Connect with us
The Residences advertisement

Features

The British Invasion: Douglas Murray and Colonel Richard Kemp, Tel Aviv International Salon, Dec.21, 2023

Douglas Murray (left) and Richard Kemp appearing in Tel Aviv Dec. 21, 2023

By GABRIEL EMMANUEL In 1964 the Beatles were banned from performing in Israel (to the Jewish state’s everlasting shame and embarrassment). Nearly 60 years later a British invasion of a different sort took place and the crowd reaction was almost like a mini Beatlemania.

Some 600 or more twenty and thirty somethings packed themselves into a meeting room at the Carlton Hotel in Tel Aviv that was meant to accommodate only about a third of that size. The featured speakers were former Commander of the British forces in Afghanistan, Richard Kemp, and author, political commentator, Douglas Murray, whose book “War on the West”(2018) quickly became a New York Times bestseller. Both Kemp and Murray have spent the past two and a half months in Israel covering the war. “I’ve almost made Aliya” quipped Kemp as the talk was about to begin. When the charismatic Murray entered the room a little late for reasons which he would come to share, the audience broke into spontaneous applause.

While Colonel Kemp has been known for years for endorsing the IDF as the “most moral army” in the world, Douglas Murray shot to fame at the opening of the present conflict with his acerbic response to an interviewer’s question as to whether Israel’s response to the atrocities of Oct. 7 could be considered “proportionate”. In a segment on British Talk TV https://talk.tv/top-stories/31465/douglas-murray-proportionality-in-conflict-is-a-joke that went instantly viral Murray responded “There is some deep perversion in Britain whenever Israel is involved in a conflict and it’s the word you just used – proportion, proportionate, proportionality. Only Britain is really obsessed with this…Proportionality in conflict rarely exists but if we were to decide that we should have this fetish about proportionality then that would mean that in retaliation for what Hamas did in Israel on Saturday (Oct. 7, G.E.) then Israel should try and locate a music festival in Gaza for instance (and good luck with that), and rape precisely the number of women that Hamas raped, kill precisely the number of young people that Hamas killed. They should find a town of exactly the same size of Sderot… and make sure they go door to door and kill precisely the correct number of babies that Hamas killed in Sderot and shoot in the head precisely the same number of old age pensioners that Hamas shot in the head on Saturday…Proportionality in conflict is a joke,” spurned Douglas adding, “that it is only the Israelis that when attacked are expected to have precisely a proportionate response.”


Given the British gentlemens’ philo-semitic reputations the audience broke out with mixed laughter and applause when the two were introduced as the “two most beloved “Goyim” in all of Israel. Non-plussed by the off-colour moniker, Kemp stated proudly that “I am also an extremely talented “Shabbat Goy” the result of having been residing in a hotel with many displaced persons from Kiryat Shmona “who have used my services quite extensively.”
Asked by another Brit, moderator Deborah Danon, what drew each of them to supporting Israel in a topsy turvy world that was largely hostile towards the Jewish State, each had similar reasons for doing so. “I was taught when I was very young to know right from wrong,” said Kemp, “and it’s my duty to support those who are right. There is no question who is in the right in this fight,” he added.


Moreover, underscoring his 30 years spent fighting terrorists in Afghanistan and Iraq Kemp felt duty bound “to do what little I can do to help fight this fight with you because it’s not just your fight it’s a fight for Western civilization; the same ideology that’s attacking you now has attacked us in the past and will intensify its attacks in the future.”


Apologizing for his late entrance for having been held up in an interview on the Piers Morgan show (“It’s quite hard to get Piers to stop talking”) Murray offered another reason responsible for drawing him over to Israel’s side. “Aside from my love for this country and its people,” he said, “I also see something which I think any writer or journalist should see and get very annoyed by, which is lies. When it’s lies about an entire nation and people, when I hear someone like this blowhard I heard earlier (on Piers Morgan, G.E.) accusing Israel of ‘genociding’ the Palestinians, I can’t sit here and not say something. I’m not going to allow these canards, smears and lies and defamation to just go on…I don’t like lies being told and Israel has been on the receiving end of some of the biggest, longest, deepest and most wounding lies of our era,” said Murray. Demonstrating his effortless ability to deftly cross over from political commentary to artful literary imagery he caps the thought with finesse: “So I believe in the simple cause of “moral hygiene” that it’s necessary to try and clean some of that up.”


The moderator then asked a pertinent question: “In a world of Tik Tok where Jesus is Palestinian, do you wonder if this is just a Myth of Sisyphus syndrome where you are just pushing that rock up the hill and do you ever ask yourself just what’s the point?”
“Never, actually,” Murray replied emphatically. “Even if it was the case what option have you got? Just to sit at the bottom of the hill and get crushed by the rock?” he asks rhetorically.
Despite the omnipresence of social media in the world, where lies are able to “rocket around the world” Murray holds fast to a different view. “if you live in a world where 99 lies are being told and one person tells the truth, the truth will win,” he asserts and gives the example of writers such as Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn whose work was effective in bringing down the entire Soviet Empire. “The validity of a truth in an era of lies cannot be underestimated,” he says.
From the topic of lies it was an easy segue to Hamas battle figures. “I don’t know what the latest exaggerated figure is from Hamas about the number of people that have been killed in Gaza” says Kemp, “I just know that it has to be defeated. If it means that a very large number of people whether military or civilian have to die in that process then unfortunately that’s the case because no sovereign, democratic state can exist under this threat so it must be eliminated, it’s as simple as that,” states Kemp in a no nonsense, tell it like it is, military analysis. Despite the unreliability of figures Kemp posits that based on the figures he’s received from Israeli sources of 8,000 or 9,000 or more have been killed from Hamas and Islamic Jihad, which would represent about 30% of the total number of terrorists. “That’s a very significant proportion,” he says, “that’s in excess of 30% of their fighting capability. The whole edifice then begins to crumble and I think we’re going to see that,” he says with conviction.

