A small Jerusalem is better
Haaretz, October 11, 2006
By Moshe Amirav
On October 17, the National Council for Planning and Construction is supposed to discuss a new plan that will change the face of Israel's capital. At issue is the construction of 20,000 residential units west of Jerusalem, which will dramatically change the direction of the city's expansion and will weaken it economically and politically.
The public uproar surrounding the new plan, which has led to the submission of 15,000 objections, stems from fear that the planning mistake of the 1970s is repeating itself. At that time, Israel invested huge sums in the construction of about 40,000 residential units in East Jerusalem. These turned into seven neighborhoods, including Ramot, Gilo and Pisgat Ze'ev, which today house about 180,000 Jewish residents.
The plan, which was initiated by Golda Meir's government in order to "strengthen the capital," was severely criticized by all the experts. Thirty years later, its destructive consequences have become evident: From a compact city of 37 square kilometers, Jerusalem has turned into a huge metropolis that covers 120 square kilometers, twice as large as the area of Tel Aviv and Haifa combined. Instead of channeling government investments into infrastructure, industry and tourism, they were channeled into the construction of these neighborhoods, which led to the flight of businessmen and the economic elites from the city.
During the past two decades, about 300,000 Jews have left the city, most from the middle or upper class. Jerusalem has turned into the poorest city in Israel, and today, Jewish neighborhoods comprise only one-third of the city's eastern part. The other two-thirds house about a quarter of a million Arabs, who have upended the demographic policy designed to reduce their proportions. The Jewish majority has shrunk to only 66 percent, and there is a fear that in another 20 years, the city will be binational - half its residents will be Palestinians.
The idea that a "bigger Jerusalem" would strengthen the city turned out to be mistaken. A "small Jerusalem" is preferable. Now, the National Council for Planning and Construction is about to repeat exactly the same mistake, but the consequences are liable to be far worse. A group of wealthy businessmen and a world-famous architect, Moshe Safdie, have joined forces to convince the municipality and the government that Jerusalem is not big enough, that it lacks built-up areas, and that 120,000 Jews must urgently be brought to it. Here lies the trap of the mistaken idea: There is no need to enlarge the city; just the opposite - it should be made smaller.
The solution is to strengthen the downtown area and invest in employment infrastructure, on one hand, and to relinquish the Arab neighborhoods, on the other. All the studies have proven that these two steps would strengthen the city economically and politically. They would raise the city's economic level from 90th (last) place, where it is now, to a respectable place in the top decile of Israeli cities. They would also increase the city's Jewish majority from 66 percent to 96 percent and ensure Jewish hegemony in the Israeli capital. But who listens to experts when wealthy businessmen promise the magic formula: the construction of 20,000 residential units on the slopes of the mountains west of the city?
The consequences of the Safdie plan, which calls for these thousands of new apartments, are liable to be a disaster for the capital. The plan would destroy the green landscape west of the city, while the economically strong population that the entrepreneurs promise to bring from the coastal plain to Jerusalem will not come. Tens of thousands of Jerusalemites will migrate from the city to private homes and cheap apartments in the luxury neighborhoods that will be built. The percentage of Jews in the city will decline to 50 percent within the coming decade, and Jerusalem will collapse economically and politically.
But now, just like 30 years ago, the experts' warnings will apparently be rejected under pressure of the entrepreneurs. Dozens of Knesset members from Labor, Yisrael Beiteinu, the National Religious Party and Meretz have signed a manifesto against the plan. But unless the interior minister and the prime minister intervene to stop the plan, or at least to downsize it, Jerusalem will continue on its planning march of folly, which holds that a "big Jerusalem" is the solution for strengthening the city.
The author served in the past as a member of the Jerusalem Municipality's administration
Thursday, October 12, 2006
Wednesday, October 11, 2006
Dr. Doolittle's legacy in Israel - wildlife university
Animals in captivity / Third in a series : A wildlife university - for study and protection
Haaretz, October 11, 2006
By Zafrir Rinat
It has no elephants or lions, and no cars lined up at its gates. Nonetheless, it is a zoo. Tel Aviv University's Garden for Zoological Research in Ramat Aviv is an important center for the preservation of Israeli wildlife.
The research area is closed to visitors. Here the Yarkon Acanthobrama fish live in special aquariums - this fish is not particularly impressive, but it is extremely rare, found nowhere except in several Israeli coastal streams.
When the Yarkon dried up in the drought a few years ago, the Acanthobrama faced total extinction, so a breeding nucleus was established at the zoo. Recently, attempts have begun to reintroduce the fish into the streams.
Among the Acanthobrama's neighbors are a pair of Lappet-faced Vultures who are among the last remaining in Israel. According to the zoo's academic director, Professor Arnon Lotem, the birds tried to nest but failed to breed.
The zoo also has a female White-tailed Eagle, who is the mother of many of the eagles reintroduced into nature in recent years to prevent the species' extinction.
University zoos are not found routinely anywhere in the world. As is often the case in Israel, this, too, was the initiative of a small number of individuals, particularly one of the university's founders, the late zoologist Heinrich Mendelssohn.
He saw to it that the zoo that operated even before the university's founding would accompany it, move to its present home in Ramat Aviv and receive the official name "Garden for Zoological Research."
Not open to the public
The zoo is not open to the public per se, but it annually hosts thousands of school children, and various professional groups hold seminars there.
All tours are guided and families can visit only by prior appointment.
The staff prepares the food for the animals and sells some of it to other zoos as a source of additional income.
"The main objectives of the garden are research, teaching and promoting conservation," Lotem says. "The animals have no names because the goal is primarily to observe them and not to bond with them - as caretakers do in ordinary zoos."
At the heart of the garden is a small green park, a congregation point for passing birds and for some of the zoo's animals. "This area allows for observing various types of animal conduct, so we placed cameras that broadcast directly to the Internet," Lotem explains. "There are also animals such as peacocks, which are simply a good model for understanding behavior."
In one corner of the park there is a group of endangered Hawaiian Nene geese. Several breeding nuclei were dispersed throughout the world, including Tel Aviv. One of the males in the group is taking no chances and exhibits intimidating behavior toward human visitors who approach the gaggle.
The zoo also attracts visiting animals from the area. Mongooses drop by regularly and recently six vipers showed up. Permanent tenants include such denizens of urban nature as the fruit bat, which is revealed upon close observation to be friendly and nothing like its superstitious reputation.
Haaretz, October 11, 2006
By Zafrir Rinat
It has no elephants or lions, and no cars lined up at its gates. Nonetheless, it is a zoo. Tel Aviv University's Garden for Zoological Research in Ramat Aviv is an important center for the preservation of Israeli wildlife.
The research area is closed to visitors. Here the Yarkon Acanthobrama fish live in special aquariums - this fish is not particularly impressive, but it is extremely rare, found nowhere except in several Israeli coastal streams.
When the Yarkon dried up in the drought a few years ago, the Acanthobrama faced total extinction, so a breeding nucleus was established at the zoo. Recently, attempts have begun to reintroduce the fish into the streams.
Among the Acanthobrama's neighbors are a pair of Lappet-faced Vultures who are among the last remaining in Israel. According to the zoo's academic director, Professor Arnon Lotem, the birds tried to nest but failed to breed.
The zoo also has a female White-tailed Eagle, who is the mother of many of the eagles reintroduced into nature in recent years to prevent the species' extinction.
University zoos are not found routinely anywhere in the world. As is often the case in Israel, this, too, was the initiative of a small number of individuals, particularly one of the university's founders, the late zoologist Heinrich Mendelssohn.
He saw to it that the zoo that operated even before the university's founding would accompany it, move to its present home in Ramat Aviv and receive the official name "Garden for Zoological Research."
Not open to the public
The zoo is not open to the public per se, but it annually hosts thousands of school children, and various professional groups hold seminars there.
All tours are guided and families can visit only by prior appointment.
The staff prepares the food for the animals and sells some of it to other zoos as a source of additional income.
"The main objectives of the garden are research, teaching and promoting conservation," Lotem says. "The animals have no names because the goal is primarily to observe them and not to bond with them - as caretakers do in ordinary zoos."
At the heart of the garden is a small green park, a congregation point for passing birds and for some of the zoo's animals. "This area allows for observing various types of animal conduct, so we placed cameras that broadcast directly to the Internet," Lotem explains. "There are also animals such as peacocks, which are simply a good model for understanding behavior."
In one corner of the park there is a group of endangered Hawaiian Nene geese. Several breeding nuclei were dispersed throughout the world, including Tel Aviv. One of the males in the group is taking no chances and exhibits intimidating behavior toward human visitors who approach the gaggle.
The zoo also attracts visiting animals from the area. Mongooses drop by regularly and recently six vipers showed up. Permanent tenants include such denizens of urban nature as the fruit bat, which is revealed upon close observation to be friendly and nothing like its superstitious reputation.
Tuesday, October 10, 2006
Personal responsibility (not...)
Yes, heads must roll
Haaretz, October 10, 2006
By Moshe Negbi
It is not only the reserve soldiers who have difficulty considering the Winograd committee to be a reliable substitute for a state commission of inquiry. The judges sitting on the High Court of Justice have also showed their displeasure with the situation in which a person who is to be investigated appoints his own investigators. Justice Ayala Procaccia expressed doubts about whether a committee of inquiry could examine "so large a failure of the mechanism, such a colossal event," when the central object under investigation is the government that appointed the committee.
This criticism from the High Court is not surprising. Last month, Supreme Court justices bid farewell to Aharon Barak and swore allegiance to his heritage. A central element in this heritage was the determination to ensure that responsibility is taken by senior officials who have transgressed. This was reflected in the so-called Buzaglo test: as when Barak was attorney-general, and he insisted on bringing such senior people to trial even if this would lead to their being deposed; in his series of rulings as a justice, when he stated that such officials had to leave office if they were no longer able to show "honesty and integrity"; and when he stated, in the state commission of inquiry following the massacre at Sabra and Shatila, that public office-holders should be removed if they have failed in their judgment.
Barak didn't accept the claim that he lacked the right to make politicians' heads roll because that was the prerogative solely of the voters. "The judgment of the public," he declared, "is not a substitute for public law." But the political establishment ignores this ethical heritage. President Moshe Katsav has lost his ability to project honesty and integrity, but neither he nor the Knesset is taking the matter to its logical conclusion. And this, of course, is true also for the behavior of those who led us in the second Lebanon war.
Ehud Olmert's refusal to have a state commission of inquiry seems to be like a targeted assassination of the possibility that justices will serve on its panel of the caliber of Barak, Mishael Cheshin and Dorit Beinisch - who have proved that they are not afraid of demanding that responsibility be taken by senior officials. But this time it is clear that an existential price might have to be paid for trying to evade responsibility, and that taking responsibility is vital not only so that those responsible can be "punished," but also to prevent them from continuing to perpetrate further disaster.
This time, we are not merely witness to an unusually crude form of lack of accountability but, for the first time, a cynical attempt has been made to turn this weakness into an "ideology." We are told that indeed lessons must be learned, but there is no possibility of allowing "heads to roll" because this would prevent necessary rehabilitation. But is it indeed at all possible to learn lessons, and is there any chance of rehabilitation, if heads do not roll and if the option of failing once again is not ruled out?
And this brings us back to the Barak legacy. In the report by the state commission of inquiry into the Sabra and Shatila massacre, Barak explained that the political and military echelons must not be freed of having to "face up to public scrutiny of deeds and omissions that indicate a lack of efficacy ... or lack of appropriate attention ... or deeds that were done in haste, with negligence, with lack of wisdom and without trying to foresee their future effect."
How can personal responsibility be imposed? It is best, of course, for the person who has failed to resign. If he does not do so, the public should demand that of him. But the public's awareness of the necessity for taking personal responsibility has also been eroded. We could have realized this even before the disappointing appearances at the protest encampments of the Movement for Quality Government and the reservists. The fact that Ariel Sharon had been condemned by a state commission of inquiry for his failure during the first Lebanon war, and even the strengthening of the claim that Sharon had misled Menachem Begin, on the part of the courts, did not prevent the public from electing him prime minister twice.
If one cannot rely either on the leaders themselves or on the public, then there is no other recourse than a state commission of inquiry that will force personal responsibility to be taken. There are indeed those who feel that the remedy lies in educating the leaders and the public about taking personal responsibility. The problem is that education is a long, drawn-out process and we cannot permit ourselves to put our fates in the hands of faltering stewards until such a process is completed.
In addition, there is not necessarily a contradiction between educating people to take personal responsibility and imposing this responsibility through a state commission. On the contrary: Only persistent efforts to force people to take personal responsibility by a legal body will make it possible to grasp that it is insufferable that in a well-ordered democracy, those responsible for fatal failures continue to serve as our leaders, and that we have an inherent need to free ourselves of them.
The writer is the legal commentator of Israel Radio and a senior lecturer at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem.
Haaretz, October 10, 2006
By Moshe Negbi
It is not only the reserve soldiers who have difficulty considering the Winograd committee to be a reliable substitute for a state commission of inquiry. The judges sitting on the High Court of Justice have also showed their displeasure with the situation in which a person who is to be investigated appoints his own investigators. Justice Ayala Procaccia expressed doubts about whether a committee of inquiry could examine "so large a failure of the mechanism, such a colossal event," when the central object under investigation is the government that appointed the committee.
This criticism from the High Court is not surprising. Last month, Supreme Court justices bid farewell to Aharon Barak and swore allegiance to his heritage. A central element in this heritage was the determination to ensure that responsibility is taken by senior officials who have transgressed. This was reflected in the so-called Buzaglo test: as when Barak was attorney-general, and he insisted on bringing such senior people to trial even if this would lead to their being deposed; in his series of rulings as a justice, when he stated that such officials had to leave office if they were no longer able to show "honesty and integrity"; and when he stated, in the state commission of inquiry following the massacre at Sabra and Shatila, that public office-holders should be removed if they have failed in their judgment.
Barak didn't accept the claim that he lacked the right to make politicians' heads roll because that was the prerogative solely of the voters. "The judgment of the public," he declared, "is not a substitute for public law." But the political establishment ignores this ethical heritage. President Moshe Katsav has lost his ability to project honesty and integrity, but neither he nor the Knesset is taking the matter to its logical conclusion. And this, of course, is true also for the behavior of those who led us in the second Lebanon war.
Ehud Olmert's refusal to have a state commission of inquiry seems to be like a targeted assassination of the possibility that justices will serve on its panel of the caliber of Barak, Mishael Cheshin and Dorit Beinisch - who have proved that they are not afraid of demanding that responsibility be taken by senior officials. But this time it is clear that an existential price might have to be paid for trying to evade responsibility, and that taking responsibility is vital not only so that those responsible can be "punished," but also to prevent them from continuing to perpetrate further disaster.
This time, we are not merely witness to an unusually crude form of lack of accountability but, for the first time, a cynical attempt has been made to turn this weakness into an "ideology." We are told that indeed lessons must be learned, but there is no possibility of allowing "heads to roll" because this would prevent necessary rehabilitation. But is it indeed at all possible to learn lessons, and is there any chance of rehabilitation, if heads do not roll and if the option of failing once again is not ruled out?
And this brings us back to the Barak legacy. In the report by the state commission of inquiry into the Sabra and Shatila massacre, Barak explained that the political and military echelons must not be freed of having to "face up to public scrutiny of deeds and omissions that indicate a lack of efficacy ... or lack of appropriate attention ... or deeds that were done in haste, with negligence, with lack of wisdom and without trying to foresee their future effect."
