‘Lost tribe’ dreams of return to Israel

AFP/Imphal

In a synagogue in northeast India, a group of men pray for the chance to “return home” to a country they have never seen and which their ancestors fled nearly 3,000 years ago.
“India is not our country,” says Haniel Reuben, 72, one of the eldest members of a tiny community that claims to have descended from the Manasseh - one of the Biblical “lost tribes” of Israel exiled in 720 BC by Assyrian conquerors.
“Our forefathers migrated and settled here. Our home is Israel and we will be reunited with our people one day or another,” Reuben said. 

 
The Bnei Menashe, as the community is known, comprise around 7,200 members of the Kuki-Chin-Mizo tribe who live in the northeastern states of Mizoram and Manipur near the border with Myanmar.
Their oral history tells of a centuries-long exodus through Persia, Afghanistan, Tibet and China, all the while adhering to certain Jewish religious practices, like circumcision.
In India they were converted to Christianity by 19th-century missionaries and, in reading the Bible, recognised stories from their own traditions that convinced them they actually belonged to the Jewish faith.
“We are the lost tribe,” insists Reuben, who lives in a ramshackle two-storey wooden home set against a scenic background of the misty, ash-coloured Manipuri foothills.
A lunisolar Jewish calendar hangs on the wall of his living room, while a mezuzah, or parchment, with verses from the Torah is fixed to the front door frame of the house in Manipur’s state capital Imphal.
He prays three times a day with his eyes facing west “towards Jerusalem.”
The ancestral claims of the Bnei Menashe - rejected by other members of the Kuki-Chin-Mizo - began to draw attention in the 1980s from Jewish organisations dedicated to identifying “lost Jews.”
In the late 1990s, groups of Bnei Menashe were brought to Israel where they formally converted and settled.
But the real breakthrough came in 2005 when Israel’s Sephardic Chief Rabbi Shlomo Amar officially recognised the entire community as “descendants of Israel”- a crucial step in securing their “right of return.”
The process was halted by new Israeli government policy in 2007, but last July the Ministerial Committee on Immigration and Absorption agreed to the return of the remaining 7,200 Bnei Menashe.
“It is a huge project,” said Yochanan Phaltual, the Indian representative for Shavei Israel, an Israeli-based organisation that reaches out to descendants of Jews around the world.
“It is very complicated as it requires the involvement of all government departments,” Phaltual said.
The head of Shavei Israel, Michael Freund, who has lobbied hard for years on behalf of the Bnei Menashe, said he was confident the immigration would finally happen.
“This is simply a bureaucratic process, and like all bureaucratic processes, it takes time,” Freund said in an e-mail.
“I hope that we will soon hear good news, and that the Bnei Menashe will be allowed to return to the land of their ancestors.”
Living as a tiny minority poses numerous problems for people like Talya Bem, a 45-year-old widow and mother of three, particularly when it comes to observing orthodox customs and rituals.
“I was born as a Jew,” Bem says. “I live in India but my heart is in Israel.
“I want to go there as soon as possible. We can’t follow all the commandments of the Torah here,” she adds tearfully, comforted by her 18-year-old daughter, dressed smartly in a long black skirt and purple top.
According to Phaltual, Bnei Menashe families almost never go out to eat in local restaurants or buy food from street vendors.
“Nothing is kosher here. All the eateries serve pork and we fear that our food will get mixed up with that,” he said.
Manipur has a primarily agrarian economy and is one of the least developed states in India - one of only five with a per capita income of less than Rs30,000 ($600).
But Phaltual bristles at the suggestion that the Bnei Menashe are motivated less by religious feeling and more by the prospect of a more comfortable, material life in Israel.
“Most of our community is well-settled. It is a very wrong conception that economic considerations have fuelled our dream of return,” he said.
Phaltual and Reuben both converted to Judaism in the 1990s.
“We studied the Bible the way Christians do,” Reuben said. “But slowly as we grew up, we started discussing how some of our customs matched with the tradition followed by ancient Israelites.”

Azzam Azzam: Pollard Must be Freed

Israeli Druze who sat in jail in Egypt calls to free Pollard. “We cannot wait for him to die in jail,” he pleads.