“I’ve been in Gaza on a number of occasions. I’m deeply impressed by the IDF combat effectiveness. This is going to come down at some point,” Kemp says quite bluntly.
Kamp makes regular visits to the soldiers in hospital and knows the tragedy of war from close up. “Tragically, many Israeli soldiers will die and have died already,” he concedes, “but they will undoubtedly prevail in the end.” He contrasts the irony with Hamas: “They want the I.D.F. to kill their civilians. They want as many civilians killed as possible because that then provokes the inevitable international demand for ceasefire, condemning Israel for War Crimes,” he concludes while shaking his head at the anticipated perversion of justice.

Asked about pressure from the United States, Douglas Murray elucidated his view that “You should be courteous to your allies but not subservient to them,” earning a strong round of applause. “The future of this State, of the Jewish people must be in the hands of the Jewish people,” he continued.” It cannot be in the hands of anyone else. It cannot be in the hands of people who, for instance say the day after the massacre of October 7th that this is why we need to double down on the two state solution. It just can’t be in the hands of people going at that kind of slow speed”, he says.


Had the events of Oct.7th happened in the U.S.A., Murray points out, proportionately over 120,000 Americans would have been massacred on one day. “Nobody can tell me that the Americans would have listened to anyone then, nor should they, “he adds. The one potential outcome of the war that Murray absolutely rejects is that the situation might return to the status quo ante of October 6th. “Israel must be allowed to win,” he asserts. “It cannot simply always be encouraged to fight for a stalemate.” Regarding the as of yet unresolved situation with Hezbollah, Murray poked fun at the thought that we will all have to relearn the map of the North and become experts again on the Litani River. “Since 2006 it’s just been a replay of the same thing,” he says. “It just feels like Groundhog Day,” he quips to the amused young people in the room. And then in a more somber tone: “Anything other than actual victory by the Israelis in this conflict is unacceptable because all of these efforts to make Israel fight into a stalemate will simply prepare the groundwork for the next war and this country deserves not to be forced into perpetual war,” he emphasizes.


According to Colonel Kemp’s analysis much of what has transpired in the world in terms of instability with the Ukraine and now Gaza has to do with a weak image projected by President Joe Biden. On the other hand, Kemp considers that Biden has been strongly in favour of Israel and the U.S. unlikely to pressure Israel to desist its military operations. For this dichotomous view Kemp actually earned applause from both Biden supporters and detractors.


The moderator brought up the tragic issue of the three hostages who had been mistakenly killed by Israeli troops. Douglas Murray reflected on the incident and said that he was genuinely shocked by “the lack of empathy for Israel internationally”. A glaring example of such a lack of empathy he suggested could be found with the posters of the hostages in various cities around the world. What followed was another of Murray’s innovative insights: “If you put up a poster of a missing cat or dog in your neighbourhood you would not expect anyone to rip it down,” he matter of factly suggests. “And if anyone did rip it down you would think that person was subhuman. You would think what kind of a sick person are we dealing with here?” he asks. “And this wasn’t dogs or cats. These were Jewish children. And in city after city sociopaths tore down these posters…This lack of empathy has been there since the day (Oct.7th G.E.) itself. And the media treats it as more evidence of the brutality of the Israeli soldiers – they even kill their own! Imagine the lives of those soldiers who shot those three hostages, how they must have felt. And yet instead of recognizing what a tragedy that is for everybody involved they use it as a weapon against Israel!” Murray’s damning condemnation resounds through the packed but quiet room. “That really has slightly startled me in this conflict,” he continued to reflect in an afterthought.


The door was left open for a little humour when the Moderator, in her last question, asked about the Day After. Colonel Kemp was first to pick up the gauntlet: “I think we need a two state solution with the United Nations supervising it,” he said without flinching and with a stiff British upper lip to boot which held tightly in place until the audience stopped laughing. And then more seriously his sober insight: “The I.D.F. has no option, whatsoever, apart from to stay in control of Gaza from now on. It doesn’t matter what anyone else thinks; it doesn’t matter what President Biden might wish to happen…What is absolutely certain is that the I.D.F. must maintain security control of Gaza. It means either a permanent IDF presence inside the whole of Gaza or it means the creation of a one or two mile buffer zone on the inside of the Gaza border which no one is allowed to go into and which the I.D.F can police.”
Kemp had nary a kind word to say about the folks on the other side:”The reality in Gaza is that the vast majority of the population of allegedly innocent civilians support Hamas, even when they see the horrors that Hamas has brought on them, they still support Hamas . And there will be efforts to have a Hamas 2,” the Colonel warned.