How can personal responsibility be imposed? It is best, of course, for the person who has failed to resign. If he does not do so, the public should demand that of him. But the public's awareness of the necessity for taking personal responsibility has also been eroded. We could have realized this even before the disappointing appearances at the protest encampments of the Movement for Quality Government and the reservists. The fact that Ariel Sharon had been condemned by a state commission of inquiry for his failure during the first Lebanon war, and even the strengthening of the claim that Sharon had misled Menachem Begin, on the part of the courts, did not prevent the public from electing him prime minister twice.
If one cannot rely either on the leaders themselves or on the public, then there is no other recourse than a state commission of inquiry that will force personal responsibility to be taken. There are indeed those who feel that the remedy lies in educating the leaders and the public about taking personal responsibility. The problem is that education is a long, drawn-out process and we cannot permit ourselves to put our fates in the hands of faltering stewards until such a process is completed.
In addition, there is not necessarily a contradiction between educating people to take personal responsibility and imposing this responsibility through a state commission. On the contrary: Only persistent efforts to force people to take personal responsibility by a legal body will make it possible to grasp that it is insufferable that in a well-ordered democracy, those responsible for fatal failures continue to serve as our leaders, and that we have an inherent need to free ourselves of them.
The writer is the legal commentator of Israel Radio and a senior lecturer at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem.
Monday, October 09, 2006
Israel's culture of government
A crooked line between two points
By Uzi Benziman, Haaretz, October 9, 2006
Tzachi Hanegbi called on no less than Benjamin Ben-Eliezer in an interview in last week's Haaretz Magazine: Ben-Eliezer, he said, told him that if the authorities were to pick on him, Ben-Eliezer, or on Sharon, the way they are picking on Hanegbi over alleged political appointments, they would have to execute them and not just try them. That is Hanegbi's defense - everybody did it, even if there is a normative defect in his actions [RM: even if what he did was wrong]. As evidence he does not bring up public figures like Benny Begin, Dan Meridor, Haim Oron or Yossi Sarid, but Ben-Eliezer. Not for nothing did the swallow go to the crow [RM: birds of a feather flock together]
Hanegbi's remarks are enlightening not only in themselves but because of the direct, albeit crooked, line between his moral world and attitude to public life as he reveals them in the interview, and those of Ehud Olmert and the members of his cabinet. The Hanegbi that floats between the lines recorded by Gidi Weitz is a person who says it is his right, in the area of political appointments, to do anything he wants in the ministries entrusted to him. He is a public figure who claims that he was not elected to his position to be the civil service commissioner and therefore he is exempt from ethical and moral considerations and the rules of proper administration. He is a politician who justifies hiring those he wants to reward with senior positions in the civil service, even if they come with a proven can of worms, including criminal convictions. He is a minister and MK who claims that it is his right to ignore High Court rulings when they contradict his political needs.
The court will decide Hanegbi's case and will clarify among other things the veracity of the facts he shared with Haaretz readers, including his claim that then-state comptroller Eliezer Goldberg ostensibly had a personal motive for criticizing the system of political appointments in the Environment Ministry during Hanegbi's tenure. The mood in the interview reflects Olmert's attitude (and that of most of his ministers) to the demand to place the investigation of the war in Lebanon in the hands of a state commission of inquiry.
Like Hanegbi, Olmert also claims that proper public norms are not what will dictate his behavior, but rather his arbitrary will. Like Hanegbi, Olmert also relates to the authority with which the state has entrusted him as his own private property with which he can do as he pleases. Like Hanegbi, Olmert also ignores precedents and accepted procedures in similar cases, in order to avoid an appointment that will let control over the composition of a committee or its work slip out of his hands. Like Hanegbi Olmert, too, prefers that the issues involving his conduct be examined by people he appoints, and not by an external state body.
Nothing in this analysis should cast any aspersions on the members of the Winograd committee. Its purpose is to highlight the cynical and arrogant culture of governing to which Hanegbi and Olmert are party.
To escape a credible external examination of his conduct and the functioning of the bodies under his authority during the Lebanon war, Olmert became entangled in a frenzy of actions, motivating the High Court to demand that within five days he explain why a state committee of inquiry should not be established. It is too soon to know how the justices will rule, but it is enough to look back at the leap-frogging decisions the prime minister made in this matter to be filled with shame and concern over the way the state investigates its failures in areas of prime importance. Readers of the Hanegbi interview can crack the code of Olmert's behavior: L'État, c'est moi.
By Uzi Benziman, Haaretz, October 9, 2006
Tzachi Hanegbi called on no less than Benjamin Ben-Eliezer in an interview in last week's Haaretz Magazine: Ben-Eliezer, he said, told him that if the authorities were to pick on him, Ben-Eliezer, or on Sharon, the way they are picking on Hanegbi over alleged political appointments, they would have to execute them and not just try them. That is Hanegbi's defense - everybody did it, even if there is a normative defect in his actions [RM: even if what he did was wrong]. As evidence he does not bring up public figures like Benny Begin, Dan Meridor, Haim Oron or Yossi Sarid, but Ben-Eliezer. Not for nothing did the swallow go to the crow [RM: birds of a feather flock together]
Hanegbi's remarks are enlightening not only in themselves but because of the direct, albeit crooked, line between his moral world and attitude to public life as he reveals them in the interview, and those of Ehud Olmert and the members of his cabinet. The Hanegbi that floats between the lines recorded by Gidi Weitz is a person who says it is his right, in the area of political appointments, to do anything he wants in the ministries entrusted to him. He is a public figure who claims that he was not elected to his position to be the civil service commissioner and therefore he is exempt from ethical and moral considerations and the rules of proper administration. He is a politician who justifies hiring those he wants to reward with senior positions in the civil service, even if they come with a proven can of worms, including criminal convictions. He is a minister and MK who claims that it is his right to ignore High Court rulings when they contradict his political needs.
The court will decide Hanegbi's case and will clarify among other things the veracity of the facts he shared with Haaretz readers, including his claim that then-state comptroller Eliezer Goldberg ostensibly had a personal motive for criticizing the system of political appointments in the Environment Ministry during Hanegbi's tenure. The mood in the interview reflects Olmert's attitude (and that of most of his ministers) to the demand to place the investigation of the war in Lebanon in the hands of a state commission of inquiry.
Like Hanegbi, Olmert also claims that proper public norms are not what will dictate his behavior, but rather his arbitrary will. Like Hanegbi, Olmert also relates to the authority with which the state has entrusted him as his own private property with which he can do as he pleases. Like Hanegbi, Olmert also ignores precedents and accepted procedures in similar cases, in order to avoid an appointment that will let control over the composition of a committee or its work slip out of his hands. Like Hanegbi Olmert, too, prefers that the issues involving his conduct be examined by people he appoints, and not by an external state body.
Nothing in this analysis should cast any aspersions on the members of the Winograd committee. Its purpose is to highlight the cynical and arrogant culture of governing to which Hanegbi and Olmert are party.
To escape a credible external examination of his conduct and the functioning of the bodies under his authority during the Lebanon war, Olmert became entangled in a frenzy of actions, motivating the High Court to demand that within five days he explain why a state committee of inquiry should not be established. It is too soon to know how the justices will rule, but it is enough to look back at the leap-frogging decisions the prime minister made in this matter to be filled with shame and concern over the way the state investigates its failures in areas of prime importance. Readers of the Hanegbi interview can crack the code of Olmert's behavior: L'État, c'est moi.
Sunday, October 08, 2006
Medical interpreter training - Israel
Accurate translation can be a matter of life and death
By JUDY SIEGEL-ITZKOVICH
Jerusalem Post, October 8, 2006
The first-ever course in medical interpreting took place just before Rosh Hashana, and the 18 graduates will serve as telephone interpreters between Hebrew and Amharic, taking calls from physicians and other healthcare professionals throughout the country. All participants in the recent course are originally from Ethiopia and trained as healthcare professionals, mostly registered nurses. The program was the result of a successful collaboration of the Tene Briut project at Hillel Yaffe Medical Center in Hadera and Bar Ilan University's department of translation and interpreting studies.
Open communication, free of language gaps, has been shown to be essential to the delivery of healthcare. A recent study of Ethiopian immigrants showed significant gaps in the extent to which they make effective use of medical services compared to the rest of the population. The study pointed to a clear need for better communication and overcoming misunderstandings stemming from cultural differences.
One of the responses to these unsettling findings was the decision to launch a program designed to train professional interpreters. The course consisted of lectures on linguistic and cultural issues, professional ethics, the challenge of remote interpreting, as well as a review of medical terminology in the two languages. The main part of the course, however, comprised open discussions concerning the role of the interpreter (whether as a "transparent tube," culture broker, language mediator, patient advocate or ad hoc social worker). Each of the participants also took part in simulated sessions, playing an interpreter between an Amharic-speaking patient and a Hebrew-speaking physician. The simulations, which were filmed in a real health fund clinic, were then analyzed to evaluate the interpreters' performance and effectiveness.
The program was initiated by Dr. Anat Jaffe, chief of the endocrinology department at the Hadera hospital, and Prof. Miriam Shlesinger, head of the BIU translation studies department. They worked with Tene Briut coordinator Pekkado (Yossi) Gadamo; epidemiologist Dr. Eltchee Seffefe; linguist Dr. Embesse Tabbere and Michal Schuster, a BIU doctoral student whose work centers on intercultural issues in healthcare delivery. They are hoping to launch the service soon, once the technical arrangements have been completed and funding has been secured.
As for the recent graduates, who are all too familiar with the hardships encountered by non-Hebrew-speaking immigrants, they too are eager to begin placing the members of their community on an equal footing in accessing medical care.
By JUDY SIEGEL-ITZKOVICH
Jerusalem Post, October 8, 2006
The first-ever course in medical interpreting took place just before Rosh Hashana, and the 18 graduates will serve as telephone interpreters between Hebrew and Amharic, taking calls from physicians and other healthcare professionals throughout the country. All participants in the recent course are originally from Ethiopia and trained as healthcare professionals, mostly registered nurses. The program was the result of a successful collaboration of the Tene Briut project at Hillel Yaffe Medical Center in Hadera and Bar Ilan University's department of translation and interpreting studies.
Open communication, free of language gaps, has been shown to be essential to the delivery of healthcare. A recent study of Ethiopian immigrants showed significant gaps in the extent to which they make effective use of medical services compared to the rest of the population. The study pointed to a clear need for better communication and overcoming misunderstandings stemming from cultural differences.
One of the responses to these unsettling findings was the decision to launch a program designed to train professional interpreters. The course consisted of lectures on linguistic and cultural issues, professional ethics, the challenge of remote interpreting, as well as a review of medical terminology in the two languages. The main part of the course, however, comprised open discussions concerning the role of the interpreter (whether as a "transparent tube," culture broker, language mediator, patient advocate or ad hoc social worker). Each of the participants also took part in simulated sessions, playing an interpreter between an Amharic-speaking patient and a Hebrew-speaking physician. The simulations, which were filmed in a real health fund clinic, were then analyzed to evaluate the interpreters' performance and effectiveness.
The program was initiated by Dr. Anat Jaffe, chief of the endocrinology department at the Hadera hospital, and Prof. Miriam Shlesinger, head of the BIU translation studies department. They worked with Tene Briut coordinator Pekkado (Yossi) Gadamo; epidemiologist Dr. Eltchee Seffefe; linguist Dr. Embesse Tabbere and Michal Schuster, a BIU doctoral student whose work centers on intercultural issues in healthcare delivery. They are hoping to launch the service soon, once the technical arrangements have been completed and funding has been secured.
As for the recent graduates, who are all too familiar with the hardships encountered by non-Hebrew-speaking immigrants, they too are eager to begin placing the members of their community on an equal footing in accessing medical care.
Saturday, October 07, 2006
Judge decides on basis of videtape evidence - criticizes police behavior
Judge: Police officers lied while testifying against left-wing activists
By Nir Hasson, Haaretz October 3, 2006
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/769956.html
Tel Aviv Magistrate`s Court revealed Tuesday that police officers lied while testifying against 11 left-wing activists accused of violent acts during anti-fence demonstrations in the West Bank village of Bil'in. The court acquitted the activists. The presiding judge viewed video footage filmed by both police officers and members of the group 'Anarchists Against the Fence' that did not reflect evidence of violent acts. Judge Muki Landman harshly criticized the police's behavior in his ruling.
'A feeling of serious discomfort has arisen from the mighty gap between the officers' testimony and what is seen in the video tapes,' Landman wrote. 'I cannot rule out the possibility that had it not been for the videotapes, I would have reached a different result regarding the defendants.'
The 11 activists were indicted following a demonstration in February 2004, on the day the International Court of Justice in The Hague began deliberations on the West Bank separation fence. The activists sought to protest against the fence in the West Bank but later moved their demonstration to a location opposite the Defense Ministry in Tel Aviv. The activists sat on the road, causing severe traffic jams. The prosecution filed serious charges against the activists that included charges of violent unruliness and of interfering with police officers. An additional indictment of attacking a police officer was erased from the charge sheet before a verdict was issued.
Landman rejected the majority of the prosecution`s claims but also rejected claims made by the activists that police officers acted violently when breaking up the protest. Landman also rejected the defendants' claims that their behavior was protected by international law as a legitimate means of opposing the occupation and the separation fence.
The judge convicted nine of the 11 activists on a minor charge of illegal congregation. Two others were convicted of vandalism after spray painting graffiti on the walls of the Kirya defense compound in central Tel Aviv. Sentencing is scheduled for February 2007.
(A.K.)
By Nir Hasson, Haaretz October 3, 2006
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/769956.html
Tel Aviv Magistrate`s Court revealed Tuesday that police officers lied while testifying against 11 left-wing activists accused of violent acts during anti-fence demonstrations in the West Bank village of Bil'in. The court acquitted the activists. The presiding judge viewed video footage filmed by both police officers and members of the group 'Anarchists Against the Fence' that did not reflect evidence of violent acts. Judge Muki Landman harshly criticized the police's behavior in his ruling.
'A feeling of serious discomfort has arisen from the mighty gap between the officers' testimony and what is seen in the video tapes,' Landman wrote. 'I cannot rule out the possibility that had it not been for the videotapes, I would have reached a different result regarding the defendants.'
The 11 activists were indicted following a demonstration in February 2004, on the day the International Court of Justice in The Hague began deliberations on the West Bank separation fence. The activists sought to protest against the fence in the West Bank but later moved their demonstration to a location opposite the Defense Ministry in Tel Aviv. The activists sat on the road, causing severe traffic jams. The prosecution filed serious charges against the activists that included charges of violent unruliness and of interfering with police officers. An additional indictment of attacking a police officer was erased from the charge sheet before a verdict was issued.
Landman rejected the majority of the prosecution`s claims but also rejected claims made by the activists that police officers acted violently when breaking up the protest. Landman also rejected the defendants' claims that their behavior was protected by international law as a legitimate means of opposing the occupation and the separation fence.
The judge convicted nine of the 11 activists on a minor charge of illegal congregation. Two others were convicted of vandalism after spray painting graffiti on the walls of the Kirya defense compound in central Tel Aviv. Sentencing is scheduled for February 2007.
(A.K.)
Wednesday, October 04, 2006
People power against Agrippas bus plan?
95% of Hot's News viewers against the Agrippas bus plan
Last night, the Hot news programme started with a report about plans to put three bus routes both ways through Rehov Agrippas, the narrow but main road on the south side of the Mahane Yehuda market. In 2002, shortly after we came to the neighborhood, there was talk of a plan to run three or four infrequent bus routes west down Rehov Agrippas. But about six months ago, suddenly this became 800 buses a day, running both ways. And the buses are, we are told, in response to a survey carried out by Egged, the bus company, which showed that the residents of certain neighbourhoods refuse to change on to the light railway which will run through the centre of town (Jaffa Road) and insist on "door-to-door" service to the market. How democratic of Egged...
