Offensive logic

In the March 22 edition of The Chronicle, Shoula Romano Horing yet again beats the drum for war with Iran. Horing asserts that President Obama “will never attack Iran or support an Israeli attack before the election because such a war in the oil-rich region would send gasoline prices even higher than they are now.” She states that Obama will only attack Iran if he is in danger of losing the election.

Her facts are wrong, her logic is offensive and her position, that the United States should start a war with Iran immediately, is dangerous in the extreme. Obama and Secretary of State Clinton have repeatedly expressed both strong support for Israel and very clear warnings to Iran on their nuclear pursuits.

As we have seen with devastating results, it’s easy to start a war; but, as former Mossad Chief Meir Dagan said recently on “60 Minutes,” “you never know how you are ending it. An attack on Iran before exploring all other approaches is not the right way.”
Not only did he believe there was more time for other methods to tackle the mounting problem, but Dagan was also skeptical a military strike would cause adequate damage to wholly destroy Iran’s plants and markedly halt the development of a nuclear weapons capability.

“You’ll have to deal with a large number of targets,” he clarified, after saying there may be more than a dozen nuclear-related sites on the military agenda.

Even if a strike were to inflict worthwhile damage, Dagan expressed concern about the repercussions of a possible Israeli mission in terms of the retaliation it might provoke from the regime and its terrorist proxies.

I fear for both Israel and the United States if all avenues are not explored.

Sheldon Roufa
Leawood, Kan.

Some of you still think that peace is possible for Israel in the Middle East. Some of you still believe that if Israel would only engage with or negotiate with its Arab enemies, there is chance for peace. Some of you argue that the roots of the conflict and the anti -Israeli and anti-Jewish terrorism and hatred are the so-called occupation, the settlements, the zealot settlers, the road blocks, poverty and a sense of humiliation and hopelessness among the Arabs, especially the Palestinians.

Some of you still believe that if Israel would only withdraw from the so called occupied territories to the 1967 borders, and a Palestinian state with Jerusalem as a capital would be established, and the Golan Heights would be given away to the Syrians, Israel will at last live in peace with its neighbors.

But the targeting of Jewish kids ages 3, 6 and 8 in Toulouse, France, should remind us that the root of the conflict is extreme Muslim indoctrination to Jihad, violence and hate against Jews.

There is no chance for any true peace in the Middle East for many years to come when several generations of young Arabs and Muslims have already been lost through daily brainwashing to the dark side of civilization, and nothing Israel or the United States will do can bring them back. Similar to Nazism, the central theme of their brainwashing is irrational and obsessive hatred of Jews.

Otherwise how do you explain the fact that the 23-year-old terrorist targeted a Jewish school in Toulouse chasing Miriam, an 8-year-old girl, grabbing her ponytail and shooting her three times in the head? Why did he take the trouble filming, strapping a video to his neck and film himself chasing the kids through the schoolyard shooting at them? Why did he document the execution of Rabbi Jonathan Sandler and his two little boys ages 3 and 5?

Because for the Islamists, like for the Nazis in World War II, Jewish children are not perceived as human beings, but rather as the rodents portrayed in the Nazis propaganda films. Similarly, thousands of sermons, statements, television shows and articles emanating from the Muslim and Arab world liken Jews and Israelis to animals, diseases and the devil, and attributing to them all manner of evil.

For the Islamists, as for the Nazis, the destruction of the Jews and the Jewish state is central to their world ideology and indoctrination of hate.

This brings to mind the historic discussion as to why Hitler devoted so much time, money and manpower in order to murder every Jewish man, woman and child in every country the Nazis occupied. Why, even on the verge of defeat, was the Nazis’ main concern, the hastening of the extermination of the Jews?

And, in the final, grisly parallel with the Nazis, for the Islamist terrorist in Toulouse, just killing Jews was not enough. His victims had to be Jewish children too.

So, what is my solution to the conflict?

I never understood why people believe that every conflict can be solved diplomatically. Many attempts by Israel to find a diplomatic solution have caused further violence and bloodshed. The 1993 Oslo agreement and the Camp David accords of 2000 caused more than 5,000 fatalities and injuries to Israelis. After the unilateral withdrawals of the Israeli army from Gaza and Southern Lebanon, Israeli communities inside Israel were victimized by thousands of rockets and missiles.

Sometimes a military solution is the only solution against evil as it was the only solution against Nazism.

Making Israel stronger than ever militarily and hunting down and targeting the terrorists and their sponsors is the solution. Cease fires, and negotiations, are used by the enemies as a delaying tactic and a period for renewed military buildups and training. Negotiations and withdrawals from territories are perceived in the Middle East as appeasement and weakness and as a motivation to restart the violence.

