This site will work and look better in a browser that supports web standards, but it is accessible to any browser or Internet device.

“Christianity Through Jewish Eyes”

Saudis Ask For Aid If Pertodollars Decline

November 6th, 2009

Two stories follow, provoking a little less sympathy for the OPEC oil sheiks’ request.

Story 1:

Sheik flies Lamborghini 6,500 miles to Britain for oil change

By Neil Syson, The Sun www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/article1493291.ece

Flashy ... the Lamborghini is same model as Batman’s

Flashy ... the Lamborghini is same model as Batman’s

Oil be blowed ... the supercar at Heathrow with Qatar Airways jet

Oil be blowed ... the supercar at Heathrow with Qatar Airways jet

A rich Arab sent his Lamborghini on a 6,500-mile round trip to Britain for a service.

The £190,000 supercar was put on a scheduled flight from Qatar to Heathrow – then flown BACK after the oil check.

Money was no object as the flight would have cost the owner – thought to be a Sheikh – around £20,000.

The move sparked fury from green campaigners.

An airport worker said: “This car doesn’t have a carbon footprint – more of a crater.”

The overall cost of sending the Lamborghini to London for the oil change would have cost more than £23,000.

His black-and-gold supercar costs £3,552 to service at an approved dealer – on top of the £20,000 to freight from Qatar to Britain.

The Murciélago LP640 – driven by Batman in movie The Dark Knight – arrived from the Middle Eastern country on Friday.

It cleared customs and was trucked to specialist mechanics in London for the service.

On Monday it was flown back 3,250 miles to the oil-rich state where it was collected by the owner.

A cargo handler at Heathrow blasted the car’s environmental damage.

He said: “It would have been far more efficient to fly mechanics out there.”

And Jenny Evans, of pressure group Plane Stupid, said: “This horrifies me. It is another example of how rich people exploit and pollute the planet because of their money.”

She said the role of the super-wealthy in climate change was not properly recognised – while poor people were rapped for going on holiday.

Friends of the Earth’s transport campaigner Richard Dyer said: “Flying a car thousands of miles for a service is ludicrous when planes are one of the most polluting ways to transport goods. We urge the individual to get their car serviced closer to home.”

But David Price, of Lamborghini Club UK, said: “If an owner wants to service his car in that way, it is his choice.

“I’m not surprised. Thankfully the age of excess in some areas continues.”

Lamborghini UK spokeswoman Juliet Jarvis said there could be “kudos” for a Middle Eastern owner in servicing a car in London.

She said the exclusive Italian brand had a network of authorised dealers around the world – and most cars were looked after in the country where they were bought.

But she added: “This sort of thing is not unheard of.”

Qatar Airways confirmed it carried the Lamborghini.

The cars are popular with celebs including Rod Stewart and David Beckham.

Story 2:

The Sultan’s 5,000 personal vehicles

www.sacarfan.co.za/2009/02/whos-personal-car-collection-numbers-over-5000/

If you were rich enough to drive any car you wanted, absolutely any car, and money is no object, what would you go for? A Lamborghini, Bugatti, Mercedes, Aston Martin, or how about something outrageous like a Formula 1 car.

Sultan’s palace

Sultan’s palace

But what if you were truly rich, not just “getting by” like Bill Gates or Sir Richard Branson, but truly rich. The Sultan of Brunei is the richest man on earth; he is not counted on rich lists because he does not earn his money it comes from his tiny country’s oil reserves which are essentially his. Estimates of his wealth pop up from time to time but the truth is that no one really knows how much money he has.

Sultan of Brunei

Sultan of Brunei

So which car do you think the richest man in the world drives, well if you said Lamborghini, you’d be correct, if you said Aston Martin that would be right too, and if you guessed F1 Race-car you would have been nearly right because he owns every Formula One championship-winning car for the last thirty years.

Sultan’s garage

Sultan’s garage

These cars fit very nicely into his garage which is a bit bigger than your garage at home, it has to be to be able to accommodate the estimated 5000 personal vehicles owned by the Sultan. If he picked one car to drive down to his local corner café for bread and milk each day, it would take him thirteen and a half years to use each one.

Outside the Sultan’s garage

Outside the Sultan’s garage

He seems to quite like the Rolls Royce range he has over 500 hundred of those, if you tried unsuccessfully to buy a Rolls during the 1990’s that would be because he accounted for over half of their entire sales for that decade.

Ferrari FX

Ferrari FX

His collection, which may well be far more than 5000 vehicles, is estimated to have cost over US$4 billion. Filling them all up may be a little expensive, at $1 per litre that’s estimated at a minimum of half a million US dollars.

Mercedes F400

Mercedes F400

Those that voted for the Lamborghini will be happy to know that he has 20 of those, but he seems to prefer the sleeker appearance of the Ferrari’s as he opted for 367 of those, Jaguars are nice little run-arounds, all 177 of them, as are the 362 Bentleys.

Mercedes CLK-GTR

Mercedes CLK-GTR

He’s also not into buying boring, run-of-the-mill BMW’s (185 of them) and likes something a bit more exotic such as the Bentley Dominator 4X4 and Bentley Java, Ferrari FX (6), the worlds only right hand drive Mercedes CLK-GTR and the Cizeta Moroder V16T (3).

Cizeta Moroder V16T

Cizeta Moroder V16T

Added to the burden of deciding which car to use each day a visitor of the sultan’s garage’s once said: “It can take an hour and a half just to get a certain car out if it’s been parked right at the back.”

The letters of Dodd: Too many Jews here at the Nuremberg trials

November 6th, 2009

By Shmuel Rosner– Chief U.S. Correspondent, www.Haaretz.com

(written in 2007 when Letters From Nuremberg was first published)

There are too many Jews around here, thought the prosecutor, Thomas Dodd. “Col. Kaplan is now here, as a mate I assume for Commander Kaplan. Dr. Newman has arrived… it is all a silly business.” In the prosecution team of the Nuremberg trials, in which Nazi high officials are indicted, there is no need for such number of Jews, that’s what Dodd was thinking. “One would expect that some of these people would have sense enough to put an end to this kind of parade.”