Murray concurs that it is a “very bleak necessity” but that Israel will need to stay in Gaza. For how long? “Call me a pessimist,” says Kemp, “but I would say forever.” Like his colleague, Murray also spends some of his days visiting the wounded in hospitals. On a recent visit he met one of the victims, a farmer, from a border Kibbutz who had lost his wife, son and both of his legs in the Hamas attack of Oct.7th . “He said something that has really stuck with me,” Murray recalled, “He said, ‘I have been a leftist all my life. I now want to look out on nothing but potato fields from here to the Mediterranean.’ Who can risk living beside these people? Nobody else in the world would be expected to have to put up with that. I don’t think the Israelis have to be an experiment test case either. I think you should have the right to live in peace and to know that the border you have does not contain genocidal maniacs on the other side who wish to kill you all.”


In the question period which followed, Murray was asked what changes he would like to see in present day Britain. “Obviously the first thing I’d do would be to make Richard Kemp Minister of Defence,” he suggests to uproarious laughter from the crowd. “I assume you’ll be Prime Minister, will you,” Kemp shot back. Feigning humility, Murray wistfully demurred saying only, “If the nations calls…” Presumably, they may one day.


Getting more serious Murray took aim at the “appalling” pro Hamas demonstrations which took place in London and included one on Remembrance Day. “I think it’s been shameful,” he said. “I want no Hamas supporters in my country. And that’s quite easy to arrange in my view,” he added making reference to a case in point of Muhammud Sawalha, a key Hamas terrorist from the West Bank who subsequently obtained British citizenship. “To get a British passport you must, among other things sign a form that says you are a person of good character. I submit that he is not a person of good character,” said Murray, “and that he lied on his form when he said that he was. I would like to see his citizenship stripped and I would like to see him deported and to try his luck in Gaza.” On a humorous roll, Murray recalled the case of a young lady whose British passport was recalled when she returned from having joined Isis and tried to pretend – once the Caliphate fell apart – that she didn’t know that they were actually a “murderous, head-hacking group” and besides, “we all make mistakes”. She shouldn’t get her passport back argued Murray maintaining vociferously that “If you’re with an Islamist death cult you should not be allowed to be in Britain.”


Colonel Kemp fielded a question about another hot potato issue, that of missiles being fired from Yemen which no one seems to be doing anything about. “Yemen has been firing missiles into Israel since the war began including the first ever in history engagement in space when a Houthi ballistic missile was intercepted by an Israeli Aero missile outside the earth’s atmosphere. They’ve been firing numerous missiles and drones towards Israel, all of which have been shot down.” Unless a message is sent soon to Yemen and Iran by the U.S. Kemp warns that war in Lebanon will be inevitable.


A visiting American Major with a pronounced Midwestern drawl asked Colonel Kemp if he could explain the concept known as “the fog of war”. “It’s an extraordinary thing that doesn’t apply anywhere else in life,” said Kemp, “you have very often young, inexperienced soldiers in the reserves with a limited amount of recent training and then suddenly they are thrown into Gaza which I would say is one of the most treacherous and demanding battlefields that anyone has fought on in the history of warfare. And they’re expected to always make the right decision. That simply cannot happen. We all make mistakes. And that’s when nobody is shooting at us. Nobody is trying to kill us. We haven’t suffered lack of sleep for days on end, we’re not cold, hungry, we’re not terrified and yet we still make mistakes. So how can these guys not make mistakes? And the enemy is trying to fool you all the time, trying to make you think that the reality in front of your eyes is not the reality in front of your eyes. And the difference is when a soldier makes a mistake very often people die as a consequence.” The reference that was embedded on most peoples’ minds was the recent tragic killing of the three Israeli hostages by friendly fire.


Murray was asked about the effect of “hasbara” (P.R. G.E) in the current war. “I believe they should be given some credit for they have done a better job that any time previously that I have been covering since 2006”, he said. Taking the Al-Shifa hospital as an example, Murray pointed out that Israel “got on top of it very fast” like releasing the closed circuit TV footage of the hostages being led in to the hospital and showing the weapons cache that was discovered there. But at the same time, he underscores why not even the best P.R. may succeed in certain circumstances. “The minute they show that the hospital has an arms dump inside it and has a load of kalashnikovs and grenades , Jeremy Bowen of the BBC goes on and is asked about it and says, ‘well, it is not inconceivable that the kalshnikovs belonged to the hospital’s security department’. On the television the next day I said, ‘yes, and it’s possible the grenades were for the cardiology department’.” Murray’s point is well taken. No matter how strong the evidence is, it is not necessarily strong enough to overcome bias.


Kemp concurs, “This extraordinary propaganda campaign against Israel – everything that Israel does is wrong. For the past 10 years the BBC has not allowed me to speak on any program about Israel. Any other security issue, any other country I’m on all the time on the BBC just not about Israel. I got a call a few weeks back asking if I would do an interview about Israel. I almost fell off my chair,” recalls Kemp. “Then I realized what was going on. They had been heavily criticized and were under a lot of pressure for their lies about Al-Alhi hospital attack (where Israel was wrongly blamed for the bombing, G.E.) They felt we need to show how broadminded we are, so we’ll even get this extremist Kemp on to speak. So that’s how I became a human shield for the BBC”, Kemp concluded with a wry smile.

