evening Standard where while arguing for freedom of the press he also reminds us of the responsibilities of the author and the editors. He writes about Scarfe and Steve Bell of the Guardian:

"Though I doubt whether the cartoonists meant to be anti-semitic, complainants would surely say this is the point - unintentional racism is as unacceptable (arguably worse), than intentional racism. It was undoubtedly thoughtless and neither man can plead naivety. They are veterans in a craft that exists in order to offend."
(The rest of Greenslade's article is here.)

In the end, I would say that what happened was thoughtless, but not antisemitic. In the Guardian, Anshel Pfeffer points out that:

"There is absolutely nothing in the cartoon which identifies its subject as a Jew. No Star of David or kippa, and though some commentators have claimed Netanyahu's nose in the cartoon is over-sized, at most this is in line with Scarfe's style (and that of cartoonists) of slightly exaggerating physical features."
(the rest of the Guardian article is here)

There are enough people in the world who hate others and promote that hatred - we do not need to increase their number by adding Gerald Scarfe to their cabal.

Killer Cats

A Science reporter on the BBC website reports this week that

"Cats are one of the top threats to US wildlife, killing billions of animals each year ... they are responsible for the deaths of between 1.4 and 3.7 billion birds and 6.9-20.7 billion mammals annually"

Stray and feral cats are mostly responsible, but pet cats do their part also. In fact, domestic cats are currently blamed for the global extinction of 33 species.

Read more about these utterly vicious killing machines here. As for me, if I were to consider writing an article about a dangerous creature currently threatening the existence of hundreds of species on the earth, I think I might focus on

                                                                                                                        homo sapiens ...

The Duelling Elmoes

It's Monday. It's cold and icy outside. It's nowhere near going-home-time. I think we need to get some love from the red furry beast itself. (thanks to SLynn for being the other hand).

qv

The Duelling Brandos

&


The SNL Dueling Brandos
(close your eyes and listen)

Anger and its consequences: Julie Burchill in the Guardian

Julie Burchill has been published in the media since my teenage years. While I do not always agree with her, I have found her writing to be thought-provoking on issues that are important to me. She is currently in the news for being accused of transphobia. Her close friend Suzanne Moore was attacked for a comment made in an essay about women's anger. Ms. Burchill has used the Guardian page 'Comment is Free' to defend her friend. This is loyal.  This is also very angry. There may be a noble ambition behind the piece, but there is much to question about the way it was done. For example, she wrote:

"To have your c0ck cut off and then plead special privileges as women - above natural-born women, who don't know the meaning of suffering, apparently - is a bit like the old definition of chutzpah:  the boy who killed his parents and then asked the jury for clemency on the grounds he was an orphan."

Read the rest of it for yourself here.

My first question, actually, is for the editor:  was this piece not proofed before publication? If it was, then presumably the Guardian considers the language and imagery used to be beyond reproach? If so, I'd like to know your definition of 'transphobic'.

My second question is for Ms. Burchill:  why did you not use your considerable journalistic experience to write a piece without such clumsy, obvious and insulting jabs at the general trans community. You are smart and witty enough to demonstrate your support for your friend without resorting to name-calling. Not to mention that the resulting furore has drowned out any valid points you might have made about the original response to Suzanne Moore's essay. I'm sadly disappointed in you, Julie.

here are some current links to various responses to the situation:

A poll in the Independent - did JB go too far?
Tim Stanley in the Telegraph - liberals being illiberal
Roz Kaveney Trans people response also in the Guardian via 'Comment is Free'
Daily Mail puts its own particular spin on the story
Pink News reports the story
HuffPostUK highlights Lynne Featherstone comment
Paris Lees writes a response in Diva magazine

Parshat Vaeira

Here are a few thoughts from last week's Liberal Judaism Thought for the Week about the Torah portion:

Parshat Vaeira

But Moses spoke before the Lord, saying, “Behold, the Children of Israel did not hearken to me. How then will Pharaoh hearken to me, seeing that I am of uncircumcised lips?” (Exodus 6:12)

The time has come for Moses to take his place as leader of his people. God tells him to go to Pharaoh and ask for the freedom of the Children of Israel.  They should be released from bondage and allowed to leave the land of Egypt. Initially, Moses chooses not to accept his mission. The excuse he gives is that since he was unable to persuade the Children of Israel to listen to him, what chance would he have of convincing Pharaoh? He claims he has a physical disability, he cannot speak.