“Grace, my dearest one,” thus Dodd opens many of his letters from those stormy days to his wife. They are very personal, and let the reader peep into the nature of relationships between Thomas and Grace. But these letters also constitute a fascinating historical documentation of the many back stage events of the Nuremberg trials. Dodd was the right hand man of Judge Robert Jackson, the leading prosecutor. He later became a Congressman and a Senator. The letters he sent are now published in a new book, Letters from Nuremberg, authored by his son, Connecticut Senator Chris Dodd, with the help of a friend, Lary Bloom. One should assume that timing it is no mere coincidence: Dodd is now running for President.

Focusing of the too-much-Jews letter doesn’t do justice to Dodd. There’s no reason to believe that he didn’t want them around him because of personal dislike or racist prejudice. “You know how I have despised anti-Semitism,” he writes to his wife, who stayed at home, in the US, while he was spending more than a year abroad. The trials failed to make the case against the Nazi persecution of the Jews. They were blamed for war crimes, but left unspoken the truth about the nature of the war they have declared against one particular nation.

“Jews should stay away from this trial – for their own sake,” Dodd explains. He doesn’t want them to supply anti-Semites and isolationists with ammunition – afraid of a possible growing sentiment to describe the war as “war for the Jews.” His son, the Senator, added a foot note reminding readers of comment made by Charles Lindbergh, leading the anti-war movement, back in 1941. Three forces are pushing America to get involved in the war, he said: The Brits, the President, the Jews.

Senator Dodd told me that he doesn’t necessarily agree with the sentiment articulated by his father in the letter sited above. He is convinced, though, that this was an honest assessment. Thomas Dodd really thought the number of Jewish members in the team was bad for the Jews themselves. There was no doubt in the son’s mind that the letters should be published in full, not censored. While speaking to three Jewish reporters about the book, he focused more on its political implications, in the broader sense, that on the events of those long-gone times.

Much more than the content of any letter, this is the really controversial side of this book. The son is using the father’s writings to promote his beliefs regarding foreign policy, the international law, human rights. Quoting them, he is trying building a case against the Bush administration, blaming it for a “fundamental shift” in America’s policy, as far as international norms of justice and the rule of law are concerned. Dodd argues that there’s a stark difference between the way America chose to react to the crimes of the Nazis, hence, his fathers’ letters, and the path it has taken after the events of September 11. In conversation, Dodd agrees that the differences between now and then are more than cosmetic. However, the first part of the book is mostly dedicated to drawing the political lessons he sees fit.

“Civilized nations respond differently,” Dodd says, armed with the proof: these newly released letters. Civilized nations do not execute, hold people in secret prisons indefinitely, circumvent the courts – but rather prosecute. The letters show that this is what the father believed. But most of them don’t deal with politics, or philosophy, but rather describe the daily struggles of a man in a unique position. In the morning, he was questioning Hitler’s deputy, Rudolph Hess; in the evening writing about it to his wife, “He is gone mentally and I doubt that he can answer for his offenses.” In the next letter he describes an encounter between Hess and Herman Goering, the Air-Force chief and second in command to the Fuhrer. “Don’t you recall me?” he asks Hess. “I am really very sorry,” Hess replies. “It is genuine,” writes Dodd. He really couldn’t recognize him.

In one of the most dramatic moments of this trial, Dodd was the one presenting to the world the shrunken head of a Polish prisoner. The photo depicting him holding this dreadful piece of evidence is still memorable. The head was used as a paper holder at the office of a Nazi officer. But from the letters, one learns about the personal relations that developed between Dodd and some defendants. Franz Von Papen, short-time deputy to Hitler and one of the few to be found not guilty at the end of the trial, is called “my friend Papen.”

Dodd the father died relatively young, at the age of 64. His political career ended in turmoil and he was censured by the Senate for personal usage of public funds. His son, as one expects, wants this book to serve as a tribute to the better days of the father (he had many good days and some achievements as a legislator too). He said that publishing the letters now, a decade after they were discovered, is the culmination of a long and slow process. There are many family members involved, and making decisions takes time. If he doesn’t mention the campaign as a reason, one should assume that it is only because this will be just stating the obvious.

No dramatic revelations can be found in this book. But it is a fascinating history lesson, and a great way to learn more about the people taking part in the trial of the century. And as it is always with people, much space is dedicated to rivalries, maneuvers, egos. “The worst of [Colonel Robert] Gill, however, is his disloyalty to Jackson,” writes Dodd about one member of the team. But he also remembers that this is not the everyday trial, that he is playing a part in one great drama. “I like the assignment,” he writes. “It is an important and worthwhile one.”

Iranian Police Clash With Protesters

November 4th, 2009

By Farnaz Fassihi and Chip Cummins,  online.wsj.com

Nov 4 — Iranian security forces battled with opposition protesters in Tehran Wednesday, after demonstrators used the 30th anniversary of the storming of the U.S. Embassy as cover for their first significant protest in weeks.

Iranian demonstrators burned an U.S. flag outside the former U.S. Embassy in Tehran. Raheb Homavandi/Reuters

Iranian demonstrators burned an U.S. flag outside the former U.S. Embassy in Tehran. Raheb Homavandi/Reuters

The scale of the opposition protests — and the government crackdown — was unclear early Wednesday, but wire services and state-controlled media reported police using tear gas and clashing violently with protesters. Iran has largely banned media coverage of non-sanctioned rallies and protests, and international newswires with reporters in the country must rely on eyewitness accounts.

Still, initial reports suggest large antiregime protests erupted in several locations across Tehran. Large crowds of demonstrators gathered in central districts of the capital near the former U.S. embassy, where an annual pro-government rally was also taking place, according to eyewitnesses and video posted on Iranian websites.

Antiriot police on motorcycle and on foot chased the crowd with batons and plain-clothed Basij militia attacked demonstrators with wooden sticks, according to these accounts.

At one point, one crowd of protesters turned its message toward the American President Barack Obama, chanting, “Obama, Obama, you are either with us or with them.”

Basij forces attacked opposition leader and former presidential candidate Mahdi Karroubi, firing teargas at him, according to Mohamad Taghi Karroubi, the cleric’s son, in a post on the opposition’s “Mowjcamp” Web site. Mr. Karroubi suffered light skin injury, but one of his bodyguards was seriously injured and was take to the hospital, according to the account. It wasn’t possible to immediately verify the incident.

