Monday, November 30, 2009

George Gilder Silicon Israel How market capitalism saved the Jewish state

City Journal Home.
George Gilder
Silicon Israel
How market capitalism saved the Jewish state
Summer 2009

The most precious resource in the world economy is human genius, which we may define as the ability to devise significant inventions that enhance survival and prosperity. At any one time, genius is embodied in just a few score thousand people, a creative minority that accounts for most human accomplishment and wealth. Cities and nations rise and thrive when they welcome entrepreneurial and technical genius; when they overtax, criminalize, or ostracize it, they wither.

During the twentieth century, an astounding proportion of geniuses have been Jewish, and the fate of nations from Russia westward has largely reflected how they have treated their Jews. When Jews lived in Vienna and Budapest early in the century, these cities of the Hapsburg Empire were world centers of intellectual activity and economic growth; then the Nazis came to power, the Jews fled or were killed, and growth and culture disappeared with them. When Jews came to New York and Los Angeles, those cities towered over the global economy and culture. When Jews escaped Europe for Los Alamos and, more recently, for Silicon Valley, the world’s economy and military balance shifted decisively. Thus many nations have faced a crucial moral test: Will they admire, reward, and emulate a minority that has achieved towering accomplishments? Or will they writhe in resentment and plot its destruction?

The test has assumed a global face today, when a large proportion of the world’s genius resides in Israel. Israel has very recently become a center of innovation, second in absolute achievement only to the United States, and on a per-capita basis dwarfing the contributions of all other nations, America included. How Israel is treated by the rest of the world thus represents a crucial test for civilization. Will we pass it?

My interest in Israeli innovation began in 1998, when I invited an Israeli physicist named David Medved to speak at the Gilder/Forbes Telecosm conference. Medved described the promise of “free-space optics”—what most of us call “light”—for high-end communications among corporate buildings and campuses. He also spoke of air force experiments in Israel that used the still-higher frequencies and shorter waves of ultraviolet light for battlefield communications. Some of the most important explorations of electromagnetic technology, I realized, were happening in Israel.

Nearly a decade later, Medved introduced me to his son Jonathan, a pioneering Israeli venture capitalist. In his offices high over Jerusalem, the younger Medved told me the startling tale of Israel’s rapid rise to worldwide preeminence in high technology. I had long known that Israel held laboratories and design centers for American microchip companies. I knew that, in a real sense, much American technology could reasonably bear the label israel inside. I was familiar with a few prominent Israeli start-ups, such as the electric-car company launched byWired cover boy Shai Agassi, which boldly bypassed the entire auto industry in redesigning the automobile from scratch, and Gavriel Iddan’s company Given Imaging, with its digestible camera in a capsule for endoscopies and colonoscopies.

But what I learned in Jerusalem was that Israel was not only a site for research and outsourcing and the occasional conceptual coup, but the emerging world leader, outside the United States, in launching new companies and technologies. This tiny embattled country, smaller than most American states, is outperforming European and Asian Goliaths ten to 100 times larger. In a watershed moment for the country, Israel in 2007 passed Canada as the home of the most foreign companies on the technology-heavy NASDAQ index; it is now launching far more high-tech companies per year than any country in Europe.

To take one example among many, Israel is a prime source not only of free-space optics but also of another form of hidden light: ultra-wideband technology. This technology features wireless transmissions that are not, like cell-phone signals, millions of hertz wide at relatively high power, but billions of hertz wide—gigahertz—at power too low to be detected by ordinary antennas. The technology is typically used for mundane purposes, such as connecting personal computers and televisions wirelessly. But a firm called Camero, in Netanya, Israel, has invented an ingenious ultra-wideband device that enables counterterrorist fighters and police to see through walls and identify armed men and other threats within. An easily portable box about the size and weight of a laptop computer, Camero’s Xaver 400 could suffuse an urban battlefield with hidden light that would penetrate walls and bunkers and be detectable only by its users. Such inventions are changing the balance of power in urban guerrilla warfare, to the advantage of the civilized and the dismay of the barbarians.

As I investigated companies like Camero, it became clear to me that Israel had achieved an economic miracle that was important to the United States and to the world. As late as the mid-1980s, Israel was a basket case, with inflation rates spiking from 400 percent to nearly 1,000 percent by early 1985. As recently as 1990, Israel was a relatively insignificant technology force, aside from a few military and agricultural initiatives. Yet in little more than a decade, the country has become an engine of global technology progress. Still more important, Israel’s technology leadership has made it a vital ally of the United States against a global movement of jihadist terror. How did it make such an astonishing leap?

With the history of twentieth-century science and technology largely a saga of Jewish accomplishment, it might seem to have been foreordained that after World War II, the rising Jewish nation would emerge as a scientific and technological leader. Yet for all the talk of deserts in bloom, the miracle did not occur quickly. For many decades after Israel achieved independence in 1948, the Jews assembled there generated few significant companies or technologies, no significant financial institutions to fund them, and little important science. Accomplishments made in American states like California, New York, and even New Jersey exceeded those of Israeli enterprise, and Jews outside Israel far outperformed Jews in Israel.

In the country’s early years, its research activities were mostly public, devoted to defense, and paltry by any standard. As late as 1965, the ratio of research-and-development spending in Israel to its gross domestic product was under 1 percent, nearly the lowest in the entire Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, behind only Italy. Just one-tenth of 1 percent of Israel’s employees were engineers, putting it far behind the United States and even Sweden. Michael Porter’s definitive 1990 tome The Competitive Advantage of Nationsmentioned Israel only once.

All this despite the presence of the Technion, one of the world’s supreme institutions of practical science and the chief contribution of Israel’s founders to its eventual preeminence in technology. Located atop a hill overlooking Haifa, the institute sprawls over its spectacular site with a massive maze of concrete institutional architecture as formidable as MIT’s: labs, auditoriums, nuclear facilities, giant telescopes, and research monoliths, mostly named for American Jewish tycoons. But nearly 80 years passed after the Technion’s opening in 1924, with Jews around the world forging the science of the age in an intellectual efflorescence unparalleled in human history, without any exceptional contributions from Israel.

