Archive

Archive for March 22, 2010

The Un-Comfort Zone with Robert Wilson

March 22, 2010 Leave a comment

 

What’s Pushing Your Buttons?

ATLANTA, Georgia — What motivates you? That’s the question I’d like to ask in this inaugural column on motivation. Are you motivated by fame, fortune or fear. Or is it something deeper that fans the flames inside of you. Perhaps you are like Jeanne Louise Calment whose burning desire enabled her to do something that no other human being has done before. A feat so spectacular that it generated headlines around the globe, got her a role in a motion picture, and landed her in the Guinness Book of World Records. A record that has yet to be beaten.

Jeanne Louise, however, did not initially motivate herself. It was someone else who drew the line in the sand. But, it became a line she was determined to cross.

In motivation we talk about getting outside of one’s comfort zone. It is only when we are uncomfortable that we begin to get motivated. Usually to get back into our comfort zone as quickly as possible.

Born into the family of a middle-class store owner, Calment was firmly entrenched in her comfort zone. At age 21 she married a wealthy store owner and lived a life of leisure. She pursued her hobbies of tennis, the opera, and sampling France’s famous wines. Over the years she met Impressionist painter Van Gogh; watched the erection of the Eiffel Tower; and attended the funeral of Hunchback of Notre Dame, author, Victor Hugo.

Twenty years after her husband passed away, she had reached a stage in life where she had pretty much achieved everything that she was going to achieve. Then along came a lawyer. The lawyer made Jeanne Louise a proposition. She accepted it. He thought he was simply making a smart business deal. Inadvertently he gave her a goal. It took her 30 years to achieve it, but achieve it she did.

Are you willing to keep your goals alive for 30 years? At what point do you give up? Thomas Edison never gave up, instead he said, “I have not failed. I’ve just found 10,000 ways that won’t work.” Winston Churchill during the bleakest hours of World War II kept an entire country motivated with this die-hard conviction: “We shall defend our Island, whatever the cost may be, we shall fight on the beaches… in the fields and in the streets… we shall never surrender.”

Many of us give up too soon because we set limits on our goals. Achieving a goal begins with determination. Then it’s just a matter of our giving them attention and energy.

When Jeanne Louise was 92 years old, attorney François Raffray, age 47, offered to pay her $500 per month (a fortune in 1967) for the rest of her life, if she would leave her house to him in her will. According to the actuarial tables it was a great deal. Here was an heir-less woman who had survived her husband, children, and grandchildren. A woman who was just biding her time with nothing to live for. That is until Raffray came along and offered up the “sucker-bet” that she would soon die. It was motivation enough for Jeanne, who was determined to beat the lawyer. Thirty years later, Raffray became the “sucker” when he passed away first at age 77.

When asked about this by the press, Calment simply said, “In life, one sometimes make bad deals.” Having met her goal, Jeanne passed away five months later. But on her way to this end, she achieved something else: at 122 years old, she became the oldest person to have ever lived.

In future articles we’ll examine further the ways in which motivation works. How to motivate ourselves, our employees, customers, friends, loved ones and children. I would like to get your feedback on which of these areas of motivation are of most interest to you. Please email me with your suggestions.

*

Robert Evans Wilson, Jr. is a motivational speaker and humorist.  He works with companies that want to be more competitive and with people who want to think like innovators.  For more information on Robert’s programs please visit www.jumpstartyourmeeting.com.

Yom HaShoah commemoration set April 11 at Lawrence Family JCC

March 22, 2010 Leave a comment

SAN DIEGO (Press Release)–On Sunday, April 11, the San Diego Jewish community will commemorate Yom HaShoah, Holocaust Remembrance Day, with a special program at 1:30 p.m. at the Jewish Community Center in La Jolla, open to the public.  The theme of this event will be “Remember, Honor, and Teach: Liberation 65 Years Later.” 

Stephen Smith, Executive Director of the Shoah Foundation, will address the group, followed by a premier showing of a short film featuring interviews with three local survivors and U.S. military camp liberators. Mayor Jerry Sanders will also make a few remarks.

The event will recognize and honor World War II veterans, Jewish and non-Jewish, with a military color guard and participation in the candle lighting ceremony. In addition, the Miryam Quartet of San Diego will perform. The entire program will last approximately 90 minutes. 

Steven Spielberg created the Shoah Foundation shortly after filming Schindler’s List.  His intention was to interview and preserve the memories of as many Holocaust survivors and witnesses of the Holocaust (military liberators and others) as possible. The archive, now containing 52,000 interviews, is permanently housed at the University of Southern California in Los Angeles.  The film to be shown at this year’s event was developed especially for this program and utilizes footage from the Shoah Foundation and the U.S. Holocaust Museum in Washington, D.C. 

The event will begin promptly at 1:30 p.m. Sunday, April 11, 2010 at the Lawrence Family Jewish Community Center, in the David and Dorothea Garfield Theater, 4126 Executive Drive, La Jolla. The San Diego Holocaust Commemoration, which has been ongoing for more than three decades, is the largest Yom HaShoah program in the United States.  Last year more than 650 people packed the theatre at the JCC, with an overflow crowd watching the program on a big screen in the library.

This important commemoration is a collaboration of the Jewish Community Relations Council of the United Jewish Federation of San Diego County, the New Life Club, the Lawrence Family Jewish Community Center Jacobs Family Campus, the Agency for Jewish Education, Jewish Family Service, Jewish Community Foundation, and the San Diego Rabbinical Association.

The event is free and open to the public.  For more information about the 2010 Community Holocaust Commemoration please contact event chair Michael Bart mikebart@roadrunner.com or Lisa Haney at the UJF, 858-571-3444, lisah@ujfsd.org.

 *
Preceding provided by United Jewish Federation of San Diego County

A blunt message for lawbreakers in the Arab-Israeli conflict

March 22, 2010 Leave a comment

 By Bruce S. Ticker
 
PHILADELPHIA–Neither the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. nor Mahatma Gandhi whined when they were jailed. They knew they violated the local burg’s usually unjust laws; endured their punishment like adults; and never blamed the Jews.
 