Gradually even our local community centre's management has come to understand that they have been stabbed in the back by the JTMT, the Jerusalem Transportation Master Plan ("Tochnit Av"). As their person responsible for "public relations" told me back in May, although they are informing all the different neighbourhoods about the plan, this is a one-way communications exercise. The fact that a plan dated 2003 has been found on the Internet showing a totally different scenario is cited as proof that "you knew about the plan all along". But nobody changed the information which was given not just to the residents, but also to the management.
Watch this space for further developments...
Last night, the Hot news programme started with a report about plans to put three bus routes both ways through Rehov Agrippas, the narrow but main road on the south side of the Mahane Yehuda market. In 2002, shortly after we came to the neighborhood, there was talk of a plan to run three or four infrequent bus routes west down Rehov Agrippas. But about six months ago, suddenly this became 800 buses a day, running both ways. And the buses are, we are told, in response to a survey carried out by Egged, the bus company, which showed that the residents of certain neighbourhoods refuse to change on to the light railway which will run through the centre of town (Jaffa Road) and insist on "door-to-door" service to the market. How democratic of Egged...
Gradually even our local community centre's management has come to understand that they have been stabbed in the back by the JTMT, the Jerusalem Transportation Master Plan ("Tochnit Av"). As their person responsible for "public relations" told me back in May, although they are informing all the different neighbourhoods about the plan, this is a one-way communications exercise. The fact that a plan dated 2003 has been found on the Internet showing a totally different scenario is cited as proof that "you knew about the plan all along". But nobody changed the information which was given not just to the residents, but also to the management.
Watch this space for further developments...
Tuesday, October 03, 2006
The City That Isn't (and isn't Chelm...)
Sweeping the Halls
Peggy Cidor, Jerusalem Post, October 3, 2006
Mayor Uri Lupolianski probably does not plan his schedule according to the Gregorian calendar. Yet this week seemed to be a typical "end-of-the-year-clean-the-desks" type of week.
First, the Finance Committee presented the 2006 budget, balanced for the first time in years, and then the final city council meeting for the year 2005 approved it.
The balanced and approved budget may have provided temporary relief to our mayor, since the last few weeks have been really tough.
The newest round of difficulties started three weeks ago with the municipal "buzz" over the mayor's problematic decision to override his general manager, Eitan Meir, in order to undo the tangle between the workers' committee and the municipality.
Zion Dahan, head of the workers' committee, had two meetings with the Mayor - and Meir wasn't present at the first of them. After the second meeting, Dahan finally achieved what he's been trying to achieve for over a year, despite Meir's opposition. In a somewhat irregular decision, the mayor agreed to transfer large sections of the social affairs department's budget to Dahan's protege, Shemi Amsallem, thus making Amsallem head of one of the largest and best-budgeted departments in the municipality.
As usual, Lupolianski meant well. But Meir took Lupolianski's decision as an expression of a lack of confidence in him. The city council opposition angrily denounced the "improper procedure."
And then the municipality's legal advisor declared the decision illegal and void.
Dahan went to court to uphold the decision. He lost - so the mayor did, too. And even the municipal spokesman was criticized for issuing a rather impolite spokesman's reaction.
Meir, often known for his own maneuvers and machinations, has come out of the incident as the "righteous man whose work is done by others."
And Lupolianski? He's still hoping that the issue will be resolved - somehow.
Next, the mayor had to contend with the resignations of Municipal Engineer Uri Shetrit and Micha Bin Nun, head of supervision and enforcement in the engineering department.
Bin-Nun, by the way, has, for the moment at least, decided to stay. But he has made it clear that he has yet to have the last word. And sources in Kikar Safra are already predicting that at least two other high-ranking officials might be announcing their resignation soon.
And Lupolianski? Dreaming that things will improve.
They haven't. Next, our mayor was summoned, earlier this week, to a police investigation.
True, we're talking about the "green" - environmental - police. Lupolianski has been questioned regarding his violation of the Environment Ministry's orders to clean up several different spots in the city, including the huge amounts of garbage that have accumulated at the Giv'at Sha'ul cemetery and the wadi (valley) beneath Ein Kerem.
The Ministry claims to have issued the mayor five orders, as required by law. The orders specifically instructed the Mayor to clean up the act within 30 days.
He hasn't.
According to Shonny Goldberger, head of the Jerusalem district of the Environment Ministry, ignoring an order of this sort could land the mayor in jail for up to one year or cost him a fine of NIS 150,000.
Earlier this year, Lupolianski had to pay NIS 30,000 to the city council opposition after the district court found him guilty of improperly using municipal buildings for haredi schools.
"Corridors of Power" hopes that this time he won't have to spare his family budget and choose prison.
And the troubles keep on coming.
Lupolianski has also had to deal with the annual comptroller's report regarding complaints registered by the public. The comptroller isn't pleased. According to her findings, more than one-third of the complaints were justified.
Head of the Comptroller's Committee, Pepe Allalu (Meretz), says that this is nearly double the proportion of justified complaints filed in last year's report.
"So what's happened to the municipality's slogans about ‘just give service’?" opposition councilman Nir Barkat (Jerusalem Will Succeed) asked cynically.
Maybe they should look for a new copywriter?
Finally, lest our readers suspect that this column is biased against the Mayor, we bring you a story from the offices of Municipal Director Eitan Meir. It is a tale which, we believe, will help to illustrate why so many citizens of Jerusalem feel that they are paying taxes to the municipality of Chelm.
In a spurt of effort to save public monies, Meir decided, among other, similar decisions, to change the company responsible for provision of computer services to the municipality, thus ostensibly saving about NIS three million a year.
A good idea. But not surprisingly, the people from the original company weren't happy about being sent home and losing their lucrative contract. In an attempt to reverse the decision, they went on strike and disrupted the municipality's computerized services, including even the email.
They put up a good fight, which went on for nearly four months, with various ups and downs.
They lost. The new company has been in since the beginning of the week.
But, as we all know, he who laughs last...
In the midst of the computer-turmoil, despite the on-going strikes and sanctions, Meir decided that the time was ripe to connect Jerusalem's 26 public libraries to the central system, so that subscribers would have access to the book lists from their personal computers.
It's a Brave New Hi-Tech World, but the timing wasn't great.
Not surprisingly, the employees of the old company made sure that the brave citizens of new-world Jerusalem were not going to enjoy this new service.
They dismantled the entire system - not just the link from home, but the entire system. Now even if you come all the way from home to the library, you couldn't check out or return a book.
The Baka library, for example, serves 1,600 subscribers, and they were furious. Even in Chelm, they probably noted, the general director might have waited for better timing.
But that's Chelm. This is Jerusalem - a totally different place.
As of earlier this week, since the new company has taken over, the entire computer system has been resurrected, the municipal email works, and the libraries are free to serve the public. Soon, the municipality promises, all 26 libraries will be connected to central system.
But while we're discussing the Baka library - this might be a perfect opportunity for the new computer company to prove its prowess. The phone number listed on the municipal website for the Baka library has been wrong for months. Until now, they couldn't change it - because of the computers, of course.
Peggy Cidor, Jerusalem Post, October 3, 2006
Mayor Uri Lupolianski probably does not plan his schedule according to the Gregorian calendar. Yet this week seemed to be a typical "end-of-the-year-clean-the-desks" type of week.
First, the Finance Committee presented the 2006 budget, balanced for the first time in years, and then the final city council meeting for the year 2005 approved it.
The balanced and approved budget may have provided temporary relief to our mayor, since the last few weeks have been really tough.
The newest round of difficulties started three weeks ago with the municipal "buzz" over the mayor's problematic decision to override his general manager, Eitan Meir, in order to undo the tangle between the workers' committee and the municipality.
Zion Dahan, head of the workers' committee, had two meetings with the Mayor - and Meir wasn't present at the first of them. After the second meeting, Dahan finally achieved what he's been trying to achieve for over a year, despite Meir's opposition. In a somewhat irregular decision, the mayor agreed to transfer large sections of the social affairs department's budget to Dahan's protege, Shemi Amsallem, thus making Amsallem head of one of the largest and best-budgeted departments in the municipality.
As usual, Lupolianski meant well. But Meir took Lupolianski's decision as an expression of a lack of confidence in him. The city council opposition angrily denounced the "improper procedure."
And then the municipality's legal advisor declared the decision illegal and void.
Dahan went to court to uphold the decision. He lost - so the mayor did, too. And even the municipal spokesman was criticized for issuing a rather impolite spokesman's reaction.
Meir, often known for his own maneuvers and machinations, has come out of the incident as the "righteous man whose work is done by others."
And Lupolianski? He's still hoping that the issue will be resolved - somehow.
Next, the mayor had to contend with the resignations of Municipal Engineer Uri Shetrit and Micha Bin Nun, head of supervision and enforcement in the engineering department.
Bin-Nun, by the way, has, for the moment at least, decided to stay. But he has made it clear that he has yet to have the last word. And sources in Kikar Safra are already predicting that at least two other high-ranking officials might be announcing their resignation soon.
And Lupolianski? Dreaming that things will improve.
They haven't. Next, our mayor was summoned, earlier this week, to a police investigation.
True, we're talking about the "green" - environmental - police. Lupolianski has been questioned regarding his violation of the Environment Ministry's orders to clean up several different spots in the city, including the huge amounts of garbage that have accumulated at the Giv'at Sha'ul cemetery and the wadi (valley) beneath Ein Kerem.
The Ministry claims to have issued the mayor five orders, as required by law. The orders specifically instructed the Mayor to clean up the act within 30 days.
He hasn't.
According to Shonny Goldberger, head of the Jerusalem district of the Environment Ministry, ignoring an order of this sort could land the mayor in jail for up to one year or cost him a fine of NIS 150,000.
Earlier this year, Lupolianski had to pay NIS 30,000 to the city council opposition after the district court found him guilty of improperly using municipal buildings for haredi schools.
"Corridors of Power" hopes that this time he won't have to spare his family budget and choose prison.
And the troubles keep on coming.
Lupolianski has also had to deal with the annual comptroller's report regarding complaints registered by the public. The comptroller isn't pleased. According to her findings, more than one-third of the complaints were justified.
Head of the Comptroller's Committee, Pepe Allalu (Meretz), says that this is nearly double the proportion of justified complaints filed in last year's report.
"So what's happened to the municipality's slogans about ‘just give service’?" opposition councilman Nir Barkat (Jerusalem Will Succeed) asked cynically.
Maybe they should look for a new copywriter?
Finally, lest our readers suspect that this column is biased against the Mayor, we bring you a story from the offices of Municipal Director Eitan Meir. It is a tale which, we believe, will help to illustrate why so many citizens of Jerusalem feel that they are paying taxes to the municipality of Chelm.
In a spurt of effort to save public monies, Meir decided, among other, similar decisions, to change the company responsible for provision of computer services to the municipality, thus ostensibly saving about NIS three million a year.
A good idea. But not surprisingly, the people from the original company weren't happy about being sent home and losing their lucrative contract. In an attempt to reverse the decision, they went on strike and disrupted the municipality's computerized services, including even the email.
They put up a good fight, which went on for nearly four months, with various ups and downs.
They lost. The new company has been in since the beginning of the week.
But, as we all know, he who laughs last...
In the midst of the computer-turmoil, despite the on-going strikes and sanctions, Meir decided that the time was ripe to connect Jerusalem's 26 public libraries to the central system, so that subscribers would have access to the book lists from their personal computers.
It's a Brave New Hi-Tech World, but the timing wasn't great.
Not surprisingly, the employees of the old company made sure that the brave citizens of new-world Jerusalem were not going to enjoy this new service.
They dismantled the entire system - not just the link from home, but the entire system. Now even if you come all the way from home to the library, you couldn't check out or return a book.
The Baka library, for example, serves 1,600 subscribers, and they were furious. Even in Chelm, they probably noted, the general director might have waited for better timing.
But that's Chelm. This is Jerusalem - a totally different place.
As of earlier this week, since the new company has taken over, the entire computer system has been resurrected, the municipal email works, and the libraries are free to serve the public. Soon, the municipality promises, all 26 libraries will be connected to central system.
But while we're discussing the Baka library - this might be a perfect opportunity for the new computer company to prove its prowess. The phone number listed on the municipal website for the Baka library has been wrong for months. Until now, they couldn't change it - because of the computers, of course.
Friday, September 29, 2006
Good news for partridges! - the pear trees will be pleased...
High Court of Justice imposes ban on partridge hunting
By Zafrir Rinat, Haaretz Correspondent (September 28, 2006)
The High Court on Thursday ordered the Israel Nature and Parks Authority to ban all hunting of partridges as of next Thursday.
The decision was made after The Society for the Protection of Nature in Israel launched a successful appeal to the High Court, claiming partridges were dangerously close to becoming extinct in Israel due to excessive hunting.
A Knesset committee recently declared partridges a protected species, but In order to appease hunters the INPA continued to allow small-scale hunting in areas where it claimed local populations had recovered.
In such instances, hunters were granted limited licenses that allowed them to hunt up to three partridges a day.
The SPNI insisted, however, that the ban applied to all hunting of partridges throughout Israel.
By Zafrir Rinat, Haaretz Correspondent (September 28, 2006)
The High Court on Thursday ordered the Israel Nature and Parks Authority to ban all hunting of partridges as of next Thursday.
The decision was made after The Society for the Protection of Nature in Israel launched a successful appeal to the High Court, claiming partridges were dangerously close to becoming extinct in Israel due to excessive hunting.
A Knesset committee recently declared partridges a protected species, but In order to appease hunters the INPA continued to allow small-scale hunting in areas where it claimed local populations had recovered.
In such instances, hunters were granted limited licenses that allowed them to hunt up to three partridges a day.
The SPNI insisted, however, that the ban applied to all hunting of partridges throughout Israel.
Tuesday, September 26, 2006
Family reunification files
The sad story of my friend Sam
GERSHON BASKIN, THE JERUSALEM POST
Sep. 25, 2006
I have been spending hours during the past couple of weeks trying to help a friend. Well, he's not really a friend, we hardly know each other.
I have exchanged e-mails with him several times over the past years, and appeared with him once at a conference at Tel Aviv University. I was impressed by his mild manner and his "go-getter" attitude to life.
In a lot of ways he reminds me of myself. He immigrated to this country out of a deep sense of idealism. He felt that he was coming home. He wanted to serve his people, build a life for himself and his family. Like me, he immigrated from the States. He has been living here for years and has scored some real achievements, including making a name for himself in the business world.
His name is Sam Bahour, and he is Palestinian. He came home to Palestine at the outset of the peace process in order to build the new state and make a contribution to peace. He believed in the peace process and he wanted to build his life with his people.
Sam has built a hi-tech company in Ramallah. He's built a small shopping center there too. He has been a central and active part of Ramallah's social and intellectual life.
Sam is all over, always willing to help out, and always willing to meet Israelis because he believes in peace. He has many Israeli friends all over Israel. He even holds an MBA from Tel Aviv University.
The one place where Sam doesn't have Israeli friends is in the Civil Administration - and that's where he needs them more than ever.
WHEN MOSHE Arens was minister of defense in the early 1990s he formed a committee, headed by Prof. Ezra Sadan, to reevaluate Israel's economic policies in the West Bank and Gaza. The Sadan committee recommended, and minister Arens implemented, a major policy change that actually encouraged investors of Palestinian origin to "return" to the West Bank and Gaza in order to invest and to create jobs.
When the peace process got under way after 1993 that policy was further developed and Palestinian expatriates were called on by both the Israeli government and the Palestinian Authority to come back to Palestine and build their future while contributing to peace.
That's what Sam did. Only Sam didn't know that Israel would continue to control the population registry, and that he would have to leave the country every three months in order to be able to stay in the country.
But Sam is a law-abiding citizen, and so every three months he left the country in order to get a new three-month tourist visa.