How to explain this lassitude? For much of Israel’s short history, the country has been a reactionary force, upholding a philosophy of victimization and socialist redistribution that could only impede its progress. In 1957, a team of American economic consultants found that Israel’s “high labor costs . . . reflected the high degree of job security . . . [and] the absence of adequate incentive to or rewards for superior efficiency or performance.” This was partly a result, they added, of “virtually complete protection from foreign competition.” Two years later, A. J. Meyer of the Harvard Center for Middle Eastern Studies noted “uncertainty in the minds of many [Israeli] industrial producers that theirs is the ‘good’ occupation or that society really gives them credit—financially and in status—for their efforts.” He also cited “welfare state concepts [that] often dictate that incompetent workers stay on payrolls.”

Many of Israel’s Jews, as the writer Midge Decter described them, “were coming into the country armed with their socialism and their ideologies of labor and a Jewish return to the soil.” Imagine it: urban socialists trying to reclaim their past glory and save themselves in a hostile world by returning to the soil in a desert! They created communal experiments—kibbutzim—and put intellectuals to work with hoes and shovels, for all the world like a voluntary version of Chairman Mao’s Cultural Revolution. In a truly menacing démarche of ideological madness, they attempted to abolish the family and private property.

Panicked, moreover, by the Jewish caricatures and stereotypes wielded by their enemies, they resolved to become mendicant nebbishes—touring the centers of Western money and industry with tin cups in hand—rather than bankers and financiers. They assigned close to a third of the economy to the ownership of Histadrut, a socialist workers’ organization prone to threatening nationwide strikes. Under Histadrut pressure, they instituted minimum wages that stifled employment and propelled inflation. Then they imposed more controls on wages, prices, and rents, making everything scarce.

In a general enthusiasm for public ownership of the means of production and finance, the government through the 1990s owned four major banks, 200 corporations, and much of the land. Israel’s taxes rose to a confiscatory 56 percent of total earnings, close to the highest in the world, stifling even those private initiatives that managed to pass through the country’s sieves of socialism. Erecting barriers of bureaucracy, sentiment, and culture, Israeli leaders balked the entrepreneurs and inventors who gathered there, creating a country inhospitable to Jewish genius.

Far more welcoming of Jewish and Israeli talent in those days were American companies, particularly Intel. It was an Israeli engineer, Dov Frohman, who invented electrically programmable read-only memory (EPROM), a chip-based permanent memory that could retain a personal computer’s core programming even when the power was off. EPROM would contribute some 80 percent of Intel’s profits over the next decade and sustain the company’s growth to become the world’s leading semiconductor company. (With the help of a company called Xicor, started by Israeli Raffi Klein, EPROM soon evolved into the flash memories that today dominate the industry. Today, flash memories are a forte of the Israeli microchip industry and lie behind many American miracles of miniaturization, from so-called thumb drives to Apple’s newer iPods to Hewlett-Packard’s Mini netbooks.)

After leaving Intel in 1974 for a charitable sojourn teaching electrical engineering in Ghana, Frohman returned to Israel to establish an Intel design center in Haifa. This laboratory soon conceived the so-called 8088 microprocessor, which was incorporated into the first IBM personal computer. In 1979, also in Haifa, Frohman supervised the development of Intel’s first mathematical floating-point coprocessor, a critical element in most subsequent personal computers and workstations.

As a guest in the country, albeit an imposing one, Intel could tap the genius of Jews while bypassing the rules, tolls, and taxes that frustrated Israeli companies. Following the Haifa design center, Frohman wanted Intel Israel to establish a semiconductor “fab,” or factory, in Jerusalem, together with the necessary chemical and engineering support services. After a battle with Intel executive Andrew Grove—himself a Hungarian Jew who became a legendary figure in Silicon Valley—over the costs of training Israelis to run the fab, Frohman managed to enlist $60 million in subsidies from the Israeli government and led the project to completion in three and a half years. By the late 1980s, the Jerusalem fab, Intel’s first outside the United States, was producing some 75 percent of the global output of Intel’s flagship 386 microprocessor and was gearing up to produce the 486 as well. Frohman later persuaded Grove to open production plants in Kiryat Gat in the Negev, Israel’s desert. Meanwhile, from Intel’s Israeli design centers—by now, there were several—emerged several generations of the Pentium microprocessor, as well as the Centrino low-power processor that integrated Wi-Fi wireless capabilities into portable PCs.

For all the achievements of Israelis working for Intel and other foreign firms, Israel’s native technology sector languished. Redemption came in unexpected forms. One was an infusion of genius: nearly a million immigrants, chiefly from the Soviet Union, whom Israel absorbed in the late 1980s and the 1990s. Impelled by constant harassment from the U.S. government—including Senator Henry “Scoop” Jackson’s emancipation amendment, which for a decade was attached to any American legislation of interest to the USSR—the Soviet government finally agreed to a frontal lobotomy of its economy. Under Gorbachev, it released the bulk of the Soviet Jews, who had continued, despite constant oppression, to supply many of the technical skills that kept the USSR afloat as a superpower.

The influx of Soviet Jews into Israel represented a 25 percent population increase in ten years, a tsunami of new arrivals that would be equivalent to the entire population of France being accepted into the United States. Largely barred in the USSR from owning land or businesses, many of these Jews had honed their minds into keen instruments of algorithmic science, engineering, and mathematics. Most had wanted to come to America but were diverted to Israel by an agreement between Israel and the United States. Few knew Hebrew or saw a need for it. At best, they were ambivalent Zionists. But many were ferociously smart, fervently anti-Communist, and disdainful of their new country’s bizarre commitment to a socialist ethos that punished achievement.

At the same time as the flood of Soviet immigrants, a smaller but seminal wave of Americans arrived in Israel from such companies as IBM and Bell Laboratories, with a knowledge of Silicon Valley and an interest in opportunities in Israel. Capping off and funding these catalytic outsiders was a generation of eminent American retirees who arrived in Israel with billions of dollars of available capital, petawatts of imperious brainpower, a practiced disdain for bureaucratic pettifogs, and Olympian confidence in their own judgment and capabilities.