Not so the 11 overgrown delinquents who disrupted Israeli Ambassador Michael Oren’s speech at the University of California- Irvine last Feb. 8. They might have violated criminal laws common to all 50 states, yet they bawled about facing charges for their deeds, and blamed the Jews.
 
The UCI incident is among the latest of tasteless tactics employed by anti-Israel activists during the last several years, and some of those acts amounted to criminal offenses which usually were not dealt with sufficiently. Until now.
 
Campus police arrested these students, eight of whom attend UCI, and will forward an investigative report to the Orange County District Attorney’s office, which will decide whether to press misdemeanor charges of disrupting a lawful meeting, explained UCI spokeswoman Cathy Lawhon.
 
In the Canadian province of Ontario, a joint police agency is investigating Toronto’s Salman Hossain for posting bigoted rantings on an Internet site where he urges yet another Jewish genocide in Canada, the United States and Europe.
 
Finally, two law enforcement agencies in North America are doing what should have been done long ago. Little or nothing was done when anti-Israel protesters periodically violated the law. Now these agencies have initiated investigative processes that would compel any lawbreakers to face justice.
 
Of course, prosecution of  crimes is  necessary. It can deter similar crimes. We recognize that there is no guarantee that these probes will lead to convictions, but at least the agencies have taken the necessary first steps.
 
The UCI case has already shaken up the pro-Arab side. In early March, students at a speak-out claimed that members of the “Irvine 11” were exercisingtheir freedom of speech. A group called Stand with the Eleven issued a news release the following week accusing “external Zionist organizations” of influencing the university.
 
The release stated, “We call for an immediate investigation into the communications and agreements between UC leadership, including President Mark Yudoff, and external Zionist organizations that threaten the academic futures of the ‘Irvine 11’ and derail the academic freedom of all UC students.”
 
 
Their concept of freedom of speech and academic freedom was to spread themselves through the audience of 500 or more and interrupt Oren 10 times as he tried to address the crowd. “Israel is a murderer,” one shouted. “How many Palestinians did you kill?” cried another. Under Pennsylvania criminal laws, a case could probably be built on charges of disorderly conduct, harassment and conspiracy. California no doubt has comparable laws on the books.
 
Students at UCI also face disciplinary action which could include a warning, behavioral probation, suspension or dismissal, Lawhon said. They were cited with violations of the student conduct code and received a letter detailing the violations. They were slated to meet with the chief judicial officer in Student Affairs, who must make a determination as to their consequences, she added. The process is confidential.
 
If these suspects did nothing wrong, then why should they worry about being investigated?
 
A few thousand miles to the northeast, Salman Hossain of Toronto is being investigated for recent Web site postings where he urged that “a genocide should be perpetuated against the Jewish populations of North America and Europe,” according to the Toronto-based National Post. He calls moderate Canadian Muslims “traitors,” berates Christians and refers to Jews as “the scum of the earth” and “mass murderers.”
 
Hossain posted on an Arizona-based Internet site called www.filthyjewishterrorists.com where he also wrote, “No one in this world can take our history away from us. Especially not the cancerous group of people calling themselves Jews or Judeo-Christians who are going to be genocided in the near future.”
 
Hossain is being investigated by the Hate Crimes Extremism Investigative Team, which is composed of representatives of 13 Ontario Province municipal police forces, spokesman Abbee Corb confirmed to The National Post.
 
According to the newspaper, Canada’s hate crimes law bars support or promotion of genocide as well as the communication of statements that willfully promote hatred against an identifiable group, with the exception of what is said in private conversation. Under Pennsylvania laws, a case might be made for committing the offense called “terroristic threats.”
 
Hossain was unrepentent in an e-mail exchange with a Post reporter, stating, “Your hate laws are only being used to stop the truth from being spoken. I don’t fear telling the truth and I don’t answer to racist genocidal Jews who want to call ME a hater, when Jews hate ALL NON-JEWS. It’s not my fault you people rape babies, then cry foul when someone exposes it.”
 
The pro-Arab side might readily question if there are Jews who break the laws in these situations. They can point to a break-in and minor degree of vandalism inside the quarters of a Muslim student organization at Brandeis University in suburban Boston. One can wonder if the culprits are pro-Israel hardliners since Brandeis is a heavily Jewish institution.
 
We have no idea if the offenders at Brandeis are Jewish, and whoever did it should be prosecuted. Criminal conduct cannot be tolerated no matter who commits the offenses. However, most who engage in offensive and sometimes criminal behavior in this conflict are advocates for the Arabs.
 
It is a relief that Orange County authorities are sending them a blunt message. Let’s hope they heed it.
 

*
Bruce S. Ticker is a freelance journalist from Philadelphia. He can contacted at Bticker@comcast.net.  
 

Old Bones

March 22, 2010 Leave a comment

By Ira Sharkansky

Ira Sharkansky

JERUSALEM–Good for BO. It may not be pretty, for those who think politics should be like a learned discussion among angels. But fair and decent for those of us who recognize that politics is like a sausage factory. We may not like to watch it in action, but the results are worth serving to the family.

I do not know what is in all those pages that the House endorsed, there is still the Senate having to do something or other, it’s too early to know the immediate and long range costs, and what will pass through subsequent steps in the bureaucracies that will define the details and the courts that consider appeals. But it moves the US toward what other democracies achieved during the 20th century. For all of them the 21st century consists of dealing with costs, deciding which expensive treatments and medications should be available within their basic plans, and which available only to those who pay more. There are no final victories where death is the ultimate enemy.

Meanwhile, in this little socialist paradise a narrow view of ancient law has set us back. Coalition politics put an ultra-Orthodox rabbi at the head of the Health Ministry, and he has won a government decision to build the new emergency room at the Ashkelon hospital a half kilometer from the rest of the hospital. Ancient bones were uncovered while excavating for the construction where the emergency room should be built, right alongside the hospital.

It is a matter of dispute in Jewish law as to whether human remains can be moved for the sake of a construction that will benefit the public. This rabbi has taken an extreme position, and said he would resign (and threaten the coalition) if the government did not go along with him. “It’s only a matter of money,” he said. Critics insist that it is not only money, but building an emergency room far from the physicians in various departments and operating rooms that must have easy access from the emergency room.

