Chit Chat

By Peloni

From now on comments on every post must relate to the content of the post.

Comments that don’t relate to the post must go here.

Any person who contravenes this demand will be put on moderation. Also their offending comment will be trashed.

The reason for this demand is so that people who want to read comments which pertain to the post, don’t have to wade through the chatter.

Everyone will be happier.

April 16, 2020 | 9,623 Comments »

Leave a Reply

14 Comments / 9623 Comments

  1. Slovenia votes in strongly pro-Israel Jansa as new PM after years of hostility towards Jewish State
    Janša is a long-time supporter of Israel. He condemned his predecessor’s recognition of Palestine as a state, calling it “illegal.”

    “…Yossi Dagan, head of the Samaria Regional Council, is a friend of Jansa, and the two recorded a joint video in recent weeks where the new Slovenian leader said: “I send greetings to the residents of Judea and Samaria.”

    Jansa has previously said he would move his country’s embassy to Jerusalem from Tel Aviv.

    While not yet clear, it has been hypothesized that Slovenia may withdraw its recognition of Palestinian independence.”

    https://www.jpost.com/international/article-897143

  5. Want more Immigrants to Israel cut down on red tape. Israel has always had bureaucracy to immigrate. However, for many years now since the Shas has had the interior ministry portfolio, this has become a nightmare, that many people give up on by being worn down.

    Gadi Eisenkot, leader of the Yashar! Party, announced that he has set a goal of two million olim (immigrants) to move to Israel by the year 2048.

    How does he intend to do it? “By cutting bureaucracy and expanding incentives for both olim and returning residents.”

    This is refreshing news, because what should have been a relatively simple process, has ended up being a non-ending nightmare of bureaucracy, almost meant to turn away new citizens by completely wearing them down. It wasn’t always that way.

    How aliyah became a bureaucratic nightmare
    It used to be that anyone desiring to live in Israel would present documents showing that at least one parent or grandparent was Jewish, in accordance to the 1950 Law of Return. That stopped being good enough the moment that the Shas Party hijacked the Interior Ministry.

    Since that time, the process became increasingly difficult, to the point where many Jews were turned away, often due to being told they didn’t qualify religiously even though they qualified ethnically.

    What does that mean? According to the present interpretation of the law, the adoption of another faith disqualifies a Jew from being eligible for citizenship. In other words, regardless of being born a Jew, if you are not a practicing Jew or believe in another faith, a bureaucrat from the Interior Ministry has erased your ethnicity and wiped out your peoplehood, based on your personally held beliefs.

    While that may have been regrettable for those who truly wanted to live in their ancestral homeland, it is now become a critical and pressing mistake, begging to be rectified.

    That is because we have reached a time in history when all Jews are prey, whether religiously or ethnically. Potentially, it means that everyone born Jewish has a target on their back, without specifying one’s religious affiliation. That animus is, instead, based on tribal affiliation.

    And that is deterring the Jewish homeland from taking in those who share the same bloodlines but not necessarily the same faith. The obvious fact is that religious affiliation is not the sole criteria for who is a Jew. Because if that were true, millions of Israeli Jews, who are unaffiliated or identify as atheists or agnostics, would also fall into the category of non-Jews, if the religious aspect is the sole factor.
    https://www.jpost.com/opinion/article-896978

    • @Rafi
      All you have to do is suffer a PM who historically called for the TTS, and who would have surrendered to Hamas rather than retake Rafiah to appease the Americans. Not the best tradeoff in the current geopolitical environment IMO.

      • @ Peloni,

        You are mixing subjects. You failed to try and I understand my point and the article’s point perhaps. Let me provide an example of someone I know what has occurred to them so maybe you can see what I am talking about.

        True Story:

        Young Jewish Man Ron, from USA moves to Israel after going to US Embassy who arranges for him to go to a Kibbutz Ulpan on a tourist visa.

        After finishing the Ulpan, Ron decides he wants to stay in Israel permanently. So, he goes to the Interior Ministry which was inside the Beersheva Police Station in those days. He obtains an Israeli ID card and his Immigrant Certificate (Teudat Oleh) immediately. He is identified as Jewish which he was.

        Later he meets and an Israeli girl and they decide to get married. The Rabbi he wants to perform the wedding says he needs a letter from an Orthodox Rabbi in the USA. He obtains this letter. He gets married and this is all documented and put in the official Israeli Marriage files by the Rabbinical Council.