Mix the leadership of these dynamic capitalists with a million restive and insurgent Soviets, and the reaction was economically incandescent. Throw in natural leadership from the irrepressible Natan Sharansky, who had faced down confinement in the Gulag and formed a new conservative political party in Israel to mobilize his Russian compatriots, and the impact reverberated through the social and political order as well. Such an influx could not be clamped or channeled, tapered or intimidated into the existing economic framework, and, as Israeli financier Tal Keinan remarks of the Russian newcomers, “they could not all work for Intel.” Today, immigrants from the former Soviet Union constitute fully half of Israel’s high-tech workers.

Despite the dramatic progress of the 1990s, at the dawn of this century, Israel still lacked a financial sector capable of propelling the nation into the globally dominant role it stands poised to fill today. To get there would take one more great reform.

The successful allocation of capital, like the launch of a new technology, is an elegant expression of the capitalist law that mind rules and matter serves. Jews throughout history have excelled in this most intellectual of capitalist endeavors. And yet Israel until recently had virtually no investment houses, deep capital markets, or venture capital. With performance fees barred, hedge funds were essentially illegal. “All my Jewish friends were making their money at Goldman Sachs, while Israel’s finance was dominated by a heavily subsidized labor union,” remembers Keinan. “The Zionist Rothschilds dominated European banking, but the only significant Rothschild presence in Israel was a winery.”

In the mid-1980s, Yitzhak Shamir’s Likud government, with Benjamin “Bibi” Netanyahu as its United Nations ambassador, did cut taxes—increasing the rewards of work and investment by some 30 percent, dramatically boosting economic growth, and reducing inflation. As prime minister in the 1990s, Netanyahu also ushered in dramatic deregulation, along with tax cuts that brought in floods of new revenue. Further spurring local entrepreneurs was the Yozma program in 1993, which waived double taxation on foreign venture-capital investments in Israel and put up a matching fund of $100 million from the government. Demand for the money became so intense that the government hiked the amount and doubled the matching-funds requirement. Nevertheless, throughout the 1990s, most of the money powering Israel’s technological ascent came from the Israeli government or from American technology companies. As the millennium dawned, Israel had failed to create a financial-services industry or to wrest control of much of Israel’s capital from the hands of Histadrut.

The force driving the Israelis decisively out of their socialist slough into the modern world of finance was once again the ingenuity of Netanyahu. As finance minister, Netanyahu used the financial crisis of 2003 and 2004, precipitated by the latest campaign of Palestinian terror, as a lever to transform Israel’s economy from a largely socialized domain dependent on foreign finance into one of the world’s most open and flourishing financial systems. In the process, he created what occasional advisor Keinan today calls “the greatest opportunity in our lifetimes.”

An Israeli supply-sider, Netanyahu faced the adamant opposition of Histadrut and its allies in the Knesset. To overcome the hostility to finance capitalism that had long hobbled the Israeli economy, Netanyahu enlisted vital help from President George W. Bush and his treasury secretary, John Snow. Netanyahu sought a sovereign loan guarantee that would give Israeli bonds the full faith and credit of the United States Treasury, so that despite intifadas and other perils, Israel could issue bonds on the same terms as the world’s leading economy. Not wanting the U.S. to appear a patsy, Snow refused to do the deal without a significant quid pro quo, stipulating that Netanyahu secure from the Knesset a series of major financial reforms.

First, Histadrut, which dominates the pension system in Israel, had to give up its direct line to the Israeli treasury, which had guaranteed it an inflation-adjusted 6 percent annual yield. This special arrangement would be phased out over a period of 20 years. Starting immediately with the first 5 percent of its holdings, Histadrut would need to begin finding other ways to invest its $300 million per month of cash flow. Somehow a financial industry would have to arise in Israel to handle this huge trove of funds. A second briar-patch reform demanded by Snow was the immediate privatization of Israel’s state-owned industries, reducing the government’s stake in these companies from an average of 60 percent ownership to minority ownerships of about 20 percent. Among the privatized ventures were oil refineries, nearly all the banks, the Bezeq telephone monopoly, and the national airline, El Al. The third key reform was the emancipation of the financial-services industry, complete with legalization of investment banks, international private equity funds, and performance fees for hedge funds. Eliminated were double taxes not merely on investments in Israel but also on international investment activities by Israelis. The Netanyahu-Snow agenda went into effect on January 1, 2005.

In under 25 years—starting from those first modest tax reforms of the mid-1980s—Israel has accomplished the most overwhelming transformation in the history of economics, from a nondescript laggard in the industrial world to a luminous first. Today, on a per-capita basis, Israel far leads the world in research and technological creativity. Between 1991 and 2000, even before the big reform of 2005, Israel’s annual venture-capital outlays, nearly all private, rose nearly 60-fold, from $58 million to $3.3 billion; companies launched by Israeli venture funds rose from 100 to 800; and Israel’s information-technology revenues rose from $1.6 billion to $12.5 billion. By 1999, Israel ranked second only to the United States in invested private-equity capital as a share of GDP. And it led the world in the share of its growth attributable to high-tech ventures: 70 percent.

Even a year or two later—while the rest of the world slumped after the millennial telecom and dot-com crash and Israel suffered an acute recession—its venture capitalists strengthened its lead in technological enterprise. During the first five years of the twenty-first century, venture-capital outlays in Israel rivaled venture-capital outlays in all of the United States outside California, long the world’s paramount source of entrepreneurial activity in high technology.

Today, Israel’s tech supremacy is even greater. A 2008 survey of the world’s venture capitalists by Deloitte & Touche showed that in six key fields—telecom, microchips, software, biopharmaceuticals, medical devices, and clean energy—Israel ranked second only to the United States in technological innovation. Germany, ten times larger, roughly tied Israel. In 2008, Israel produced 483 venture-backed companies with just over $2 billion invested; Germany produces approximately 100 venture-backed companies annually. The rankings registered absolute performance, but adjusted for its population, Israel comes in far ahead of all other countries, including the United States.

Venture capital is the most catalytic force in the world economy. In the United States, venture-backed companies produced nearly one-fifth of GDP in 2007. At a time when American venture capital is flagging under the financial crisis, the emergence of a comparable venture scene in Israel, linked closely to Silicon Valley, is providential for both the American economy and its military defense.

This development makes Israel one of America’s most important economic allies. Israel’s creativity now pervades many of the most powerful and popular new technologies, from personal computers to iPods, from the Internet to the medical center.