Articles beginning on the front page of Ha’aretz are headlined, ” Government Necrophilia,” “Extreme Lack of Reason,” “Dark Decision,” and “Burning Torch.” The cartoon shows a helicopter holding the emergency room above the graves (so as to not contaminate the room or to disturb the dead), while personnel trundle patients from the room to the hospital, and a religious aide asks the rabbi if the helicopter will work on the Sabbath.

Another issue, no less problematic in religious law and modern public relations, concerns the nature of the bones. Archaeologists have said that the style of burial is not Jewish. Perhaps they are pagan from the time when the Philistines dominated the region of modern Ashkeloon. Remember that it was Ashkelon where Samson did his thing (Judges 13-16). His shiksa was a Philistine.

Like the movement of graves, the differential treatment of Jews and Gentiles (live and dead) is a matter of dispute in Jewish law. The rabbi at the head of the Health Ministry is willing to change his mind if convinced that the graves are not Jewish.

The specialist in religious law who commented in one media discussion pondered the blot on Israel’s reputation if the emergency room is built where it should be only because those are goyishe bones.

The vote in the government was 11 to 10. The forces of light are close. The secular, and even some of the religious media, is mounting a campaign in behalf of reason.  The professional serving as director general of the Health Ministry has resigned. Health professionals are in full mobilization. No surprise that the prime minister has not spoken clearly on the issue. Currently he is in Washington dealing with bigger fish. Perhaps he will take a moment to congratulate the president on health reform. Can we hope that the president will speak about the emergency room in Ashkelon along with apartments in Jerusalem?

*

Sharkansky is professor emeritus of political science at Hebrew University

Militants in Gaza fire Qassam rockets into Israel, killing Thai civilian

March 22, 2010 Leave a comment

(WJC)–Terrorists in the Gaza Strip fired several Qassam rockets against Israel, killing one civilian. Israel’s Air Force retaliated on Friday by bombing smuggling tunnels on Gaza’s border with Egypt. One of three rockets that were fired into Israeli territory on Thursday smashed into a greenhouse of an agricultural community in the Israeli village Netiv Haasara, killing the 33-year-old Thai worker Manee Singueanphon. It was the first death since Israel’s offensive against Hamas-ruled Gaza over a year ago.

The missile launch happened despite a ban put in place by Hamas. According to experts, it highlights the growing challenge to Hamas from more radical rivals, including al-Qaeda-linked groups.

The Quartet of Middle East mediators, which met in Moscow on Friday, condemned the rocket attack on Israel and called for calm. It also called for the immediate release of Israeli soldier Gilad Shalit, who has been held by Hamas in the Gaza Strip for nearly four years.

*

Preceding provided by World Jewish Congress

The high price of necrophilia

March 22, 2010 1 comment

By Rabbi Dow Marmur

 JERUSALEM–If Orthodox Jews we tend to describe as “ultra” (to distinguish them from those we call “modern” or “nationalist”) aren’t obsessed with sex (manifest, for example, in segregated buses on certain routes), they’re preoccupied with the dead. Ostensibly in the name of Jewish law which seeks to preserve the dignity of corpses, they find ancient gravesites in the most unlikely places. This gives them excuses to demonstrate against archeological digs and the erection of buildings on reputed cemeteries. They don’t seem to feel they’re serving God unless they make life unbearable for God’s creatures.

When they’ve political clout, they use it mercilessly. That’s what happened in the case of building a much needed emergency unit in the Barzilai Hospital in Ashkelon. In view of the continuing rocket barrage from nearby Gaza on Jewish settlements, and the danger to life and limb this entails, such a unit is of vital importance for the region. Everybody agrees that it would save many lives.

But when they started work to lay the foundations, they found some human remains from ancient times. The bones are probably not Jewish, but their very presence was enough for Deputy Minister of Health Litzman (he doesn’t want to be minister, because then he’d sit around the Cabinet table of a government whose legitimacy his ultra-Orthodox party doesn’t recognize, so he occupies the top job without being part of cabinet decisions) to object and seek to move the unit to another place thus delaying its construction for a couple of years and increasing the cost by some fifty million dollars.

On the eve of Prime Minister Netanyahu’s departure for Washington, the Cabinet approved the change of plans. The vote was tight: eleven members agreed with, ten opposed Litzman’s proposal. Had it not passed, Litzman said he’d resign and his party would cease to support the coalition. Therefore, one of those to vote in favor was the Prime Minister himself, even though some members of his own party – plus the Cabinet members of Labor and others – voted against.

 The decision was, of course, purely political, intended to save the coalition. The damage inflicted on would-be patients will be enormous and the cost to the country great. Echoing the outrage of the medical profession, the Director-General (i.e., the top civil servant) of the Ministry of Health resigned in protest.

Yossi Sarid, the former leader of Meretz and a member of several governments, called the decision in his Ha’aretz column “Necrophilia.” Like several other commentators he rightly accused the ultra-Orthodox of caring more for the dead than for the living: further evidence of their scandalous behavior in the name of religion.

No doubt the matter will now be taken by some group that opposes the decision to the Supreme Court. Having in mind the Court’s record as a champion of justice, decency and human rights, it’s reasonable to assume that it’ll overrule the Cabinet. The Prime Minister, who in this case chose the guise of champion of Orthodox Judaism and Jewish law, may have a crisis on his hands, unless, of course, he’ll either brazenly ignore the law or corruptly bribe Litzman’s party with something else to induce it to stay.

From where I stand, a so-called coalition crisis would well serve the Israeli public and force the Prime Minister to reconfigure his government. If he gets rid of Lieberman and Yishai at the same time, Livni and her Kadima party are likely to join him.

*

Marmur is spiritual leader emeritus of Holy Blossom Temple in Toronto.  He now divides his time between Canada and Israel.

