RSS
South African Jews Decry ‘Outrageous’ Push to Rename Johannesburg Street After Palestinian Terrorist
Anti-Israel protesters march through the streets of the township of Lenasia in Johannesburg, South Africa, Oct. 6, 2024. Photo: REUTERS/Ihsaan Haffejee
South Africa’s Jewish community has lambasted a proposal by the City of Johannesburg to rename the street on which the US Consulate is located after notorious Palestinian terrorist Leila Khaled.
“This bizarre move to change the name of Sandton Drive is nothing more than political theatrics for the ANC [South Africa’s ruling African National Congress] and their cohorts in the City of Johannesburg,” Wendy Kahn, national director of the South African Jewish Board of Deputies (SAJBD), told The Algemeiner.
The decision “is designed to hurt fellow South African citizens at a time when social cohesion and goodwill should be part of the agenda of this city,” Kahn said. “The name Sandton Drive is not offensive to anyone. Yet, they want to replace it with the name of someone who, together with her organization, the PFLP, are synonymous with hijacking of planes and killing Jews in cold blood. Clearly this is offensive to more than one constituency in Johannesburg.”
Khaled — a member of the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP), an internationally designated terrorist organization — hijacked a Tel Aviv-bound plane in 1969 and attempted another hijacking, this time of an El Al flight, in 1970. Khaled was arrested in London, where the El Al pilot diverted the plane, and later released in exchange for hostages from another hijacking.
Beyond hijackings, PFLP has also been involved in suicide bombings, shootings, and assassinations.
The proposal to rename Sandton Drive as Leila Khaled Drive was initially adopted by the City Council in Johannesburg in 2018. Then-City Council member Thapelo Amad proposed the motion. According to the South African Zionist Federation (SAZF), Amad on Oct. 7 of last year posted online: “We stand with Hamas, Hamas stands with us, together we are Palestine and Palestine will be free. With our souls, with our blood, we will conquer Al Aqsa.”
In recent weeks, the name change has been considered once again, with the government in Johannesburg preparing to act on the proposal. The measure, which was supported by the ANC in 2018, is open for public comment until Friday.
“Their intention can only be interpreted as wanting to cause hurt and division,” Kahn told The Algemeiner. “The intention of renaming a street should be around honoring a South African who had made a contribution to the city or even the country. Had they done, so, we would have no problem. Yet, the choice of Leila Khaled is contemptible, and goes against the purpose of renaming any street.”
Sandton Drive is a major road in Johannesburg, and Sandton, the neighborhood in which the street is located, is home to many of South Africa’s 50,000 Jews and at least four synagogues, among other Jewish institutions.
“The SAJBD is objecting to this outrageous proposition as it flouts both the Johannesburg policy on the naming of streets and is designed to divide our city,” Kahn said, arguing that the “narrow-minded” decision is unnecessarily divisive at a time when the city “needs investment and a boost to its economy.”
The SAZF has also lodged a protest with the South African government, expressing similar concerns.
“Renaming Sandton Drive after a failed terrorist with ties to a globally recognized terrorist organization not only sows division among residents but also contradicts the city’s renaming policy. It potentially burdens businesses with address changes and undermines confidence in the city,” SAZF spokesperson Rolene Marks said in a statement. “This change appears deliberately provocative towards the US Consulate located on Sandton Drive, potentially discouraging American investment in Johannesburg. It’s particularly concerning given that the US government has officially designated the PFLP as a terrorist organization.”
The backlash over the City of Johannesburg’s proposal came as the South African Jewish community continued to oppose the national government’s approach to Israel.
South Africa’s ANC government has been one of the harshest critics of the Jewish state since Oct. 7 of last year, when Hamas-led Palestinian terrorists launched the ongoing war in Gaza with their invasion of and massacre across southern Israeli communities.
South Africa temporarily withdrew its diplomats from Israel and shuttered its embassy in Tel Aviv shortly after the Oct. 7 Hamas pogrom, saying that the Pretoria government was “extremely concerned at the continued killing of children and innocent civilians” in Gaza.
In December, South Africa hosted two Hamas officials who attended a government-sponsored conference in solidarity with the Palestinians. One of the officials had been sanctioned by the US government for his role with the terrorist organization.