Early in 2009, for example, Intel launched a massive new advertising campaign to celebrate what it described as its most important advance since its initial invention of the microprocessor chip some 40 years ago: the new Core i7 device, code-named “Nehalem,” which combined leading-edge computing power with unprecedented economy of energy use. Like many of the inventions that have made Intel the world’s leading microchip company, the Core i7 was designed in Israel.

Israelis are also leaders in arguably the most important technology arena today, particularly for military uses. This is the ability of computers using parallelism to sense, accept, and process information as quickly as modern transmission techniques—especially fiber-optics lines—can deliver it. A representative device in this effort, and a powerful symbol of Israel’s leading position in Internet technology, is the “network processor.” Just as a Pentium microchip is the microprocessor that makes most PCs work, the network processor is the device that makes the next-generation Internet work, doing the vital routing and switching at network nodes. The next-generation Internet will allow “petaflops” (1015 floating-point operations per second) of real-time computational power to be deployed to virtually any point on the earth. The network processor will let any desktop computer access data and processing power exponentially greater than that incorporated in any PC or any single corporate data center.

The next-generation Internet and its associated technologies will be both the next great machine of capitalism and the next great weapon in its defense. Only by accepting and processing sensory data as fast as or faster than the human brain registering a glimpse of a known terrorist’s face buried beneath $100,000 worth of plastic surgery will computers make the leap from glorified adding machines to indispensable allies against the forces of chaos and terror. Leading the field are companies like Eli Fruchter’s EZchip (in which I have long been an investor), launched in the late 1990s with a few dollars, no customers, and a compelling PowerPoint presentation in lieu of any actual products. In less than a decade, EZchip drove most of its rivals—firms like Intel, Motorola, and IBM—to the sidelines, and welcomed the rest, like Cisco and Juniper, to its list of major customers.

During a trip to Israel in 2008, Fruchter, Amir Eyal, and Guy Koren of EZchip took me out to dinner in Caesarea. The restaurant was on the Mediterranean beach. Above the beach stood the ruins of Roman temples and terraces, theaters and arches, all surfaced with golden sandstone and carefully refurbished and illuminated. Shops and restaurants were decorously arrayed along the beach. The rush of water on the sand, the scent of fish in the air, the glow of sunset, and the lights on the Roman stone all lent the area a magical feeling of peace and prosperity.

I thought of Gaza, under 100 miles to the south, with similar beaches and balmy weather, and similar possibilities of human advance. Could the Gazans join the Israelis to create a Riviera on their exquisite beaches, their glowing sands? To do so, they would have to leave behind a world of zero-sum chimeras and fantasies of jihadist revenge. And they would discover that their greatest ally is a man long portrayed as their most feared enemy, a man who, having led for decades the fight to liberate Israeli Jews from self-destructive socialist resentment, now offers to bring all of Palestine and perhaps all of Arabia on the same journey.

Netanyahu’s vision is an Israel that, as a global financial center, could transform the economics of the Middle East. Israel could become a Hong Kong of the desert. Just as Hong Kong ultimately reshaped the Chinese economy in its own image when Deng Xiaoping mimicked its free economy, Israel could become a force for economic liberation in the Middle East, reaching out to Palestinians and other Arabs with the blandishments of commercial opportunity. After all, it has long been Israeli enterprise that has attracted Arabs to Palestine. Between 1967, when Israel took over the West Bank and Gaza Strip, and 1987, when the first intifada erupted, those two territories were one of the fastest-growing economies on earth. GDP surged 30 percent a year for a decade, the Arab population nearly tripled, six new universities were launched, and Arab longevity jumped from 43 years to 74.

Netanyahu has long believed that the peace process as we know it is irrelevant, focused on a handful of issues that breed anger and perpetuate conflict. Meanwhile, true peace—and the promise of a decent life—lies waiting to be picked up by those Palestinians and Israelis who are willing, and now increasingly able, to invest in creation over destruction.

George Gilder is the founding director of Gilder Technology Associates, a venture capital fund, and a contributing editor of Forbes. His books have sold more than 2 million copies worldwide. The newest is The Israel Test.

Monday, November 23, 2009

Sunday, October 11, 2009

Richard Falk's article on White House Website

Richard Falk wrote an article comparing Jews in Israel to Nazis. White House posted it, since he is a key middle east advisor.
After complaints, the white house removed it...so here it is...

Post from Polish Americans:
Richard Falk, the professor of international law at Princeton University and the UN’s special rapporteur on the Palestinian territories, had accused Israel of violating international law,

Nazi Israel … IndeedImage

Richard Falk, the professor of international law at Princeton University and the UN’s special rapporteur on the Palestinian territories, had accused Israel of violating international law, international humanitarian laws, and the Geneva Convention. He described Israel’s policies against Palestinians and its siege of Gaza as “war crimes”, “genocidal tendencies”, “holocaust implications”, and “holocaust-in-the-making”. He urged the International Criminal Court to look into the possibility of indicting Israeli leaders for war crimes.

Professor Falk had a little taste of Israel’s Nazi-like crimes and human rights violation when he traveled to Israel, last Sunday December 14th, 2008, to visit the Occupied West Bank and Gaza Strip to report on Israel’s compliance with human rights standards and international humanitarian law. The Israelis “detained” Professor Falk at the airport, treated his as a criminal and a threat to the state, humiliated him and deported him next day back to Geneva.

Despite Israel’s strong declaration that every Jew in the world is automatically granted full Israeli citizenship with all the protections this entails, and despite being a Jew himself, Professor Falk was not spared the humiliations and cruelty Israel treats its enemies with

Emboldened by the American blind and unconditional support, defiant Israel wanted to publicly give its finger to Falk and to the UN he represents, declaring itself above all international laws and above any criticism of its crimes and human rights violations even if such criticism comes from a Jew himself. Such defying humiliation of the world political body is meant to distract the UN, and thus the whole world, away from the holocaust it is perpetrating against the 1.5 million Palestinians in Gaza, and all its on-going war crimes against the rest of Palestinians throughout the whole Palestine.

Falk’s accusations of Israel’s Nazi-like holocaustal implications are no different from those made by John Dugard, his predecessor, in several reports on conditions in occupied Palestine. Many conscientious political figures, as well as regular citizens, around the world had described Israel’s policies in occupied Palestine in specific and in the Middle East in general as war crimes and threat to world peace.