Recruiting female terrorists over the Internet: terrorism’s “Virtual Sisters”

March 22, 2010 Leave a comment

HAIFA, Israel (Press Release)–Many terrorist organizations, including Hamas, are using their children’s websites in order to recruit girls for terrorist activities. This is part of an increasing trend adopted by terrorist organizations and fundamentalist Islamic groups that are using the Internet with a focus on targeting women. This has been shown in a new study by Prof. Gabriel Weimann, a University of Haifa expert on terrorism on the Internet. “Terrorist organizations’ use of female suicide terrorists is on the rise, and it is directly reflected in the constant upsurge in websites dedicated to female terrorists,” maintains Prof. Weimann.

For over more than a decade Prof. Weimann has monitored and analyzed Internet sites of all the active terrorist organizations. Just as marketing experts have understood that in order to reach target audiences they must create appropriate content for those audiences, Prof. Weimann observes, so have terrorist groups realized that in order to recruit women for their purposes, they must “narrowcast”, i.e., approach them with specific messages and not make do with general websites that primarily target a male audience.

This trend began in 2004, when Al-Qaida’s online magazine published an edition intended for women. Following the special women’s edition, the organization launched an online magazine intended for women only, providing content that guides its readers in administering first aid for family members injured in combat, in raising children that will join the Jihad war and in training to fight.

Prof. Weimann says that other topics on such websites and forums intended for women only include advice on how to refrain from keeping a husband and children from becoming martyrs (shahid); and encouragement to take an active role in terrorist activities, including martyrdom operations. Such encouragement is given through stories of heroic female suicide terrorists, publishing Islamic laws sanctioning such acts and operative guidance in using different types of weapons.

Over the past few years the call upon women to join the circle of suicide terrorists, sometimes from a very young age, has been on a sharp rise. The Hamas children’s website published a story called “A Palestinian Girl’s Heroism”, describing how a young girl calmly plans and carries out a suicide terrorist attack. The story ends with the girl lying on the grass with a smile on her face, since she has died a martyr, a shahid, for her people. A video clip published on Hamas websites portrays a young girl following her mother’s suicide attack and how she plans to follow in her mother’s footsteps when she grows up.

“Terrorists are fine-tuning their appeals, sharpening their messages according to narrowly-defined sub-populations. The unmistakable growth in the participation of women in suicide attacks and terrorist activities with the evident growth in persuasive online messages targeting women – may provide alarming signals of the narrowcasting tactic’s success,” Prof. Weimann concluded.

Preceding provided by University of Haifa.

Who’s crazy?

March 22, 2010 Leave a comment

By Ira Sharkansky

Ira Sharkansky

JERUSALEM–Sorry my friends and relatives, but I’ve concluded that America is crazy. Its policymakers ought to be institutionalized.

Problem is, there is no institution big enough. America is the institution, and defines what is deemed crazy among those many who follow its lead.

And they think we are crazy.

I could be talking about health care. Even though the Congress may enact an impressive increment over what exists, members had to be pulled screaming toward what every other civilized country did years ago.

I am really talking about the Middle East. No surprise to those who know me. Some of them will call the men in white carrying a large net, and give them my address.

A leading general has asserted that Israel is causing problems for his soldiers in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Might he consider that his soldiers in Iraq and Afghanistan are causing problems for the civilized few who live in the Middle East? My impression, crazy though I might be, is that anti-Americanism and rants against Israel have increased in fervor since the United States invaded Iraq in 2003, and decided to stay in Afghanistan.

The president and his secretary of state, as well as virtually every other national leader who agrees with the American president when the local cost is insignificant, blames Israel for a lack of progress in making peace with Palestine. They demand concessions, return to the non-starter of stopping construction in neighborhoods of Jerusalem, condemn Jewish residence in Arab neighborhoods, and make the micro-management of Israel’s capital city a subject for international discussion.

If Barack Obama and Tom Friedman would join us in our walks around French Hill they would notice that we pass neighbors chatting in Arabic. Why can’t Arabs living in Silwan or Sheikh Jarrah tolerate neighbors who chat in Hebrew?

Jerusalem has a long history, and Muslims as well as Jews have a claim. Christians, too, but the Muslims have been largely responsible for pushing them out. I would feel more inclined to criticize Jews for minimizing the Muslim connection with Jerusalem’s history if the Muslims showed a sign of recognizing that the Jews have any connection with Jerusalem’s history.

What to do with a crazy White House that returns to demands that Israel’s government has already rejected, and continues with its efforts to promote a peace process that has been shown time and again to have no future?

Play house.

Most of us did it as kids.

It consists of pretending to do something that everyone knows has no meaning.

Israeli leaders must go along with the American president and say they accept a two-state solution. They must agree to concessions that will build confidence. Take down a barricade or two. Endure a drive by shooting. Wait for the reason to re-establish the barricades. Offer concessions, and endure the response that they are not enough. Make the case of Palestinian incitement, all those school room maps that show no Israel, and television programs that demonize Jews. Someone will listen. Israel has friends, although not currently in the White House. Count on the Palestinians to make this a long process, most likely endless.

What will Barack and Hillary do when there is no agreement?

Then we will see who is really crazy.

There will be another election in the United States. The person sitting in the emperor’s seat will change. It may get better. Politics usually works in waves, with the next one different from this one.

*

Sharkansky is professor emeritus of political science at Hebrew University.

Hillary Clinton supports and criticizes Israel

March 22, 2010 Leave a comment

WASHINGTON, D.C. (Press Release)–Following is a speech delivered to the American Israel Public Affairs Committee meeting in Washington D.C. by Secretary of State Hillary Clinton on Sunday:

Thank you. Thank you for that welcome. And it is wonderful to be back at AIPAC with so many good friends. I saw a number of them backstage before coming out, and I can assure you that I received a lot of advice. (Laughter.) I know I always do when I see my friends from AIPAC. And I want to thank Lee Rosenberg for that introduction. And congratulations, Rosy; you’re going to be a terrific president. (Applause.)
I also want to thank David Victor and Howard Kohr and Lonny Kaplan and J.B. Pritzker and Howard Friedman and Ester Kurz and Richard Fishman — and I’d better stop – but all of AIPAC’s directors and staff for your leadership and hard work. And I’m very pleased that you will be hearing from a good friend of mine, Congressman Jim Langevin, a great champion for Israel. And let’s hear it for Jim. (Applause.)
And to all of you, all of AIPAC’s members, thank you once again for your example of citizen activism. Petitioning your government, expressing your views, speaking up in the arena – this is what democracy is all about. (Applause.) And I am particularly pleased to see that there are, once again, so many young people here. (Applause.) You recognize that your future and the future of our country are bound up with the future of Israel. (Applause.) And your engagement today will help to make that future more secure.