Now everyone knew Sam wasn't a tourist, but everyone has been playing the game of make-believe that he was so he could stay in Ramallah with his wife and children and could continue to manage the successful businesses he has worked so hard to build.
THOUSANDS of people have been playing the same game for years. Sam did apply for family reunification in 1994, before the PA took over. It is also worth pointing out that thousands of Jews live for years in Israel for years on tourist visas without being threatened at all.
At the end of this month, in a few days, Sam will have to leave the country again - but this time he will not be coming back. Someone decided that the charade has to end.
A certain Mr. Gur Lavie, who is in charge of Palestinian population registration for the West Bank, said to me last week: "Let's face it. We all know he's not a tourist."
I said, "That's right, we all know that."
So, said my interlocutor, "let him apply for family reunification."
Brilliant idea! Some 120,000 family reunification files have been opened since 2000, but since the beginning of the intifada in September 2000, the State of Israel has stopped reviewing family reunification files.
The registration officer's response: "That's his problem" - and he is right, it is his problem; but it should be ours too.
NOW IT IS very important to get something straight. Sam Bahour does not want to live in the State of Israel. He lives in Ramallah, and he wishes to continue to live in Ramallah. He too wants to stop playing the charade.
He is not alone. He is one of thousands of Palestinians who have no Palestinian ID issued by the Palestinian Authority, thus, he has no ID approved by the State of Israel. Sam Bahour only has his US passport and that document is no longer useful for getting him permission to live in Ramallah.
The official I spoke to is implementing a policy which is nothing more than a form of ethnic cleansing, but he did not make the decision himself. He is simply a mid-level clerk in a pseudo-government system of control called "the occupation."
One of his bosses made the decision. Since his direct boss is the head of the Civil Administration, it might appear that some brigadier-general made the decision, but Brig.-Gen. Kamil Abu Rukon, the current head of the Civil Administration, did not make the decision. It came from higher up. Abu Rukon answers to Gen. Yosef Mishlev, the coordinator of government activities in the territories, but Gen.
Mishlev also didn't make this decision. It was made by the minister of defense - not Amir Peretz but his predecessor, Shaul Mofaz. It was probably one of the last decisions he made before leaving the ministry. It is possible that Peretz is not even aware of the decision and its impact on tens of thousands of people in the West Bank.
IT IS TIME to end the charade. When I immigrated to Israel they made me a temporary resident. When I was ready I was given citizenship and permanent residency.
Sam Bahour does not yet have a state to become a citizen of, but he certainly should be granted some form of residency that allows him to be the exemplary citizen that he is. We Israelis should be interested in keeping Sam Bahour and the thousands of others like Sam as our neighbors in the West Bank. The chances for building real peace increase when people like Sam Bahour can be our neighbor. Shame on any government of Israel that would force people like Sam to leave.
During the final days leading up to Yom Kippur we should all say sorry to Sam Bahour and correct this injustice to Sam and to thousands of others once and for all. It is the most Jewish thing to do, particularly in the Holy Days between Rosh Hashana and Yom Kippur.
The writer is the Israeli Co-CEO of IPCRI, the Israel/Palestine Center for Research and Information. www.ipcri.org
GERSHON BASKIN, THE JERUSALEM POST
Sep. 25, 2006
I have been spending hours during the past couple of weeks trying to help a friend. Well, he's not really a friend, we hardly know each other.
I have exchanged e-mails with him several times over the past years, and appeared with him once at a conference at Tel Aviv University. I was impressed by his mild manner and his "go-getter" attitude to life.
In a lot of ways he reminds me of myself. He immigrated to this country out of a deep sense of idealism. He felt that he was coming home. He wanted to serve his people, build a life for himself and his family. Like me, he immigrated from the States. He has been living here for years and has scored some real achievements, including making a name for himself in the business world.
His name is Sam Bahour, and he is Palestinian. He came home to Palestine at the outset of the peace process in order to build the new state and make a contribution to peace. He believed in the peace process and he wanted to build his life with his people.
Sam has built a hi-tech company in Ramallah. He's built a small shopping center there too. He has been a central and active part of Ramallah's social and intellectual life.
Sam is all over, always willing to help out, and always willing to meet Israelis because he believes in peace. He has many Israeli friends all over Israel. He even holds an MBA from Tel Aviv University.
The one place where Sam doesn't have Israeli friends is in the Civil Administration - and that's where he needs them more than ever.
WHEN MOSHE Arens was minister of defense in the early 1990s he formed a committee, headed by Prof. Ezra Sadan, to reevaluate Israel's economic policies in the West Bank and Gaza. The Sadan committee recommended, and minister Arens implemented, a major policy change that actually encouraged investors of Palestinian origin to "return" to the West Bank and Gaza in order to invest and to create jobs.
When the peace process got under way after 1993 that policy was further developed and Palestinian expatriates were called on by both the Israeli government and the Palestinian Authority to come back to Palestine and build their future while contributing to peace.
That's what Sam did. Only Sam didn't know that Israel would continue to control the population registry, and that he would have to leave the country every three months in order to be able to stay in the country.
But Sam is a law-abiding citizen, and so every three months he left the country in order to get a new three-month tourist visa.
Now everyone knew Sam wasn't a tourist, but everyone has been playing the game of make-believe that he was so he could stay in Ramallah with his wife and children and could continue to manage the successful businesses he has worked so hard to build.
THOUSANDS of people have been playing the same game for years. Sam did apply for family reunification in 1994, before the PA took over. It is also worth pointing out that thousands of Jews live for years in Israel for years on tourist visas without being threatened at all.
At the end of this month, in a few days, Sam will have to leave the country again - but this time he will not be coming back. Someone decided that the charade has to end.
A certain Mr. Gur Lavie, who is in charge of Palestinian population registration for the West Bank, said to me last week: "Let's face it. We all know he's not a tourist."
I said, "That's right, we all know that."
So, said my interlocutor, "let him apply for family reunification."
Brilliant idea! Some 120,000 family reunification files have been opened since 2000, but since the beginning of the intifada in September 2000, the State of Israel has stopped reviewing family reunification files.
The registration officer's response: "That's his problem" - and he is right, it is his problem; but it should be ours too.
NOW IT IS very important to get something straight. Sam Bahour does not want to live in the State of Israel. He lives in Ramallah, and he wishes to continue to live in Ramallah. He too wants to stop playing the charade.
He is not alone. He is one of thousands of Palestinians who have no Palestinian ID issued by the Palestinian Authority, thus, he has no ID approved by the State of Israel. Sam Bahour only has his US passport and that document is no longer useful for getting him permission to live in Ramallah.
The official I spoke to is implementing a policy which is nothing more than a form of ethnic cleansing, but he did not make the decision himself. He is simply a mid-level clerk in a pseudo-government system of control called "the occupation."
One of his bosses made the decision. Since his direct boss is the head of the Civil Administration, it might appear that some brigadier-general made the decision, but Brig.-Gen. Kamil Abu Rukon, the current head of the Civil Administration, did not make the decision. It came from higher up. Abu Rukon answers to Gen. Yosef Mishlev, the coordinator of government activities in the territories, but Gen.
Mishlev also didn't make this decision. It was made by the minister of defense - not Amir Peretz but his predecessor, Shaul Mofaz. It was probably one of the last decisions he made before leaving the ministry. It is possible that Peretz is not even aware of the decision and its impact on tens of thousands of people in the West Bank.
IT IS TIME to end the charade. When I immigrated to Israel they made me a temporary resident. When I was ready I was given citizenship and permanent residency.
Sam Bahour does not yet have a state to become a citizen of, but he certainly should be granted some form of residency that allows him to be the exemplary citizen that he is. We Israelis should be interested in keeping Sam Bahour and the thousands of others like Sam as our neighbors in the West Bank. The chances for building real peace increase when people like Sam Bahour can be our neighbor. Shame on any government of Israel that would force people like Sam to leave.
During the final days leading up to Yom Kippur we should all say sorry to Sam Bahour and correct this injustice to Sam and to thousands of others once and for all. It is the most Jewish thing to do, particularly in the Holy Days between Rosh Hashana and Yom Kippur.
The writer is the Israeli Co-CEO of IPCRI, the Israel/Palestine Center for Research and Information. www.ipcri.org
Monday, September 18, 2006
Analysis - Lebanon postwar
Lebanon - a reassessment
Sep. 13, 2006
By ASHER SUSSER
Anyone following the war in Lebanon in the Israeli media could not but come away engulfed in deep depression. Israelis and their media tend to focus obsessively on themselves, their own losses and failings, remaining largely oblivious to what is happening on the other side of the divide. This is as true about Gaza as it is about Lebanon. In contrast to the uniform and self-centered discussion in Israel, the war with Hizbullah and its consequences are being discussed in Lebanon and the broader Arab world in a more diverse and more sophisticated debate.
In the Arab world, views vary from the one extreme, which sees the ultimate victory of the Arabs in more missiles and rockets that will surely bring Israel to its knees in the not too distant future, to those at the other end of the spectrum, according to whom Hizbullah, Lebanon and the Arabs have, in fact, been defeated.
At the height of the war, as Hizbullah rockets regularly sent hundreds of thousands of Israelis scurrying to the shelters like "rabbits and mice," as some of the Arab media noted with undisguised gratification, the mood tended to be militantly euphoric, buoyed by the widely broadcast images of Israeli suffering and humiliation. But as the war came to its conclusion and life in Israel returned pretty much to normal, opinion in the Arab world has shifted to more sober analysis, as Lebanon, Hizbullah and the Shi'ites face the daunting task of what will probably be years of multi-billion dollar reconstruction.
Even a cursory perusal of the Arab press, will reveal that Hizbullah's status in Lebanon has changed for the worse, as many Lebanese come to the rather shocking realization that the south of their country, unknown to them, had in fact been transformed into an Iranian and Syrian launching pad against Israel posing an existential threat to their own livelihoods and to their entire country. Hizbullah is now on the defensive, trying to protect its political assets against a more assertive Lebanese domestic majority, that seems more determined than ever to contain Hizbullah's "state within a state," so that they are not drawn again into a destructive war with Israel, without as much as a word of consultation.
Many in Lebanon, especially non-Shi'ites, but also some important Shi'ite spokespersons, are calling for an end to the armed phase of Hizbullah's development and its integration into the Lebanese political system, like all other political parties, lest further provocation of Israel will expose Lebanon to even greater devastation in the future. In other words, they are demanding the disarming of Hizbullah.
Muna Fayyad, a Shi'ite professor at the University of Lebanon, and the Mufti of Tyre, Sayyid Ali al-Amin, for example, both questioned the right of Hizbullah to bring disaster on the Shi'ites of Lebanon, by dragging them into an ill considered adventure they never wanted, in the interests of a foreign power like Iran, about whom they were never consulted.
NASRALLAH NOW has to contend with his newly constructed image as the destroyer of Lebanon rather than its protector, as he himself regularly claimed before the war, as a main justification for the very existence of his militia. His recent interview (explaining that he would not have ordered the abduction of the two Israeli soldiers had he expected such a ferocious Israeli response) is indicative of this new predicament.
Arab commentators are considerably less impressed with Nasrallah's strategic genius than some of their Israeli counterparts seem to be in their moments of self-critical excess. They question the wisdom of his decision-making, as they wryly ridicule his claims of victory. A poll conducted in Lebanon in late August revealed that two thirds of the non-Shi'ite public believed that Hizbullah had actually been defeated in the war.
Hazim Saghiya, writing in Al-Hayat, questioned whether victory could be celebrated on the ruins of Lebanon by a leader who had to remain in hiding. Another commentator in Al-Hayat, Hasan Haydar, compared Nasrallah's interview of apology to Egyptian president Gamal Nasser's admission of defeat in 1967. The Arabs, he noted, were still paying for the defeat in 1967, and he wondered for how long the Lebanese and the Arabs would be paying for Nasrallah's "ill-considered 'victory.'"
Abd al-Mun'im Sa'id, the Director of the Al-Ahram's Center for Political and Strategic Studies, urged the Arabs to follow Israel's example and set up a commission of inquiry to establish how Nasrallah could have dragged Lebanon into war without the country and the home front having being at all prepared. He dismissed Nasrallah's contention that preparation of the home front was the responsibility of the state, arguing that the state could hardly prepare for a war about which it had no advance knowledge. As opposed to Israeli journalists, who tended to glorify Nasrallah's credibility, Abd al-Mun'im questioned why Hizbullah had failed to fire its long-range rockets after Israel had repeatedly bombed Beirut, even though Nasrallah had vowed to do so. And what about the relative ineffectiveness of the short-range rockets? The damage they caused was limited, and a significant proportion of the Israeli casualties were actually Arabs.
ALL OF the above have emboldened the Lebanese government to deploy its army in the South, which it had not done for over 30 years, and to accept the stationing of a more robust international force there as well. Neither of these had hitherto been acceptable to Hizbullah. These forces will not disarm Hizbullah, which will no doubt make every effort to rearm and replenish its depleted stocks. All the same, they do serve the purpose of reasserting the sovereignty of the Lebanese state in all of its territory. This in turn adds to all the other factors seeking to reduce Hizbullah's freedom of action to operate militarily against Israel from the South.
None of this would have happened had it not been for the severe damage Israel inflicted upon Hizbullah's civilian, political and military infrastructure. The civilian backbone of Hizbullah, the Shi'ite community of Lebanon, has incurred heavy loss of life and enormous property damage, which will take years to repair. The period of reconstruction may not be free of criticism for the leadership that led the community to this disaster.
And once rehabilitated will the Shi'ites of Beirut and the South be ready to endanger everything and go through their recent ordeal all over again, for what Hizbullah might feel required to do in the service of Iran and Syria? Moreover, a new Shi'ite middle class has emerged during the last generation and they are eager to integrate into the mainstream of Lebanese politics, something they might not be able to achieve as long as Hizbullah is perceived to be serving the interests of foreign powers.
IN DIRECT military terms Hizbullah's losses were heavy and will not be easily replenished either. Key installations and command and control centers were totally destroyed in the Dahiya area of Southern Beirut and in the South of the country. Fortified positions, bunkers and stores in close proximity to the border with Israel have been demolished, and it is highly unlikely that Israel will allow their reconstruction under any circumstances.
The organization lost between a quarter to a third of its fighting men. Bravado aside, in numerous encounters Hizbullah fighters fled the field of battle, leaving their equipment behind, to avoid direct confrontation with Israeli ground forces.
Much of Hizbullah's long and medium-range rocketry has been destroyed. They still have large stocks of the short-range rockets, which were the great majority of the over 4,000 rockets fired during the war into Northern Israel. But their effectiveness is limited. It is true that the North of the country was almost brought to a standstill and the trauma of hundreds of thousands of Israelis in shelters or living as internal refugees in other parts of the country will not be forgotten. But in terms of loss of life the thousands of rockets were less effective than a couple of suicide bombers.
The Iranian strategic outpost that had been built up for future use against Israel has been defanged, at least for the meantime. It must have cost hundreds of millions to construct and has been lost prematurely, spent not very effectively and not at a time of Iran's choosing. Moreover if intended to deter Israel from taking action, it achieved quite the opposite result.
Hizbullah, at this stage, is observing the cease-fire. They do not want a second round now. Nasrallah needs a breather, and has no choice but to accept the hitherto unacceptable in the form of the restoration of Lebanese state sovereignty to the South. The euphoria in the Arab media has also subsided. The "rabbits and mice" have left the shelters and it is the Lebanese and Hizbullah who must now survey the damage wrought unto them. Nasrallah's references to Israel as a society as flimsy as "cobwebs" seem somewhat less appropriate from the ruins of South Beirut.
AN EGYPTIAN commentator, Ali al-Ibrahim, noted recently that the Arabs had learned to differentiate between victories on television and real victories in the field. How long will it take the Israelis to do likewise?