Comparing the present-day Israel with Nazi Germany one discovers that the majority of the Israeli policies are the exact copies of the Nazi policies. Nazi Germany had invaded its European neighbors extending from England to Russia. Israel had also invaded all its neighboring countries; Egypt, Jordan, Syria, and Lebanon. It is also heavily involved in the invasion of Iraq and Afghanistan. Its tentacles had also reached African countries as far as South Africa, Somalia, Sudan, Angola, and Sierra Leone.

Nazi war machines used to invade resisting towns, line up the men in the center of the town to be executed in cold blood, and destroyed the whole town as a deterring example for any possible other resisting towns. Worse than the Nazis Israeli forces used to invade peaceful Palestinian towns, execute men, women and children in cold blood everywhere and anywhere they encounter them, dynamite their homes on top of their residents, and finally demolish the whole town making room for new Israeli colonies. Throughout 1948/49 Israelis had committed 70 ugly massacres against Palestinian villagers, and totally destroyed 675 Palestinian towns and villages including their churches and mosques. Such massacres and demolitions followed a set pattern, repeated in one village after the other, indicating a pre-meditated genocidal plan.

In the words of the late Israeli General Moshe Dayan: “The declaration of the State of Israel in 1948 was at the expense of ethnically cleansing 513 Palestinian villages, creating over 700,000 Palestinian refugees and expropriating their lands, homes and businesses in 78% of Palestine … There is not one single place built in this country that did not have a former (Palestinian) population.”

Israel is, still up till today, carrying these same genocidal Nazi-like holocaustal crimes gradually choking 1.5 million Palestinians in Gaza to death by starvation, thirst, lack of fuel and disease. Israeli army is in the process of demolishing 40 Palestinian villages in the Negev desert. Army bulldozers are daily destroying Palestinian homes in major Palestinian cities such as Jerusalem, Bethlehem, Hebron, Ramallah, and Nablus.

The Nazi army perpetrated many massacres against prisoners of war. They used to execute prisoners and dump them in graves the prisoners where ordered to dig for themselves. The Israeli army followed the same method of executing prisoners of war especially during 1956 and 1967 Israeli-Egyptian wars. This was reported in the Israeli Haaretz newspaper in June 27th 2000. The Egyptian Human Rights Organization Secretary-General, Muhammad Munib, submitted a report confirming that Israel had killed between 7,000 to 15,000 Egyptian prisoners of wars of 1956 and 1967. The report also identified the locations of 11 mass graves in Sinai and Israel in which thousands of Egyptian prisoners were buried.

The most prominent of these massacres was the El-Arish massacre, where Israeli forces murdered at least 150 Egyptian prisoners of war. Some of the prisoners were run over by Israeli tanks several times, a crime that is still practiced by Israeli army especially in the Gaza Strip. The story of the massacre was originally reported by Israeli eyewitnesses in Israel’s Yediot Ahronot newspaper, and later by Israeli journalist Ran Adelist on Israeli television. It was also reported by the Washington Report of May/June 1996 pages 27 and 28. The massacre was also recorded by the American USS Liberty surveillance ship that was sailing 12 miles off the shore of Gaza. This massacre was a serious war crime and could have been the main reason for the Israeli attack on the Liberty.

Worse than the Nazis the Israeli army had adopted the policy of targeting young Palestinian children in an attempt to “nudge” Palestinian families to leave the country for the sake of the future of the children, and/or to exhaust their financial resources in treating and caring for their disabled and crippled wounded children; the victims of Israeli snipers. Since the beginning of the second Palestinian Intifada, September 2000, Israeli forces have murdered 1050 children in the Gaza Strip and the West Bank; see also the Guardian, October 21, 2008, and Al-Jazeera, October 22, 2008. A Palestinian Centre for Human Rights report documented, with eyewitness testimonies, at least 68 children were murdered by Israeli army during 12 months from June 07 to June 07 just before the cease fire agreement. The child murder toll rose dramatically during the first six months of 2008 with the Israeli army massive assault of “Operation Winter Heat” against Gaza Strip. Children were directly targeted by Israeli snipers while walking in the streets, while standing in front of their homes, and even while sitting in their school rooms, also directly by drone missiles while playing in courts. They are also the indirect victims if Israeli deliberate targeting densely populated residential areas (Gaza is densely populated) including schools, hospitals and food markets.

The average age of the targeted children was ten years old according to a thousand-page document by Save the Children. The majority of these children were innocent bystanders not participating in any “hostile” activity or causing any threat to the heavily armed Israeli soldiers. In the 80% of the cases of targeted children, the Israeli army prevented the victim from receiving any medical attention. The report also documented that more than 50,000 child victims required medical attention for injuries including gunshot wounds, tear gas inhalation and multiple fractures. A bulletin titled “Deliberate Murder” published in 1989 by the Israeli League for Human and Civil Rights reported the targeting of Palestinian children by Israeli army and snipers from “special unit” had“carefully chosen” the children, who were shot in the head or heart and died instantaneously (Mike Berry & Greg Philo, ‘Israel and Palestine-Competing Histories’, Pluto Press, London, 2006, pp. 86-87).

According to the 1949 Fourth Geneva Convention, and the 1989 UN Convention on the Rights of the Child (signed by Israel) children are to be afforded special protection during international armed conflicts. Israel had, and still is violating these international laws.

Like Nazi Germany, who developed and used all kinds of new weapons including the V2 rocket bomb and nerve gas, Israel has used every kind of weapons, even new experimental ones, against Palestinian civilians. This included the Dumdum exploding bullets, nerve gas, experimental chemical and biological weapons, flying drones, and DIME (Dense Inert Metal Explosive) and the latest remote control high power machine guns (seer shoots) installed on the high towers of the imprisoning wall (separation wall) and operated by teen aged female soldiers in far away operating rooms like computerized war games. Israel is also know to be a nuclear weapon and is always hinting at using it if/when they feel threatened.

Nazi Germans were brainwashed and driven by a social supremacist ideology of the superior Aryan Race (Der Supermann). They believed that they were superior to the rest of the people and that they should rule the world. Similarly the Israelis are brainwashed and driven by the religious supremacist ideology of god’s chosen people in god’s promised land, and believe that it is their religious duty (mitzvah) to cleanse the world from all gentiles (non-Jews), and to establish a Jewish only world government in preparation for the coming of the Messiah. Such dangerous extreme ideology is taught to Israeli children since childhood.