“Today the government of the coup proved once again that it will stop at nothing to crush the massive wave of demonstrations,” said a statement by the opposition posted on their Web site.

Some marchers through Tehran’s streets wore green clothing that symbolized the campaign of opposition leader Mir Hossein Moussavi. It wasn’t clear whether Mr. Mousavi was among the protestors.

At Tehran University, students brought down President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s picture to whooping cheers and chants of “God is Great,” according to video posts circulating on the Internet.

Witnesses told the Associated Press that security forces, mainly paramilitary units from the elite Revolutionary Guard Corps, swept through several hundred demonstrators at Haft-e-Tir Square in central Tehran, clubbing, kicking and slapping protesters.

The unrest provides another significant challenge for Mr. Ahmadinejad and Iran’s conservative clerical leadership, headed by Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. For months, the regime has struggled to put a lid on simmering unrest, which erupted after contested presidential elections in June, in which Mr. Ahmadinejad was declared the landslide victor.

Mr. Ahmadinejad’s attempts at enforcing domestic calm come amid unrest along its restive border with Pakistan and Afghanistan, where antigovernment rebels have stepped up a violent campaign against the regime, killing several senior Revolutionary Guard commanders last month.

Antigovernment protestors chanted slogans on the sidelines of state-sanctioned rallies. Associated Press

Antigovernment protestors chanted slogans on the sidelines of state-sanctioned rallies. Associated Press

At the same time, Tehran officials are negotiating with Western powers over Iran’s nuclear program. The fresh protests come as Mr. Ahmadinejad and other leaders have tried to present a unified front in its deliberations with the West.

After appearing to agree to a deal to send out the bulk of its fissile material for enrichment in Russia, Iranian officials have balked at ratifying the agreement, frustrating Washington and its allies. Western officials have warned they won’t wait forever for progress in talks, suggesting an end-of-year deadline.

After that, Washington has suggested it will push for tough new economic sanctions, and Israeli officials have long suggested they would consider a military strike if they felt Iran was close to building a nuclear weapon. Iran says its nuclear program is for peaceful purposes.

In the days immediately following the election, supporters of presidential candidates Mr. Moussavi, a former prime minister, and senior cleric Mahdi Karroubi, took to the streets, staging the regime’s largest antigovernment demonstrations since the founding of the Islamic Republic thirty years ago.

Mr. Ahmadinejad’s government cracked down violently, clashing with protesters and jailing scores. Government officials put the death toll at several dozen, though human-rights groups have claimed the number of deaths was much higher. The government has put on trial more than a hundred people it alleges agitated against the regime, in cahoots with foreign powers such as the U.S. and Britain.

The bloody crackdown quieted most large street protests by the end of the summer. But opposition leaders, organizing underground, have increasingly hijacked state-sponsored holidays and rallies to come back out on the streets in force. In September, antigovernment protesters spilled out into the streets during Quds Day, a state-sponsored holiday aimed at rallying support for the Palestinians and condemning Israel.

Israel Seizes 500 Tons of Hezbollah Bound Iran Arms

November 4th, 2009

By Gwen Ackerman and Calev Ben-David, www.Bloomberg.com

11-4-09 captured vesselNov. 4  – The Israeli navy intercepted a ship heading for Syria and seized an unprecedented 500-ton haul of weapons from Iran intended for the Shiite Muslim Hezbollah militia in Lebanon, the army said.

“This is the largest cache of smuggled weapons ever to be seized by Israel,” army spokeswoman Avital Leibovitz said in a phone interview today. “The cache includes thousands of rockets as well as hand grenades and mortar shells.”

Israel seized the ship 100 miles off its Mediterranean coast and discovered 40 containers carrying the weapons, Leibovitz said. The vessel was flying the flag of Antigua and was stopped late yesterday due to “suspicions” about the vessel, she added.

The seizure reflected “a well-known Iranian technique, taking advantage of cargo ships flying different flags in order to smuggle containers loaded with large amounts of highly volatile weaponry to terrorist organizations such as Hezbollah,” the army said in a statement. Israeli officials have accused Iran and Syria previously of supplying weapons to Hezbollah in Lebanon and the Islamic Hamas movement in the Gaza Strip.

“This is another success in the continuous struggle against attempts to smuggle weapons and military equipment with the goal of strengthening terrorist elements that threaten the security of Israel,” Defense Minister Ehud Barak said in an e- mailed statement.

‘Supplier of Arms’

In December, Israel launched a three-week military initiative against Hamas to stop cross-border rocket attacks from Gaza. It fought a monthlong war against Hezbollah in 2006 after two soldiers were abducted.

“Iran is the major supplier of arms to Hezbollah, usually via Syria by air or over land,” Ephraim Kam, deputy director of Tel Aviv University’s Institute for National Security, said today in a telephone interview. “Maybe they used a sea route this time because of the types of weapons involved.”

In 2002, Israel seized the ship Karine A, which it said was bringing arms from Iran to the Gaza Strip. In January, Cyprus seized an Iranian ship that it said may have been taking arms to Gaza in violation of United Nations sanctions.

Israeli officials said yesterday that Hamas had tested a rocket with a range of 60 kilometers, enabling it to reach from Gaza to the Tel Aviv metropolitan area. “This is the type of weapon that could not be made in Gaza, and had to be brought in from outside,” Kam said.

Did Jews Invent The Violin?

October 30th, 2009

By Elana Estrin, www.JPost.com

From Fiddler on the Roof to the ubiquitous fiddler in the works of painter Marc Chagall to world-renowned musician Itzhak Perlman, the violin has long been associated with the Jewish people.

What accounts for this connection? The answer is still unclear, but scholars believe that Jewish ties to the violin may go back to the very beginning.

“It doesn’t look like the violin is of Italian origin. It looks like it’s of Jewish origin,” says Monica Huggett, a violinist and artistic director of the Historical Performance Program at the Juilliard School in New York City.

The origin of the violin has always been murky. Scholars have suspected that the violin’s precursor, the viol, was invented in Spain in the second half of the 15th century — before the Jews were expelled. Then, shortly after the Spanish expulsion, the viol showed up in Italy, where it quickly developed into the violin we know today. But who brought the viol to Italy and who is responsible for its development into the violin have largely remained a mystery.