How much more bloodshed is necessary for people to understand that even if Israel gave away all territory demanded, and even went further and limited its territory only to the city of Tel Aviv, there would still not be peace but a jumpstart and invitation for another war?

Shoula Romano Horing is an Israeli born and raised, an attorney in Kansas City, Missouri and a national speaker. Her blog: www.shoularomanohoring.com.

Interfaith marriage can cause confusion and conflict in the homes of the parents. Observing two sets of holidays and teaching the kids two different religious cultures and visiting two different houses of worship often is a tough balancing act for parents.

Every year the Easter/Passover dilemma surfaces in interfaith families with children. This year the first seder and Good Friday fall on the same day. Passover and Easter are holidays where the religious element is definitely in the forefront, and that makes the situation more difficult.

More than half of all Jews who wed these days marry non-Jewish people.  Grandparents are finding that the tradition of passing on their heritage to their grandchildren has become a perplexing problem in diplomacy.

Problems for the interfaith family may arise when visits are made to each of the grandparents’ homes. For example, Sally and Ben Weiss have stopped visiting Sally’s parents for Easter. Her mother cannot accept Sally’s conversion to Judaism and talks constantly about a baptism for her grandchildren. These visits have become too stressful, so the young parents have chosen not to visit at holiday time so as to remove the strain and conflict.

For grandparents, one of the biggest challenges is to listen non-judgmentally to interfaith grandchildren as they try to understand and tell about their beliefs.

In the book I wrote, “Mingled Roots: A Guide For Jewish Grandparents of Interfaith Grandchildren,” my advice is not to meddle in the religious upbringing of your grandchildren. I remind grandparents that the number one rule of interfaith grandparenting is “follow the parents’ wishes. These are your grandchildren, not your children, so play by the rules. Don’t be judgmental, and try to accept the parents’ choices even when you might not agree. It will make the family a more harmonious one.” Agree in advance with the parents on what may or may not be said to their children.

It is essential that the two sets of grandparents support each other and make an effort to compromise where it is needed. There are many things that may be new and strange to the other family. If possible, share the holiday. Invite the Christian grandparents to your Passover seder and join the fun if you are invited for an Easter egg hunt. In this way the grandchildren will have an opportunity to develop an understanding of both cultures. You can’t expect to be privileged to attempt to transmit your heritage without accommodation being made for the other side of the equation.

Here are some suggestions to avoid in-law problems:

• Do talk frankly with the parents about how you plan to transmit heritage to the grandchildren.

• Do indicate your respect for the rituals your children or the other grandparents observe in their home. even if they are unfamiliar to you.

• Don’t take your grandchild to religious service or give books or religious objects without parental approval.

Being a part of a Jewish/Christian extended family offers special challenges at holiday time. With patience the families can learn to adjust to the difference. It’s not easy and it takes effort on the part of all generations, but it is worth it.

Sunie Levin has lectured and held workshops around the country and has been interviewed on national television and radio programs. Her newest book, “Make New Friends … Live Longer,” can be ordered at http://www.makenewfriendslivelonger.com.

Misleading journalism

As an individual affiliated with the Occupy KC movement, I would like to point out that the headline of the article stating that Occupy KC has been infiltrated (Anti-Semitic propaganda infiltrates Occupy Kansas City Movement, March 15) is representative of misleading journalism.

Occupy KC General Assembly has passed a proposal denouncing hate speech of all kinds, including speech directed against different religious and racial backgrounds, against LGBTQ individuals and other groups. As the article stated, Occupy KC did not produce and certainly does not endorse the hate-filled material that is in question.

Another error in the article, which may not be the fault of the editor or your publication, is that “leaders” of the Occupy KC movement have denounced this broadsheet and website. Although, as I mentioned, Occupy KC has spoken out against hate speech, the statement was issued through General Assembly through a horizontal leaderless consensus-based process. Although some individuals assume leadership roles based on intrinsic traits and influenced by sociological constructs, we remain a leaderless horizontal movement with no individual voice having more power than another. To speak of leaders and referencing traditional vertical organizational structures is to thwart the spirit of the movement as a whole.

Please visit occupykc.net for additional information, as this represents a record of our local Kansas City movement and is endorsed by Occupy KC General Assembly.

Anthony Cage
Kansas City, Mo.

While Israel fears a new holocaust from a nuclear armed Iran, President Obama seems only to be worried about a preemptive attack on Iran or the talk of war raising oil prices and thereby harming the U.S. economy and his re-election campaign.