Moshe Feiglin, who won a respectable position on the Likuds’ Knesset list for the upcoming Israeli election is an admirer of Hitler and his superior ideology. In an interview with the Ha’aretz Newspaper in 1995 he described Hitler as a military genius and a great nation builder. “Hitler was an unparallel military genius. Nazism had transformed Germany from a low to a fantastic physical and ideological status. The ragged, trashy youth body turned into a neat and orderly part of society and Germany received an exemplary regime, a proper justice system, and public order. … This was no bunch of thugs. They merely used thugs and homosexuals”. His holocaustal solution to the Palestinian problem, according to his Manhigut ha’Yehudit (Jewish leadership) website, is to order “the complete stoppage of water, electricity and communication” to the four million Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza.

Feiglin expresses the inner sentiment of every Israeli political leader starting from their first Prime Minister Ben Gurion up to Tzipi Livni, the latest acting Prime Minister and Minister of Foreign Affair, who have been calling for the murder and the transfer of Palestinians out of the god’s promised land of Israel (Erez Israel). Their real policies become obvious and louder in their campaign rhetoric.

Such genocidal holocaustal tendencies are nurtured, encouraged and called for by top Israeli Rabbis and political leaders. Rabbi Yousef Obadia, the top Israeli religious leader, Rabbi Yisrael Rosen, director of the Tsomet Institute, Rabbi Mordechai Eliyahu, the leading religious authority in Israel’s religious national current and former chief Eastern rabbi for Israel, Rabbi Dov Lior, president of the Council of Rabbis of Judea and Samaria (the West Bank), Rabbi Shmuel Eliyahu, the chief rabbi of Safed and a candidate for the post of chief rabbi or Israel, Rabbi Eliyahu Kinvinsky, the second most senior authority in the Orthodox religious current, Rabbi Israel Ariel, one of the most prominent rabbis in the West Bank colonies, and Rabbi Yitzhaq Ginsburg, a top rabbi in Israel among many other extremist religious Israeli leaders are continually calling for total extermination and transfer of Palestinians.

Brainwashed and misguided Israelis, especially religious fundamentalists, regularly attack Palestinian towns, vandalize their churches, mosques and cemeteries with graffiti slogans such as “Death to Arabs”, “Gas the Arabs”, and “Mohammad is a pig”, occupying Palestinian after forcefully evicting their Palestinian owners, attacking farmers, burning their crops, cutting their fruit trees, poisoning their water wells, killing their farm animals, destroying properties, looting shops, terrorizing civilians and children and shooting people. Searching youtube.com for “Israeli settlers violence” to watch the hundreds of videos showing Israeli settlers terrorism.

One prominent similarity between Israel and the Nazis is their state sponsored terror groups. According to articles “Eichmann Tells His Own Damning Story”, Life Magazine, Volume 49, Number 22, (November 28th 1960) pp. 19-25, 101-112, and “Eichmann’s Own Story: Part II”, Life Magazine, December 6th 1960 pp. 146-161, Adolf Eichmann stated how Zionist leaders were idealist like Nazi leaders, willing to sacrifice hundred thousands of their own blood to achieve political goal. Lenni Brenner explains in his book “Zionism in the Age of Dictators”, in chapter 25, that Eichmann was referring here to a deal the Nazi struck with Zionist leaders, such as Hungarian Rezso Kastner, to save a few thousand hand-picked Zionists and wealthy Jews, who would immigrate to Palestine, in return for leading 750,000 Hungarian Jews, and other millions of European Jews to their death to make Jews “rightful victim”, so that World Zionist Organization would have the “right” to come “before the bargaining table when they divide nations and lands at the war’s end … for only with (Jewish) blood shall we (Zionists) get the land.”

The Nazis set up Police Battalion 101, a terrorist group, whose sole purpose was hunting Jewish citizens, killing them and looting and destroying their property. Daniel Jonah Goldhagen states in his book “Hitler’s Willing Executioners” that Battalion 101 was responsible for “the deportation and gruesome slaughter in Poland of tens of thousands of Jewish men, women, and children”.

Israel had its own exact copy of Battalion 101 called Unit 101 under the terrorist Ariel Sharon, who later became Israel’s Prime Minister. Under Sharon’s leadership Unit 101 adopted the same criminal methods to terrorize Palestinians. It also implemented what became known as jeep raids; driving jeeps, with machine guns mounted on the front and rear, into Palestinian towns murdering inhabitants, dynamiting homes, and burning their fields. Since early 1950s Unit 101 was responsible for massacres in Palestinian towns such as Bureij refugee camp, Qibya, Idna, Surif, Wadi Fukin, Falameh, Rantis, Jerusalem, Budrus, Dawayima, Beit Liqya, Khan Younis and Gaza.

Israel had always resorted to terrorist attacks against Jews in other countries especially Arab countries, such as North African Arab countries, Iraq, Lebanon, and Jordan, to encourage Jewish Arab residents to immigrate to Israel. The Lavon Affair is just one famous terrorist related incident in Egypt.

In January 29th 1999 article in Israeli Ha’aretz paper, Gideon Spiro, a former member of the 890 battalion, stated that Unit 101 was an early, more primitive prototype for the more sophisticated liquidation units of Duvdevan and Shimshon established during the Intifada” Its operations were characterized by “lots of killing of civilians and little real combat”.

Israel is the only county in the world with many Prime Ministers, who were members of terrorist and state-sponsored terrorist organizations directly involved in slaughter of civilians. These include Golda Meir, Yitzhak Rabin, Menachem Begin, Yitzhak Shamir, Ehud Barak, Ariel Sharon, and Shimon Peres.

Arnold Toynbee wrote “It was a supreme tragedy that the lesson learnt by them (the Jews) from their encounter with the Nazi German Gentiles should have been, not to eschew but to imitate some of the evil deeds that the Nazis had committed against the Jews.”