In a final story, also about the BBC, Kemp relates that he was once invited to the BBC studio in Jerusalem to do a number of interviews. In the interview which was live from London he was asked why the IDF were so keen to send in ground forces to Gaza. I explained “they don’t want to go in on the ground, they know the problems with that. So I was asked then why do the politicians want to go in on the ground. I said they don’t. I’ve spoken to them, the Prime Minister, the Defence Minister they will only go in if they have to. The interviewer was completely stumped at this and all he could say was, ‘yes, but you’re a Jew’. Now how do you answer that,” Kemp asked incredulously. Do I say in a belligerent tone, “how dare you accuse me of being a Jew!?” But instead I said simply, “I don’t have that honour.”


“If I can just say something” interjected Murray, “about the youth of this country. So young! So brilliant! So vivacious. I met a young woman the other day of 21 who was an expert on Yemen! Why her contemporary in America is being educated to become stupid and wicked!” his observation met by peals of laughter. Then more seriously, “I have been so moved by these young people. They will be an example not just to Israel but to the people of the world. And if I may leave you with one last thought,” he continued. “I know this period is incredibly troubling, disturbing, upsetting and much more for the people of this country. I think the country is still going through a trauma, trying to work out what was done to you in October. You asked at the beginning why we do this. I would just say whether I can answer it or not, it is the honour of my life to be standing in alliance with you.”


The evening done, the young people rushed the small stage to take selfies with both fine gentlemen. Douglas Murray and Colonel Richard Kemp. Two of Israel’s most beloved friends, indeed.

Gabriel Emanuel is a former Winnipegger.

An edited version of this article first appeared in the Jerusalem Post, December 29, 2023 .

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Features

“The Rabbi of Baton Rouge”: new book is both a rom com and an insightful look at the challenges of living in a small Jewish community

Reviewed by BERNIE BELLAN About a month ago I received an email from a publicist about a new book titled The Rebbe of Baton Rouge.
Now, I should explain that even though I’m now officially retired as publisher of The Jewish Post I still receive loads of emails inviting me to review new books. Unfortunately, most of the titles seem to fall into one of two categories: Either self-help books or books about the Holocaust. I usually don’t even open those emails.
But, when I received this particular email – whose title alone intrigued me (“Review copy: the Rebbe of Baton Rouge”), I decided to read the email.
Here’s what it said:
“Dear Bernie,
“I hope you’ll consider The Rebbe of Baton Rouge for review or feature coverage in The Jewish Post and News. It’s a new Southern-Jewish novel from University of Louisiana at Lafayette Press, out this October.
“Anna Zisk, a Yiddish literature professor, flees a scandal in Boston and moves back into her childhood home in Baton Rouge. Adam Kluger is the new rabbi in town, trying to hold together a shrinking congregation in a city with barely enough Jews to fill a high school gym. His ex-fiancée left him at the altar, a rival synagogue is picking off his members, and he’s being haunted by a Yiddish-speaking ghost. Then he starts falling for Anna.
“It’s a funny, fast-moving rom-com that’s also about faith, belonging, and what holds a small community together.
“The authors, Jennifer Anne Moses and Stuart Green, lived in Baton Rouge for years and raised their three children there. Jennifer has written nine previous books, including the memoir Bagels and Grits: A Jew on the Bayou. Stuart is a Distinguished Professor of Law at Rutgers.
“I’d be glad to send a PDF or print review copy or arrange an interview with the authors. Thank you for considering it.”
I responded to the publicist:
“This sounds interesting – a bit of a distraction from the endless series of Holocaust books that we’re usually asked to consider reviewing.
“You can send me a pdf of the book and I’ll take a look at it – no promises.”