Despite his reassurances at the AIPAC conference that he “won’t hesitate to use force to prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon,” in reality, he is bluffing to woo Jewish voters and stop an Israeli unilateral attack on Iran.

Less than two days after his AIPAC campaign speech, Obama had already begun backsliding from his commitment. When asked what he meant by his comments that “we have Israel’s back,” the president answered that “it was not a military doctrine that we were laying out for any particular military action.”

Israel should realize by now that Obama will never attack Iran or support an Israeli attack before the election because such a war in the oil-rich region would send gasoline prices even higher than they are now, exacerbating the economy he perceives to be recovering and hurting his chance for re-election.

The price of gasoline has been rising daily over the last month due to the sanctions and tensions over Iran, averaging $3.79 a gallon. Since 1976 in the United States, there has been a correlation between rising oil prices and falling presidential approval ratings. Jimmy Carter lost the presidency when gas averaged $3.37 per gallon when adjusted to the current value of the dollar.

Not only is Obama warning against an attack but he has also been warning against any talk of an attack. In his AIPAC speech, Obama literally blamed high gas prices on his Republican critics and Israel’s supporters saying “Already, there is a loose talk of war. Over the last few weeks such a talk has only benefited the Iranian government by driving up the price of oil, which they depend on to fund their nuclear program. Now is not the time for bluster.”

Despite Obama taking credit in his AIPAC speech for the new “crippling” sanctions against Iran and asking the Israelis to wait a few months to allow them to take effect, in reality he has tried to weaken them. In December the Kirk-Menendez amendment, passed by a rare 100-0 vote in the Senate, directed the administration to take punitive measures against foreign entities that do business with Iran. However, the administration tried to pressure top ranking Democrats, thankfully to no avail, to delay the implementation of the sanctions by a few months arguing that such an amendment could raise oil prices and hurt the U.S. economy. Moreover, President Obama failed to begin enforcing the sanctions on Feb. 29 as the law intended.

The nightmare scenario for Barack Obama would be the revelation, in the midst of an improving economy during the next eight months, of an Iranian nuclear breakthrough forcing him to either act or back down and then be judged by the voters.

The only scenario under which Obama will attack Iran is if he believes he has a chance of losing the election because the economy deteriorates, unemployment rises and Romney, the Republican presidential candidate, is gaining in popularity. Two days after Bin Laden was killed in 2011, Obama’s job approval ratings rose by 9 percent to its highest level since 2009 despite the stagnant economy.

If he is re-elected, President Obama, in his second term, will not attack Iran even as a last resort. Not needing Jewish votes or re-election and true to his ideology of appeasement, he will re-adopt his “containment policy” of useless diplomacy and engagement policies, leading eventually to a nuclear armed Iran.

By then, the Middle East will be an explosive powder keg, waiting for the Iranian trigger. Israel’s only deterrence option to stop Iran from attacking would be the threat of retaliation through total annihilation by its nuclear weapons arsenal.

Watching Benjamin Netanyahu’s AIPAC speech, it seems clear that he realized after talking to Obama that Israel is alone in this fight. Israel’s only remaining hope is if Obama loses the election and the Republican candidate becomes president. The only time that the extremist Iranian leadership decided to suspend its nuclear program was in 2003, after the U.S. invaded Iraq, because it truly believed a Republican president’s warnings that they would be attacked next.

Shoula Romano Horing was born and raised in Israel. She is an attorney in Kansas City and a national speaker. Her blog: www.shoularomanohoring.com.

Take a lesson from history

When dealing with Iran, America needs to take a lesson from history. During the Cuban Missile Crisis (according to Evan Thomas’ biography “Robert Kennedy”) the hawks surrounding President Kennedy were calling for air strikes while Kennedy decided on a blockade combined with negotiations. Though it was true that toughness and unbending resolve were the ways to handle the Soviets, recognizing that Khrushchev needed to be met with firmness, at the same time it was important that he be allowed to save face.

Marvin Fremerman
Springfield, Mo.

“Mom, when can we change the kitchen over to being kosher?”

It was a warm June evening as I absently prepared dinner for Allen, my husband of 38 years, and Michael, our 19 year old son.

Michael, our youngest child, a wonderful gift in our early 40s, has always kept us on our toes with his interests. This time he asked us for something that could have the impact of an earthquake, rocking our familiar, comfortable world.

“Michael, this isn’t something one does lightly,” I said. I glanced over at Allen and saw his eyes agree. “Let’s just take it one step at a time.”

We expected Michael to change once he returned home from Israel where he spent the past school year. We knew that observant practices are not unusual for someone just home from living an Orthodox Jewish life at Yeshiva Reishit Yerushalyim in Beit Shemish. We knew he would eventually want to make some changes at home because bringing in food from the kosher deli was quickly becoming tiresome and expensive.