In the last few decades, some scholars have concluded that Jewish musicians were the ones responsible. The violin seems to have originated in Italy in the first half of the 16th century, around the same time that the expelled Spanish Jews would have settled there. And the viol seems to have traveled the same path and at the same time that the Jews fled Spain.

While few scholars have published research backing this theory, the idea is beginning to strike a chord in the music world. At a biannual violin symposium at the Juilliard School in May, which draws the world’s top violinists, Huggett presented a keynote lecture outlining the history of the violin. She excitedly announced to the roughly 100 violinists in the audience that she’s waiting for more research to be conducted that would definitively add the violin to the list of Jewish achievements.

The first to propose this theory was Roger Prior, 73, a retired lecturer from the University of Belfast. He’s written two articles and a book about Jewish musicians around the time of the violin’s origin.

“Did you know that there’s no reference to the violin in Spain in the 16th century? When the Jews were pushed out of Spain, one of the obvious places they went to was Italy. That’s where the violin seems to have been developed. That’s the reason for linking the Jews and the violin. I think that’s been quite well-documented,” Prior says.

Prior serendipitously came to unravel the mystery of the Jewish musicians while researching a different discipline and a different part of Europe – the court of King Henry VIII. Around 1983, as a lecturer in the University of Belfast’s Department of English, Prior was researching the identity of the “Dark Lady,” the mysterious woman mentioned in several of Shakespeare’s sonnets. Noted British historian A.L. Rowse suggested that the Dark Lady was a woman by the name of Emilia Bassano, and Prior began investigating her biography.

He noticed parallel language describing her and Shylock, the Jewish moneylender in Shakespeare’s The Merchant of Venice. It led him to suspect that Bassano was Jewish. He began to gather evidence confirming his hypothesis, but didn’t expect to find that several members of the Bassano family were the original members of the wind consort at King Henry VIII’s court. That discovery led him to the king’s Jewish string consort.

HERE’S HOW the story goes: In the early 16th century, King Henry VIII began a campaign to increase the prestige of the English court. He started by hiring prestigious Italian musicians, and in 1540 a group of six Italian viol players showed up at his doorstep. Prior’s research concludes that most of these viol players were probably Spanish or Portuguese Jews who had fled to Italy after the 1492 Spanish expulsion. Since Jews seem to have been leading viol players around the same time that the viol developed into the violin, Prior concludes that Jews may have played a role in the creation of the violin.

“I haven’t got any definite proof, but there’s an awful lot of evidence that the viol players were Jewish,” Prior says.

One piece of the puzzle Prior points to is a historically mysterious event in English history. Scholars have always known that in 1541, Henry VIII was told that there were “Marranos,” Portuguese Jews who formally converted to Christianity but still practiced Judaism in secret, living in London. He had these crypto-Jews imprisoned. Prior says that Henry normally wouldn’t hurry to imprison crypto-Jews, but the circumstances were exceptional; he was trying to win Charles V’s favor at the time, and thought that prosecuting “secret Jews” would prove himself as a Catholic. Charles’s English ambassador, Eustace Chapuys, praised the arrests. But suddenly, Charles’s sister and even the king and queen of Portugal wrote to Chapuys as advocates of the prisoners. In the end, the crypto-Jews were released.

Though this story has long been known, the identity of these secret Portuguese Jews has always been a mystery – that is, until Prior connected this account to his research of Henry VIII’s viol consort. First, he noticed that the records used to support the arrests came from Milan, which is where many of the viol players lived before coming to England.

Prior also studied a chilling letter Chapuys wrote in 1542, referencing the imprisoned Portuguese Jews: “Most likely, however well they may sing, they will not be able to fly away from their cages without leaving some of their feathers behind.”

According to Prior, this cryptic sentence is no longer a mystery: The birds Chapuys refers to must be a metaphor for musicians – namely, the Jewish viol consort of King Henry’s VIII’s court.

Though the songbird reference strongly suggests that the prisoners were musicians, what does Chapuys mean when he says that the prisoners can’t leave “without leaving some of their feathers behind”? Prior thinks that he may be referring to the deaths of two of the musicians while in prison. Here, another piece of the puzzle comes together.

John Anthony, a Jewish sackbut (early trombone) player, and Romano of Milan, a viol player, both died in prison. Anthony drew up a will, using the four members of the royal viol players as witnesses. Prior noticed two oddities in the official record of his will two days after his death: Anthony’s name suddenly appears as “Anthonii Moyses,” and one witness’s name, Ambrose of Milan, suddenly becomes “Ambrosius deolmaleyex.” Prior quickly concluded that Anthony was Jewish, since “Moyses” was a common Jewish name meaning “son of Moses.”

The trickier name to unravel was the enigmatic name “deolmaleyex.” Prior thinks that an incompetent English clerk butchered the name in a failed attempt to write down “de Olmaliah” or “de Almaliah,” which Prior says is the Sephardi version of “Elmaleh.” Prior presumes that the two probably changed their names to John Anthony and Ambrose of Milan to hide their Jewish identities. Most likely, he suspects, they revealed their real names in prison because they had nothing to hide anymore since they were imprisoned for being Jewish. And, on his deathbed, John Anthony probably figured he had nothing to lose.

It’s probably no coincidence that most of Henry VIII’s court musicians were Jewish. According to Prior, Henry probably chose Jewish musicians because they didn’t owe allegiance to either the Catholic Church or the Lutheran Church and were therefore more likely to be reliable servants for the English court. Another possibility is that at that time in England, Jews were renowned for being excellent musicians. Jewish musicians, in turn, saw England as a safe place of refuge from the Inquisition.

THERE’S FURTHER evidence that the violin may be of Jewish origin. It’s based on Prior’s second theory: that the renowned Amati family was Jewish. The Amatis are famed for being the first makers of the modern violin (and for teaching Antonio Stradivari, widely regarded to be the best violin craftsman in history). If the Amatis were Jewish, this could once again point to the violin being of Jewish origin since they were the earliest prominent makers of the modern violin.

Once again, in collecting evidence about the Amatis, Prior looked to their last name. He consulted Bibliografia Ebraica, a book of Jewish-Italian names by Carlo Barduzzi, which posits that the Hebrew surname “Haviv,” which means lovable or likable in Hebrew, is equivalent to the Italian surname “Amato,” which means beloved in Italian.