Israelis and Jews of the world have relentlessly pursued Nazi war criminals for decades for their war crimes committed during WWII. They chased Nazi war criminals for the rest of their lives, even when they were old and close to their death, to make them pay for their crimes. No doubts in my mind that Israeli war criminals, in turn, will be pursued and sentenced for their war crimes committed against Arabs.

Sunday, March 01, 2009

7 Things You Need to Know About This Economy and the Jews

http://www.jewishjournal.com/opinion/article/7_things_you_need_to_know_about_this_economy_and_the_jews_20090226/
February 26, 2009
7 Things You Need to Know About This Economy and the Jews
By Jonathan Sarna
The Jewish community grew wealthy, along with the nation as a whole, in the post-Reagan era. Arguably, more Jewish wealth was created in those good years than in all of American Jewish history put together. And since much of that wealth was created by investors and venture capitalists, it is no surprise that they brought a venture capital mindset into the American Jewish nonprofit sector, promoting innovation and experimentation.
We also now know that the burgeoning number of Jews in hedge funds created a dangerous sense of overconfidence. We came to believe that smart Jews could make money whatever the markets did—up or down. Most of us could not understand how they made money, but thank God if we were lucky they would let us—for a price—share in the wealth. We could expect 10 percent returns almost guaranteed. That, in the end, paved the way for the way not only for the great market crash, but also for Bernard Madoff.
This is not the first time that the American Jewish community has confronted an unexpected and severe downturn. Something similar happened 80 years ago, in 1929. The following is the Dec. 29, 1929 diary entry from Reconstrctionist Judaism founder Rabbi Mordecai Kaplan, as published in “Communings of the Spirit” (Wayne State University Press, 2001):
“When I preached on the First Day of Succot concerning the need of using religion as a means of fortifying ourselves against the insecurity and precariousness of modern life, I little realized that I, as well as the people I spoke to, would soon have occasion to put their religion to the test. It was only two or three days after that [that] the big crash in Wall Street took place. Some of my friends and relatives lost heavily. Brous who was about to be married to my niece Harriet Baron, lost about $300,000 [roughly $3.6 million in today’s money]. Not having dealt on margin there is a possibility of my recovering some of the money that was invested for me. In the meantime, the value of my investments shrank from about $85,000 to $45,000 [a drop from about $1 million to $540,000 in today’s terms.] I had hoped that in the course of a few years, by saving and investing in stocks that would rise in value, I would save up sufficiently to be able to give up all institutional connections and strike out boldly upon some program of spiritual reformation of Jewish life. Although that dream has now vanished I dare not complain. There are thousands of people who are in dire straits as a result of the crash and would consider themselves the happiest in the world if they were economically even half [as well] off as I am.“
Kaplan’s economic woes did not end there. Even though, he later writes, “we invested in bank stock which we had been assured was the safest of all stocks,“ he like 1 in 5 New York Jews lost money when the Jewish-owned Bank of the United States closed its doors on December 11, 1930. Kaplan lost the equivalent of about $25,000 in today’s money.
I recount this history not because I think that we are about to return to depths of Great Depression—nobody I know seriously believes that we are headed back to 25 percebt unemployment—but because I think that we need to look back to Great Depression for some lessons that may still be relevant to our day.
Two negative lessons:1. The Great Depression saw a widespread abandonment of Jewish education. In New York City, between 1928 and 1935, the number of students enrolled in Jewish schools dropped by 22 percent. In just six months, from December 1930-June 1931, enrollment in Chicago’s Jewish schools dropped 16 percent. We paid a big price for those declines. Those young Jews never made up what they lost. We need to be careful to avoid a repeat of that pattern.
2. In the early years of Great Depression, American Jewry turned inward and paid little heed to what was going on abroad, particularly in Germany. As the American Jewish Year Book gently put it in 1931, “the Jews of the United States did not during the past years watch the situation of their overseas co-religionists with the same concentration as in the preceding 12 months.“ We were, as a result, less prepared as a community than we should have been for the terrible impact of world events.
On the positive side, Jews turned primarily to one another during the 1930s, relying on ties of faith and kinship to carry them through the hard times. Traditions of self-help and mutual aid overcame religious, ideological and generational differences within the American Jewish community. American Jews assumed responsibility for helping their own. There is much that we can learn from this today. We have a huge opportunity to remind Jews of the benefit of the idea that all Jews are family, that we help one another in need. We desperately need to relearn some of our traditional communitarian values, some of them forgotten, in a few circles, during the years of plenty. America traditionally glorifies lone rangers and cowboys. We Jews, though, believe in community. The benefits of community—of mutual responsibility—become very clear when times are tough.
A second positive trend in the 1930s was the impact of New Deal programs and government centralization on Jews. More than anybody realized at the time, the Depression set the stage for the five-day week and for growing government responsibility for social services. Together, these transformed postwar Jewish life in myriad ways. The New Deal also provided a model for growing centralization in Jewish life at the national and local levels.
Ronald Reagan, of course, reversed course at the national level when he became president in 1981. He argued that big government was the problem and not the solution. It was, he complained, inefficient, bureaucratic, slow, wasteful and unable to innovate. Under him, we began a project of decentralization: cutting taxes and shifting power away from Washington. The American Jewish community, as if in step, likewise shifted course away from central control by the United Jewish Appeal and the Large City Budgeting Council (which were also deemed inefficient, bureaucratic, slow, wasteful and unable to innovate), and we moved toward more local control. Most importantly for the Jewish Funder’s Network, we also moved in the Reagan years toward our own version of privatization, which resulted in the growth of private Jewish foundations.
To give you a sense of how rapid that change has been, let me remind you that prior to Ronald Reagan’s presidency, which began in 1981, not one of the following Jewish foundations existed: Wexner, AVI CHAI, CRB, Schusterman or Steinhardt. Back when I was studying the American Jewish community with Marshall Sklare, and reading Daniel Elazar, foundations were not on our radar screens.