I glanced at our kitchen, the small but efficient room that served us well while raising our three children. Did we want to make such a dramatic change at this point in our lives? Would our tiny ‘50s-era kitchen hold two sets of everything? Most importantly, would Allen be able, and willing, to give up his beloved cheeseburgers?

Neither Allen nor I previously considered kashering our kitchen but keeping kosher wasn’t completely foreign to us. We both learned the finer aspects of maintaining a kosher kitchen from Allen’s mother, a Conservative Jew. Several of our friends keep kosher too, and all our get-togethers involve observing kashrut.

But as much as Allen and I thought we knew about keeping kosher from our family and friends, in reality we knew very little about the practice. Starting online and in the synagogue library, we researched the practice of kashrut looking for answers to our questions. Then we consulted rabbis, rebbitzens, friends and family too, seeking answers to the questions that remained.

In the end, we realized that Conservative standards, the same standards followed by our family and friends, made us the most comfortable. This was not surprising since Conservative Judaism has always been central to our family life. While in Israel Michael experienced Orthodox glatt kosher meals, or those with a more restrictive kosher standard. We hoped he could accept a different one at home.

I wanted to support my son yet I felt I had to be true to my own beliefs too. I knew that asking Michael to make this compromise might push our son away. How would he react to our decision?

Weekday dinners became special to us as a family during this time since Michael stayed with friends close to his synagogue over Shabbat. During those meals we sat at the same table using plastic and paper tableware but consumed different foods.

While this practice was a necessary compromise, it seemed divisive to all of us. It was during one of these dinners that I chose to inform him of our decision. Maybe he would feel more compromising then.

“Michael,” I said as he looked up from his dinner preparations, “I think it’s time to talk about kashering the kitchen.”

“Excellent! Thanks Mom!” he beamed.

“Well, before you get your hopes up I have one request. Dad and I agree that if and when we convert the kitchen, we want to do it to Conservative standards. It’s really important to us.”

“I can handle that.” In the moment of stunned silence that followed, our relief flooded the room like a spring breeze. How he was able to be so conciliatory?

“One of the rabbis at Reishit taught that we should make some compromises in our homes in the name of Shalom Bayit,” he said. Shalom Bayit, peace in the home, a concept taught by a wise and understanding yeshiva rabbi who readily acknowledged the barriers students might face back home. I am eternally grateful to this Rabbi for his foresight.

Before I began the project, I learned about the biblical and historical underpinnings of kashrut. One fact intrigued me: Many Jews keep kosher as a way to elevate the mundane act of eating to a religious event. I wondered if our meals would ever reach that level and began to look forward to the day when we could eat in our own kosher kitchen.

I searched for information about the specific steps involved in kashering a kitchen that had never been kosher. How should I plan my time? Surely some tasks must be done before others to assure that the whole project is completed efficiently. I asked our kosher friends and family for their opinions regarding these issues and I met with two rebbetzins. While everyone gave sound suggestions and valuable guidance, no one truly answered my “logistics” questions. I learned as I went.

The more I learned, the more questions I had. One question stayed in the background of all I did: Was my kitchen big enough to accommodate two sets of everything?

I also wondered if the kitchen would ever be kosher enough. Would I, could I, do it right? Would people judge me harshly if I limited the physical labor, expense and time involved in taking the cookware, dishes and silverware to the mikveh and instead, boil utensils or use our dishwasher instead?

One rabbi, for whom I have the utmost respect, offered wonderfully sage advice “In The Name Of Leniency.”  Those were important words for me to hear because my desire to make my kitchen perfect started to become a barrier to the project’s timely completion. The project moved forward.

We made several discoveries on this journey. Most amazingly, we have enough space; our tiny kitchen can hold two sets of everything and accommodate separate milk and meat preparation. While our meals have not elevated to a religious event, we discovered that keeping kosher is a nice daily reminder of one’s Judaism. While we do not know if Michael will continue with his Orthodox practices in the coming years, we are pleased that we supported his commitment to a mitzvah-centered life.

At last, six months of planning and a week of kashering were complete in time for Shabbat dinner. I looked at our masterpiece — our kitchen — compact, organized and kosher. Before sitting down to the meal, we lit candles and said the blessings. Blessed are you, Lord our God, King of the universe, who has kept us alive and sustained us and enabled us to reach this occasion.

Encourage interfaith dialogue

The Greater Kansas City Interfaith Council (GKCIC) is saddened by recent events that have occurred between two schools in the Blue Valley School District. A skit depicting a Jewish dance caused unintentional harm. Subsequent reactions revealed latent anti-Semitism, expressed in person and through social media.

