Monday, July 03, 2006

What the Lovers of the Land of Israel can learn from the International Gay Pride Parade

This summer, the International Gay Pride Parade is scheduled to take place in Jerusalem. This Gay-fest was originally scheduled to take place last summer, but was delayed until this summer, as the "Disengagement" (expulsion) from Gush Katif and the northern Shomron was taking place at that time.

However, it seems that the International Gay Pride Parade, and all of the festivities that go along with it, may not happen this summer after all, and everyone who opposed Ariel Sharon's "Disnegagement" plan and who are now opposed to Ehud Olmert's "Convergence" plan should be paying close attention.

Police weigh banning J'lem gay parade

Jerusalem police are expected to decide this week whether to allow a controversial international gay pride parade to take place in the city this summer amidst growing international opposition to the event by an unusual coalition of religious Christians, Jews, and Muslims around the world.

The super-sensitive police decision, which will be taken by Internal Security Minister Avi Dichter in consultation with Jerusalem police chief Ilan Franco, comes after months of simmering tension over the planned August event, with concerns growing of a violent showdown between extremist opponents of the parade and its participants if it goes ahead as scheduled.

Why is the likelihood of this Gay-fest ever getting off the ground shrouded in doubt?

Simply because, the police recognize that there is such overwhelming opposition to this parade, regardless of what the Jerusalem Municipality or Supreme Court have to say about it. The police recognize that this parade has the potential to cause civil unrest, and frankly, they don't want any part of it.

After reading the above article, the failure of the struggle against Ariel Sharon's expulsion plan becomes even more apparent.

Simply put, had those who opposed the expulsion plan been successful in creating the impression that, should the expulsion plan go forward, the entire country would erupt, the plan would not have been carried out - regardless of how badly Ariel Sharon or Aharon Barak (Chief Justice of the Supreme Court) wanted it to happen.

Can one truly believe that a Gay-fest in the heart of Jerusalem is significantly worse than the destruction of over a dozen Jewish communities in the Land of Israel, handing those communities over to those who actively seek our very destruction, along with the expulsion of 10,000+ Jews from their homes, turning them into refugees within their very own Homeland?!?

Contrary to the response of those opposed to the International Gay Pride Parade, when it came to the expulsion of 10,000 Jews from their homes and the destruction of Jewish communities in the Land of Israel, many of the leaders of the "opposition" went out of their way to ensure that no such public fury would erupt, and this message was received loud and clear by the government, police and army.

Calls for soldiers to refuse orders were rejected out of hand, a coordinated campaign of non-violent civil disobedience was casually dismissed; all the while the leaders of the "opposition" to the expulsion plan stressed time and again the supreme importance of maintaining national unity, above all else.

Is it any wonder that the struggle against Sharon's expulsion plan failed so miserably?

The secret to success in future struggles over the Land of Israel is playing itself out before our very eyes.

Hopefully, the Lovers of the Land of Israel are paying attention.


Without getting into a repeat performance of last years gay arguments, your categorisation of "Lovers of The Land of Israel" as "Opponents of the Disengagement Plan" is fundamentally flawed: You are not in any position to decide what does and doesn't consitute a Lover of the Land of Israel. Change your title, please.

By Blogger tafka PP, at Mon Jul 03, 06:45:00 PM GMT+3  

PP, I will make you a deal.

When the Israeli Left stops referring to itself as the "Peace Camp" - implying that only those on the political left want peace, to the exclusion of the religious / nationalist right - who seemingly wants only war, I will change the title of this post...

By Blogger Ze'ev, at Mon Jul 03, 07:08:00 PM GMT+3  


somthing in your argument is unclear to me.

Let's say, for the sake of argument, that there is "such overwhelming opposition to this parade" and the police decide that therefore the parade should not take place. In what way is that comprable to the disengagement- which the vast majority of Israelis were in favour of? The anti's had about 2 years of serious campaigning to try and change the minds' of the Israeli public, during which time the Govt. did bugger all to 'sell' the plan or explain themselves, and yet the percentage in favour never dropped below 60/65%. The threats of violence, refusal of orders etc. which you appear to be supporting, will, as they were last summer, only be counter productive (from your point of view). I am amazed that you have not internalised this.

Yellow Boy

By Anonymous Anonymous, at Mon Jul 03, 08:51:00 PM GMT+3  

Yellow Boy,last I checked, Ariel Sharon was elected overwhelemingly on a platform that was against Amram Mitzna's plan to "disengage" from Gaza. As Sharon said himself - the fate of Netzarim is the fate of Tel Aviv.

When, in fact, there was a referendum on the matter, within Sharon's own Likud party, he lost overwhelimingly.