In May, members of South Africa’s Jewish community protested Foreign Minister Naledi Pandor’s call for students and university leaders to intensify the anti-Israel demonstrations that have engulfed college campuses across the US.
Later that month, South African President Cyril Ramaphosa led the crowd at an election rally in a chant of “From the river to the sea, Palestine shall be free” — a popular slogan among anti-Israel activists that has been widely interpreted as a genocidal call for the destruction of the Jewish state, which is located between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean Sea.
In January, the South African government failed in its bid to argue before the International Court of Justice (ICJ) that Israel’s defensive war in Gaza constituted a “genocide.” However, the top UN court in May ordered Israel to halt its military operations against Hamas in the southern Gaza city of Rafah. The emergency ruling was part of South Africa’s ongoing case at the ICJ.
The post South African Jews Decry ‘Outrageous’ Push to Rename Johannesburg Street After Palestinian Terrorist first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
A History of Hanukkah and Jewish Survival
A Hanukkah menorah. Photo: Pixabay
We like to think that Hanukkah was the great victory of Judah, the son of Mattiyahu the Priest (who initiated the resistance) against the mighty Syrian or Seleucid Greeks over 2,000 years ago. The Seleucid campaign against Judea began when Antiochus the 4th invaded in 167 BCE). He believed his culture was far superior to that of the Jews. Jewish merchants were beginning to rival the Greeks in the Eastern Mediterranean, so commercial rivalry was a factor too.
Judah (the name Maccabee is not mentioned in Talmudic sources) did indeed defeat some Seleucid armies and retook the Temple and purified it in 164 BCE. But in fact, the fighting went on for some five years.
Although in between, the Temple did indeed function the way it did before Antiochus, nevertheless it was not a clear-cut victory. The in-fighting in the court of the Syrian Greeks, the assassination of kings and rival generals, all contributed to stalemate with Syrians still holding on to their fortress in Jerusalem.
Judah was killed in the battle of Elasa in 160 BCE. Judah’s brother Jonathan was killed in 143 BCE. Only with the last brother Simon, who was recognized officially as Judea’s high priest and the head of the Judean state in 142 CE, did Judea become independent, for a while.
Judah did not establish the annual eight-day festival we have today. He did replicate the Eight Days of King Solomon’s original dedication of the first Temple when he re-took it. The late Talmudic rabbis established the ongoing eight days to commemorate the miracle of the oil not mentioned earlier. And their failure to mention Judah indicates their disapproval of the Hasmonean dynasty in general as it played out.
Was Hanukkah just a matter of military conquest — or just cultural disagreement with the Greeks? There were no Palestinians to be seen. In competing for markets, Greeks killed Jews and Jews killed Greeks back. John Hyrcanus, Simon’s successor ,was particularly effective at retaliating against those who attacked Jews even beyond his territory.
Within the Jewish community of Judea, there were huge divisions, which reflected the precise divisions that exist today within the Jewish communities in Israel and the Diaspora.
Succeeding generations could not even agree what the significance of Hanukkah was. For those who fought, it was a military victory that ultimately led to the establishment of regaining and re-opening the Temple and an autonomous state.
For the rabbis of the Talmudic era, who were scarred by the Roman conquests, it was a celebration of the spiritual flame kept burning by the few against the many. Judah the fighter was not mentioned. Some saw it as a response to the Diaspora festival of Purim, others as the interaction between the Diaspora and Israel, with both suffering from different pressures and antagonisms. What we now call antisemitism.
A lot has changed over the last 2,000 years — and a lot has not.
Empires have come and gone, rulers have risen and died, and Jews remain a people as Bilaam says (Numbers 23:9) “A nation that dwells alone and is not regarded (or valued) by the other peoples.” We have always been loners. Does this really matter? For some it does and that explains why so many Jews have always abandoned the confines of Jewish life to try to thrive in the non-Jewish world. It also explains why others have fought for their beliefs and freedom — and why some have become zealots.
We should not be surprised today to discover how many Jews are antagonistic to the Jewish people, and certainly not about how the non-Jewish world continues to be extremely ambivalent towards us. Both in the Middle East and in the West, communities are now no longer as monochromatic or as unified as they once were. Mass migrations have changed the complexity of many societies and divided them against themselves.
This is why the Hanukkah story is so important. It’s the only festival we have that records the military triumph of Israel against its opponents, and the survival of our tradition despite the continuous, repeated attempts to snuff us out.