In short order I received a pdf of The Rebbe of Baton Rouge – and wow – was this one ever good!
The problem is, after you’ve finished reading what’s about to be a glowing review, you’re going to have a tough time buying this book. From what I can see, it’s available only through Amazon so far – and even though Amazon says it’s just a paperback, it’s priced at $42.66 (I assume that’s in Canadian dollars because I looked for it on Amazon Canada.)
Putting aside the cost of the book, however, I want to tell you why I was so thoroughly entertained by this book – and why I think it will interest Winnipeg Jews in particular.
The story is set mostly in Baton Rouge, which I discovered is a relatively small city (only about 225,000 population) – with a very small Jewish population (only about 1500).
From the way it’s described in the book, anyone considering moving there would have to think twice before doing that. It’s very humid, is infested with mosquitoes – and, at the time the book was set (which is 2016), it was prime MAGA territory.
The two principal protagonists in the book, a Yiddish studies professor named Anna Zisk, and a Reform rabbi named Adam Kluger, both end up in Baton Rouge – although neither one by choice.
Anna has become entangled in an embarrassing affair with one of her male grad students in a Boston college – and when the affair ends at Anna’s insistence, the grad student launches a sexual harassment campaign against Anna, which forces her to leave Boston and head back home to Baton Rouge, which is where she is from and where her family still lives.
Rabbi Kluger, on the other hand, is looking for a pulpit of his own – even though he’s had a prior successful career working as a programmer for Google. He’s also decided to break off a relationship with a woman he says he loves, Deborah, because she wouldn’t even consider moving with him to the boonies – in this case, Baton Rouge.
Now, that particular aspect of the story really resonated with me. Here we have a rabbi who doesn’t really want to move to a community which is looking for a new rabbi (after the previous rabbi has died suddenly), but he figures he’ll take the position – until something better turns up.
Frankly, given the fact that neither Anna nor Adam is looking forward to living in Baton Rouge – for different reasons, I was expecting the book to turn into a typical rom com where two ill-starred people find love by being thrust together in unfortunate circumstances.
But The Rebbe of Baton Rouge isn’t that kind of book – much to my delight – and surprise. Sure, Anna and Adam do connect – although I won’t ruin the surprise by telling you what happens in the end, but their connection is more a result of their both respecting one another and having an honest appreciation of the plight that has led both of them to Baton Rouge. (Anna is actually pursued by a handsome Jewish doctor in Baton Rouge, while Adam’s former girlfriend is also quite beautiful – and still cares for him deeply, so it’s not as if Anna and Adam are two losers thrown together after having been rejected by others). They both need to decide whether they are willing to make certain concessions for the sake of ending up just “comfortable,” rather than truly fulfilled.
What I especially appreciated was the manner in which Rabbi Adam especially, comes to find the charm of serving as a rabbi to a small, and very unfunded congregation, so rewarding. There’s a complication to his position though: While he’s the rabbi of a very small Reform congregation, the rabbi of the only other Reform congregation in Baton Rouge, whose membership is much larger, has his sights set on absorbing the members of the smaller congregation into his own.
And frankly – it makes total sense for the two congregations to merge. (Now, haven’t we seen this same scenario played out in Winnipeg?) In fact, a major part of the book is taken up with Rabbi Adam seeking a better paying position elsewhere in the U.S. (in this case, Santa Barbara) because he’s very concerned his own congregation is about to be swallowed up by the larger congregation – and he’s worried that he will end playing second fiddle to a dominant, longer serving rabbi.
As for Anna, she tries to make the best of a bad situation by accepting a temporary position teaching English composition to the members of the Louisiana State University football team – which provides both some comic relief, but also puts her into another embarrassing situation when she is accused of becoming too close with the star of the football team – even though her intentions are totally above board (and so are the football star’s).
Through into the mix an intriguing sub plot about a Hasid ghost who appears every so often in Rabbi Adam’s life – to offer sage advice when Adam is at his lowest points. There is an explanation for why the ghost appears, but I wont’ spoil it here.
One other thing – the book is full of Yiddishkeit. Each chapter has a Yiddish title (there’s a glossary at the end in case you don’t understand the words) and there’s a fair bit of Yiddish sprinkled throughout the book. (After all, Anna is a Yiddish professor – not that she uses Yiddish in her everyday speech. It just gives the book a real “haimish” feel.)

Authors Stuart Green and Jennifer Anne Moses


I ought to mention something about the authors: Jennifer Anne Moses and Stuart Green. Jennifer Moses is an accomplished novelist (having written seven previous works of fiction, along with two memoirs), while Stuart Green is a Rutgers law professor who’s also written several books on the law. They began writing The Rebbe of Baton Rouge together during the Covid epidemic. It’s their first jointly written book.
The dialogue in the book is sharp and well informed. It’s clear that Jennifer Moses has honed her craft – and while I was expecting the book to be full of clichés about a rabbi and a congregant having to ward off their physical attractiveness to one another – which is the primary theme of that annoying American show about a rabbi and a non-Jewish woman falling in love in “Nobody Wants This,” this book makes offers much deeper insights into many of the challenges 30 and 40 something Jews face today, including choosing careers over relationships, and the difficulty of finding meaningful relationships in the first place.
And, as for getting a rabbi to move to the boondocks – well Baton Rougers, have you ever heard of Winnipeg?

The Rebbe of Baton Rouge
By Jennifer Anne Moses and Stuart Green
Published by University of Louisiana at Lafayette Press, 2026
202 pages
Available on Amazon

Continue Reading

Features

You might not like what this article has to say about what happened on October 7 and the aftermath

71-year-old Palestinian dentist Dr. Mazen Rantisi, who was recently released from Israeli imprisonment

By MARTY GREEN I just read a very disturbing article in Ha’aretz about the treatment of Arab prisoners in Israeli detention. 71-year-old Dr. Mazen Rantisi was recently released after 127 days in detention, and he told Amira Hass about conditions on the inside. No, he was not hung upside-down and beaten; his fingernails were not pulled out or his bones broken. That is not the Jewish way. Without getting into details, the conditions he describes are more along the lines of filth, enforced “discomfort”, hunger, and daily humiliations. And yes, occasional kindness from one guard or another. All in all, treatment no better (and probably often worse) than our own hostages received while they were being held in Gaza.

Which brings me to the point of this article. We like to justify our devastation of Gaza by reminding the world that the declared purpose of Hamas’s invaders was to kill every single Jew they could get their hands on…man, woman, or child. “It’s right there in their Charter!” we proclaim.

We, on the hand, were perfectly blameless in our conduct of the war. “We dropped leaflets to warn people of impending attacks”. “Civilian casualties were because Hamas used them as human shields”. And our trump card: “Hamas could have ended the war at any moment by simply releasing the hostages”.