The Midrash tells us that as a baby, Moses was tested by Pharaoh to see if he would be a threat to the kingdom. A golden cup and a blazing coal were placed in front of the child. He naturally reached towards the gold, but the angel Gabriel came down and moved his hand towards the coal. Baby Moses picked up the coal, put it in his mouth, and burned his lips. This was the explanation for his problem in later life.

Moses, however, uses an odd phrase to describe his speech impediment:  aral s’fatayim. Orlah is Hebrew for foreskin, an obstruction over the head of the penis. Thus we might understand the phrase as meaning his lips are somehow impeded by a metaphorical flap of skin. Rashi gives several examples in the Tanach of the root ayin, resh, lamed used to mean clogged or closed. This is to make clear to us that the ‘closing of his lips’ meant that Moses definitely had some kind of speech defect.

Other commentators consider this issue from a less literal perspective. Perhaps not wishing to speak is an example of the humility of Moses. Or this one flaw in Moses would prove that any person he persuaded would have been converted by the purity of the message rather than the sophistry of the speaker. Or that since he had not grown up within the slave community, he did not feel that he could speak for them. One thing is certain, though – Moses doubted his ability to say what should be said.

It is clear from myriad explanations through the ages, that understanding this moment in the history of our people always has contemporary relevance. In the Torah, God solved the problem by enlisting Moses’ brother Aaron to be the speaker (Ex. 7:1). Today we do not expect such Divine intervention. Yet one does not have to be a Moses to be faced with a situation when speaking up may make a difference. It could be something as fleeting as a homophobic slur, a racist remark, or a sexist comment made at work, on the Tube, or amongst our circle of friends. However, so often we also hesitate – is it appropriate? Will it make things difficult? Will it make a difference?

What is it that stops us speaking, and how may we overcome those fears and limitations in order to take our part in developing the world in which we live? While God may not provide us with an Aaron, we do have the resources of family and good friends. Their support can help to overcome the demons of self-doubt and uncertainty that stand in our way. Ultimately, though, the key is to find within ourselves the strength to take the chance. Our words may not be elegant or articulate, but they must be spoken. For while we are not obliged to finish the task, neither are we free to neglect it!

Bizarre News from the BBC

Let's see what might be newsworthy this morning:  UK peers suggest the decriminalisation of all illegal drugs ... 8-year-old girl shot dead in Jamaica ... Golden Globes winners ... and what is one of the top stories on the BBC web page?

Puppy thrown at German biker gang

A German student "mooned" a group of Hell's Angels and hurled a puppy at them before escaping on a stolen bulldozer, police have said.

Tha man drove up to a Hell's Angels clubhouse near Munich, wearing only a pair of shorts and carrying a puppy. He dropped his shorts and threw the dog, escaping on a bulldozer from a nearby building site. He was arrested later at home by police. The 26-year-old is said to have stopped taking depression medication.

After making his getaway on the bulldozer, he had driven so slowly that a 5 km tailback built up behind him on the motorway.. After driving about 1 km, he had abandoned the bulldozer in the middle of the motorway, near Allershausen. He continued his journey by hitchhiking.

"What motivated him to throw a puppy at the Hell's Angels is currently unclear," a police spokesman said. The puppy is now being cared for in an animal shelter.

O look, the Telegraph picked it up as well (here).

Did You Think I Wouldn't Mention It?!

My beloved Queens Park Rangers are unbeaten so far in 2013. I might mention that they have actually played some games as well. And I feel bound to refer to a recent match at Stamford Bridge.

Having sat through the Sunday game at home to Liverpool, where we were 0-3 down after 28 minutes, and utterly dire the rest of the time, I decided there was no way I was prepared to spend 60 squid to sit in the rain and watch us be thumped by the auld enemy.

this is a picture of Shaun Wright-Phillips. Throughout the season so far there has been a consensus that he should not be picked for the first team because he brings nothing to it. He only made it onto the Stamford Bridge pitch because Hoillett was injured early on. In this picture, SWP is scoring a goal.

Here is a better view of SWP's first goal for QPR. It turned out, in fact, to be the only goal of the game. This made his team-mates quite happy.