By Maayana Miskin

First Publish: 4/1/2012, 9:26 PM

Azzam Azzam

Flash 90

Azzam Azzam has issued an emotional appeal for the release of Jonathan Pollard, a Jewish American sentenced to life in prison for passingclassified information to Israel. “I do not want to think about the possibility that Jonathan will not be freed, and will keep rotting in jail,” he said.

He joined those calling on President Shimon Peres to refuse to accept a “Freedom Medallion” award from United States President Barack Obama while Pollard remains inprison.

“It chills me to think of how I would feel if something like that happened in Egypt while I was still imprisoned,” he said. Azzam was jailed by Egypt for eight years on charges of spying for Israel, charges which he denies to this day.

He concluded his plea for Pollard’s freedom by saying, “We cannot wait for him to die there, in jail.”

More than 24,000 people have signed a petition calling on Peres not to accept theFreedom Medallion unless Pollard is released. On Saturday night, the heads of the National Youth Council announced that they would join the cause.

“Israeli students will send a clear message – there cannot be a Freedom Medallion without freedom,” they said. “We do not learn about justice and morality in order to put those values in storage.”

Peres has responded to the petition by reiterating his commitment to obtaining Pollard’s release. “In meetings with President Obama and the heads of the U.S. government I have raised the explicit request for Pollard's release and will continue to work this way during my meeting with Obama in June,” he said.
http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/154374#.T3jIVDHOwfw

Amnesty International Promotes Anti-Semitism Among Children

By Eurasia Review on March 24, 2010 | From eurasiareview.com

By GEES

Everything began when Israel’s embassy in Madrid, Spain started receiving letters written by 9-year old children and filled with anti-Semitic content. In their lines, the minors accused Israelis of military crimes and torture. The children’s letters included phrases such as “Jews kill for money,” “Leave the country to the Palestinians,” or “Go somewhere else where they accept you.” Israel presented a formal complaint to Spain’s ambassador in Tel Aviv since the letters had as senders different schools belonging to the Spanish public education network. Although the letters came from an array of schools throughout Spain, the ones written by elementary school children at El Castell School (in Almoines, Valencia) were the ones distilling a much deeper hatred for Israel. The school’s principal indicated that he knew nothing about this initiative.

Where did it all start? El Castell School belongs to the Amnesty International (AI) school network whose purpose – according to the organization’s webpage – is to carry out “some (or all!) mobilization proposals” organized by AI for its members. AI has created a network of indoctrination and political proselytism in schools and institutes throughout Spain, in which it organizes activities and distributes materials. To join the AI school network, it’s enough that one teacher of that school wants to join. AI offers the possibility of belonging to its network of political activism without regard for the opinions of parents and its adhesion forms don’t need to get the green light from the principal’s office for the children to be indoctrinated.

Through some teachers, Amnesty International organizes school visits and campaigns; its activists arrange lectures and distribute material among schoolchildren. One of their campaigns is to propose children to start a letter-writing campaign denouncing Israeli authorities.

This sort of campaign means to engage 10-year old minors in activism, following the mobilization scheme that Amnesty International uses with its associates. To this end, the organization drafted a two-part document with elementary school children in mind. In the first part, AI accuses Israelis of military crimes, of murdering innocent people, hindering the investigations, and manipulating the facts. In the second part, Amnesty International exhorts children to write a letter to the Israeli ambassador in Spain and even provides the children with the address (Velazquez St.) so that they can denounce Israel.

It all resulted in many letters sent to Israel’s embassy in Madrid conveying in every detail the ideas and arguments that AI expresses about Israelis. The letters include phrases such as: “Mr. Ambassador… You should think twice (or more) before killing women and children.” In some letters, Israel is accused of killing for money while in others children demand that the Jews leave their country behind. These letters are signed by 9-year olds.

This scandal involving Amnesty International has some aspects. The first one has to do with AI’s indoctrination campaign of Spanish children. The organization has created a network of teachers with access to children of all ages: from seniors in high school, to middle school, to even elementary school.

AI recreates the campaigns directed to its members and applies them to children in an exercise of child indoctrination. Besides, it performs this activity using the Spanish public school network, paid for with taxpayers’ money, to impart lessons and distribute printed works and audiovisual materials. This takes place during school hours without parental input or knowledge and oftentimes without the school principal’s knowledge. In the case of El Castell School, the principal declared that he found out about the scandal in the newspapers and that everything started with AI’s campaign in his school. .