Could they really have? The last hostages were released a year ago but we are still killing “militants” every single day…some 1,600 since October 10th 2005. (A figure not disputed by Israeli authorities…and considerably more than the 1200 Israeli’s killed on October 7th.) It seems we continue to carry out targeted killings of every single Gaza resident who we can identify as having participated in the October 7th operation…even if those targeted killings involve “collateral damage”.

Yes, we had every justification to invade Gaza to rescue our hostages. But on October 7th weren’t there already thousands of Arab prisoners being held “hostage” in our own prisons, including 1,300 being held without criminal charges or pending trial under our “administrative detention” system? And if the conditions were anything close to those described by Dr. Rantisi, was the need for action (at least from Hamas’s viewpoint) to liberate those prisoners – by whatever means possible – any less than the subsequent need for us to liberate our own hostages?

Does any of this justify the unspeakable cruelties perpetrated by Hamas on October 7th? This is a difficult question to answer, because those cruelties and acts of barbarism were so…well, unspeakable…that Israel has for the most part refrained from posting the evidence online. Yet some details have come out little by little. For one thing, contrary to early claims, it does not seem that any babies were murdered by being placed alive in microwave ovens. Yes, it is all but certain that individual acts of wanton cruelty occurred, but let us look at some actual numbers: specifically, rapes and murders.

But we are going to analyze those in the context of what we will presume, for the sake of argument, to have been a “military operation” whose purpose was the taking of hostages for the “legitimate” purpose of negotiating the release of the detainees being improperly held in Israeli prisons. What are the numbers? And how do they compare with the numbers from our Gaza operation? You should stop reading right now if you don’t like where this is going. . . .

*

*

*

*

Okay, let us continue. Of the 1200 Israeli casualties, 373 were members of security forces. That’s almost a third. So 800 deaths were civilians…that would be what we call “collateral damage” when they are Palestinian deaths. Then let us call them the same when they are ours. We pride ourselves on the low ratio of “collateral damage” we inflicted on Gaza, claiming 20 to 30 thousand armed combatants out of 70,000 total casualties. Well, then evidently our ratio of “collateral damage” is not better than that of Hamas.

(And by the way, how do we count the three unarmed Israeli escapees we killed? If they had turned out to be Arabs would they have been counted as enemy combatants (despite being unarmed) or merely as “collateral damage”? Clearly, we had no compunction about killing unarmed individuals who might have had concealed weapons. Should Hamas have been more scrupulous than us in terms of who they killed in the course of their operation?)

Now let’s look at some percentages. The biggest single site for casualties was the Nova festival, where some 350 were killed….about 10 percent of the total number there. After that, some nearby kibbutzes and settlements were hard hit…Kibbutz Be’eri, 132 dead out of a population of 1,000; Kfar Aza, 80 out of 800 (some of those were security personnel); and communities like Nir Oz, Nahal Oz, and Kissufim: 170 out of 1100.

So the numbers killed in the most heavily hit communities was 10 to 15 percent. These are devastating numbers but they are hard to reconcile with the claim that Hamas intended to murder every single Jew they could lay their hands on. Israeli resistance was stiff in many of these locales, as evidenced by the high number of military casualties. So many of the civilian deaths must have been, (once again from the point of view of Hamas) “collateral damage”.

We all know the story of the one killer who boasted gleefully of having killed ten Jews all by himself. But if we reckon that at least half the civilian casualties were “legitimate” (by the same definition we used for civilian casualties in Gaza), that they were merely “collateral damage”, then no more than two to three hundred civilian deaths would have been gratuitous murders. Those murders could have all been plausibly committed by no more than 30 to 50 of the six thousand invaders in total….less than one percent. Yet in the post-ceasefire world, it remains our declared intention to kill every invader who participated in October 7th.

What about women and children? Women were close to 300 civilian casualties out of 800. Children….perhaps 40 altogether, including exactly seven under the age of six. How many of the 70,000 casualties in Gaza were children under the age of six? We cannot know the true figure with any certainty, but it is hard to believe that the comparison would favor Israel on a percentage basis.

What about rape? There is little doubt that rapes took place at several locations, with many of the victims being subsequently killed. But no actual numbers are readily available. Surely the great majority of the 300 female casualties were mere “collateral damage” and not rape victims. All we can guess is that the number of women raped and then killed could have been anywhere from 10 to 100. But again, these are mere guesses.

Survivors of rape is another story. Only one woman has come forward to publicly testify that she was raped. How many more may have kept quiet or reported their ordeals only privately is unknown. But I would find it hard to believe that in the chaos of the day’s events, that 100 women were raped and only one survived to tell her story out loud. Yes, rape happened. But it could hardly have been on any kind of mass scale. Especially considering the eagerness of the Israeli side to publicize stories of atrocities.

Finally, it is important to remember that this operation was not a “walk in the park” for Hamas. It is said that out of an elite contingent of 3800 fighters, between twelve and fifteen hundred died on Israeli territory. More Arabs than Jews died on October 7th.

Those special forces were followed by perhaps 2000 civilian looters, many of them armed. To the extent that atrocities occurred, it seems highly likely that they came largely from perhaps a hundred individuals out of this contingent of opportunistic marauders, rather than the disciplined forces that were evidently fighting and dying to complete their assigned mission.