Given the shared challenges we face, the relationship between the United States and Israel has never been more important. (Applause.) The United States has long recognized that a strong and secure Israel is vital to our own strategic interests. (Applause.) And we know that the forces that threaten Israel also threaten the United States of America. (Applause.) And therefore, we firmly believe that when we strengthen Israel’s security, we strengthen America’s security. (Applause.)

So from its first day, the Obama Administration has worked to promote Israel’s security and long-term success. And if you ever doubt the resolve of President Obama to stay with a job, look at what we got done for the United States last night when it came to passing quality affordable healthcare for everyone. (Applause.) And we know that, as Vice President Biden said in Israel recently, to make progress in this region, there must be no gap between the United States and Israel on security. (Applause.) And let me assure you, as I have assured you on previous occasions with large groups like this and small intimate settings, for President Obama and for me, and for this entire Administration, our commitment to Israel’s security and Israel’s future is rock solid, unwavering, enduring, and forever. (Applause.)

And why is that? Why is that? Is it because AIPAC can put 7,500 people into a room in the Convention Center? I don’t think so. Is it because some of the most active Americans in politics and who care about our government also care about Israel? That’s not the explanation. Our countries and our peoples are bound together by our shared values of freedom, equality, democracy, the right to live free from fear, and our common aspirations for a future of peace, security and prosperity, where we can see our children and our children’s children, should we be so lucky – and as a future mother of the bride, I’m certainly hoping for that – (applause) – to see those children, those generations come of age in peace, with the opportunity to fulfill their own God-given potentials.

Americans honor Israel as a homeland for a people too long oppressed and a democracy that has had to defend itself at every turn, a dream nurtured for generations and made real by men and women who refused to bow to the toughest of odds. In Israel’s story, we see our own. We see, in fact, the story of all people who struggle for freedom and the right to chart their own destinies.

That’s why it took President Harry Truman only 11 minutes to recognize the new nation of Israel – (applause) – and ever since, our two countries have stood in solidarity. So guaranteeing Israel’s security is more than a policy position for me; it is a personal commitment that will never waver. (Applause.)
Since my first visit to Israel nearly 30 years ago, I have returned many times and made many friends. I’ve had the privilege of working with some of Israel’s great leaders and have benefited from their wise counsel. I may have even caused some of them consternation – I don’t think Yitzhak Rabin ever forgave me for banishing him to the White House balcony when he wanted to smoke. (Laughter.) And over the years, I have shared your pride in seeing the desert bloom, the economy thrive, and the country flourish. But I have also seen the struggles and the sorrows. I have met with the victims of terrorism, in their hospital rooms I’ve held their hands, I’ve listened to the doctors describe how much shrapnel was left in a leg, an arm, or a head. I sat there and listened to the heart-rending words that Prime Minister Rabin’s granddaughter Noa spoke at her grandfather’s funeral. I went to a bombed-out pizzeria in Jerusalem. I’ve seen the looks on the faces of Israeli families who knew a rocket could fall at any moment.

On one of my visits, in 2002, I met a young man named Yochai Porat. He was only 26, but he was already a senior medic with MDA and he oversaw a program to train foreign volunteers as first responders in Israel. I attended the program’s graduation ceremonies and I saw the pride in his face as yet another group of young people set off to do good and save lives. Yochai was also a reservist with the IDF. And a week after we met, he was killed by a sniper near a roadblock, along with other soldiers and civilians. MDA renamed the overseas volunteer program in his memory and it has continued to flourish. When I was there in 2005, I met with his family. His parents were committed to continuing to support MDA and its mission – and so was I. That’s why I spent years urging the International Red Cross, introducing legislation, rounding up votes to send a message to Geneva to admit MDA as a full voting member. And finally, with your help – (applause) in 2006, we succeeded in righting that wrong. (Applause.)

As a senator from New York, I was proud to be a strong voice for Israel in the Congress and around the world. And I am proud that I can continue to be that strong voice as Secretary of State.

Last fall, I stood next to Prime Minister Netanyahu in Jerusalem and praised his government’s decision to place a moratorium on new residential construction in the West Bank. And then I praised it again in Cairo and in Marrakesh and in many places far from Jerusalem to make clear that this was a first step, but it was an important first step. And yes, I underscored the longstanding American policy that does not accept the legitimacy of continued settlements. As Israel’s friend, it is our responsibility to give credit when it is due and to tell the truth when it is needed.

In 2008, I told this conference that Barack Obama would be a good friend to Israel as president, that he would have a special appreciation of Israel because of his own personal history – a grandfather who fought the Nazis in Patton’s Army, a great-uncle who helped liberate Buchenwald. President Obama and his family have lived the Diaspora experience. And as he told you himself, he understands that there is always a homeland at the center of our story. As a senator, he visited Israel and met families whose houses were destroyed by rockets. And as President, he has supported Israel in word and in deed.

Under President Obama’s leadership, we have reinvigorated defense consultations, redoubled our efforts to ensure Israel’s qualitative military edge, and provided nearly $3 billion in annual military assistance. (Applause.) In fact, as Rosy told you – or maybe it was Howard – that assistance increased in 2010 and we have requested another increase for 2011. (Applause.) And something else I want you to know, more than 1,000 United States troops participated in the Juniper Cobra ballistic missile defense exercises last fall, the largest such drill ever held. (Applause.) President Obama has made achieving peace and recognized secure borders for Israel a top Administration priority.

The United States has also led the fight in international institutions against anti-Semitisms and efforts to challenge Israel’s legitimacy. We did lead the boycott of the Durban Conference and we repeatedly voted against the deeply flawed Goldstone Report. (Applause.) This Administration will always stand up for Israel’s right to defend itself. (Applause.)