“Their last name may be evidence of the Jewish connection with the violin. They may have chosen the name, of course. I think it’s the Jewish habit of taking positive-sounding names which bring good luck,” Prior says. Despite this evidence, he acknowledges that it’s not enough to verify for certain that the Amatis were Jewish.

At this point, Prior’s theories are only theories. One skeptic is Prof. Alexander Knapp, an ethnomusicologist from the University of London who specializes in Jewish music. He contends that there is not sufficient evidence to conclude that the violin is of Jewish origin.

“As far as I understand, the viol existed in Italy and lots of other places throughout Europe. One can’t say it existed in Spain and was then brought to Italy. Even if it was, it doesn’t mean to say that Jews are the only ones who played the viol. So the violin could have been invented by others, then the Jews traveled. But other people traveled too, like gypsies. So I think it’s unrealistic, wishful thinking to say that,” Knapp says.

WHETHER OR not Jews were instrumental in creating the violin, some of today’s leading violinists have their own theories about Jews’ historically disproportionate affinity for it. These violinists, needless to say, are Jewish, too.

“The violin has always been a Jewish instrument,” says Russian-Israeli violinist Vadim Gluzman. “I hope I’m not perceived as chauvinistic, but it’s a fact of life: The greatest violinists who ever lived were Jewish. I do feel that I am the next link. I carry on the tradition, to the best of my ability of course. I feel the weight of generations on my shoulders.”

That tradition includes 17th-century Jewish virtuoso violinist Salamone Rossi (credited with being one of the first composers of violin music), and three of the leading violinists in the 19th century: Joseph Joachim, to whom Johannes Brahms dedicated his violin concerto; Ferdinand David, to whom Felix Mendelssohn dedicated his violin concerto; and Henryk Wieniawski, who was a virtuoso violinist and composer of significant works for the violin.

The list of the 20th century’s leading violinists is heavily dominated by Jews, each considered to be among the best violinists of all time: Jascha Heifetz, Isaac Stern, Yehudi Menuhin, David Oistrakh, Nathan Milstein and Mischa Elman, among others. And many of today’s leading violinists carry on the torch in the world’s concert halls, including Itzhak Perlman, Shlomo Mintz, Pinchas Zukerman, Gil Shaham, Joshua Bell, Hagai Shaham and Vadim Gluzman.

What accounts for the phenomenon? There are about as many theories as there are Jewish violinists. A popular theory posits that the Jews have historically been a mobile people and therefore have preferred a mobile instrument. So why is there no strong connection between the Jewish people and, say, the flute?

“The flute hasn’t captured the Jewish imagination as much as the violin has,” Knapp conjectures. “String instruments have a certain intensity and passion, and capture the feelings of the heart in a way that’s intense and immediate.”

Israeli violinist Hagai Shaham suggests that this “intensity and passion” of the violin is well-suited to Jewish music. And he has an answer for why the clarinet, which is both portable and important in klezmer music, has not been picked up by as many Jewish musicians.

“Jewish music in general is much more expressive. The violin is a much more sophisticated instrument than the clarinet – it’s much more versatile. And there are more job possibilities for a violinist, since there are many more violin seats than clarinet seats in an orchestra. The violin was a better bet,” Shaham says.

During the 19th and 20th centuries, when career paths for Jews were limited, the potential for job opportunities was a strong selling point for taking up the violin.

“At least for Russian Jews, that was the only way out of settlements,” Gluzman says. “If you were accepted into the St. Petersburg Conservatory, that was your way into the big city. So the violin became a tool of hope, because it was convenient. They were the children of hope: Mischa Elman, Jascha Heifetz, David Oistrakh, Nathan Milstein. That was the way for them and their families to move and have the legal right to bigger cities.”

He adds that this inevitably led to competition among families: “Every Jewish momma had to have her son play the fiddle; otherwise she’d be losing to the mom next door.”

Shaham says that Jewish families in recent history were prepared for the challenge to rise to the top.

“Jewish society is very competitive; it strives for excellence. Part of the culture of excellence was that young kids from the age of three were sent to study in the heder [Hebrew school]. Education, discipline and perfectionism were very important. It yielded good results, and they applied it also in musical studies,” Shaham says.

IF A culture of excellence and discipline accounts for the number of leading Jewish violinists, this same cultural tradition could account for the recent surge in leading Asian violinists.

“In the 20th century, it was part of the Jewish culture – everyone studied the violin. In recent years, we have Asian violinists in great numbers because everyone studies violin there,” Shaham says.

A further link between Judaism and the violin may lie in the hassidic musical tradition.

“The root of it is in the hassidic tradition, of course,” Gluzman says. “Hassidism gave importance to celebration in music. The violin was the instrument, next to clarinet and bass drum, depending on what they had in the village at the time. They played music to celebrate everything, from births to weddings.”

Yet another consideration is the musical tradition in the synagogue.

“It may be that the violin appeals to the Jewish soul because of the intensity of its music. Maybe it recollects the intensity of the hazan’s voice,” Knapp says.

The jury is still out on the origins of the violin, and the reasons for the remarkable affinity Jews have had to this instrument. But there’s one more theory, proposed by a simple dairy farmer named Tevye.

“A fiddler on the roof: sounds crazy, no?” Tevye begins in the opening of the popular musical which has become synonymous with Jewish life. “But here, in our little village of Anatevka, you might say, every one of us is a fiddler on the roof – trying to scratch out a pleasant, simple tune without breaking his neck. It isn’t easy… And how do we keep our balance? That I can tell you in one word: tradition! Without our traditions, our lives would be as shaky as, as… as a fiddler on the roof!”

The Pros and Cons of Reverse Mortgages

October 30th, 2009

By Cybele Weisser, www.TIME.com

While the recession hasn’t spared any age group, it’s been particularly brutal for older Americans who were counting on their (now shrunken) nest eggs to last through their retirement years. To supplement their stash, an increasing number of seniors are turning to reverse mortgages, which function essentially as a cash advance on their home equity, repaid only when they sell their home or die. The loans are available to those 62 and over, and lenders have to eat the difference if a home ends up declining in value. In the three months after February–when a provision in the economic-stimulus package raised the eligible home-value limit from $417,000 to $625,500–the number of federally insured reverse-mortgage originations jumped 10% compared with the same period last year. Industry experts predict that reverse mortgages will play an increasingly important role in the coming years as some 70 million baby boomers hit their 60s–often with a lot less saved than they’d hoped.