And what of the success of the mission itself? If it was intended to give Israel a black eye, it was hardly a failure. And if it was intended to secure bargaining chips in the form of hostages, then the 4000 Arabs released from custody would have to be a win for Hamas. What about the 70,000 dead? Well, we all know that human life means very little to the Arabs. Don’t we? We’ve said it often enough.

If the Arabs don’t regard their own casualties as human beings, maybe it’s time we started to. And going back to where we began this story, with Dr. Rantisi: let’s remember that we are supposed to be responsible for the humane treatment of prisoners. I can’t help but wonder if we haven’t somehow decided to make those who remain in our custody endure extra suffering on behalf of those we were forced to release.

Continue Reading

Features

A Sensation at the Bible Contest in Jerusalem

The final of the International Bible Contest, Chidon HaTanakh, takes place every year on Israeli Independence Day (Yom HaAtzmaut). The event is broadcast live across the country, and American contestants appear each year — yet few expect them to win. History, however, records exceptions. In 1988, two teenagers from New York challenged decades of Israeli dominance, and one of them accomplished the impossible.

A TV Quiz Show Where the Subject Is the Bible

Chidon HaTanakh is an annual international competition testing knowledge of the Hebrew Scriptures — something like Jeopardy, except that instead of pop culture, every question revolves around the Torah. It is the country’s largest televised event, followed by the entire nation; the nation’s top officials are invariably present in the hall. Students travel from around the world, yet the balance of power is predictable. In more than half a century of the contest’s existence, only three Americans have taken the top prize. The crown almost always goes to an Israeli.

Why Israel Holds an Almost Permanent Advantage

The reasons for the host country’s dominance are less mystical than pragmatic. In Israel, Chidon is surrounded by state attention and public prestige, especially within the Religious Zionism community. Schools release promising candidates from regular classes for dedicated preparation; some are trained almost from infancy. The Israeli stage covers around 400 chapters from the most demanding books, while the American national qualifier covers roughly 100 from relatively accessible ones. Finally, the language barrier is enormous: absorbing hundreds of chapters of biblical Hebrew is incomparably easier when modern Hebrew is one’s native tongue. The language question frequently proves a stumbling block beyond Israel’s borders as well — kykNET is launching a new show in South Africa, Die 1% Klub, and one of the requirements for participants is knowledge of Afrikaans. This already eliminates a significant proportion of potential contestants from outside South Africa, even though there are formally no citizenship requirements.

For foreigners, the contest is just one of many extracurricular activities; for Israelis, it is a matter of national importance.

A Joke That Turned Out to Be an Accurate Diagnosis

As far back as the 1970s, the celebrated Israeli comedy troupe Lul turned the predictability of the results into a sketch that became widely quoted. “We are at the Chidon final,” gasps the host. “Of 60 contestants, three remain. The Scandinavian has 37 points, the Sudanese has 42, and the Israeli has 473 out of a possible 400. The final question is worth 13 points. Everything can still change!” The sketch captured a cultural phenomenon in which suspense existed only on paper.

A Quiz or a Money Game

The TV quiz show format built around the Hebrew Scriptures fits naturally within Jewish tradition. Competition in Torah knowledge is encouraged, and in religious circles it is perceived as an extension of study. Entertainment shows built on gambling are a different matter. The wheel of fortune, bets, multipliers, and cash prizes — as seen in Playtech Live Game Shows, information about which is publicly available — are also presented as televised spectacle complete with a studio and a charismatic host. From a religious standpoint, however, the picture is more complex. To simplify greatly and set aside the distinctions between streams of Judaism: the dividing line runs through money. A person who simply watches the broadcast as entertainment and risks nothing is not participating in gambling. One who places a wager is playing, and under halakha such conduct is either prohibited or, in more lenient interpretations, condemned. In Chidon, only points and reputation are at stake, and the only thing a contestant can wager is years of preparation. In 1988, those years unexpectedly outweighed decades of Israeli tradition.

The Exception That Happened in 1988

That year, two American teenagers arrived in Jerusalem not as also-rans. Jeremy Wieder and Noah Feldman were considered genuine contenders for the title. Both knew the material down to the finest detail. But the story of their rivalry ended in a way no one had predicted.

The American Qualifier, Where the Favorite Was Not the Future Champion

The national Chidon in the United States is divided into four divisions: two each for middle and high school, separately in English and in Hebrew. The strongest contestants typically emerge from the senior Hebrew-language division. In June 1987, that division was won by Feldman — with a near-perfect score. Wieder finished second. Contest organizer Dr. Mitchell Orlian noted that the gap between them was negligible, though the American program’s scope was considerably narrower than the Israeli one.

Who Wieder and Feldman Were

Wieder grew up in Monsey, New York, in the family of a physics professor. He studied at the Ashar and Spring Valley yeshivas and then at the Yeshiva University boys’ high school. An experienced synagogue Torah reader, he was competing in the international final for the first time and was remembered by rivals as someone who “simply knew everything.”

Feldman came from an academic family in Cambridge, Massachusetts; his parents taught at Harvard and MIT. He attended Maimonides School in Brookline and displayed intellectual brilliance from an early age. He won the national qualifier having lost only half a point — he had confused the dimensions of two sets of curtains of the Tabernacle. “I was off by about a cubit and a half,” he recalled later.