Let’s look at where we are today and where we are likely to go from here.At the moment, following billions of dollars in losses to Jewish endowments and a significant decline in annual gift giving, different sectors of the American Jewish community are busy explaining to all who will listen why their particular area of the Jewish economy has to be preserved at all costs. Human services (obviously a priority in tough times); Jewish education (as necessary as oxygen); Jewish camping (shapes Jewish memories and lifelong associations); innovative Jewish start-ups (they are the most efficient sector of the Jewish economy and in many ways the most creative); Birthright Israel (perhaps the most successful program we have established in decades & critical to preserving American Jews’ ties to Israel). And so on and so forth—more or less every program is too good to give up. In a way, the community is like my university: everyone understands that we need to cut back in hard times. The faculty simply insists that: nothing be cut from crucial areas like the arts, the humanities, the sciences, the social sciences and the co-curriculars. Everything else is on the table!
The problem in the American Jewish community at large is that, aside from killing off CAJE: The Coalition for the Advancement of Jewish Education and the American Jewish Congress, nobody has put forth serious ideas about how to cut the Jewish communal budget by one-third. That, however, might well be what we need to do. Foundations, even not taking into account the Madoff losses, are about one-third poorer than they were this time last year. If the downturn stretches into 2010, annual campaigns may be down by one-third as well.
Inevitably in downturns, the weaker organizations are the first to fall. As Warren Buffett observed in his usual colorful way, “you don’t know who is swimming naked until the tide goes out.“ My own guess is that, at the very least, many of the Hebrew colleges, many of the bureaus of Jewish education, several of the Jewish museums and some other shakier Jewish organizations will not survive this downturn.
Orthodox Jewish organizations are apparently in the worst shape. Orthodox Jews have been disproportionately involved in banking and the stock market, and were also disproportionately hurt by Madoff ($2 billion, by one account, were lost by members of a single Orthodox synagogue). They also are heavy users of our most expensive Jewish institutions (synagogues and schools). I have felt for a long time—and for numerous reasons—that Orthodoxy’s rise had run its course. My sense is that the downturn will confirm this. I do not expect to see same kind of Orthodox growth moving forward as we have seen since 1960s, and my guess, sadly, is that some significant Orthodox institutions will not survive.
Seven trends to watch:1. We have seen several Jewish organizations that either have or are close to being merged into non-Jewish organizations (Philadelphia Jewish Archives Center and Temple University; Baltimore Hebrew College and Townson State; rumors regarding Center for Jewish History and NYU; and Northeastern and Hebrew College). Some Jewish day schools are also talking of sharing secular classes and facilities with non-Jewish private or parochial schools. None of this could have happened in the 1930s, when anti-Semitism was so rampant. But today we are confident—maybe too confident—that we can make deals with non-Jewish organizations without fear of losing an essential part of ourselves.
2. Effort to re-engage small donors. Historically, American Jewish philanthropy was in the hands of a small number of wealthy elite Jews up to World War I. For years, Jacob Schiff held veto power in many aspects of philanthropy and communal policy. But then the catastrophe of war and the great desire of immigrants to aid relatives left behind led to mass philanthropy. For the next 60 years or so, philanthropy was not only a way to raise money but also a form of Jewish identification. Then, over the past 20 years, business-minded consultants persuaded federation heads to focus on big givers, for the sake of efficiency. The cost per dollar raised was much less with wealthy donors, they observed, and with only so much time to educate donors, they thought it was a better investment in time and resources to educate wealthy ones. As a result, the donor base, dropped from 900,000 to under 500,000 over the past 20 years, according to United Jewish Communities. Fortunately, new web technology has made it much easier to engage small donors cheaply and efficiently. The Obama campaign proved this. Some of the new minyanim, like Hadar, have demonstrated this as well. The loss of some of our wealthier older donors makes effort to re-engage small donors more urgent than ever.
3. Calls for higher standards of ethics and for greater transparency. Madoff losses and nationwide dissatisfaction with executive salaries and perks are bound to have an effect on the nonprofit world. Donors will demand more openness, less reliance on “the wisdom of the rich,“ and a higher general commitment to ethical principles and to transparent investments and spending. My guess is that salaries at the top will fall at foundations, federations, day schools, etc. In the short run, this will have no effect; people are glad just to be employed. In the long run, it may deprive us of quality individuals who will prefer to work in the private sections.
4. Power will flow back to the center. The Jewish community tends to follow national trends. Now that we again have a president who believes that government is a force for good and a force for change, I expect more efforts to “rein in” the cowboys and to promote greater communal co-operation and centralized planning. Even Facebook, after all, has a leader who shapes policy. The growing power and significance of the Jewish Funders Network may be an indication of precisely this new trend.
5. New focus on sweat equity. In the absence of lots of start up money, young, creative, technologically savvy Jews will give time to causes that inspire them. We already see this among minyans. I expect that we will see it elsewhere as well. Indeed, as unemployment rises the challenge is to try to harness the time of the unemployed for the benefit of the Jewish community. Many unemployed are eager to be useful. Can we figure out ways to use them productively?
6. There is a discernable focus inward in the contemporary U.S. Jewish community, with less engagement with Israel (especially among non-Orthodox). Notice how few of the Jewish start-ups are Israel related; few Slingshot organizations are Israel related either. Even the war in Gaza did not lead to mass fundraising for Israel—a first. As Birthright takes fewer young people to Israel, we find ourselves back in the bad old days of the intifada when so many young Jews learned about Israel primarily from watching CNN.
7. At same time, downturns in the United States generally promote aliyah (immigration to Israel). I expect an uptick in aliyah especially among the Orthodox and those who have already spent time in Israel, but did not think they could take risk of making aliyah. As prospects darken in United States, some will look to Israel—Nefesh B’Nefesh makes this easier (and it has just received unexpected new funding).
It behooves us to be humble as we try to imagine the future. As Mark Twain famously observed, “The art of prophecy is very difficult, especially with respect to the future.“ Nobody in the wake of the great 1929 crash ever imagined that just 20 years later 6 million Jews would lie dead in the Shoah; the State of Israel would come into existence; American Jewry would move from the cities to the suburbs, anti-Semitism would drastically decline; and Jewish education would become a growing communal priority. I do not have high confidence that we can predict the future today any more clearly.
But this much I am prepared to predict: the economic downturn will end, the stock market will turn around, Jews will begin to make money again, and Jewish funders will regain their confidence and search for new ways to make our community better and stronger.
Let’s hope that this happens soon.
Jonathan Sarna is professor of American Jewish history at Brandeis University and director of its Hornstein Jewish Professional Leadership Program. This column was adapted from a speech he gave at a recent Jewish Funders Network event. Reprinted with the author’s permission.