I must admit that when I awoke the next morning, I was pretty sure I had dreamt the whole thing. I'd been at home, happily watching David Attenborough's new programme about Africa. My mind and heart were full of  drongoes and meerkats. I was trying to drown out the inevitable massacre. And then the e-mails began arriving, and the texts, and the Facebook comments. What an incredible high, and so soon after the utter despair of the performance vs Liverpool. It is nights like this that keep us hooked. Come on you R's!

Happy 2013 from the ravaj!

Whether or not you celebrate 1st January as a New Year, it's always good to have an opportunity to clear the decks and start over. If I were to reduce all my hopes and wishes and plans to one central thought, it would be to hold dear and close those I love.

with best wishes for a healthy and fulfilling 2013!

Happy Birthday Omi!

The maternal grandmother of the ravaj was born on this day in Essen in 1913. Hard to believe that was 99 years ago!

Der Rattenfaenger is (not quite) 200!

It's a well-known fact that in London one is supposed to never be more than about 6 feet from a rat. That would be genus rattus rather than genus homo. It's an unpleasant thought, especially for anyone who's ever read any James Herbert novels. Thank goodness for the BBC News page! In a current article they utterly debunk this myth, proving that in fact at any given moment anywhere in the United Kingdom one is most likely a whopping 164 feet from a rat. Read it here.

NB I got all excited when the article noted that the Brothers Grimm story of the Pied Piper of Hamelin, aka Der Rattenfaenger von Hameln was 200 years old this year. However, this may not be the case. although the first book of Grimms' Fairytales was published (as Kinder und Haus Maerchen) in 1812, I think that the Pied Piper appears in their next volume, Deutsche Sagen, which was published in 1816. In which case, we must defer all rat-related celebrations for another 4 years.

The Tory Tornado KO's Himself

The Huffington Post in the UK has reported that David Davies, the Conservative MP for Monmouth, has responded to accusations of homophobia following an interview he gave to BBC Radio Wales yesterday. On the radio, he said that:

"I think most parents would prefer their children not to be gay, knowing most parents want grandchildren if nothing else."

This was the comment that engendered the accusations. Personally, my first thought was to send him a turkey baster, and a copy of this article from the New York Times. However, in his defence, Mr. Davies pointed out that during his amateur boxing career he once fought a gay boxer. Apparently he posted a vid of the fight as proof. That makes total sense:  how to prove one is not a homophobe - show everyone a film of oneself punching a homosexual in the face. Nice one, Dave!

Piglet Magritte

It's dragging towards 4 pm on a dreary Monday. If you get a kick from cute pics of puppies and kittens, this is the page for you. I'm diabetic so that's no good for me. When I find myself in times of trouble, E. H. Shepard comes to me ... it's time for a Piglet picture!

Piglet was visiting the Magritte Museum in Brussels, when he noticed this mirror in a shop window.

A Time for Miracles

We are approaching the day of the winter solstice, when the sun is at its lowest in the sky (for those of us living in the Northern hemisphere) and the darkness of the night reaches its peak. Many religions and cultures have rituals and festivals of light at this time, as if by making and celebrating light we will bring the sun back up into the heavens. If we believe, we may perform this miracle. Don't knock it, it hasn't failed us yet! So Happy Advent, Chanukah, Diwali, Kwanzaa & St Lucia's Day!!

Speaking of miracle workers, what about this chap here:

Mr. Redknapp has arrived at QPR at a time of great darkness. We are looking to him to deliver us, and to bring the light back into our footballing lives. He is aware of the depths in which we wallow. In a recent interview, he noted that:

"Joe Royle sent me a message today, but I've never read the Bible, and it was about turning fish into whatever - a miracle is what he meant."

If Billy the Fish is available in the January transfer window, we hope Harry will sign him. Otherwise, we just hope Harry knows his tactics and man-management better than his Bible. Meanwhile, we wish him luck, because what we need now is defo a miracle.

Rant Rant Rant: Fingernails!

Fingernails are lovely things. Most of the time. You can paint them, scratch itches with them, turn the page with them, and use them to get difficult crumbs out of your keyboard. Eventually, unless you are Howard Hughes, you will need to cut your nails. You may hire someone to take care of your feet, such as the lovely Bastien Gonzalez (we love him because he once took on the almighty challenge of the feet of the father of ravaj). Fingernails are much easier, though, and usually you cut them yourselves. Or clip them.