Until the very end, his own central committee voted against him, ultimatley forcing him to leave and start a new party.

In order to secure a majority within his cabinet he had to fire cabinet ministers who voted against his policy. And, to secure a majority in the Knesset, he bought off votes by providing cushy portfolios...

So, Yellow Boy, the only yime the "people" were ever asked about their feelings on "Disengagement" they were strongly against, and the fact that Sharon never went to a national referendum can largely be attributed ot the fact that he was afraid of losing it.

Undoubtebly, the 60-65% support you speak off contains a large non-Jewish %.

By Blogger Ze'ev, at Mon Jul 03, 09:06:00 PM GMT+3  

Ze'ev- I'm not the "Peace Camp", nor do I claim to represent them, whoever they are, so that proposed deal is a non-starter.

I'm addressing you as an individual, as a fellow "Lover of the Land of Israel" and pointing out that you have no right to claim that only people in the Anti-Disengagement "Camp" deserve it. Please change it. Thank you.

By Blogger tafka PP, at Mon Jul 03, 11:26:00 PM GMT+3  


What chutzpah! This is Ze'ev's blog, in case you hadn't noticed. He's free to title his posts as he sees fit.

At any rate, it's a perfectly appropriate title. Since you consider yourself a lover of the Land of Israel, then the post is directed to you, regardless of what "camp" you belong to. There may be future struggles in which your love of Israel will lead you to oppose a government policy. I don't see that Ze'ev's point is limited to those who would take his side (though of course he would probably prefer that).

You may disagree with Zev's point and/or his recommendations, and say so, but should he change the title of his post because a reader disagrees with the conclusion he draws? I would hope not!

By Blogger Lynn B., at Mon Jul 03, 11:48:00 PM GMT+3  

This is where I have to note one sad point: The assumption here is that there will unrest because it is "fanatic" charedim who will be enraged over the parade. The government does not feel it can reason with the charedi community nor control the charedi community as it could the religious zionist community of the shtachim.

I'm not sure that that is a correct assessment or not in this case, but the country was correct in assessing that there would be little to no violent resistance to last year's disengagement. Trying to portray the opposite would simply not have been convincing, and attempts to do so would have been outright lies. Moreover, attempts to do so may have pushed a few individuals TO carry out violent protest, and I do not think you intend to condone such action. (I certainly would not.)

By Blogger Ezzie, at Tue Jul 04, 09:01:00 AM GMT+3  

PP, I must agree with Lynn 100% on this one. If you consider yourself to be a "Lover of the Land of Israel", then the post was directed towards you.

Ezzie, I am not advocating violence. However, I do beleive that if every single Jew who was opposed ot the expulsion would have take nt othe streets, refused ordewrs and otherwise made ti clear to the powers that be, as the Chareidim are doing in relation to the Gay Pride Parade - made it clear that life will not go on as usual should this go forward - things would have been different.

By Blogger Ze'ev, at Tue Jul 04, 09:55:00 AM GMT+3  

Interesting one.

It looks to me that Ezzie did in fact inadvertently hit the nail on the head - Ze'ev you are in fact calling for violent protest, or at least the threat of violent protest.

This is of course a version of terror. Last year innocents were attacked by a lunatic hareidi protestor at Gay pride. This year, only the threat of such events is making the police think about cancellation. This is terror.

Your condoning of this brutal bullying and threatening, Ze'ev, is irresponsible and dangerous.

As for PP's point - it is clear that Ze'ev is free to say what he wants, but it is also clear that he is claiming that only those opposed to the disengagement were lovers of the land of Israel. While claiming to want informed debate about the issues with people who think otherwise to himself, Ze'ev constantly hurls various types of insult at them. His sardonic use of "Gay-fest" is another example. Of course I support Ze'ev's right to say whatever he likes, but if he annoys his readership, they will simply stop reading, thus defeating the point of his blog.

As a fan of Ze'ev's writing and someone who has taken part in a number of interesting exchanges on the message boards of the blog, I would say that part of the interest is created by the very fact that its readership has a wide range of opinions. If the only people reading were dyed (orange) in the wool dati NU voters, the blog would lose its point.

By Anonymous H, at Tue Jul 04, 12:21:00 PM GMT+3  

Haim, nice to hear from yuo, as always.

A few points.

1st, to reiterate a point made earlier, "Lover of the Land of Israel" need not only refer to those who see things exactly as I do. If you are a "Lover of the Land of Israel", then you can feel that the post was directed to you as much as it was towards anyone else.