These incidents demonstrate a need for interfaith dialogue at every level of our community. We encourage school administrators, teachers and parents to impart respect for people of all faiths and cultures.

We invite high school students to participate in the Kansas City Interfaith Youth Alliance (KCIYA). It is a group of high school students of different faiths who meet to perform community service while getting to know each other. In turn, myths and stereotypes are dispelled. More information about the KCIYA may be found at www.kciya.org.

The GKCIC also offers a Speakers Bureau, book clubs and other programs to help our community become more knowledgeable and respectful toward people of all faiths. For more information, visit www.kcinterfaith.org.

Robert Bacic
Convener
Greater Kansas City
Interfaith Council

I am disappointed by what I see as the lack of pro-Israel activism in the Kansas City Jewish community. Israel is facing an existential threat from Iran, the Middle East region is becoming increasingly radicalized, and the Boycott, Divestment, Sanctions movement continues. Yet there seems to be no coherent strategy in our community, or even nationally, for dealing with these threats from an educational and public relations standpoint. In fact, I’d wager that more has been said and written locally about the religious pluralism issue in the last six months than the Iranian threat. I agree that respect for religious differences in Israel is an important issue, but shouldn’t be our first priority in these dangerous times.

American Jews used to look back at the 1930s and 1940s and wonder why more wasn’t done to rescue Jews from the Holocaust. Many Jewish organizations got their start after those terrible years to protect the welfare of Jews around the world. Now, with a plethora of organizations, who is doing what to strengthen Israel? The organizations I’ve observed as very effective advocates for Israel have a limited focus, such as AIPAC, StandWithUs, and CAMERA. Other organizations, while they care about Israel, are multi-faceted in their missions and it seems to me that Israel does not float to the top of their priority list.

Kansas Citians show strong support for Israel through visits and donations. Israel emissary Lilach Nissim, who left her post recently at the Jewish Federation, is a strong advocate for Israel, and used social media, programming and articles in the Jewish Chronicle to make the case. AIPAC is very effective locally and nationally. But in my opinion we need to do more.

What if every synagogue, Jewish organization and youth group in town commits itself to having one serious program on Israel in 2012? What if some of these programs are advertised to the wider community and held in a non-Jewish venue, such as a public library or college campus? What if when rabbis write in the Kansas City Star, they use the opportunity to advocate for Israel? What if more positive letters about Israel are written to the Kansas City Star? What if more individuals put pro-Israel links and messages on their Facebook page? What if the organized community dialogues not only with non-Jews who support Israel, but with those who are ambivalent or uneducated on the subject? What if all of our congregations form Israel Solidarity Committees or Israel Affairs Committees, or make pro-Israel activism a part of the Social Action function? What if we have a letter-writing day to our members of Congress and President Obama urging them to realize the Iran threat is a threat to all?

I think it is time we re-examine our priorities and use our time as a community for serious issues, as well as lighter programming.

Judy Press was executive director of the Mid-Kansas Jewish Federation from 1996-2007 and focused attention on Israel advocacy. She is currently president of Congregation Ohev Sholom Sisterhood, which recently sponsored the film “The Case for Israel: Democracy’s Outpost,” followed by a panel discussion..
.

Ignorance is disappointing

The rivalry between Blue Valley North and Blue Valley Northwest has been raging for years. Recently though, this friendly competition has turned into a disgusting display of anti-Semitism.

In a cafeteria packed with roughly 800 students, Blue Valley Northwest mocked Blue Valley North for having Jewish students. Kids were seen dancing around to a popular Jewish song and doing a popular Jewish dance. This is not the first time anti-Semitism has been directed toward Blue Valley North. The administration put a video up of this little “skit” for everyone to see. The ignorance displayed by the administration after and during this event has been disappointing to say the least.

The event has shown to be a popular topic on social media websites. Although a few are admitting to the wrongs, many others are defending Blue Valley Northwest’s actions. To make things even worse, a student involved in leading this skit was Jewish.
This is a problem because if we as Jews make fun of ourselves, we are indirectly allowing others to do the same. As Jewish people, we cannot accept to live in a world where anti-Semitism is acceptable and such events can be blown off.

As we write this and the controversy rages on, we are attending BBYO International Convention with 900 Jewish teen leaders. The immense passion displayed here is both inspiring and hopeful. Meeting incredible people, like the only Jewish teen in Albania, makes us prouder to be a Jew than ever.

That being said, it is important to learn from these mistakes and grow as a Jewish people as well as a human race.

Maddy Friedman
Zach Kaseff
BBYO Kansas City Council Presidents