A Year of Preparation, Two Different Approaches

From September 1987, Wieder — who had enrolled early at Yeshiva University — devoted at least one hour each day to reviewing the material. His foundation was a thorough knowledge of the Pentateuch, which made up a third of the program, but the remaining sections required months of additional work.

Feldman structured his preparation differently. His school released him from classes during the Prophets (Nevi’im) period, and he used the 42-minute slot to memorize texts with traditional cantillation. In the final months, he discovered in the Harvard library an archive of Chidon questions and answers dating from the 1950s and used it as a training tool.

The Two Weeks Before the Broadcast That Viewers Never See

Foreign participants arrive two weeks before the final. The program includes tours of the country, meetings with rabbis, politicians, and the Prime Minister, and a visit to a military base — all guided by mentors drawn from former finalists. Informally, the whole experience is known as “Tanakh camp” — a project for strengthening Jewish communal bonds around Israel and the biblical text.

It was here that the Americans first grasped the scale of the competition. Among the contestants was a student from behind the Iron Curtain who had arrived with a teacher from Hungary, and Canadian champion Sean Zelig Aster. The Israelis displayed photographic memory: one of them moved a finger across his forehead as if turning pages and recited entire passages from memory. “They were a little frightening,” admitted another American contestant, Jeremy Spierer. Feldman summed up the contrast this way: in America, he had simply been told — “Noah, there’s a Tanakh quiz, you like that sort of thing, go tomorrow.”

The Final at the Jerusalem Theatre and the Role of the Written Exam

On Israeli Independence Day (Yom HaAtzmaut), thousands of spectators filled the Jerusalem Theatre, where in earlier years David Ben-Gurion had personally checked contestants’ answers against his own Bible. Television cameras broadcast every movement on stage.

A significant portion of the contest, however, is decided before the broadcast. Several days before the televised rounds, contestants sit a written exam of 50–60 questions, and the points scored carry over into the final. The questions on stage are made easier so that no one is publicly humiliated, meaning that anyone who loses too many points in the written portion is effectively out of contention before the cameras roll.

In 1988, the written exam proved unusually lenient and even included a multiple-choice section. Several contestants achieved a perfect score. “I was lucky,” Wieder said. “The Israelis knew the material better than anyone, and the only reason I had a chance was the unusually easy written exam.” Sixteen contestants advanced to the televised rounds; Wieder and Feldman were among them.

On stage, the foreign contestants added color: Aster placed a small Canadian flag in front of him, and Feldman, in the Israeli manner, answered with long quotations, reciting a passage from the Song of Songs from memory. Contestants were eliminated one by one, but several maintained a perfect score into the decisive round. The final question was posed, as tradition dictates, by Prime Minister Yitzhak Shamir. Contestants were given ten biblical occurrences of the word shalom and asked to identify the source of each and provide commentary. Wieder answered 19 of the 20 points correctly. The result: a tie for first place with an Israeli contestant of Tunisian descent, Zehava Haddad. Aster finished fourth, Feldman fifth.

Shock, Rumors, and Mutual Suspicion

The result triggered a wave of conspiracy theories. The American participants believed that Wieder had in fact won outright, but that the judges had not dared award the gold to a foreigner and had arranged a tie instead. The Israeli side advanced the mirror-image accusation: one of the finalists publicly claimed that the political establishment had wanted the prize to go neither to an Israeli nor to a woman. The organizers rejected both versions.

The Winner Himself Called It Luck

Wieder consistently emphasized that his success was a confluence of circumstances. In a “normal” year, with a rigorous written exam, he would never have reached the final question. Nevertheless, the record stands: the first American victory since 1973, when the prize was taken by Leora Reich of the Flatbush yeshiva in Brooklyn. The next comparable result came only in 2013, when Yishai Eisenberg shared first place.

Two Paths After the Contest

Wieder received rabbinic ordination (semikha) and became the youngest head of the RIETS rabbinical school in Yeshiva University’s history. He also earned a doctorate in rabbinic literature from New York University and today teaches Talmud and Tanakh. “The knowledge of Prophets (Nevi’im) and Writings (Ketuvim) that the preparation gave me has remained a resource for life,” he has noted.

Feldman graduated from Harvard with the highest grade point average in his class, received a Rhodes Scholarship to Oxford, completed Yale Law School, and clerked for Supreme Court Justice David Souter. He later advised the Coalition Provisional Authority in Iraq and became a professor at Harvard Law School. He described Chidon as “one of the most important educational experiences of his life,” one that opened access to medieval Hebrew poetry, to English-language literary corpora saturated with biblical allusions, and that deepened his inner connection to a foundational text.

A Rare American Victory Still Debated Today

Over more than half a century of Chidon HaTanakh history, Americans have won only a handful of times. The 1988 final stands out against the backdrop of prolonged Israeli dominance for several reasons at once: an anomalously lenient written exam that for the first time opened a genuine path to victory for foreign contestants; a tie for first place that some considered fair and others politically motivated; and two careers that grew from a single youthful competition.

Continue Reading

Copyright © 2017 - 2023 Jewish Post & News