And for Israel, there is no greater strategic threat than the prospect of a nuclear-armed Iran. (Applause.) Elements in Iran’s government have become a menace, both to their own people and in the region. Iran’s president foments anti-Semitism, denies the Holocaust, threatens to destroy Israel, even denies that 9/11 was an attack. The Iranian leadership funds and arms terrorists who have murdered Americans, Israelis, and other innocent people alike. And it has waged a campaign of intimidation and persecution against the Iranian people.

Last June, Iranians marching silently were beaten with batons. Political prisoners were rounded up and abused. Absurd and false allegations and accusations were leveled against the United States, Israel, and the West. People everywhere were horrified by the video of a young woman shot dead in the street. The Iranian leadership denies its people rights that are universal to all human beings, including the right to speak freely, to assemble without fear, the right to the equal administration of justice, to express your views without facing retribution.

In addition to threatening Israel, a nuclear-armed Iran would embolden its terrorist clientele and would spark an arms race that could destabilize the region. This is unacceptable. It is unacceptable to the United States. It is unacceptable to Israel. It is unacceptable to the region and the international community. So let me be very clear: The United States is determined to prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons. (Applause.)

Now, for most of the past decade, the United States, as you know, declined to engage with Iran. And Iran grew more, not less, dangerous. It built thousands of centrifuges and spurned the international community. But it faced few consequences. President Obama has been trying a different course, designed to present Iran’s leaders with a clear choice. We’ve made extensive efforts to reengage with Iran, both through direct communication and working with other partners multilaterally, to send an unmistakable message: Uphold your international obligations. And if you do, you will reap the benefits of normal relations. If you do not, you will face increased isolation and painful consequences.

We took this course with the understanding that the very effort of seeking engagement would strengthen our hand if Iran rejected our initiative. And over the last year, Iran’s leaders have been stripped of their usual excuses. The world has seen that it is Iran, not the United States, responsible for the impasse. With its secret nuclear facilities, increasing violations of its obligations under the nonproliferation regime, and an unjustified expansion of its enrichment activities, more and more nations are finally expressing deep concerns about Iran’s intentions. And there is a growing international consensus on taking steps to pressure Iran’s leaders to change course. Europe is in agreement. Russia, where I just returned from, has moved definitely in this direction. And although there is still work to be done, China has said it supports the dual-track approach of applying pressure if engagement does not produce results. This stronger consensus has also led to increased cooperation on stopping arms shipments and financial transactions that aid terrorists, threaten Israel, and destabilize the region.

We are now working with our partners in the United Nations on new Security Council sanctions that will show Iran’s leaders that there are real consequences for their intransigence, that their choice is to live up to their international obligations. Our aim is not incremental sanctions, but sanctions that will bite. It is taking time to produce these sanctions, and we believe that time is a worthwhile investment for winning the broadest possible support for our efforts. But we will not compromise our commitment to preventing Iran from acquiring these nuclear weapons. (Applause.)

But Iran is not the only threat on the horizon. Israel today is confronting some of the toughest challenges in her history. The conflict with the Palestinians and with Israel’s Arab neighbors is an obstacle to prosperity and opportunity for Israelis, Palestinians, and people across the region. But it also threatens Israel’s long-term future as a secure and democratic Jewish state.

The status quo is unsustainable for all sides. It promises only more violence and unrealized aspirations. Staying on this course means continuing a conflict that carries tragic human costs. Israeli and Palestinian children alike deserve to grow up free from fear and to have that same opportunity to live up to their full God-given potential. (Applause.)

There is another path, a path that leads toward security and prosperity for Israel, the Palestinians, and all the people of the region. But it will require all parties, including Israel, to make difficult but necessary choices. Both sides must confront the reality that the status quo of the last decade has not produced long-term security or served their interests. Nor has it served the interests of the United States. It is true that heightened security measures have reduced the number of suicide bombings and given some protection and safety to those who worry every day when their child goes to school, their husband goes to work, their mother goes to market. And there is, I think, a belief among many that the status quo can be sustained. But the dynamics of demography, ideology, and technology make this impossible.

First, we cannot ignore the long-term population trends that result from the Israeli occupation. As Defense Minister Barak and others have observed, the inexorable mathematics of democracy – of demography are hastening the hour at which Israelis may have to choose between preserving their democracy and staying true to the dream of a Jewish homeland. Given this reality, a two-state solution is the only viable path for Israel to remain both a democracy and a Jewish state. (Applause.)

Second, we cannot be blind to the political implications of continued conflict. There is today truly a struggle, maybe for the first time, between those in the region who accept peace and coexistence with Israel and those who reject it and seek only continued violence. The status quo strengthens the rejectionists who claim peace is impossible, and it weakens those who would accept coexistence. That does not serve Israel’s interests or our own. Those willing to negotiate need to be able to show results for their efforts. And those who preach violence must be proven wrong. All of our regional challenges – confronting the threat posed by Iran, combating violent extremism, promoting democracy and economic opportunity – become harder if the rejectionists grow in power and influence.

Conversely, a two-state solution would allow Israel’s contributions to the world and to our greater humanity to get the recognition they deserve. It would also allow the Palestinians to have to govern to realize their own legitimate aspirations. And it would undermine the appeal of extremism across the region.
I was very privileged as First Lady to travel the world on behalf of our country. I went from Latin America to Southeast Asia. And during the 1990s, it was rare that people in places far from the Middle East ever mentioned the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Now, when I started traveling as Secretary of State and I went to places that were so far from the Middle East, it was the first, second, or third issue that countries raised. We cannot escape the impact of mass communications. We cannot control the images and the messages that are conveyed. We can only change the facts on the ground that refute the claims of the rejectionists and extremists, and in so doing create the circumstances for a safe, secure future for Israel. (Applause.)
And then finally, we must recognize that the ever-evolving technology of war is making it harder to guarantee Israel’s security. For six decades, Israelis have guarded their borders vigilantly. But advances in rocket technology mean that Israeli families are now at risk far from those borders. Despite efforts at containment, rockets with better guidance systems, longer range, and more destructive power are spreading across the region. Hezbollah has amassed tens of thousands of rockets on Israel’s northern border. Hamas has a substantial number in Gaza. And even if some of these are still crude, they all pose a serious danger, as we saw again last week.