The second aspect has to do with the specific case of this anti-Jewish campaign. Amnesty International indoctrinates children in hatred of Jews and Israelis, manipulating them ideologically and feeding 9-year olds with information they cannot discern. Firstly, AI’s campaign in the schools tells the children that Israel shoots against women and children, that it commits war crimes, that it tortures and murders its Palestinian victims. Secondly, the children draw the conclusion that Israelis are murderers without scruples, that they kill children, that they kill for money and that they don’t let the people in Gaza live in peace. In addition, Amnesty International goes a step further and urges schoolchildren to participate in campaigns against Israel by sending their letters to Israel’s embassy. AI manipulates children and turns them into anti-Israel political activists behind their parents’ backs.


©2010 Translated by Miryam Lindberg

GEES is the Madrid-based Grupo de Estudios Estratégicos / Strategic Studies Group where this article originally appeared and is reprinted here with permission.

http://www.zimbio.com/International+human+rights/articles/UBEAIWL3sE7/Amnesty+International+Promotes+Anti+Semitism

Oscar winner Emma Thompson calls for Israeli theater’s ban

The ‘Sense and Sensibility’ star opposes inclusion of Habimah theater at festival, saying it must distance itself from ‘policies of exclusion practiced by the Israeli state’

Emma Thompson. China's national theater is ok, but Habimah is not kosher. (photo credit: CC Caroline Bonarde Ucci, Wikipedia)

T

wo-time Oscar winner Emma Thompson is among three dozen actors, directors and writers protesting the inclusion of an Israeli theater company at an upcoming Shakespeare festival in England.

Recent Tony winner Mark Rylance and seven-time Oscar nominee Mike Leigh are among the other artists who signed a letter expressing “dismay and regret” that Tel Aviv’s Habimah theater will be participating in Globe to Globe, a six-week festival taking place at Shakespeare’s Globe Theatre in London.

“Habima [sic] has a shameful record of involvement with illegal Israeli settlements in Occupied Palestinian Territory,” says the letter, published March 29 in England’s Guardian newspaper. The document notes that unlike other members of Israel’s theater community, Habimah did not participate in a boycott of a controversial cultural center that opened in Ariel, a West Bank settlement, in 2010. “By inviting Habima, Shakespeare’s Globe is undermining the conscientious Israeli actors and playwrights who have refused to break international law,” the letter says.

Signed by more than three dozen English artists, the letter declares that signatories have “no problem” with Globe to Globe’s desire to include Hebrew in the festival, which will showcase the Bard’s 37 plays in 37 languages. “But by inviting Habima, the Globe is associating itself with policies of exclusion practised by the Israeli state and endorsed by its national theatre company,” the letter states. “We ask the Globe to withdraw the invitation so that the festival is not complicit with human rights violations and the illegal colonisation of occupied land.”

Other companies participating in the festival include the National Theatre of China, which will perform “Richard III” in Mandarin, and the Ashtar Theatre, a Palestinian company that will perform “Richard II” in Arabic.

Habimah is currently scheduled to perform “The Merchant of Venice” at the festival twice in late May.

http://www.timesofisrael.com/oscar-winner-emma-thompson-calls-for-israeli-theaters-ban-at-festival/

Bradford West: A View from the Ground

by Sean Dolat on Saturday, March 31, 2012 at 3:45pm ·

A view from the ground

I joined the campaign full time 2 weeks before the election, and spent every day campaigning at the office and out canvassing and door knocking, obviously we thought we were going to win, we were never complacent, and we worked our hides off till polling day.

From around the 15th March till the 22nd it was clear it seemed we were going to win, we had our headquarters set up in each ward and our campaign was leaps ahead in backing, money and numbers.

The first danger sign was in our HQ on Toller lane, I was only there once, and it was packed with members from the Asian community, all of whom were old, and as I sat down I picked up a newspaper, then the man sitting next to me leaned over and pointed to George Galloway, he then looked at me and smiled and nodded as he said confidently “he’s good!”

I was shocked! This was in a Labour headquarters! And I have the man next to me liking the Respect candidate, it was bizarre. Though I didn’t think anything of it, I just assumed it was some silly second preference if he could give, little did I know it was a sign of things to come.