We have thrived despite it all. In our prayers every single day of the year, we think of Jerusalem and returning to it in our minds if not in our bodies. This is something that the world just does not get — because they are not concerned with history or facts. This is our story, whichever the way the wind blows, and they will not snuff our lights out.
The author is a writer and rabbi, currently based in New York.
The post A History of Hanukkah and Jewish Survival first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
Deriving Harmony: A ‘Mathematical’ Reading of Parshat Vayigash and the Story of Yosef
Reading from a Torah scroll in accordance with Sephardi tradition. Photo: Sagie Maoz via Wikimedia Commons.
Parshat Vayigash brings us to one of the most emotionally charged moments in the Torah.
Yosef, now a powerful ruler in Egypt, reveals his identity to his brothers, setting the stage for reconciliation after years of separation, pain, and misunderstanding. The parsha highlights themes of forgiveness, unity, and divine providence, as fractured relationships are mended and a family realigns with its shared destiny.
From a mathematical perspective, the resolution in Parshat Vayigash can be seen as a system of linear equations. Just as a system requires each equation to be satisfied simultaneously at a single solution point, the family’s conflicting perspectives and needs converge into a unified outcome. This metaphor provides a structured lens through which to understand the intricate interplay of values, responsibilities, and emotions in this story.
The Mathematical Framework: Systems of Linear Equations
A system of linear equations consists of two or more equations that must be satisfied simultaneously. For example:
Here, x and y represent variables, while the coefficients
This concept mirrors the narrative arc of Parshat Vayigash. Yosef’s perspective, shaped by his journey and Divine purpose, represents one equation, while Yehdah’s plea, grounded in responsibility and repentance, represents another. Both have their own unique parameters, yet the Torah demands that their paths intersect to achieve harmony.
Yosef’s Equation
Yosef’s trajectory is shaped by years of hardship and Divine intervention. Sold into slavery by his brothers, he rises to become the viceroy of Egypt, using his position to save countless lives during a devastating famine. His equation includes parameters such as forgiveness, hidden identity, and the fulfillment of his prophetic dreams. Yosef operates with a long view of history, understanding that his suffering was part of a Divine plan to ensure the survival of his family.
In mathematical terms, Yosef’s line reflects a higher-level perspective. His decisions are calculated, testing his brothers to see if they have truly changed. He places Benjamin in a position of vulnerability, forcing his brothers to confront their past actions and demonstrate growth.
Yehudah’s Equation
Yehudah’s line, meanwhile, is rooted in loyalty, repentance, and self-sacrifice. Once a key player in the sale of Yosef, Yehudah now steps forward as the family’s moral leader. His heartfelt plea to protect Benjamin, even offering himself as a slave in his brother’s place, demonstrates a profound transformation. Yehudah’s parameters include responsibility for his actions, a commitment to his father Yakov, and a willingness to endure personal suffering for the sake of his family’s unity.
Yehudah’s line represents a grounded, immediate perspective. He is not thinking about grand plans or Divine foresight; he is focused on the here and now, ensuring Benjamin’s safety and preserving his father’s fragile spirit.
Solving the System
The brilliance of Parshat Vayigash lies in how these two “lines” converge. Yosef and Yehudah begin from vastly different places: Yosef with his concealed identity and tests, and Yehudah with his guilt and earnestness. Through their charged interaction, each adjusts their position, mirroring the process of manipulating equations to find a solution.
Yosef’s eventual revelation — “I am Yosef” — is the moment when the system resolves. At this point, all conditions are satisfied: Yosef’s need to confirm his brothers’ repentance, Yehudah’s commitment to his family’s well-being, and the overarching Divine plan to reunite Yakov’s children.
The solution to the system is a point of harmony where all variables align. The family’s unity is restored, not by erasing their differences, but by finding a resolution that respects and incorporates each perspective.
Lessons from the Formula
The system of linear equations in Parshat Vayigash teaches us profound lessons about reconciliation and harmony. Just as mathematical systems require each equation to maintain its integrity while finding common ground, human relationships thrive when differing perspectives are acknowledged and balanced. The Torah shows us that unity is not about uniformity; it’s about creating a space where all voices can contribute to a shared solution.