Israel's achievements in the war should not be underestimated, all the more so because they were attained despite the unbelievably incompetent and indecisive handling of the military campaign by the triumvirate of Olmert, Peretz and Halutz. They have failed us miserably and must go.
The courageous citizens of this country, who endured patiently in the shelters, and the brave and resourceful fighting men and women of the IDF, regulars and reservists, who put their lives on the line, deserve much better.
Whether the achievements of the war prove lasting or not is another question. Can the Lebanese led by Fuad Seniora's government build on the new political realities that the war has created? Will they be able to withstand the pressure that is bound to come from the Iran-Syria-Hizbullah axis that will seek to undo the consequences of the war and reestablish the status quo ante? Only time will tell, but these are questions that would not even have been asked had it not been for the war against Hizbullah.
The writer is Director of the Moshe Dayan Center for Middle Eastern and African Studies at Tel Aviv University.
Sep. 13, 2006
By ASHER SUSSER
Anyone following the war in Lebanon in the Israeli media could not but come away engulfed in deep depression. Israelis and their media tend to focus obsessively on themselves, their own losses and failings, remaining largely oblivious to what is happening on the other side of the divide. This is as true about Gaza as it is about Lebanon. In contrast to the uniform and self-centered discussion in Israel, the war with Hizbullah and its consequences are being discussed in Lebanon and the broader Arab world in a more diverse and more sophisticated debate.
In the Arab world, views vary from the one extreme, which sees the ultimate victory of the Arabs in more missiles and rockets that will surely bring Israel to its knees in the not too distant future, to those at the other end of the spectrum, according to whom Hizbullah, Lebanon and the Arabs have, in fact, been defeated.
At the height of the war, as Hizbullah rockets regularly sent hundreds of thousands of Israelis scurrying to the shelters like "rabbits and mice," as some of the Arab media noted with undisguised gratification, the mood tended to be militantly euphoric, buoyed by the widely broadcast images of Israeli suffering and humiliation. But as the war came to its conclusion and life in Israel returned pretty much to normal, opinion in the Arab world has shifted to more sober analysis, as Lebanon, Hizbullah and the Shi'ites face the daunting task of what will probably be years of multi-billion dollar reconstruction.
Even a cursory perusal of the Arab press, will reveal that Hizbullah's status in Lebanon has changed for the worse, as many Lebanese come to the rather shocking realization that the south of their country, unknown to them, had in fact been transformed into an Iranian and Syrian launching pad against Israel posing an existential threat to their own livelihoods and to their entire country. Hizbullah is now on the defensive, trying to protect its political assets against a more assertive Lebanese domestic majority, that seems more determined than ever to contain Hizbullah's "state within a state," so that they are not drawn again into a destructive war with Israel, without as much as a word of consultation.
Many in Lebanon, especially non-Shi'ites, but also some important Shi'ite spokespersons, are calling for an end to the armed phase of Hizbullah's development and its integration into the Lebanese political system, like all other political parties, lest further provocation of Israel will expose Lebanon to even greater devastation in the future. In other words, they are demanding the disarming of Hizbullah.
Muna Fayyad, a Shi'ite professor at the University of Lebanon, and the Mufti of Tyre, Sayyid Ali al-Amin, for example, both questioned the right of Hizbullah to bring disaster on the Shi'ites of Lebanon, by dragging them into an ill considered adventure they never wanted, in the interests of a foreign power like Iran, about whom they were never consulted.
NASRALLAH NOW has to contend with his newly constructed image as the destroyer of Lebanon rather than its protector, as he himself regularly claimed before the war, as a main justification for the very existence of his militia. His recent interview (explaining that he would not have ordered the abduction of the two Israeli soldiers had he expected such a ferocious Israeli response) is indicative of this new predicament.
Arab commentators are considerably less impressed with Nasrallah's strategic genius than some of their Israeli counterparts seem to be in their moments of self-critical excess. They question the wisdom of his decision-making, as they wryly ridicule his claims of victory. A poll conducted in Lebanon in late August revealed that two thirds of the non-Shi'ite public believed that Hizbullah had actually been defeated in the war.
Hazim Saghiya, writing in Al-Hayat, questioned whether victory could be celebrated on the ruins of Lebanon by a leader who had to remain in hiding. Another commentator in Al-Hayat, Hasan Haydar, compared Nasrallah's interview of apology to Egyptian president Gamal Nasser's admission of defeat in 1967. The Arabs, he noted, were still paying for the defeat in 1967, and he wondered for how long the Lebanese and the Arabs would be paying for Nasrallah's "ill-considered 'victory.'"
Abd al-Mun'im Sa'id, the Director of the Al-Ahram's Center for Political and Strategic Studies, urged the Arabs to follow Israel's example and set up a commission of inquiry to establish how Nasrallah could have dragged Lebanon into war without the country and the home front having being at all prepared. He dismissed Nasrallah's contention that preparation of the home front was the responsibility of the state, arguing that the state could hardly prepare for a war about which it had no advance knowledge. As opposed to Israeli journalists, who tended to glorify Nasrallah's credibility, Abd al-Mun'im questioned why Hizbullah had failed to fire its long-range rockets after Israel had repeatedly bombed Beirut, even though Nasrallah had vowed to do so. And what about the relative ineffectiveness of the short-range rockets? The damage they caused was limited, and a significant proportion of the Israeli casualties were actually Arabs.
ALL OF the above have emboldened the Lebanese government to deploy its army in the South, which it had not done for over 30 years, and to accept the stationing of a more robust international force there as well. Neither of these had hitherto been acceptable to Hizbullah. These forces will not disarm Hizbullah, which will no doubt make every effort to rearm and replenish its depleted stocks. All the same, they do serve the purpose of reasserting the sovereignty of the Lebanese state in all of its territory. This in turn adds to all the other factors seeking to reduce Hizbullah's freedom of action to operate militarily against Israel from the South.
None of this would have happened had it not been for the severe damage Israel inflicted upon Hizbullah's civilian, political and military infrastructure. The civilian backbone of Hizbullah, the Shi'ite community of Lebanon, has incurred heavy loss of life and enormous property damage, which will take years to repair. The period of reconstruction may not be free of criticism for the leadership that led the community to this disaster.
And once rehabilitated will the Shi'ites of Beirut and the South be ready to endanger everything and go through their recent ordeal all over again, for what Hizbullah might feel required to do in the service of Iran and Syria? Moreover, a new Shi'ite middle class has emerged during the last generation and they are eager to integrate into the mainstream of Lebanese politics, something they might not be able to achieve as long as Hizbullah is perceived to be serving the interests of foreign powers.
IN DIRECT military terms Hizbullah's losses were heavy and will not be easily replenished either. Key installations and command and control centers were totally destroyed in the Dahiya area of Southern Beirut and in the South of the country. Fortified positions, bunkers and stores in close proximity to the border with Israel have been demolished, and it is highly unlikely that Israel will allow their reconstruction under any circumstances.
The organization lost between a quarter to a third of its fighting men. Bravado aside, in numerous encounters Hizbullah fighters fled the field of battle, leaving their equipment behind, to avoid direct confrontation with Israeli ground forces.
Much of Hizbullah's long and medium-range rocketry has been destroyed. They still have large stocks of the short-range rockets, which were the great majority of the over 4,000 rockets fired during the war into Northern Israel. But their effectiveness is limited. It is true that the North of the country was almost brought to a standstill and the trauma of hundreds of thousands of Israelis in shelters or living as internal refugees in other parts of the country will not be forgotten. But in terms of loss of life the thousands of rockets were less effective than a couple of suicide bombers.
The Iranian strategic outpost that had been built up for future use against Israel has been defanged, at least for the meantime. It must have cost hundreds of millions to construct and has been lost prematurely, spent not very effectively and not at a time of Iran's choosing. Moreover if intended to deter Israel from taking action, it achieved quite the opposite result.
Hizbullah, at this stage, is observing the cease-fire. They do not want a second round now. Nasrallah needs a breather, and has no choice but to accept the hitherto unacceptable in the form of the restoration of Lebanese state sovereignty to the South. The euphoria in the Arab media has also subsided. The "rabbits and mice" have left the shelters and it is the Lebanese and Hizbullah who must now survey the damage wrought unto them. Nasrallah's references to Israel as a society as flimsy as "cobwebs" seem somewhat less appropriate from the ruins of South Beirut.
AN EGYPTIAN commentator, Ali al-Ibrahim, noted recently that the Arabs had learned to differentiate between victories on television and real victories in the field. How long will it take the Israelis to do likewise?
Israel's achievements in the war should not be underestimated, all the more so because they were attained despite the unbelievably incompetent and indecisive handling of the military campaign by the triumvirate of Olmert, Peretz and Halutz. They have failed us miserably and must go.
The courageous citizens of this country, who endured patiently in the shelters, and the brave and resourceful fighting men and women of the IDF, regulars and reservists, who put their lives on the line, deserve much better.
Whether the achievements of the war prove lasting or not is another question. Can the Lebanese led by Fuad Seniora's government build on the new political realities that the war has created? Will they be able to withstand the pressure that is bound to come from the Iran-Syria-Hizbullah axis that will seek to undo the consequences of the war and reestablish the status quo ante? Only time will tell, but these are questions that would not even have been asked had it not been for the war against Hizbullah.
The writer is Director of the Moshe Dayan Center for Middle Eastern and African Studies at Tel Aviv University.
Saturday, September 16, 2006
"Legal bureaucracy is the culprit"
Public trust in legal system result of inefficiency, not 'legal activism'
Yossi Tamar
Published in Ynet on September 14, 2006
The endless words, reports, and interpretations regarding the change at the Supreme Court's helm made us forget that public trust in the Israeli legal system is at an all-time low. The new chief justice, Dorit Beinisch, would do well if. along with working to protect the rule of law, she will also look into what's really going on at lower courts and execution offices responsible for implementing verdicts.
The wheels of justice turn slowly, but in Israel they're having a hard time turning at all. It's no secret courts are finding it difficult to serve their function. Citizens who seek to bring matters for legal debate discover that, even when they're dealing with minor issues, years will pass before a decision is made.
On the tortuous road to justice, the parties get to enjoy the best of Israeli bureaucracy, including extended waiting periods, useless sessions, needless forms, wasted money, and of course, endless lines. Even when a legal matter is decided, it turns out the State does not possess enough tools or power to enforce the decision.
More judges needed
Ordinary citizens who require mediation or legal defense and experience the Israeli legal system view the legal approach as an expensive, ineffective privilege. The sense that the system is not working as it should grows when one becomes familiar with the enforcement mechanisms, such as execution offices.
The same system, which shows apathy in the face of money owed to citizens, turns out to be a wonderfully effective well-oiled machine when it comes to banks seeking to collect debts.
Seemingly, the legal system possesses the basic condition needed for it to be effective and credible: The ratio of lawyers per population in Israel is among the highest in the world, and every year thousands more join the system and produce much work, and also great income, for the system.
However, it appears that while the whole world has moved forward and internalized the significance of service to citizens, the legal system has frozen in place and remained an island of bureaucracy, slowness, and ineffectiveness.
The legal system needs more judges. Currently, judges are sustaining an inhumane burden and are forced to hear dozens of cases and read hundreds of pages every day. The strict work procedures, which include a huge variety of forms, are incommensurate with our current age, while the manpower mechanism is tired, slow, and awkward.
Real problem ignored
The claim that the drastic decline in the public's trust in the courts is a result of controversial verdicts and doctrines on the part of the Supreme Court, in the wake of Israel's "constitutional revolution," is convenient for some elements.
This way, both those who back the "rule of law" displayed by Supreme Court justices and those who criticize them for interfering in government decisions sanctify the eternal argument and consistently ignore the genuine problem, which is the inefficient bureaucratic mechanism of the courts.
In my view, citizens who want the courts to hear their cases and discover the foot-dragging and system weakness lose their trust as a result of this state of affairs, and not because of the "legal activism" and the justice system's interference in Knesset decisions.
The system needs to be shaken up, and now. The number of judges must be boosted significantly, indicators that will determine their quality should be established, and judges who take too long in handing down verdicts should be made to retire.
It would be proper to add recognized and supervised mediation mechanisms that will lead to a decrease in the number of matters submitted to the courts by the public.
In addition, execution offices must be given real powers and the service offered to citizens must be significantly improved.
Previous Supreme Court presidents preferred to ignore the erosion of public trust in the legal system. Regrettably, the lack of faith in the system is so serious at this time that new Chief Justice Beinisch will have to consider the matter. Let's hope she deviates from the path of her predecessors and leads genuine reform in the justice system where ordinary citizens also have their place.
Yossi Tamar is an attorney and economist and managed the constitution project at the Shalem Center
Yossi Tamar
Published in Ynet on September 14, 2006
The endless words, reports, and interpretations regarding the change at the Supreme Court's helm made us forget that public trust in the Israeli legal system is at an all-time low. The new chief justice, Dorit Beinisch, would do well if. along with working to protect the rule of law, she will also look into what's really going on at lower courts and execution offices responsible for implementing verdicts.
The wheels of justice turn slowly, but in Israel they're having a hard time turning at all. It's no secret courts are finding it difficult to serve their function. Citizens who seek to bring matters for legal debate discover that, even when they're dealing with minor issues, years will pass before a decision is made.
On the tortuous road to justice, the parties get to enjoy the best of Israeli bureaucracy, including extended waiting periods, useless sessions, needless forms, wasted money, and of course, endless lines. Even when a legal matter is decided, it turns out the State does not possess enough tools or power to enforce the decision.
More judges needed
Ordinary citizens who require mediation or legal defense and experience the Israeli legal system view the legal approach as an expensive, ineffective privilege. The sense that the system is not working as it should grows when one becomes familiar with the enforcement mechanisms, such as execution offices.
The same system, which shows apathy in the face of money owed to citizens, turns out to be a wonderfully effective well-oiled machine when it comes to banks seeking to collect debts.
Seemingly, the legal system possesses the basic condition needed for it to be effective and credible: The ratio of lawyers per population in Israel is among the highest in the world, and every year thousands more join the system and produce much work, and also great income, for the system.
However, it appears that while the whole world has moved forward and internalized the significance of service to citizens, the legal system has frozen in place and remained an island of bureaucracy, slowness, and ineffectiveness.
The legal system needs more judges. Currently, judges are sustaining an inhumane burden and are forced to hear dozens of cases and read hundreds of pages every day. The strict work procedures, which include a huge variety of forms, are incommensurate with our current age, while the manpower mechanism is tired, slow, and awkward.
Real problem ignored
The claim that the drastic decline in the public's trust in the courts is a result of controversial verdicts and doctrines on the part of the Supreme Court, in the wake of Israel's "constitutional revolution," is convenient for some elements.
This way, both those who back the "rule of law" displayed by Supreme Court justices and those who criticize them for interfering in government decisions sanctify the eternal argument and consistently ignore the genuine problem, which is the inefficient bureaucratic mechanism of the courts.
In my view, citizens who want the courts to hear their cases and discover the foot-dragging and system weakness lose their trust as a result of this state of affairs, and not because of the "legal activism" and the justice system's interference in Knesset decisions.
The system needs to be shaken up, and now. The number of judges must be boosted significantly, indicators that will determine their quality should be established, and judges who take too long in handing down verdicts should be made to retire.
It would be proper to add recognized and supervised mediation mechanisms that will lead to a decrease in the number of matters submitted to the courts by the public.
In addition, execution offices must be given real powers and the service offered to citizens must be significantly improved.
Previous Supreme Court presidents preferred to ignore the erosion of public trust in the legal system. Regrettably, the lack of faith in the system is so serious at this time that new Chief Justice Beinisch will have to consider the matter. Let's hope she deviates from the path of her predecessors and leads genuine reform in the justice system where ordinary citizens also have their place.