Our message to Hamas is clear: Renounce violence, recognize Israel, and abide by previous signed agreements. (Applause.) That is the only path to participation in negotiations. They do not earn a place at any table absent those changes. (Applause.) And I will repeat today what I have said many times before: Gilad Shalit must be released immediately and returned to his family. (Applause.)
Unfortunately, neither military action nor restricting access into and out of Gaza has significantly stemmed the flow of rockets to Hamas. They appear content to add to their stockpile and grow rich off the tunnel trade, while the people of Gaza fall deeper into poverty and despair; that is also not a sustainable position for either Israelis or Palestinians.
Behind these terrorist organizations and their rockets, we see the destabilizing influence of Iran. Now, reaching a two-state solution will not end all these threats – you and I know that – (applause) – but failure to do so gives the extremist foes a pretext to spread violence, instability, and hatred.
In the face of these unforgiving dynamics of demography, ideology, and technology, it becomes impossible to entrust our hopes for Israel’s future in today’s status quo. These challenges cannot be ignored or wished away. Only by choosing a new path can Israel make the progress it deserves to ensure that their children are able to see a future of peace, and only by having a partner willing to participate with them will the Palestinians be able to see the same future.

Now, there is for many of us a clear goal: two states for two peoples living side by side in peace and security, with peace between Israel and Syria, and Israel and Lebanon, and normal relations between Israel and all the Arab states. (Applause.) A comprehensive peace that is real, not a slogan, that is rooted in genuine recognition of Israel’s right to exist in peace and security, and that offers the best way to ensure Israel’s enduring survival and well-being. That is the goal that the Obama Administration is determined to help Israel and the Palestinians achieve.

George Mitchell has worked tirelessly with the parties to prepare the ground for the resumption of direct negotiations, beginning with the proximity talks both sides have accepted. These proximity talks are a hopeful first step, and they should be serious and substantive. But ultimately, of course, it will take direct negotiations between the parties to work through all the issues and end the conflict.

The United States stands ready to play an active and sustained role in these talks, and to support the parties as they work to resolve permanent status issues including security, borders, refugees, and Jerusalem. The United States knows we cannot force a solution. We cannot ordain or command the outcome. The parties themselves must resolve their differences.

But, we believe – (applause) – we believe that through good-faith negotiations, the parties can mutually agree to an outcome which ends the conflict and reconciles the Palestinian goal of an independent and viable state based on the ‘67 lines, with agreed swaps, and Israel’s goal of a Jewish state with secure and recognized borders that reflect subsequent developments and meet Israel’s security requirements. (Applause.)

And the United States recognizes that Jerusalem – Jerusalem is a deeply, profoundly important issue for Israelis and Palestinians, for Jews, Muslims, and Christians. We believe that through good-faith negotiations the parties can mutually agree on an outcome that realizes the aspirations of both parties for Jerusalem and safeguards its status for people around the world.

But for negotiations to be successful, they must be built on a foundation of mutual trust and confidence. That is why both Israelis and Palestinians must refrain from unilateral statements and actions that undermine the process or prejudice the outcome of talks.

When a Hamas-controlled municipality glorifies violence and renames a square after a terrorist who murdered innocent Israelis, it insults the families on both sides who have lost loves ones over the years in this conflict. (Applause.) And when instigators deliberately mischaracterize the rededication of a synagogue in the Jewish quarter of Jerusalem’s old city and call upon their brethren to “defend” nearby Muslim holy sites from so-called “attacks,” it is purely and simply an act of incitement. (Applause.) These provocations are wrong and must be condemned for needlessly inflaming tensions and imperiling prospects for a comprehensive peace.

It is our devotion to this outcome – two states for two peoples, secure and at peace – that led us to condemn the announcement of plans for new construction in East Jerusalem. This was not about wounded pride. Nor is it a judgment on the final status of Jerusalem, which is an issue to be settled at the negotiating table. This is about getting to the table, creating and protecting an atmosphere of trust around it – and staying there until the job is finally done. (Applause.)

New construction in East Jerusalem or the West Bank undermines that mutual trust and endangers the proximity talks that are the first step toward the full negotiations that both sides say want and need. And it exposes daylight between Israel and the United States that others in the region hope to exploit. It undermines America’s unique ability to play a role – an essential role – in the peace process. Our credibility in this process depends in part on our willingness to praise both sides when they are courageous, and when we don’t agree, to say so, and say so unequivocally.

We objected to this announcement because we are committed to Israel and its security, which we believe depends on a comprehensive peace, because we are determined to keep moving forward along a path that ensures Israel’s future as a secure and democratic Jewish state living in peace with its Palestinian and Arab neighbors, and because we do not want to see the progress that has been made in any way endangered. .

When Prime Minister Netanyahu and I spoke, I suggested a number of concrete steps Israel could take to improve the atmosphere and rebuild confidence. The prime minister responded with specific actions Israel is prepared to take toward this end, and we discussed a range of other mutual confidence-building measures. Senator Mitchell continued this discussion in Israel over the weekend and is meeting with President Abbas today. We are making progress. We’re working hard. We are making it possible for these proximity talks to move ahead. I will be meeting with Prime Minister Netanyahu later today and President Obama will meet with him tomorrow. (Applause.) We will follow up on these discussions and seek a common understanding about the most productive way forward.

Neither our commitment nor our goal has changed. The United States will encourage the parties to advance the prospects for peace. We commend the government of President Abbas and Prime Minister Fayyad for the reforms they’ve undertaken to strengthen law and order, and the progress that they’ve made in improving the quality of life in the West Bank. But we encourage them to redouble their efforts to put an end to incitement and violence, continue to ensure security and the rule of law, and ingrain a culture of peace and tolerance among Palestinians. (Applause.)

We applaud Israel’s neighbors for their support of the Arab Peace Initiative and the proximity talks. But their rhetoric must now be backed up by action. (Applause.) They should make it easier to pursue negotiations and an agreement. That is their responsibility.

And we commend Prime Minister Netanyahu for embracing the vision of the two-state solution, for acting to lift roadblocks and ease movement throughout the West Bank. And we continue to expect Israel to take those concrete steps that will help turn that vision into a reality – build momentum toward a comprehensive peace by demonstrating respect for the legitimate aspirations of the Palestinians, stopping settlement activity, and addressing the humanitarian crisis in Gaza.