The Asian vote in particular collapsed in that last week of campaigning (22nd till the 29th), and we were getting a bit shook up by it, I was in the office when two Asian female campaigners came in genuinely frightened to the point of paralysis by the experience they just had. They said how they canvassed Asian houses where voters there who had been labour for decades were now voting Respect, and on a few occasions they witnessed having voters ripping up the Imran literature in front of them and throwing it to the floor, this was days before the election. So any argument raised by the press that we expected a landslide were lying.

On twitter during this last week I’d check the #bradfordwest hash tag, and for every pro Labour tweet there was easily 10 pro Galloway ones from seemingly young Asian Bradford constituents. Also my university friends were getting inundated with emails that had been forwarded from friends about voting for Respect, and someone on our campaign team was telling me how school kids were texting each other about who their brothers and sisters should vote for (Galloway). And the day after the Sunday Politics hustings I had 3 people on the door in one door knocking round who told me that their friends told them to watch the show to watch Imran get bested, and my Asian friends in particular were talking to me about this interview too, and that they heard from their friends. We’d pass kids in street who would shout Galloway at us all the time. Their campaign was so much better organised and so much more enthused, it was quite unreal, I’ve never witnessed anything like this in British politics, and I really don’t say that lightly. The communication between activists on the Galloway side was phenomenal.

Our Ground Strategy

Could Labour have held it? Probably, though there were a few problems, primarily that our literature was solely focused on the Tories and national issues, and not on Galloway and local issues, which was key. Galloway picked on local issues like ‘The hole in ground’ which was meant to be a Westfield in the city centre, our Odeon building which is in ruins and Bradford’s 30 year plus industrial decline. All 3 of which weren’t Labours fault, the first being the Tory-Liberal coalition on the council, the Odeon being private, and the industrial decline happened in the 1980s under Thatcher. Though these 3 things were on all the Respect literature, yet we produced no counter leaflets what so ever! And I heard on polling night that our HQ received a paper on everything bad Galloway has got himself into if we wished to use it, from supporting the Iranian and Syrian leadership, to his second home in the Algarve, to his poor attendance in parliament, everything! Though none was used! It was especially annoying when I heard lots of people telling me about what they read on the Galloway flyers and how great he is without knowing all the crap he’s got up to. Such was the scale that even I was being informed of some other negative Galloway facts after 10pm on Thursday in the Hotel that even I didn’t know, so if I as an activist didn’t have all the information at hand how can we expect the electorate to make a fully informed judgement on him. Well they didn’t!

Secondly we had this bizarre obsession with getting members of the shadow cabinet to come down and campaign and knock on some doors. On one occasion and three days before the vote this reached a peak where we wasted half a day trying to organise MP’s in to groups that can canvass doors so the media can take photos, we wasted 100’s of doors doing this.

Why Galloway won

Overall I’d say these factors lost us the election:

1. Galloway’s personal appeal as an orator and debater.
2. Many financial backers in Bradford switched sides to Galloway in that final week.
3. Muslim youth’s general feeling of being disenfranchised and who campaigned for him on mass.
4. An organisational failure on the ground to identify Galloway as a threat and our insistence on making this about the Tories nationally.
5. A local candidate who was perceived as a puppet and weak, and who got his candidacy through Bradree nepotism rather than merit. This played a massive part that needs a separate article.
6. And a feeling (trumpeted by Galloway) that Labour locally was weak, complacent and corrupt. A view I heard a lot on the door.
7. Galloway constantly promoted himself as the ‘Real’ Labour candidate, I think this helped people change sides with greater ease. His election speech was also about cementing that switching of sides. The speech was bizarre in a way, it was full of praise of the Labour party and it’s traditions and how he craves the old party back, he even said on Sky that he wants to see a Labour government in 2015!

From what I saw on the ground this had absolutely nothing to do with the leadership of Ed Miliband, if David was leader I can assure you we’d have exactly the same result. It was more of a vote for Galloway as a person than of Respect as a party, and it didn’t happen because people started hating labour as a national party with its ideas, but rather as a rejection of points 5 and 6 above. 

This by-election was fought over local issues like the Odeon and Westfield, rather than a granny tax or the 50p tax rate, and the fact that it was is Labour’s fault, so don’t believe what you hear from the media that this was a rejection of Ed Miliband, it was an overwhelmingly local issues based by-election.

I don’t know how Labour can win this back, I’m still in shock, but hopefully I or a colleague can write a good piece on that!