        Ron, leaves Israel before he becomes a citizen. However, he has an Israeli ID, records of his immigration and a wedding license on record.

        30 Years later Ron wants to return to Israel and obtain his citizenship. He is now told he must prove he is Jewish again (needs another letter from a Rabbi). However, he does not belong to a Temple, so this is a serious stumbling block. He is asked for about 10 different type of documents and much more than he was ever asked previously. If Ron could obtain all this it would take at least 8 to 12 months before he could get his approval to return as a returning residency.

        When he asks why his marriage record could not be looked up to prove his Judaism. The answer you must get the letter period.

        Instead of welcoming residents returning and new immigrants, the Shas run interior ministry puts intentional barriers up because they are trying to allow only religious (Orthodox) Jews into Israel if they can.

        So Eisenkot has many things that are not admirable about him perhaps, but his idea of a less convoluted and seriously burdensome immigration process is spot on. Shas in the government is a nightmare for many potential immigrants.

        What I would like is an Israeli government without the Haredi screwing up the country in everything from immigration, marriages, divorces, shabbat transportation to the military draft!

        • @Rafi
          @Peloni

          This diacussion reminded of something so I googled and got:

          what was the debate between jabotinsky and weizman over the character of jewish immigration desired on the eve of the holocaust +13 On the eve of the Holocaust, Vladimir Jabotinsky and Chaim Weizmann clashed over the speed, scale, and socioeconomic character of Jewish immigration to Palestine.The core of their debate centered on emergency versus gradualism:Vladimir Jabotinsky (Revisionist Zionism)Jabotinsky foresaw imminent destruction for European Jewry.Character of Immigration: He advocated for “mass evacuation,” demanding the immediate, unselective transport of millions of Eastern European Jews to Palestine.Philosophy: He believed the primary goal of the Yishuv was to serve as a physical sanctuary from European antisemitism. He viewed the socio-economic status of the immigrants as secondary to saving lives, famously arguing with mainstream Zionists that a mass influx was necessary to build a Jewish majority and establish a sovereign state.Chaim Weizmann (Mainstream/Labor Zionism)Weizmann, leading the World Zionist Organization and aligning closely with Labor Zionists, took a much more measured approach.Character of Immigration: He favored “selective immigration” based on strict ideological and physical screenings. The mainstream movement prioritized young, healthy, trained pioneers (halutzim) who could build the socialist/collectivist agricultural foundations of the future state.Philosophy: Weizmann favored a gradual approach tethered to Palestine’s “economic absorptive capacity” and British policy. He feared that the unselective influx of destitute refugees would recreate the economic dependencies and vulnerabilities of the European diaspora within the nascent state.The Climax of the DebateAs the threat from Nazi Germany escalated and Great Britain moved to restrict all immigration via the White Paper of 1939, the divide became a tragedy. While Weizmann continued to navigate diplomatic channels and promote building the land incrementally, Jabotinsky and his followers organized Aliyah Bet, clandestine and illegal immigration operations to rescue as many European Jews as possible, as fast as possible.To explore the primary historical documents and archival resources surrounding this clash, visit the Jabotinsky Institute or the Yad Vashem World Holocaust Center.

        • @Rafi

          You are mixing subjects.

          No, I just recognize that the subjects can not be separated from the man you are voting for, which in this case would be Eisenkott.

          If the various subjects were not all tied to Eisenkott at once, then yes, I think his policies on immigration would bear an important consideration, but since it is tied to his person, I have to recognize the role which voting for him would play in facing down the re-emergence of the TSS, as well as his military prowess of calling to surrender half way thru the war with Gaza, To be honest, The issue of immigration is critical to Israel’s future, but these other issues are critical to Israel’s survival as we stand in a period of war and look towards a future of regional realignment. Simply put, in such a time as this, the issue of immigration reform can not take the lead over security matters, IMO of course..

          And yes, I am fully aware of the egregious problems which exist in the immigration hurdles which are humiliating, and in many instances completely arbitrary. Notably, as Sebastien wisely notes this is not the first time this conversation on the priorities of immigration has been raised, but we have to secure the state so that the correct immigration policy might be pursued, not the other way around…again, IMO. The best outcome would be to not choose at all, but to support someone who can pursue both security and a fair immigration process, but such a man is not Eisenkot I would argue.

    • @Peloni
      @Rafi

      Weizmann advocated for gradual, selective settlement in cooperation with the British, whereas Jabotinsky demanded immediate, mass immigration to forcefully establish a Jewish demographic majority.

      AI overview