As I said to PP, if you believe that that phrase is exclusive as opposed to inclusive, then I ask you only to look at your party's (Meretz) use of the term "Peace Camp", which is meant to exclude those on the nationalist / religious right, who seemingly are against peace!

2nd, I will repeat what I wrote in my response to Ezzie. I am not calling for violence. I am calling for a campaign on non-violent civil disobedience, which is the right of every individual living in a "democratic" society. This principle has its roots, not just in the teachings of the likes of Ghandi, Thoreau and Martin Luther King, but in Judaism itself, - in the father of the Jewish People - Avraham Avinu.

If one truly believes that the actions of a government are unjust and wrong, they not only have the ability to act against such a law, but they are obligated to.

I truly belive that had the government, army and police trruly believed that there would have been mass refusal as well as a major expression of non-violent civil disobedience, the expulsuion would not have happened.

3rd, I am no fan of the Gay Pride Parade, but the post did not deal with the issue in one way or the other. (I'll probably get around to posting about it should the parade take place). You seemed to be bothered by the term "Gay-fest", but, in my eyes, that seems like a wholly appropriate name for a week long festival celebrating the gay lifestyle.

By Blogger Ze'ev, at Tue Jul 04, 02:00:00 PM GMT+3  

I think the point of this is who are the ones opposing the Sodomites. Its Muslims and Christians in addition to Jews. It’s O.K. to offend Jews. But if it doesn't sit well with the other religions then it must be stopped. Now I am glad that there is cooperation in this matter because it is a Chillul Hashem but I disagree with the connection to expulsion because it’s not about the numbers of people who oppose this parade but who is opposing it.
Just an afterthought to an earlier comment I saw about the 50-50 polls in Israel about expulsion. It was only a few years ago when the political left was very demoralized as Netanyahu had great popularity due to a seemingly unending assault of suicide bombings. Chaim Ramon and others would constantly say that a slight majority does not constitute a mandate. For some reason this logic did not apply to expulsion that every poll seemed to indicate it was close one way or the other, but nevertheless there was no clear supermajority to change the status quo.

By Anonymous strenger 101, at Tue Jul 04, 03:17:00 PM GMT+3  

Strenger, your raise a good point. there is no doubt, that unfortunatley, the government is more concerned about offending the sensibilities of Christians and Muslims then they are that of Jews.

However, as you yourself stated, there was not overwhelming support for the expulsion plan, and as such, if a large number of those who opposed the plan would have launched a campaign of non-violent civil disobedience, I do not beleive that the government would have been able to carry out the plan.

Amir Peretz, when he led the Histadrut labor union, launched strikes all the time that would cripple the country, and more often than not, the country would give in to his demands.

I don't see why the expulsion of Jews from the Land of Israel, and handing over those areas to our existential enemies is a cause that is less important than wages for teachers, doctors, bankers and garbage men.

By Blogger Ze'ev, at Tue Jul 04, 04:09:00 PM GMT+3  


Visit the following websites for further information on ISLAM.
(Quran and Science)

By Blogger Ahmedinajad, at Wed Jul 05, 01:49:00 AM GMT+3  

Lynn P- I have a feeling Ze'ev saw the rationale in my argument before your comment, and my feeling is based upon the fact that his category of "Alternative Viewpoint Israel Blogs" (where he chooses to list me) did not originally contain the word "Israel"- he inserted that at my request.

And of course he is entitled to say what he wants on his blog. But as H also noted, Ze'ev was very clearly equating "Lovers of the Land of Israel" with "Opponents of the Disengagement" which is an extremely value-laden premise. And therefore I, as a reader, am equally entitled to object to that. Ze'ev has proven himself to be open to discourse- there are many blogs on which I wouldn't even bother attempting to counter such sweeping statements, but because I know Ze'ev, I feel I can comment on his blog in this way and he won't see it as "Chutzpah".


By Blogger tafka PP, at Wed Jul 05, 12:14:00 PM GMT+3  

PP, I agree with you 100% here. I am always open to suggestions and critques from my readers. Some times I may listen to them, and other times I may not, but feel free to tell what you think, and I promise to consider it.

By Blogger Ze'ev, at Wed Jul 05, 12:35:00 PM GMT+3  

We should throw our bodies in front of the impurade to block their even getting near the Kotel and the Holy Walls of our Beis HaMikdash - our Har HaBayit!!!

AND after viewing what happened with the 'peaceful' disen -gorgement last year, we should ALL likewise stand up, run, and prevent those yidden from being uprooted from their homes!!!

By Anonymous Neshama, at Sat Jul 08, 02:54:00 AM GMT+3  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

<< Home

Blogwise - blog directory Blogarama - The Blogs Directory