Here comes the rant:  since when has it become the custom to clip one's nails in public? It's not that the act itself is vile, but rather that the clippings are allowed to lie where they fall. For example, just this week I saw a woman across the aisle on the plane, this morning it was the woman next to me on the Tube, and  the other day there was a woman on the top deck of the bus; all of them tending to their nails with no concern for their debris. It was utterly disgusting.

When I was young, Rabbi Hugo Gryn z"l told me that he would collect his nail-clippings and burn them, because his grandmother had told him that all the rubbish undisposed during his life would be waiting for him after death. I don't know about that, but Google did give me a couple of suggestions for the reuse of fingernail clippings:

1. they are compostable (as long as you remove the polish), since they are rich in protein.
2. if you cannot afford a Brillo pad (steel wool), put them in the foot of an old pair of tights and tie off the end. Voila - an inexpensive pot scrubber.
3. send them to Tim Hawkinson, a man who makes sculptures out of them

Ultimately, whatever you do with them, for goodness sake please do it at home. Thank you.

The Vatican Fights Back

Reuters news agency reports that in the wake of the U.S. states of Maryland, Maine and Washington extending the right of marriage to same-sex couples via a popular vote, the Vatican has responded by pledging never to stop fighting attempts to "erase" the privileged role of heterosexual marriage, which it called "an achievement of civilisation." The chief spokesman for the Vatican - Father Federico Lombardi - made the standard and expected arguments on behalf of the Roman Catholic Church. Unfortunately, he also decided to perpetuate a popular canard by suggesting that if same-sex marriage is acceptable, "... why not contemplate also freely chosen polygamy and, of course, not to discriminate, polyandry?" (as quoted by, among others, the Chicago Tribune newspaper).

I still don't get why it isn't as clear as a clear day that those of us who wish to get married are utterly supporting the institution of marriage, not undermining it. Otherwise, why would we fight for it?! Furthermore,  it's not as if we are trying to deny the heterosexuals their right to marry. If marriage is so threatened, surely the first people to target are those hets who are daring to live together as husband and wife without the sacrament of marriage? Sigh.

Thank [your Deity of choice. Or not] that everyday people are using democracy to create equality.  I'm so happy that those Americans voted for equality, and I'm delighted that the blinkered religious hegemony has been thwarted. Onward we go!

PS  For a look at how the LGBT situation has developed in the USA, there's an interesting article here by Michael Lindenberger in this week's Time magazine.

United States Elections 2012 (i)

Awwwww.

Having lived abroad for the last 3 years, my perspective of the United States of America is once again coloured by a European filter. Nevertheless, I am still a registered Democrat, and last week faxed and posted my absentee ballot to be counted at the City Hall in Waltham MA.

The choice for me was not difficult. The Republicans generally seem so far to the right these days that a vote for them would be voting for my own death sentence. It's just so sad that so many are voting against a particular candidate instead of for someone. As my blogroller Echidne of the Snakes wrote recently:

"How should I put this best? Voting for Barack Obama is like choosing shingles. Voting for Mitt Romney is like choosing a terminal illness. I prefer the former, though naturally I'd love to feel perfectly healthy. But we are all going to have one of those two conditions, and in my view the Obama-condition is much more bearable and less dangerous."

It is also a bit scary that the entire election may rest on the way that the candidates respond to Hurricane Sandy. If Barack is Presidential, he may gain voters; and if Romney is not, he will sink. O well, at least it's a better basis for choice than who has the best hair (in London last weekend, Margaret Cho suggested that elections are often won by hair, e.g., JFK vs Nixon, Clinton vs Bush 1 and Ross Perot).

Thinking of those currently victims of the hurricane ...

Savile Scandal

Jimmy Savile was a DJ and broadcaster in the 1960's and 1970's. He was incredibly popular, and known to my generation as a weird but charitable man who made people's dreams come true in his show "Jim 'll Fix It". It turns out that he was a sexual predator who may have abused myriad young girls. A television programme recently revealed the alleged crimes of the star, who died one year ago today, and there has been intense media frenzy ever since.

We are shocked and disgusted by Jimmy Savile's behaviour, all the more so because we thought he had been a positive force in the charity world, e.g., raising c. £40 million for various organisations. What I don't understand is the hysteria engendered by this discovery. This weekend, the Guardian reported that dozens of celebrities are frightened that they will be implicated in the scandal. Also, the Catholic Church of England,

"... has contacted the Holy See to ask if the papal knighthood awarded to (Savile) could be removed"
(the rest of the article may be found here.)