This has some folks in Washington concerned. In June, the Government Accountability Office said it had uncovered misleading marketing practices in the reverse-mortgage industry, and Missouri Senator Claire McCaskill, a longtime consumer advocate, chaired a hearing to investigate predatory lending tactics. A big no-no is cross-selling, e.g., trying to persuade a senior to get a reverse mortgage and use the funds to buy an annuity or other financial product.

Comptroller of the Currency John Dugan recently noted that reverse mortgages, like some flavors of the infamous subprime mortgages, are too complex for many seniors to understand. “Millions of older Americans still have a lot of equity in their homes, and it’s tempting for them to tap into this pot of money,” he says.

Still, under the right conditions, these loans can be a sensible solution to a tough financial situation. So if you or your parents are considering one, here’s what you need to know:

The amount you can borrow is based on interest rates, your age and the value of your home. (Use the calculator at www.rmaarp.com for an estimate.) There are no credit or income requirements to get a reverse mortgage, but you must be able to keep up with property taxes and insurance bills–or you could lose your home. The up-front costs are high. Generally, $10,000 to $15,000 in fees are lopped off the amount you can borrow. Finally, if someone is pressuring you to take one of these loans in order to buy something else, that’s a huge red flag. Walk away.

Lenders aren’t allowed to close on a federally insured reverse mortgage until borrowers meet with a HUD-approved counselor, who is required to help them explore alternatives such as selling their home or lowering their expenses. That’s because the greatest reverse-mortgage risk, especially for younger borrowers, may be that they will live longer than they expected and drain all the available equity from their home. Says reverse-mortgage specialist Bronwyn Belling: “If you borrow the money now, you may not have it when you need it later on.”

Egypt’s anti-Mubarak succession coalition

October 27th, 2009

By Amro Hassan, LATimesblogs.LATimes.com

Gamal Mubarak

Gamal Mubarak

Opposition leaders and political parties have started a new front to challenge the prospect that President Hosni Mubarak’s son, Gamal, an untested politician with limited domestic and international experience, will succeed in the 2011 elections.

Talk of succession has gripped the country in recent months as Gamal Mubarak’s profile has risen, including a trip to Washington with his 81-year-old father. Gamal is an influential voice in the ruling National Democratic Party. But many Egyptians, who have suffered under the government’s economic programs and repressive human rights policies, don’t want the presidency kept in the Mubarak family.

The new front took the name Mayehkomsh — Egyptian slang for “You don’t have the right to rule” — as its slogan. The question, however, remains: How can a disparate group of opposition parties successfully come together to challenge a police state that has pressured them for years with intimidation and arrests?

The anti-succession coalition, initiated by former presidential candidate and founder of El Ghad party, Ayman Nour, gained momentum in a conference held October 14 among representatives from the Muslim Brotherhood, the Egyptian Movement for Change (Kefaya), the Democratic Front, the Egyptian Communist party, and the Justice and Development party.

“This is a campaign to confront this irregular and illogical state, where a president-in-waiting is practicing all the duties of the president already,” Nour said at the conference. “Our constitution is for a republic, not a kingdom,” he said.

Hassan Nafee, a professor of political science at Cairo University, was chosen to be general coordinator of the campaign. “Fighting the succession is only part of a bigger project targeting the establishment of a democratic ruling system,” Nafee said.

Nour, who was runner-up to Hosni Mubarak in Egypt’s first contested elections, in 2005, received a five-year imprisonment in December of that year after the government accused him of forging signatures in order to establish his party. He was released on health grounds in February this year and has been strongly calling for democratic reforms and fighting succession plans. He can’t run in the next elections because of his earlier conviction.

Israel’s Secret War on Hezbollah

October 25th, 2009

Iran’s proxy army in Lebanon will think twice before launching another round of missile attacks.

By Ronen Bergman,

On October 12, a secret Hezbollah munitions bunker in South Lebanon blew up under mysterious circumstances, injuring a senior official in the organization. This is the second such incident in recent months. The first occurred on July 14, when an explosion destroyed a major Hezbollah munitions dump in the South Lebanese village of Hirbet Salim. Hezbollah immediately pointed fingers at the Mossad. Whether or not Israel was to blame, the explosion caused Hezbollah considerable discomfort by proving that it was in flagrant violation of U.N. Security Council Resolution 1701, which forbids stockpiling weapons south of the Litani River.

The U.N. issued a strongly worded rebuke and sent representatives to investigate. But their efforts were thwarted by Hezbollah fighters, who, with the assistance of Lebanese troops, prevented the foreigners from examining the site. This caused further embarrassment to Lebanon, as it exposed the army’s lack of neutrality and the active aid that it extends to Hezbollah.

The episode also led to heightened tensions on the Israel-Lebanon border. The specter of renewed fighting between Israel and Hezbollah looms as large today as it has at any time since the end of the Lebanon war in August 2006. Yet senior military officers in Israel’s Northern Command are confident that the embarrassing outcome of the last round will not be repeated.

“By all means, let the Hezbollah try,” one officer told me two weeks ago when I asked if he was concerned about the possibility of warfare. “The welcome party that we are preparing for them is one that they will remember for a very long time.” That sentiment is shared by many of his colleagues.

The recent explosions have highlighted the weakened geopolitical status of Hezbollah, a diminishment which no one could have foreseen at the end of the last war. In 2006, on both sides of the border—and elsewhere in the Middle East—Hezbollah was seen as having triumphed. Not only was it able to withstand the vastly superior invading Israeli force, but it also inflicted heavy military casualties and brought civilian life in northern Israel to a standstill with its rockets. At the end of the war, a commission of inquiry was set up in Israel to investigate the military and political failure. A number of senior army officers resigned, and Israel’s deterrence power was seen as having sustained a severe blow.

If the 2006 war underlined the military might of Hezbollah—a repeat, in a sense, of Hezbollah’s success in driving out the Israeli occupying forces from South Lebanon in May 2000—it also forced Israel to include Hezbollah in any assessment of possible responses to an Israeli attack against Iranian nuclear installations.