The process of solving such a system highlights the importance of adjustments and dialogue. Yosef and Yehudah’s interactions involve testing, negotiation, and moments of vulnerability. The result is a meaningful reconciliation that strengthens their family’s bond.
Conclusion
Parshat Vayigash offers a timeless blueprint for resolving conflicts and building unity. Through the lens of a system of linear equations, we see how Yosef and Yehudah’s distinct trajectories intersect to create a harmonious outcome. Each perspective brings its own parameters, yet the solution honors them all. This mathematical metaphor not only deepens our understanding of the parsha, but also inspires us to seek alignment in our own relationships, finding points of connection where harmony can flourish.
Rochie Gottheil is an analyst by day and creates high school and college math curricula in her spare time. She can be reached at Rochel.desk@gmail.com
The post Deriving Harmony: A ‘Mathematical’ Reading of Parshat Vayigash and the Story of Yosef first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
How Hamas Lies About Israeli Hostages — With the BBC’s Help
The BBC logo is seen at the entrance at Broadcasting House, the BBC headquarters in central London. Photo by Vuk Valcic / SOPA Images/Sipa USA.
On Dec. 17, the BBC News website published a report by Yolande Knell and Rushdi Abualouf headlined “Gaza ceasefire talks in final stage, Palestinian negotiator tells BBC.” Readers of that report were told that:
Of 96 hostages still held in Gaza, 62 are assumed by Israel to still be alive.
As was the case in another BBC report published a week earlier, that portrayal fails to clarify that Hamas also holds two Israeli civilians who entered the Gaza Strip in 2014 and 2015, and the bodies of two soldiers who were killed in 2014.
Readers are also told that Israel’s concern for the security of its civilians is “problematic” and a nod to the “far right”:
According to his spokesman, [Israel’s minister of defence] Katz told members of the Israeli parliament’s foreign affairs committee on Monday: “We have not been this close to an agreement on the hostages since the previous deal,” referring to an exchange of hostages and Palestinian prisoners in Israel in November 2023.
He has since written on X: “My position on Gaza is clear. After we defeat Hamas’s military and governmental power in Gaza, Israel will have security control over Gaza with full freedom of action,” comparing this to the situation in the occupied West Bank.
“We will not allow any terrorist activity against Israeli communities and Israeli citizens from Gaza. We will not allow a return to the reality of before 7 October.”
Such comments are likely to be seen as problematic by negotiators trying to bridge gaps with Hamas. However, in Israel, they are seen as vital to guarantee the support of far-right Israeli cabinet ministers who have previously warned they would not agree to what they have described as a “reckless” deal in Gaza.
In a televised report about the talks which was aired on the BBC News channel on the same day, Rushdi Abualouf (located in Istanbul) told viewers that: [emphasis in italics in the original, emphasis in bold added]
“…also the first stage will allow the dead hostages — the civilian dead hostages — also will be released. So not only alive [sic] hostages but also the people who were killed in the airstrikes and they are civilians…”
With that highlighted statement Abualouf promoted and mainstreamed the long-standing Hamas propaganda whereby any deceased hostages were killed as a result of Israeli actions.
In August we saw that when such claims were shown to be false, the BBC failed to adequately inform its audiences when Hamas murdered six Israeli hostages, including American Hersh Goldberg-Polin.
Among the civilian hostages known to be deceased, are those who were murdered during the October 7 onslaught and their bodies then abducted and taken to the Gaza Strip. They include Idan Shtivi, Judith Weinstein Haggai, Gadi Haggai, Dror Or, Yair Yaakov, Manny Godard, Ilan Weiss, Eitan Levy, Ofra Keidar and two Thai nationals. Additional hostages were kidnapped alive and subsequently died or were murdered while in captivity.
Rushdi Abualouf not only promoted disinformation by claiming that the deceased civilian hostages were “killed in the airstrikes” — he deliberately misled BBC audiences by means of brazen promotion of the Hamas narrative, which is intended to erase its responsibility for the deaths of hostages and place the blame on Israel.
Hadar Sela is the co-editor of CAMERA UK — an affiliate of the Committee for Accuracy in Middle East Reporting and Analysis (CAMERA), where a version of this article first appeared.
The post How Hamas Lies About Israeli Hostages — With the BBC’s Help first appeared on Algemeiner.com.