How many priests within the church have committed similar crimes? Where are the public requests to the Holy See for action against those men? Do the leaders of the Church believe that making a big deal about one public figure will be compensation to all the victims of the everyday non-famous perpetrators? For crying out loud, turn that energy and interest to the parishioners who need your protection and support!

Meanwhile, what about publicist Max Clifford's comment in the Guardian article:

"I am hoping that the real predators are the ones we are going to find out about ... not people that were randy young pop stars in the 1960s, 70s and 80s even, that had women throwing themselves at them everywhere they went, because that is a whole different area and a whole different situation. No one had heard the word 'paedophile' in those days"

Since the women were "throwing themselves", the men had no power to resist? Ok, we know about rock culture, groupies, etc. I do get uncomfortable, though, with the inference that the women wanted it so that made it ok. It's not a question of my being overly PC here. It is to do with the current and past lack of protection for vulnerable people who come into contact with the entertainment world. It has always been the case that fame and celebrity seem to breed indulgence when it comes to immoral behaviour. There are no 'real' and 'unreal' predators. If lives have been damaged and destroyed by those "randy young pop stars", and speaking out about it might bring healing, why not? Except of course that is an utterly naive and idealistic perspective, since what will probably feed a call for such revelation is more likely to be the economic aspirations of the tabloids.

Support for Anat Hoffman & Women of the Wall

In Jerusalem, at the Western Wall aka the Kotel, a Jewish woman was arrested last week for the crime of singing the Shema, i.e., praying. Her name is Anat Hoffman. She is currently the Director of the Israel Religious Action Center aka IRAC.

Click to learn what is actually illegal according to Israeli law

Background to the issue of a pluralistic group of women praying at the Wall may be found here.
There is also a 2009 story in the NY Times here.
An American perspective from the Jewish Journal may be found here.

Here are some links to the latest part of the struggle for egalitarian status in prayer at this site:

Why I was arrested for praying at the Western Wall via Huffington Post
Anat Hoffman after arrest in Haaretz
Police shackle Anat Hoffman for saying Sh'ma at the Kotel by Debra Nussbaum Cohen in the Jewish Daily Forward

Rabbi Laura Geller talks about Anat and Henrietta Szold
A view from the Velveteen Rabbi
Who has the right to pray at the Western Wall by Rabbi Daniel Brenner
What is the textual source of Kol Isha? by Rabbi Judith Abrams

There was a live webcast with Anat this evening. The most popular question for her was - how may we help to support her and the work of Women of the Wall? She replied with the following suggestions:

1.  sign the petition to liberate the Wall on the IRAC website.  The link is here.
2.  visit the Women of the Wall website
3.  buy the WOW tallit - Anat used some of the funds to pay her legal fees, and said that she loved the idea that the subversive act of wearing a tallit also supports the struggle in Israel
4.  Organise a Rosh Chodesh service outside the Israeli consulate in your home town
5.  Write your sentiments in the Jewish and the Israeli press
6.  Persuade your Israeli relatives to vote for measures to change the situation in Israel
7.  Donate financially whatever you can!

@kungfujew18 trawled the Twitterverse for us to bring this selection of Tweets sent during the webchat

You can join in also via projects such as
Hear O Israel: The Global Sh'ma Flashmob
Reclaim and Liberate the Kotel

btw, there were two other women arrested alongside Anat!

Colosseum Piglet

It's been a while, Piglet fans. Here is a shot from his recent visit to Rome. It was his first time there, and the first thing he did on his first day was to check out the most iconic place in the city - the Colosseum.

NB it's totally worth 30 Euro for a 3-day pass called the Roma. Not only do you get free travel on bus and train, but also it lets you walk past the 2-hour queue to get into the Colosseum and enter immediately!

Gotcha!

O Obama! It hurts, y'know. Look at him in this pic - he's laughing in our faces. Those of us who put our trust in you cannot understand how general opinion after the first debate is clear that Romney "won". Since there seem to be myriad citizens of our country that cannot see how utterly bonkers he is, we need you to be strong.

It breaks my heart that people will make such an important decision as the choosing of a President based on surface impressions, rather than listening to what is being said and figuring out what is true and what is a lie, what is factual and what is spin. Your guys gotta get your into shape here, c'mon!