Yossi Tamar is an attorney and economist and managed the constitution project at the Shalem Center
Monday, September 11, 2006
And now for something completely different!
An (unshaggy) dog story
When David and Daisy and I were on our way home this afternoon from Rehavia, our irresistible doggie attracted a lovely female white puppy with black spots who started by sniffing at the normal place and then decided this was the playmate for her - now. Since this part of Rehov Usshishkin is busy and the pavements narrow, it was not a good idea for them to play there: apart from the fact that David was desperate to get home because he was shlepping a not-light elderly printer to be passed on to one of his creative-writing group students.
We were just outside a courier business, where three men were sitting outside on a bench, so I asked whose dog it was. Typically, they were very unhelpful. I picked the puppy up and put her on the bench (by this time the men had stalked off), where she suddenly seemed very scared. She had a collar but no “dog tag” (in both senses), as we have done for Daisy, with her name in English and Hebrew and “her” mobile phone number on the other side. So what do we do?
David suggested putting her in the garden of the house opposite, which I did, not managing to close the gate properly. After we got home, David immediately went out shopping. I settled myself down to carry on reading a student’s thesis, and then decided to go to town to change a dollar cheque because finally the shekel is weakening so I’ll get more shekels. (If anyone can explain to me how we can fight a war and have our local currency strengthen, I’ll be grateful….)
Anyway, Daisy decided that she absolutely had to go out again, so I said fine, I’ll take you with me.
The moment we came out of the house, a youngish man asked me if I’d seen a dog – his had gone missing. Small, I said, a puppy? White? Yes, yes. With black spots? Yes! I told him where I’d left her, but he looked a bit unclear, so I said, fine, we’ll walk with you. When we got to the garden, the gate was wide open, and my heart fell into my boots. No signs of puppy.
Daisy insisted on going upstairs inside the building. I had a faint hope that the puppy might be hiding inside, but no luck. By the time we emerged, there was no sign of the owner. However, I’d taken the trouble to ask him his name, so I continued up the street calling his name. He came back looking crestfallen – no puppy. We all went into the house next door and walked round in the garden, but again no joy.
I insisted that he give me his mobile phone number, and gave him mine, in case one of us found her. And then suddenly, behind him, outside the gate, I saw something white, with a tail. “There,” I said – “there’s a doggie there. Is that her?” He turned round and saw her, and in a very matter-of-fact fashion said, “Michelle!” (a very unusual name for a dog in Israel).
We all emerged into the street and the puppy instantly started playing with Daisy again, just as she had an hour earlier… She was so oblivious of the cars, and the owner didn’t have a lead with him, that I begged him to pick her up. I couldn’t bear the thought that moments after I had managed to reunite dog and owner, something awful might happen to her.
The owner, Micha, said that he’d not long been back from Lebanon: gesturing at his short hair, he said, “I went there with a pony tail, and this is how I came back.”
So in the puppy’s short life - she's four months old - she’d been separated from her owner for over a month. But she was one of the lucky ones: his parents looked after her while he was in the army. Many of the dogs who were abandoned by their owners when they fled the North during the shelling have not been reclaimed and are in danger of being put down.
Israelis are not on the whole a dog-friendly population….
When David and Daisy and I were on our way home this afternoon from Rehavia, our irresistible doggie attracted a lovely female white puppy with black spots who started by sniffing at the normal place and then decided this was the playmate for her - now. Since this part of Rehov Usshishkin is busy and the pavements narrow, it was not a good idea for them to play there: apart from the fact that David was desperate to get home because he was shlepping a not-light elderly printer to be passed on to one of his creative-writing group students.
We were just outside a courier business, where three men were sitting outside on a bench, so I asked whose dog it was. Typically, they were very unhelpful. I picked the puppy up and put her on the bench (by this time the men had stalked off), where she suddenly seemed very scared. She had a collar but no “dog tag” (in both senses), as we have done for Daisy, with her name in English and Hebrew and “her” mobile phone number on the other side. So what do we do?
David suggested putting her in the garden of the house opposite, which I did, not managing to close the gate properly. After we got home, David immediately went out shopping. I settled myself down to carry on reading a student’s thesis, and then decided to go to town to change a dollar cheque because finally the shekel is weakening so I’ll get more shekels. (If anyone can explain to me how we can fight a war and have our local currency strengthen, I’ll be grateful….)
Anyway, Daisy decided that she absolutely had to go out again, so I said fine, I’ll take you with me.
The moment we came out of the house, a youngish man asked me if I’d seen a dog – his had gone missing. Small, I said, a puppy? White? Yes, yes. With black spots? Yes! I told him where I’d left her, but he looked a bit unclear, so I said, fine, we’ll walk with you. When we got to the garden, the gate was wide open, and my heart fell into my boots. No signs of puppy.
Daisy insisted on going upstairs inside the building. I had a faint hope that the puppy might be hiding inside, but no luck. By the time we emerged, there was no sign of the owner. However, I’d taken the trouble to ask him his name, so I continued up the street calling his name. He came back looking crestfallen – no puppy. We all went into the house next door and walked round in the garden, but again no joy.
I insisted that he give me his mobile phone number, and gave him mine, in case one of us found her. And then suddenly, behind him, outside the gate, I saw something white, with a tail. “There,” I said – “there’s a doggie there. Is that her?” He turned round and saw her, and in a very matter-of-fact fashion said, “Michelle!” (a very unusual name for a dog in Israel).
We all emerged into the street and the puppy instantly started playing with Daisy again, just as she had an hour earlier… She was so oblivious of the cars, and the owner didn’t have a lead with him, that I begged him to pick her up. I couldn’t bear the thought that moments after I had managed to reunite dog and owner, something awful might happen to her.
The owner, Micha, said that he’d not long been back from Lebanon: gesturing at his short hair, he said, “I went there with a pony tail, and this is how I came back.”
So in the puppy’s short life - she's four months old - she’d been separated from her owner for over a month. But she was one of the lucky ones: his parents looked after her while he was in the army. Many of the dogs who were abandoned by their owners when they fled the North during the shelling have not been reclaimed and are in danger of being put down.
Israelis are not on the whole a dog-friendly population….
Sunday, September 10, 2006
Jerusalem: A wheelchair view of Nachlaot
Good news to travelers in wheelchair: Nachlaot neighborhood in Jerusalem is very accessible
Jenny Ki Tov, Published on Ynet: 09.07.06, 12:45
Let’s start from the end: To my surprise, the Jerusalem neighborhood of Nachlaot, one of the Israeli’s most picturesque areas, can be enjoyed from a wheelchair. The beauty and character I remember from my two-legged days can still be appreciated now that I sit in a wheel chair.
I was surprised to discover that the route of the tour which took about two hours of constant movement was totally navigational for me, except for one stair at the beginning and three stairs which were low but fairly wide in the middle.
Now come the drawbacks as I prepare a second guide for wheelchair-bound tourists where I team up with Arnon Brokstein, a friend who is also a tour guide. We limited our tour to the neighborhoods between Agrippas and Bezalel Streets during which I used a light wheelchair easily maneuverable by a healthy person.
This kind of tour requires cooperation of everyone involved: The person in the wheelchair willing to deal with sudden twists and turns in the narrow alleyways, roads that are far from paved and the accompanying person not to deviate from the predetermined route.
'Heart of the City’
Nachlaot is part of the greater community called ‘Heart of the City’ comprising 32 individual neighborhoods that adjoin one another. Some of them consist of only a few homes or buildings. The entire area is undergoing extensive renovations and preservation, which emphasize the beauty and unique character. Thus anyone whose last visit to the area was a few years ago is in for some surprises.
The 2-2.5 hour walk through the area was conducted on a typical Jerusalem day. It is preferable to begin in the late afternoon when traffic is light and there is parking near the Davidka Square or Clal Center.
The winding route requires strict adherence to the directions laid out where easy wheelchair access to the various sites is assured. Arnon and I did the entire route three times in order to check and double check this.
Yet despite the favorable conditions, I cannot resist asking one naive question: Why are so many of the neighborhood synagogues inaccessible to wheelchair visitors? Why is there no ramp for the disabled to enter more easily? The Jewish religious sites are no different than Christian ones in that regard as described in our first guidebook.
One other thing before we begin: There are no bathrooms in the entire area for the disabled and any potential visitor needs to take that into account.
Note by Daisyima: I live in the neighborhood and don't know of any public bathrooms (toilets) other than those in the shuk (Mahane Yehuda).
The route
Let’s start opposite the Gindy paper store on Agrippas St. Cross the street to the arched entrance at number 21 and enter the neighborhood of Sukkat Shalom
Continue straight until you see number 14 where you turn right and find yourself on Mishkanot Street. Look for the lane named for Rabbi Arye Levine. He was a legend of the city; counseled the underground fighters who were imprisoned by the British and was known to all as a righteous man. A long narrow alley traverses a number of the smaller neighborhoods.
Cross Shomron Street to the neighborhood of Mazkeret Moshe. At number 21 turn right to Einayim Lmishpat Street and stop at the beautifully designed gates of the Moroccan synagogue Hesed and Rachamim. Turn left and continue to the Ohel Moshe neighborhood named for philanthropist Moshe Montifiore.
The street features a community water cistern which has since been covered up by the municipality but one can still see its elevated presence. Continue on Carmel Street, passing the park known as mulberry tree park because of the massive tree which lends its shade there as well as mentioned in, 'Me, and Simone and Little Moise', a song by Yossi Banai about his childhood in the neighborhood.
Further on is Shilo Street. Turn left into the Nachlat Zion and Nachlat Achim neighborhoods. Stop at the impressive synagogue of the Syrian Adas Jewish community at the corner of Shilo and Beersheva Streets. Its interior is magnificent but difficult for the wheelchair tourist to enter.
Our tour takes us down Beersheva Street, right to Lachish Street, thus avoiding many stairs from where we continue until it meets Geva Street. Turning left and left again, then right we arrive at Ovadia Somech Street. Although we have done some backtracking it is worth stopping at the Beit Yitzhak, the Persian synagogue built in 1894. We turn left and return to the corner where we once again meet Shilo Street. Continue straight until you see a right turn which brings you to the charming Zichron Tuvia neighborhood of one street leading you out to Agrippas and back to where the car is parked.
Jenny Ki Tov is an editor and translator. She is wheelchair bound since being diagnosed with multiple sclerosis
Jenny Ki Tov, Published on Ynet: 09.07.06, 12:45
Let’s start from the end: To my surprise, the Jerusalem neighborhood of Nachlaot, one of the Israeli’s most picturesque areas, can be enjoyed from a wheelchair. The beauty and character I remember from my two-legged days can still be appreciated now that I sit in a wheel chair.
I was surprised to discover that the route of the tour which took about two hours of constant movement was totally navigational for me, except for one stair at the beginning and three stairs which were low but fairly wide in the middle.
Now come the drawbacks as I prepare a second guide for wheelchair-bound tourists where I team up with Arnon Brokstein, a friend who is also a tour guide. We limited our tour to the neighborhoods between Agrippas and Bezalel Streets during which I used a light wheelchair easily maneuverable by a healthy person.
This kind of tour requires cooperation of everyone involved: The person in the wheelchair willing to deal with sudden twists and turns in the narrow alleyways, roads that are far from paved and the accompanying person not to deviate from the predetermined route.
'Heart of the City’
Nachlaot is part of the greater community called ‘Heart of the City’ comprising 32 individual neighborhoods that adjoin one another. Some of them consist of only a few homes or buildings. The entire area is undergoing extensive renovations and preservation, which emphasize the beauty and unique character. Thus anyone whose last visit to the area was a few years ago is in for some surprises.
The 2-2.5 hour walk through the area was conducted on a typical Jerusalem day. It is preferable to begin in the late afternoon when traffic is light and there is parking near the Davidka Square or Clal Center.
The winding route requires strict adherence to the directions laid out where easy wheelchair access to the various sites is assured. Arnon and I did the entire route three times in order to check and double check this.
Yet despite the favorable conditions, I cannot resist asking one naive question: Why are so many of the neighborhood synagogues inaccessible to wheelchair visitors? Why is there no ramp for the disabled to enter more easily? The Jewish religious sites are no different than Christian ones in that regard as described in our first guidebook.
One other thing before we begin: There are no bathrooms in the entire area for the disabled and any potential visitor needs to take that into account.
Note by Daisyima: I live in the neighborhood and don't know of any public bathrooms (toilets) other than those in the shuk (Mahane Yehuda).
The route
Let’s start opposite the Gindy paper store on Agrippas St. Cross the street to the arched entrance at number 21 and enter the neighborhood of Sukkat Shalom
Continue straight until you see number 14 where you turn right and find yourself on Mishkanot Street. Look for the lane named for Rabbi Arye Levine. He was a legend of the city; counseled the underground fighters who were imprisoned by the British and was known to all as a righteous man. A long narrow alley traverses a number of the smaller neighborhoods.
Cross Shomron Street to the neighborhood of Mazkeret Moshe. At number 21 turn right to Einayim Lmishpat Street and stop at the beautifully designed gates of the Moroccan synagogue Hesed and Rachamim. Turn left and continue to the Ohel Moshe neighborhood named for philanthropist Moshe Montifiore.
The street features a community water cistern which has since been covered up by the municipality but one can still see its elevated presence. Continue on Carmel Street, passing the park known as mulberry tree park because of the massive tree which lends its shade there as well as mentioned in, 'Me, and Simone and Little Moise', a song by Yossi Banai about his childhood in the neighborhood.
Further on is Shilo Street. Turn left into the Nachlat Zion and Nachlat Achim neighborhoods. Stop at the impressive synagogue of the Syrian Adas Jewish community at the corner of Shilo and Beersheva Streets. Its interior is magnificent but difficult for the wheelchair tourist to enter.
Our tour takes us down Beersheva Street, right to Lachish Street, thus avoiding many stairs from where we continue until it meets Geva Street. Turning left and left again, then right we arrive at Ovadia Somech Street. Although we have done some backtracking it is worth stopping at the Beit Yitzhak, the Persian synagogue built in 1894. We turn left and return to the corner where we once again meet Shilo Street. Continue straight until you see a right turn which brings you to the charming Zichron Tuvia neighborhood of one street leading you out to Agrippas and back to where the car is parked.
Jenny Ki Tov is an editor and translator. She is wheelchair bound since being diagnosed with multiple sclerosis
Site - reservists' call for a state commission of enquiry
Anyone interested in signing the miluimnikim (reservist) call for a state commission of enquiry can do so through
www.adcan.co.il
A friend visited their protest tent in the Rose Garden near the Knesset and the Prime Minister's Office. They're calling on Olmert, Peretz and Halutz to resign and for an independent commission of enquiry, and they're collecting signatures to back them.
They don't have money to advertise the website and ask for those who support the commission to tell everybody they know about the website.
www.adcan.co.il
A friend visited their protest tent in the Rose Garden near the Knesset and the Prime Minister's Office. They're calling on Olmert, Peretz and Halutz to resign and for an independent commission of enquiry, and they're collecting signatures to back them.
They don't have money to advertise the website and ask for those who support the commission to tell everybody they know about the website.
Saturday, September 09, 2006
Four Monkeys, Israel 2006 style...
For those unfamiliar with the figures, from right to left:Amir Peretz, Defence Minister
Ehud Olmert, Prime Minister
Dan Halutz, Chief of General Staff
Moshe Katsav, President of the State, currently under police investigation for forcing unwanted sexual attentions on women in his employment...
Thursday, September 07, 2006
A foodies tour of Nahlaot and some history...