As part of its combat doctrine, which eschews reliance on reinforcements and resupply, Hezbollah has stockpiled its weapons throughout Lebanon, but particularly near the Israeli border. According to current Israeli intelligence estimates, Hezbollah has an arsenal of 40,000 rockets, including Iranian-made Zelzal, Fajr-3, Fajr-5, and 122 mm rockets (some of which have cluster warheads), and Syrian-made 302 mm rockets. Some of its rockets can reach greater Tel Aviv. Hezbollah also has a number of highly advanced weapons systems, including anti-aircraft missiles, that constitute a threat to Israeli combat aircraft.

But all is not rosy for Hezbollah. After the war, considerable dissatisfaction with the organization was voiced inside Lebanon. Many blamed its leader, Hassan Nasrallah, for Israel’s retaliatory bombardments that caused widespread damage. Nasrallah stated that had he known Israel would respond as forcefully as it did, he would have thought twice before ordering the abduction of the two Israeli soldiers—the act that sparked the conflict.

Harsh criticism of Hezbollah also came from an unexpected source: Tehran. The Iranian strategy calls for Hezbollah to play two roles. One is to instigate minor border provocations. The other is to launch, on Tehran’s command, a full-scale retaliatory attack should Israel target Iran’s nuclear facilities. The 2006 war met neither criterion, and, as the Iranians complained, merely served to reveal the extent of Hezbollah’s military capabilities.

Then, in February 2008, Imad Mughniyeh, the organization’s military commander and Nasrallah’s close associate, was killed in a car bomb in Damascus. The assassination of the man who topped the FBI’s most-wanted list prior to Osama bin Laden was a severe blow to morale, as well as to Hezbollah’s strategic capabilities. Nasrallah was convinced that the Mossad was responsible, and vowed to take revenge “outside of the Israel-Lebanon arena.”

The Shin Bet, Israel’s internal security agency, which is also responsible for protecting the country’s legations abroad, has been on high alert ever since. But as of today, Hezbollah has not exacted its revenge. This fact was a topic of discussion at a high-level, secret forum of Israel’s intelligence services that took place from late July to early September.

Israeli officials raised four possible reasons for Hezbollah’s failure to act, all of which reflect its current weakness.

First, no replacement has been found for Mughniyeh, whose strategic brilliance, originality, and powers of execution are sorely missed by Hezbollah.

Second, Israel’s intelligence coverage of Iran and Hezbollah is far superior today to what it was in the past. Planned attacks, including one targeting the Israeli Embassy in Baku, Azerbaijan, have all been foiled. The Israeli security services have warned Israeli businessmen abroad of possible abduction attempts by Hezbollah. They also shared information with Egyptian authorities that led to the arrest of members of a Hezbollah network who intended to kill Israeli tourists in Sinai. The arrest of these operatives resulted in sharp public exchanges between Egypt, Hezbollah, and its Iranian masters when Nasrallah admitted that these, in fact, were his men.

Third, Nasrallah cannot afford to be viewed domestically as the cause of yet another retaliation against Lebanon. Any act of revenge that he contemplates needs to be carefully calibrated. On the one hand, it needs to hurt the enemy and be spectacular enough to stoke Hezbollah pride. On the other hand, it cannot be so murderous as to cause Israel to respond with force. To complicate matters further, Israel has made it clear that because Hezbollah is part of the Lebanese government, despite the fact that the party that it backed lost in the recent election, any Hezbollah action against Israel would be viewed as an action taken by the Lebanese government. Thus Israel would regard Lebanese infrastructure as a legitimate target for a military response.

Finally, there are the Iranians. Their primary focus is on proceeding with their nuclear program without unnecessary distractions. Tehran’s main concern is that a terror attack that can be linked to Iran would result in the arrest of its agents overseas, who are currently procuring equipment for its uranium-enrichment centrifuges.

Tehran has avoided direct involvement in foreign terrorism ever since 1996, when a group of Iranians were convicted in Germany of murdering political opponents of the Iranian regime. And unlike in the past (as, for instance, in the case of the 1992 bombing of the Israeli Embassy in Buenos Aires in retaliation for the assassination of Nasrallah’s predecessor), it is now reluctant to place intelligence resources at Hezbollah’s disposal. This is a serious blow to Hezbollah, which is not yet able to function internationally as a full-fledged independent operational organization.

Hezbollah is also clearly aware of the severe blow in terms of power and prestige that the Iranian mullahs suffered as a result of the massive protests following June’s presidential election. Automatic support from Tehran is no longer a certainty. For now, at least, the Iranian hardliners have troubles of their own.

In short, despite the fact that Hezbollah today is substantially stronger in purely military terms than it was three years ago, its political stature and its autonomy have been significantly reduced. It is clear that Nasrallah is cautious and he will weigh his options very carefully before embarking on any course of action that might lead to all-out war with Israel. There are some experts in Israel who believe that even Hezbollah’s retaliatory role in the Iranian game plan is currently in question.

Whether or not this is the case, all of this is being considered in Jerusalem as part of Israel’s calculations about whether to strike Iran’s nuclear facilities.

Mr. Bergman, a correspondent for the Israeli daily Yedioth Ahronoth, is the author of the “The Secret War With Iran” (Free Press, 2008).

UN tries to put Israel in the dock

October 23rd, 2009

www.nydailynews.com

Dare defend yourself from terrorist attacks and risk international war crimes prosecution.

That is the lesson of the October 16 action by the UN Human Rights Council, which voted 25 to 6, with 11 abstentions, to endorse the Goldstone Report, a document that brands Israelis as war criminals for trying to stop deadly rocket-fire from Gaza 10 months ago.

Ever since Israel’s 2005 pullout from Gaza, Israeli civilians were battered by thousands of mortars and rockets launched by Hamas in its war to destroy the Jewish state and kill its people.

And, straight from the terrorist textbook, Hamas was assembling and launching its rockets from civilian neighborhoods, near mosques, near schools, near hospitals.

Late last year, Israel finally launched a military offensive to stop the terror. Wherever and whenever civilians might be harmed, Israel’s military dropped leaflets to urge civilians to clear out. An innovative new technique of “knocking” on roofs with non-exploding noisemakers was employed as well, to give ordinary Palestinians every opportunity to save themselves.

Because, it was Israel’s objective to punish and disarm the terrorists, no one else.

For this, the Human Rights Council – already known for its anti-Israel bias – opened an investigation, producing a report calling the terrorists and the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) equally culpable. Equally guilty of crimes against humanity.