Now, from the time of David Ben-Gurion, who accepted the UN proposal to divide the land into two nations, Israel and Palestine, leaders like Begin and Rabin and Sharon and others have made difficult but clear-eyed choices to pursue peace in the name of Israel’s future. It was Rabin who said, “For Israel there is no path that is without pain. But the path of peace is preferable to the path of war.” And last June at Bar-Ilan University, Prime Minister Netanyahu put his country on the path to peace. President Abbas has put the Palestinians on that path as well. The challenge will be to keep moving forward, to stay on what will be a difficult course.

Peace does brings with it a future of promise and possibility. Ultimately, that is the vision that drives us and that has driven leaders of Israel going back to the very beginning – a future freed from the shackles of conflict; families no longer afraid of rockets in the night; Israelis traveling and trading freely in the region; Palestinians able to chart their own futures; former adversaries working together on issues of common concern like water, infrastructure, and development that builds broadly shared prosperity and a global strategic partnership between Israel and the United States that taps the talent and innovation of both our societies, comes up with solutions to the problems of the 21st century.

From addressing climate change and energy to hunger, poverty and disease, Israel is already on the cutting edge. Look at the spread of high-tech start-ups, the influx of venture capital, the number of Nobel laureates. Israel is already a force to be reckoned with. Imagine what its leadership could be on the world stage if the conflict were behind it. We are already working as partners. There is so much more we could achieve together.

We are entering the season of Passover. The story of Moses resonates for people of all faiths, and it teaches us many lessons, including that we must take risks, even a leap of faith, to reach the promised land. When Moses urged the Jews to follow him out of Egypt, many objected. They said it was too dangerous, too hard, too risky. And later, in the desert, some thought it would be better to return to Egypt. It was too dangerous, too hard, too risky. In fact, I think they formed a back-to-Egypt committee and tried to stir up support for that. And when they came to the very edge of the promised land, there were still some who refused to enter because it was too dangerous, too hard, and too risky.

But Israel’s history is the story of brave men and women who took risks. They did the hard thing because they believed and knew it was right. We know that this dream was championed by Herzl and others that many said was impossible. And then the pioneers – can you imagine the conversation, telling your mother and father I’m going to go to the desert and make it bloom. And people thinking, how could that ever happen? But it did. Warriors who were so gallant in battle, but then offered their adversaries a hand of peace because they thought it would make their beloved Israel stronger. Israel and the generations that have come have understood that the strongest among us is often the one who turns an enemy into a friend. Israel has shed more than its share of bitter tears. But for that dream to survive, for the state to flourish, this generation of Israelis must also take up the tradition and do what seems too dangerous, too hard, and too risky. And of this they can be absolutely sure: the United States and the American people will stand with you. We will share the risks and we will shoulder the burdens, as we face the future together.
God bless you. God bless Israel and God bless the United States of America. (Applause.)

*
Preceding transcript provided by U.S. State Department

City Ballet’s ‘Peter Pan’ takes euphoric flight

March 22, 2010 Leave a comment

By Sheila Orysiek

SAN DIEGO–One of the thrills of dance – both to the dancer as well as the observer – is the momentary euphoria of suspension in space and the freedom of apparent flight.  City Ballet of San Diego’s production on March 21 of Peter Pan at the Spreckles Theatre is a delight in every sense – including the sensation of flight.

Ballet dancers “flying” about the stage is not new – but quite old. We can see in a number of lithographs of the Romantic Era ballets in the 1800′s, sylphs, peris, wilis and other winged female creatures hovering above the stage.  It fulfilled the desire of the Romantic Era to turn a woman into something sublime and unreachable.  Peter Pan and his world are the dream stuff of children or better yet, those of us lucky to have never quite lost the child we were.

This ballet in two acts is fraught with staging difficulty; from several complex sets (designed by Catherine I. Irving), carefully crafted lighting (Stephen Judson), bright choreography (Bruce Steivel), and a technical company “Flying by Foy.”  This last is surely an art form in its own right.  Two dancer/technicians were assigned to “fly” each character.  An additional challenge was the complex choreography of several flights happening at once, and on musical cue, which could not be rehearsed in the studio but only on stage which rather restricted the time spent in rehearsal.  Notwithstanding all this complexity of changing sets, flying and earthly choreography, it all spun out smoothly like a silken skein.

The highlight was the aerial pas de deux between Wendy (Ariana Samuelsson) and Peter Pan (Gerardo Gil).  From earth to air – from air to earth – the transitions were like those we experience in dreams; now we touch earth – now we are free.  Gil was an intriguing other world creature but still human enough to make us wish to join him.  Janica Smith’s Tinker Bell, while rife with impish naughtiness, was also the imp in each of us.  Wendy’s brothers: Patrick Lahey as John, and Megan Nichols as Michael – were mischievously enjoyable. 

This entire production was thoroughly enjoyable on every level. The characters are fun, the mood is light, the ballet entirely accessible to even the newest member of the ballet audience.  Though there were many children in attendance, it is a delight no matter one’s age.

Other characters:  Emily Pardington was loveable as Nana, the Dog; John Nettles as Mr. Crocodile, who was responsible for Capt. Hook’s hook (is this the same John Nettles who is the Company’s music director?) was smilingly fearsome; Capt.  Hook (Kevin Engle) was properly evil and comically engaging.  Well done to the pirates:  Bryce Corson, Geoffrey Gonzalez, Kyle Rivieccio and special mention to fire cracker “Smeed” danced by Daniel Ching. 

Moving into fouetté turns without the usual preparation is difficult.  That whipped leg can begin the rotation either from the side (a more Russian version) or the front – but one needs to decide ahead of time which it will be.

This ballet is a worthy addition to City Ballet’s growing repertoire and I hope it sees many more happy flights.

The music by Thomas Semanski – synthesized and recorded – was wedded to the story and choreography in every sense.
*
Orysiek is a freelance dance reviewer and columnist based in San Diego.  She may be contacted at orzak@aol.com

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 92 other followers