Jerusalem: Follow the smell
Tour guide Oded Amitai smelled the aroma of delicacies emanating from the local kitchens and decided to give tours in a variety of flavors in the multi-cultural capital
Ronit Svirsky Published on Ynet, August 21, 2006
Where to eat is a question that comes up on every hike, walking tour, or trip around the country. Sandwiches and water canteens are a thing of the past, and even when the meal is eaten in the area, gourmet or at least “authentic” is the preferred choice.
Jerusalem tour guide Oded Amitai usually takes groups around Jerusalem’s colorful neighborhoods. One day he smelled the aroma of delicacies emanating from the local kitchens, and he decided to give walking tours in a variety of flavors in the multi-cultural capital.
In Ein Karem you’ll find a combination of French, Russian, British, and Italian culture, so when you take a tour of the village you end with an Italian or French cooking workshop.
After a visit to the ultra-Orthodox neighborhoods of Makor Baruch and Meah Shea’rim you’ll be introduced to kugel, cholent, matzoh balls, and gefilte fish. The tour along Jaffa Road will introduce you to Ethiopian cooking, and a tour of the alleyways of Nahlaot will acquaint you with the cuisine of Kurdistan, Aleppo, Urfa, and the Ashkenazi lands.
Kurds vs. Urfals
The tour of Nahlaot starts at the “Ta’amim” cooking school at 88 Agrippas Street. The school was established by Guy Tuchman and is under the direction of Chef Yufal Attias. After a small cup of coffee and cake you go out to the street, next to the Mahaneh Yehuda market, and stop across from a building with a large wall painting (mural), one of several in the city.
A group of French artists from Lyons is responsible for these paintings. They select cities all over the world where there are conflicts and seek to bring beauty to the residents of these cities. They take a prominent building, restore it, and decide on the theme. In this case they took their inspiration from Mahane Yehuda and painted the shoppers, residents of Nahlaot, and scenes from daily life.
The market
Cross Agrippas Street and enter the cobblestone streets of Nahlaot. The area is over 100 years old, and has fascinating stories, human dramas, and unique architecture. When the neighborhood was built every street or two was its own separate neighborhood, but Jerusalemites preferred to call them all “Nahlaot.”
Nahlaot is spread out between two main roads that are parallel to each other, Bezalel and Agrippas. Just a few steps take you away from a noisy main road and bring you to one of the tranquil houses, redolent with the smells of cooking and baking.
Go along the alleyways, feel the cool stone, peek into the arched windows with iron shutters, stop in front of the courtyards full of greenery, and meet Jerusalemites from all of the various ethnic groups.
It's all about the food
The Kurds are cooking hamousta soup with white kubeh balls; matfunia kubeh, a reddish soup made from beets; grilled beef in okra soup; and stuffed vine leaves. The Persians serve rice with chopped meat with an egg inside. The Sephardim cook bourekas with spinach that are rolled up like a snail.
The food makes its way to every heart, and love stories are also part of Nahlaot’s lore. Marriages between different ethnic groups were not welcomed, but it’s hard to make rules when it comes to love, so Sephardim fell in love with Ashkenazim, Yemenites with Aleppans, and most problematic of all, Urfals with Kurds.
According to Amitai’s stories, the Urfals were known for their ability to have sons, while the Kurds had mostly daughters. The Urfals did not like the Kurds’ stinginess, to put it mildly, and the battles between them were intense and bitter.
The accursed house and the blessed house stand next to each other in the heart of Nahlaot. The accursed house was built in the 1970s, near the Rabbi Shalom Sharabi yeshiva, for residential and commercial purposes. While it was being built the rabbi asked the contractor not to take over part of the yeshiva’s courtyard, but he refused. Since then, no business has managed to survive in the large "marble" building.
On the other hand, the small building next door, with a red tile roof, is known to increase fertility. Every childless woman who has gone to live there has become a mother of many children.
The underground widow
In 1882 Moses Montefiore founded the Ohel Moshe neighborhood, which inspired the play “Bustan Sepharadi” (Spanish Garden). Ohel Moshe has a stone entrance gate and courtyards filled with fruit trees and vegetable gardens. The Sephardic neighborhood provides love stories, stories of food brought on Fridays to the communal oven, and stories of a social life that revolved around the well (cistern).
The tour continues through Mahane Yehuda. Alongside the stalls and the singing vendors you can now find cafes serving short espresso and latte, gourmet restaurants, fashion designers’ boutiques, and jewelry stores. Ronnie, a vegetable vendor, stands behind piles of parsley and cilantro, reading rhyming poems he has written; while a pair of designers seated on retro metal chairs sip coffee.
The end of the tour is the closing of a circle for Oded Amitai. On the wall of a house in the Mazkeret Moshe neighborhood is a sign saying “Kramer-Rechtman House.” Chaya and Alexander Kramer, Amitai’s grandparents, lived in this house until 1986. His mother Rachel, their only daughter, fought with the Lehi pre-state underground movement, and was engaged to Meir Feinstein, who was a member of the Irgun, another pre-state underground group.
They met in 1946 at the height of anti-British underground activity. Rachel wanted to join the Irgun but her parents were vehemently opposed, and she ran away from home. Eventually it was agreed that she would come home and content herself with posting announcements made by the underground.
Meir Feinstein was caught blowing up a British train two weeks after the engagement. During his trial Rachel tried to convince him to ask for a pardon, which the Irgun was opposed to. He was sentenced to death, and on the day he was scheduled to be executed, Feinstein and his friend Moshe Barazani blew themselves up with a hand grenade that was smuggled into their cell.
Rachel joined the Lehi, became a fighter, and later married Efraim Rechtman, who was in the Palmach.
The tour began with a wall painting, and ends at a painting that is only several months old. The artists from Lyons returned to Mahaneh Yehuda and created a wall painting in the back parking area showing class pictures and school activities from the Alliance Israélite Universelle school. The school, which to this day is located next to the parking lot (but not in use), was once the first educational institution in the city.
It’s time to eat
Hungry and tired, we return to the Ta’amim school, where cold watermelon, kubeh, fresh laffa (flatbread), and homemade hummus await. Chef Yuval Attias explains how grandmothers chop beef to prepare fried kubeh nablusiyah, and demonstrates the use of jerish (not regular bulgur wheat) to prepare the dough.
The recipes are placed before the guests on stainless steel tables arranged in a horseshoe, and Attias now prepares the white kubeh balls for the soup. The matfunia soup is already boiling, and everyone on the tour receives a steaming bowl with a thick red liquid, like what you eat at stone houses in Nahlaot.
Ta’mim Cooking School, 88 Agrippas Street. Tour with workshop and meal: NIS 135. Call Oded Amitai at 972-50-630-0928.
Tour guide Oded Amitai smelled the aroma of delicacies emanating from the local kitchens and decided to give tours in a variety of flavors in the multi-cultural capital
Ronit Svirsky Published on Ynet, August 21, 2006
Where to eat is a question that comes up on every hike, walking tour, or trip around the country. Sandwiches and water canteens are a thing of the past, and even when the meal is eaten in the area, gourmet or at least “authentic” is the preferred choice.
Jerusalem tour guide Oded Amitai usually takes groups around Jerusalem’s colorful neighborhoods. One day he smelled the aroma of delicacies emanating from the local kitchens, and he decided to give walking tours in a variety of flavors in the multi-cultural capital.
In Ein Karem you’ll find a combination of French, Russian, British, and Italian culture, so when you take a tour of the village you end with an Italian or French cooking workshop.
After a visit to the ultra-Orthodox neighborhoods of Makor Baruch and Meah Shea’rim you’ll be introduced to kugel, cholent, matzoh balls, and gefilte fish. The tour along Jaffa Road will introduce you to Ethiopian cooking, and a tour of the alleyways of Nahlaot will acquaint you with the cuisine of Kurdistan, Aleppo, Urfa, and the Ashkenazi lands.
Kurds vs. Urfals
The tour of Nahlaot starts at the “Ta’amim” cooking school at 88 Agrippas Street. The school was established by Guy Tuchman and is under the direction of Chef Yufal Attias. After a small cup of coffee and cake you go out to the street, next to the Mahaneh Yehuda market, and stop across from a building with a large wall painting (mural), one of several in the city.
A group of French artists from Lyons is responsible for these paintings. They select cities all over the world where there are conflicts and seek to bring beauty to the residents of these cities. They take a prominent building, restore it, and decide on the theme. In this case they took their inspiration from Mahane Yehuda and painted the shoppers, residents of Nahlaot, and scenes from daily life.
The market
Cross Agrippas Street and enter the cobblestone streets of Nahlaot. The area is over 100 years old, and has fascinating stories, human dramas, and unique architecture. When the neighborhood was built every street or two was its own separate neighborhood, but Jerusalemites preferred to call them all “Nahlaot.”
Nahlaot is spread out between two main roads that are parallel to each other, Bezalel and Agrippas. Just a few steps take you away from a noisy main road and bring you to one of the tranquil houses, redolent with the smells of cooking and baking.
Go along the alleyways, feel the cool stone, peek into the arched windows with iron shutters, stop in front of the courtyards full of greenery, and meet Jerusalemites from all of the various ethnic groups.
It's all about the food
The Kurds are cooking hamousta soup with white kubeh balls; matfunia kubeh, a reddish soup made from beets; grilled beef in okra soup; and stuffed vine leaves. The Persians serve rice with chopped meat with an egg inside. The Sephardim cook bourekas with spinach that are rolled up like a snail.
The food makes its way to every heart, and love stories are also part of Nahlaot’s lore. Marriages between different ethnic groups were not welcomed, but it’s hard to make rules when it comes to love, so Sephardim fell in love with Ashkenazim, Yemenites with Aleppans, and most problematic of all, Urfals with Kurds.
According to Amitai’s stories, the Urfals were known for their ability to have sons, while the Kurds had mostly daughters. The Urfals did not like the Kurds’ stinginess, to put it mildly, and the battles between them were intense and bitter.
The accursed house and the blessed house stand next to each other in the heart of Nahlaot. The accursed house was built in the 1970s, near the Rabbi Shalom Sharabi yeshiva, for residential and commercial purposes. While it was being built the rabbi asked the contractor not to take over part of the yeshiva’s courtyard, but he refused. Since then, no business has managed to survive in the large "marble" building.
On the other hand, the small building next door, with a red tile roof, is known to increase fertility. Every childless woman who has gone to live there has become a mother of many children.
The underground widow
In 1882 Moses Montefiore founded the Ohel Moshe neighborhood, which inspired the play “Bustan Sepharadi” (Spanish Garden). Ohel Moshe has a stone entrance gate and courtyards filled with fruit trees and vegetable gardens. The Sephardic neighborhood provides love stories, stories of food brought on Fridays to the communal oven, and stories of a social life that revolved around the well (cistern).
The tour continues through Mahane Yehuda. Alongside the stalls and the singing vendors you can now find cafes serving short espresso and latte, gourmet restaurants, fashion designers’ boutiques, and jewelry stores. Ronnie, a vegetable vendor, stands behind piles of parsley and cilantro, reading rhyming poems he has written; while a pair of designers seated on retro metal chairs sip coffee.
The end of the tour is the closing of a circle for Oded Amitai. On the wall of a house in the Mazkeret Moshe neighborhood is a sign saying “Kramer-Rechtman House.” Chaya and Alexander Kramer, Amitai’s grandparents, lived in this house until 1986. His mother Rachel, their only daughter, fought with the Lehi pre-state underground movement, and was engaged to Meir Feinstein, who was a member of the Irgun, another pre-state underground group.
They met in 1946 at the height of anti-British underground activity. Rachel wanted to join the Irgun but her parents were vehemently opposed, and she ran away from home. Eventually it was agreed that she would come home and content herself with posting announcements made by the underground.
Meir Feinstein was caught blowing up a British train two weeks after the engagement. During his trial Rachel tried to convince him to ask for a pardon, which the Irgun was opposed to. He was sentenced to death, and on the day he was scheduled to be executed, Feinstein and his friend Moshe Barazani blew themselves up with a hand grenade that was smuggled into their cell.
Rachel joined the Lehi, became a fighter, and later married Efraim Rechtman, who was in the Palmach.
The tour began with a wall painting, and ends at a painting that is only several months old. The artists from Lyons returned to Mahaneh Yehuda and created a wall painting in the back parking area showing class pictures and school activities from the Alliance Israélite Universelle school. The school, which to this day is located next to the parking lot (but not in use), was once the first educational institution in the city.
It’s time to eat
Hungry and tired, we return to the Ta’amim school, where cold watermelon, kubeh, fresh laffa (flatbread), and homemade hummus await. Chef Yuval Attias explains how grandmothers chop beef to prepare fried kubeh nablusiyah, and demonstrates the use of jerish (not regular bulgur wheat) to prepare the dough.
The recipes are placed before the guests on stainless steel tables arranged in a horseshoe, and Attias now prepares the white kubeh balls for the soup. The matfunia soup is already boiling, and everyone on the tour receives a steaming bowl with a thick red liquid, like what you eat at stone houses in Nahlaot.
Ta’mim Cooking School, 88 Agrippas Street. Tour with workshop and meal: NIS 135. Call Oded Amitai at 972-50-630-0928.
Sunday, September 03, 2006
Meanwhile, a client of David's and Ruth's does some research and -
Poll: Israelis believed Nasrallah over Peretz
Polls conducted by Dr. Udi Lebel, political psychology lecturer, found sad picture of Israeli PR
Anat Breshkovsky, published on Ynet (Yediot Ahronot) 09.03.06, 16:38
Since the end of the war in the north, two main issues have been keeping the public busy: The demand for an account of the failures by the Israeli leadership, and criticism of the press and nature of reports.
A new study, however, by Dr. Uri Lebel of the Ben Gurion Institute, Beer Sheva University, has found that another problem requires urgent treatment: Israeli PR.
During the poll, entitled "the management of Israeli PR during the second Lebanon war," members of six groups were asked to watch video recordings of Israeli PR in Israel and abroad, and to answer questions. Lebel says he held polls in the past on issues of strategic press, political psychology, and army-media relations. The result of his latest poll show that Israeli PR was so lacking, that in many cases the public was forced to rely on the reports of Hizbullah leader Hassan Nasrallah.
Lebel says a good media leader relies on three points – gripping the audience, being watchable, and giving the feeling of certainty.
The participants of the poll were asked who gave the a sense of certainty regarding the continuance of the war, and who was most authentic. The results were unequivocal: The Israeli public chose Nasrallah's speeches as giving it both.
'Nasrallah contradicted the Israeli spokespeople'
Asked about Nasrallah's authenticity compared to that of Israeli spokespeople, not one Hebrew spokesperson received high authenticity marks.
"We reached a really crazy situation," says Lebel. "A psychological situation which seems inconceivable: Instead of the Israeli public watching our national spokesman who tells it what is happening every day, who will minimize the chaos and who will be seen as believable, something unprecedented happened: The public perceived the enemy leader against whom we fought as having those characteristics, and waited impatiently for his speeches. Nasrallah contradicted the Israeli spokespeople more than once, many times contradicting the minister of defense – he was the first to announce the deaths of Israeli soldiers and the sad circumstances which led to them."
He added: "This isn't the first time that a bereaved mother found out the truth of the death of her son in recordings released by Hizbullah, which showed a totally different picture to what was provided by the IDF and its spokespeople."
Dr. Lebel believes that the figures indicate a serious crisis of leadership down the road. "It's not important if objectively the leadership did its best – now the public perceives it as cut off, unprofessional, and boastful. It won't follow the leadership to the next confrontation," he said.
Polls conducted by Dr. Udi Lebel, political psychology lecturer, found sad picture of Israeli PR
Anat Breshkovsky, published on Ynet (Yediot Ahronot) 09.03.06, 16:38
Since the end of the war in the north, two main issues have been keeping the public busy: The demand for an account of the failures by the Israeli leadership, and criticism of the press and nature of reports.