The Council has now formally ratified this libel and urged Israeli and Palestinian authorities to demonstrate that they are investigating the alleged crimes. Or else the charges will be referred to the International Criminal Court in the Hague.

In fact, Palestinian Authority officials recenlty visited that court to argue for its jurisdiction over these matters.

Which means Israeli commanders who set out to defend innocent people from indiscriminate attacks, with painstaking plans to protect civilians in the process, could wind up alongside the butchers of Darfur, alongside those tried at Nuremberg.

Only five nations stood with the U.S. in opposition: Hungary, Italy, Netherlands, Slovakia, and Ukraine. Good for them.

We have to ask, again, what’s the use of Americans sitting on the Council, spitting into its hurricane-force winds? 25 nations are party to the crime—among them: Egypt, Saudi Arabia, China, and Russia. Shame on them. Do you see a pattern?

France and Britain were among the abstainers. Unlike the abstaining dictatorships, the democracies should have known better; so, double shame on them.

As Elie Wiesel once said, “Silence in the face of evil is always on the side of the aggressor.”

If Israel Strikes Iran First

October 21st, 2009

Retired General Says Israeli Attack to Take Out Iran’s Nuclear Facilities Not Only Possible, the U.S. Should Join In

By Dan Raviv, www.CBSnews.com

Expect the unexpected at a conference of Middle East experts.

Several hundred spent a recent weekend at a resort hotel 30 miles northwest of Washington, D.C., forced by cold rain to focus on nothing but Iran and the nearly moribund Israeli-Palestinian peace process.

At this annual gathering of financial backers of the Washington Institute for Near East Policy – joined by diplomats, journalists, and analysts – many had expected a feisty debate between proponents and opponents of a military attack on Iran’s nuclear facilities.

Instead, the crowd heard experts suggesting the military option is a very realistic one; and a retired U.S. Air Force general said Israel might open fire first – and that the United States would find it wise to join in.

Gen. Charles Wald, former head of strategic planning and policy for the Air Force who also had been deputy commander at U.S. European Command, said a bombing campaign – while “unpalatable” – could set back Iran’s nuclear work for many years.

“I don’t think Israel can do it alone,” Wald added. “They have a fantastic military, but not big enough for weeks or months of attacks – hundreds of sorties per day.”

Wald said the U.S. would not exactly be dragged into air strikes on Iran, but if “our great ally Israel” decided that it “can’t take it anymore” – the prospect of an Iranian nuclear bomb – then “pressure will mount for us to stand by Israel.”

The general said that after commanding the air portion of the post-9/11 invasion of Afghanistan, he thought deeply about neighboring Pakistan and the possibility that it might one day use its nuclear arsenal. “I asked my staff to look into what would happen if there were a Pakistani-Indian nuclear exchange. They said there’d be tens of millions of dead at the low end, and 300 million dead at the high end.”

Wald said he soon discovered what the Pakistani leaders’ reaction to that analysis was: They had not thought of that.

Wald suggested Iran, Israel, and other Middle Eastern nations that were likely to feel compelled to acquire nuclear bombs might also be failing to face facts.

“In 2003, General Jim Jones [now President Obama's National Security Adviser] and I sat down with our Strategic Advisory Group for Europe. I couldn’t get anyone interested in talking about Iran. The subject was always Iraq. And now Afghanistan is sucking all the oxygen out of the room.” Wald added that Arab governments along the Persian Gulf, however, have for years had Iran as their main concern.

Sitting near Wald, a former head of Israel’s military intelligence – retired General Aharon Farkash – agreed that the U.S. Air Force could be far more effective than Israel in crippling Iran’s nuclear program. “The U.S. can destroy the nuclear capacity, and the war would not be long,” Farkash said, though he cautioned that Western intelligence still might not know about all of Iran’s nuclear sites.

Like other Israelis, Farkash stressed the importance of making Iran believe that U.S. and Israeli threats are real. Harsh sanctions might lead to a decision by President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and the Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Khamenei, to stop nuclear enrichment.

“The Teheran regime doesn’t seek suicide,” said the Israeli, who heads a new high-tech security company. “When they realize we mean business this time, they won’t want to lose their regime.”

David Makovsky, a senior analyst at the Washington Institute and co-author (with Obama administration official Dennis Ross) of a book on Middle East policy, commented that the generals gave the impression of two different attack philosophies: “The U.S. believes ‘do it huge, and make it overwhelming,’ while Israel would do what it can because not acting is so much worse.”

Makovsky asked General Wald to comment on the suggestion by Jimmy Carter’s former national security advisor Zbigniew Brzezinski – in a Daily Beast interview last month – that the U.S. shoot down Israeli warplanes if they try to fly over Iraq to attack Iran.

“The chance of that,” Wald replied, “is zero. No, less than zero.”

Earlier, the same audience heard a former vice-president of the Islamic Republic of Iran argue that if his country is attacked, the pro-democracy “Green Movement” would be extinguished. Ata’ollah Mohajerani, who resides in London but is considered close to opposition candidate Mehdi Karoubi, said he strongly supports the reform movement, and considers Ahmadinejad’s re-election illegitimate. But he said a military strike or severe sanctions would serve to strengthen the regime.

The Iranian politician’s unexpectedly long speech included references to books by Dostoevsky, Kafka, Walt Whitman, Elie Wiesel, and even Britain’s chief rabbi Jonathan Sacks. Mohajerani claimed that any good Muslim would not want nuclear weapons, but he made a point of saying that most of the nations putting pressure on Iran now have their own nuclear arsenals, alleging also that the United States and Israel wanted Iran to have atomic bombs when the late Shah was in power.

Responding to questions from supporters of Israel at the conference, Mohajerani refused to condemn Iranian-supported terrorism and declined to say if he thought Israel has a right to exist. Many in the crowd, believing that Mohajerani’s goal in this rare appearance near Washington was to raise money and support for the Green Movement, said they were bitterly turned off. It looked to them like a Green-led Iran would not necessarily be much different from Ahmadinejad’s regime.

Based in Washington, CBS News correspondent Dan Raviv is host of radio’s “CBS News Weekend Roundup,” and co-author of “Every Spy a Prince: The Complete History of Israeli Intelligence.”