A new study, however, by Dr. Uri Lebel of the Ben Gurion Institute, Beer Sheva University, has found that another problem requires urgent treatment: Israeli PR.
During the poll, entitled "the management of Israeli PR during the second Lebanon war," members of six groups were asked to watch video recordings of Israeli PR in Israel and abroad, and to answer questions. Lebel says he held polls in the past on issues of strategic press, political psychology, and army-media relations. The result of his latest poll show that Israeli PR was so lacking, that in many cases the public was forced to rely on the reports of Hizbullah leader Hassan Nasrallah.
Lebel says a good media leader relies on three points – gripping the audience, being watchable, and giving the feeling of certainty.
The participants of the poll were asked who gave the a sense of certainty regarding the continuance of the war, and who was most authentic. The results were unequivocal: The Israeli public chose Nasrallah's speeches as giving it both.
'Nasrallah contradicted the Israeli spokespeople'
Asked about Nasrallah's authenticity compared to that of Israeli spokespeople, not one Hebrew spokesperson received high authenticity marks.
"We reached a really crazy situation," says Lebel. "A psychological situation which seems inconceivable: Instead of the Israeli public watching our national spokesman who tells it what is happening every day, who will minimize the chaos and who will be seen as believable, something unprecedented happened: The public perceived the enemy leader against whom we fought as having those characteristics, and waited impatiently for his speeches. Nasrallah contradicted the Israeli spokespeople more than once, many times contradicting the minister of defense – he was the first to announce the deaths of Israeli soldiers and the sad circumstances which led to them."
He added: "This isn't the first time that a bereaved mother found out the truth of the death of her son in recordings released by Hizbullah, which showed a totally different picture to what was provided by the IDF and its spokespeople."
Dr. Lebel believes that the figures indicate a serious crisis of leadership down the road. "It's not important if objectively the leadership did its best – now the public perceives it as cut off, unprofessional, and boastful. It won't follow the leadership to the next confrontation," he said.
Olmertism
Ehud Orwell's speech
If PM has confessed to being 'entirely responsible' he should resign
B. Michael Ynet (Yediot Ahronot)
Published: 09.02.06, 16:06
In the event that future historians ask for some type of document attesting to the nature and acumen of Prime Minister Ehud Olmert, it's hard to think of a more appropriate document than the speech he delivered this week to the heads of local authorities.
It was obviously a speech that had been well rehearsed. It didn't comprise any grumbling outbursts so typical of Ehud Olmert, who is known for his inadequacy to control his verbal utterances.
And because of it, its preciseness and planning, Olmert's true character came through; a transparent manipulator of words and facts; a go-getter who erroneously made his way to the top. And although each and every sentence in his address personifies this argument, lack of space only permits discussion of a small portion.
It would have been most appropriate to begin with the prime minister's opening sentence: "The decision to go to war, including the responsibility of its outcome – is entirely mine," but instead we'll leave this sentence to the end.
We'll begin, therefore, with the second sentence: "The Israeli, civilian home front was the enemy's main target, and not incidentally."
Hizbullah had one intention
But incidentally, the contrary is true. Hizbullah, explicitly and with much audacity said right from the start that it had one intention: To abduct Israeli soldiers in order to engineer a prisoner exchange deal.
That's what Nasrallah said on the day of the kidnapping, and he reiterated this in his speech of "remorse" which the prime minister enjoys quoting. This time, regretfully, the civilian home front was not the enemy's primary target, and not incidentally.
Let's go to the next sentence: "Hizbullah's target was…to harm the home front, to kill, to terrorize in an attempt to spread fear, panic and to create a public outcry that would paralyze military operations."
George Orwell couldn't have put it better. Because, this was in fact Israel's declared tactic: To strike at the home front, to kill, to terrorize and so on and so forth, or as commonly put in official Israeli jargon: "To put pressure on the Lebanese government."
Additionally, contrary to common belief, the first to shift the fighting inside the other side's civilian home front was Israel. Only after the IDF bombed Beirut and Lebanese infrastructure, did the rocketing of the Israeli home front begin.
The prime minister said in that same speech that when he decided to go to war "we knew very well that rocket fire would be aimed at civilian populations." And indeed it was. The first Katyusha rockets landed inside Israeli territory only on Thursday (July 13) before dawn, just a few hours after Israel attacked the Lebanese home front.
This fact doesn't clear the Hizbullah of its responsibility for starting the war; however, even in times of frustration and rage we would do well to stick to the facts.
We surprised them
The next sentence is a spectacular sample of Olmertism: "We surprised them. The home front persevered." The prime minister knows all too well that the home front did not persevere. The home front went south, and rightfully so. Those who persevered were the ones who had nowhere to go.
In general, the home front persevered the way any home front perseveres, in whatever country and in whatever war, whether it's here, in Lebanon, Iraq, London, Hamburg, Sarajevo or Tyre. What else can it do? Those who can flee do so, and those who can't, "persevere".
The prime minister also knows all too well that no one made any effort to assess the home front's preparedness for the "perseverance" it was forced into. But now, instead of asking for the home front's forgiveness, he is trying to use excessive doses of flattery.
Let's continue. In order to reinforce his victory argument, the prime minister quoted his enemy: "Nasrallah says simply – had I known this would be the outcome; I would not have given the order to start the war."
Isn't this wonderful? At the same time the prime minister was taking pride in these words, tens of thousands of soldiers and civilians hoped that Olmert would be the one to say simply: "Had I known this would be the outcome of the war, I would not have ordered it to begin." But it seems that Olmert leaves these simple sayings to Nasrallah. He prefers more convoluted pronouncements.
The most amusing part is undoubtedly the part where Mr. Olmert tries to explain why a state commission of inquiry is inappropriate: It will be prolonged, it will paralyze, it will keep attorneys occupied, it's a luxury, it is indeed an "enticing solution" but it's "not what the country needs…"
Not since Louis XIV
Since Louis XIV, who said "L'État, c'est moi" (I am the State), no head of state has demonstrated such absolute monarchy. Namely, what he doesn't need, the state doesn't need either.
And then came the ultimate 'attorney' schmaltz, the pit of pathetic manipulation: "Each one of you, with his hand on his heart, knows deep inside that this will not put the shortcomings right."
Everyone - with or without his hand on his heart - knows all too well that when an attorney resorts to such meager tricks, it is an indication that he is in great distress.
One final sentence for the finale – and it cannot be more revealing: "The military should be examined in a way that a democratic civil society examines its military. And the same applies to us, the political echelon."
According to the prime minister, a state commission of inquiry is neither civil nor is it democratic. According to him only blunt-toothed investigative committees, devoid of any authority and financed by those being investigated, are appropriate for examining "a democratic civil society."
To sum up, as promised we'll go back to the first sentence: "The responsibility for the war is entirely mine."
If so, there's no need for an investigation. The person responsible has been found. And in keeping with the Jewish tradition of "He who confesses and forsakes (sins) will find mercy," he should be told: You confessed? Very well. Now resign. Only then will you find mercy.
If PM has confessed to being 'entirely responsible' he should resign
B. Michael Ynet (Yediot Ahronot)
Published: 09.02.06, 16:06
In the event that future historians ask for some type of document attesting to the nature and acumen of Prime Minister Ehud Olmert, it's hard to think of a more appropriate document than the speech he delivered this week to the heads of local authorities.
It was obviously a speech that had been well rehearsed. It didn't comprise any grumbling outbursts so typical of Ehud Olmert, who is known for his inadequacy to control his verbal utterances.
And because of it, its preciseness and planning, Olmert's true character came through; a transparent manipulator of words and facts; a go-getter who erroneously made his way to the top. And although each and every sentence in his address personifies this argument, lack of space only permits discussion of a small portion.
It would have been most appropriate to begin with the prime minister's opening sentence: "The decision to go to war, including the responsibility of its outcome – is entirely mine," but instead we'll leave this sentence to the end.
We'll begin, therefore, with the second sentence: "The Israeli, civilian home front was the enemy's main target, and not incidentally."
Hizbullah had one intention
But incidentally, the contrary is true. Hizbullah, explicitly and with much audacity said right from the start that it had one intention: To abduct Israeli soldiers in order to engineer a prisoner exchange deal.
That's what Nasrallah said on the day of the kidnapping, and he reiterated this in his speech of "remorse" which the prime minister enjoys quoting. This time, regretfully, the civilian home front was not the enemy's primary target, and not incidentally.
Let's go to the next sentence: "Hizbullah's target was…to harm the home front, to kill, to terrorize in an attempt to spread fear, panic and to create a public outcry that would paralyze military operations."
George Orwell couldn't have put it better. Because, this was in fact Israel's declared tactic: To strike at the home front, to kill, to terrorize and so on and so forth, or as commonly put in official Israeli jargon: "To put pressure on the Lebanese government."
Additionally, contrary to common belief, the first to shift the fighting inside the other side's civilian home front was Israel. Only after the IDF bombed Beirut and Lebanese infrastructure, did the rocketing of the Israeli home front begin.
The prime minister said in that same speech that when he decided to go to war "we knew very well that rocket fire would be aimed at civilian populations." And indeed it was. The first Katyusha rockets landed inside Israeli territory only on Thursday (July 13) before dawn, just a few hours after Israel attacked the Lebanese home front.
This fact doesn't clear the Hizbullah of its responsibility for starting the war; however, even in times of frustration and rage we would do well to stick to the facts.
We surprised them
The next sentence is a spectacular sample of Olmertism: "We surprised them. The home front persevered." The prime minister knows all too well that the home front did not persevere. The home front went south, and rightfully so. Those who persevered were the ones who had nowhere to go.
In general, the home front persevered the way any home front perseveres, in whatever country and in whatever war, whether it's here, in Lebanon, Iraq, London, Hamburg, Sarajevo or Tyre. What else can it do? Those who can flee do so, and those who can't, "persevere".
The prime minister also knows all too well that no one made any effort to assess the home front's preparedness for the "perseverance" it was forced into. But now, instead of asking for the home front's forgiveness, he is trying to use excessive doses of flattery.
Let's continue. In order to reinforce his victory argument, the prime minister quoted his enemy: "Nasrallah says simply – had I known this would be the outcome; I would not have given the order to start the war."
Isn't this wonderful? At the same time the prime minister was taking pride in these words, tens of thousands of soldiers and civilians hoped that Olmert would be the one to say simply: "Had I known this would be the outcome of the war, I would not have ordered it to begin." But it seems that Olmert leaves these simple sayings to Nasrallah. He prefers more convoluted pronouncements.
The most amusing part is undoubtedly the part where Mr. Olmert tries to explain why a state commission of inquiry is inappropriate: It will be prolonged, it will paralyze, it will keep attorneys occupied, it's a luxury, it is indeed an "enticing solution" but it's "not what the country needs…"
Not since Louis XIV
Since Louis XIV, who said "L'État, c'est moi" (I am the State), no head of state has demonstrated such absolute monarchy. Namely, what he doesn't need, the state doesn't need either.
And then came the ultimate 'attorney' schmaltz, the pit of pathetic manipulation: "Each one of you, with his hand on his heart, knows deep inside that this will not put the shortcomings right."
Everyone - with or without his hand on his heart - knows all too well that when an attorney resorts to such meager tricks, it is an indication that he is in great distress.
One final sentence for the finale – and it cannot be more revealing: "The military should be examined in a way that a democratic civil society examines its military. And the same applies to us, the political echelon."
According to the prime minister, a state commission of inquiry is neither civil nor is it democratic. According to him only blunt-toothed investigative committees, devoid of any authority and financed by those being investigated, are appropriate for examining "a democratic civil society."
To sum up, as promised we'll go back to the first sentence: "The responsibility for the war is entirely mine."
If so, there's no need for an investigation. The person responsible has been found. And in keeping with the Jewish tradition of "He who confesses and forsakes (sins) will find mercy," he should be told: You confessed? Very well. Now resign. Only then will you find mercy.
A Persian Paradise in Israel's desert - a while ago...
Ancient biblical waterworks found in Israel
Network of reservoirs, drain pipes and underground tunnels served a palace in biblical kingdom of Judea
Reuters, published in Ynet, (Yediot Ahronot), 09.01.06, 19:42
Archaeologists in Israel have unearthed an ancient water system which was modified by the conquering Persians to turn the desert into a paradise. The network of reservoirs, drain pipes and underground tunnels served one of the grandest palaces in the biblical kingdom of Judea.
Archaeologists first discovered the palace in 1954, a structure built on a six-acre (2.4 hectare) site where the communal Ramat Rachel farm now stands. Recent excavations unearthed nearly 70 square meters (750 square feet) of a unique water system.
"They had found a huge palace ... even nicer than the palaces in Jerusalem, (dating) from the late Iron Age to the end of the biblical period in the 7th century," Oded Lipschits, a Tel Aviv University archaeologist, said.
The infrastructure of the palace was remodeled throughout the centuries to fit the needs of the Babylonians, Persians, Romans and Hasmoneans who ruled the Holy Land, said Lipschits, who heads the dig with an academic from Germany's University of Heidelberg.
To turn a desert into a paradise
But it was the Persians, who took control of the region around 539 BC from the Babylonians, who renovated the water system and turned it into a thing of beauty. Lipschits said they added small waterfalls to try to turn a desert into a paradise.
"Imagine on this land plants and water rushing and streaming here," Lipschits said. "This was important to someone who finds aesthetics important, for someone who wanted to feel as though they are not just in some remote corner in the desert."
Yuval Gadot, a biblical archaeology expert from Tel Aviv University who is taking part in the excavation, said it was unclear exactly how the water system worked.
"Probably rainwater came down on the roof of the houses (in the palace complex)," he said. "From there, it was collected by drains into pools or to the underground reservoir and taken to nearby fields for crops or nice gardens."
For centuries water supplies have been one of the most sensitive issues in the Middle East, where most of the region is desert.
Network of reservoirs, drain pipes and underground tunnels served a palace in biblical kingdom of Judea
Reuters, published in Ynet, (Yediot Ahronot), 09.01.06, 19:42
Archaeologists in Israel have unearthed an ancient water system which was modified by the conquering Persians to turn the desert into a paradise. The network of reservoirs, drain pipes and underground tunnels served one of the grandest palaces in the biblical kingdom of Judea.
Archaeologists first discovered the palace in 1954, a structure built on a six-acre (2.4 hectare) site where the communal Ramat Rachel farm now stands. Recent excavations unearthed nearly 70 square meters (750 square feet) of a unique water system.
"They had found a huge palace ... even nicer than the palaces in Jerusalem, (dating) from the late Iron Age to the end of the biblical period in the 7th century," Oded Lipschits, a Tel Aviv University archaeologist, said.
The infrastructure of the palace was remodeled throughout the centuries to fit the needs of the Babylonians, Persians, Romans and Hasmoneans who ruled the Holy Land, said Lipschits, who heads the dig with an academic from Germany's University of Heidelberg.
To turn a desert into a paradise
But it was the Persians, who took control of the region around 539 BC from the Babylonians, who renovated the water system and turned it into a thing of beauty. Lipschits said they added small waterfalls to try to turn a desert into a paradise.
"Imagine on this land plants and water rushing and streaming here," Lipschits said. "This was important to someone who finds aesthetics important, for someone who wanted to feel as though they are not just in some remote corner in the desert."
Yuval Gadot, a biblical archaeology expert from Tel Aviv University who is taking part in the excavation, said it was unclear exactly how the water system worked.
"Probably rainwater came down on the roof of the houses (in the palace complex)," he said. "From there, it was collected by drains into pools or to the underground reservoir and taken to nearby fields for crops or nice gardens."
For centuries water supplies have been one of the most sensitive issues in the Middle East, where most of the region is desert.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)