A LETTER TO MY DAUGHTER KIM BEFORE SHE EMBARKS ON THE MARCH OF THE LIVING

Standard

A Letter to My Daughter Kim before she embarks on the March of The Living…

Dearest Kim,

The March of the Living is an extraordinary, unforgettable experience.  With thousands  of Jewish people, from countries all around the world, you will share in a once in a lifetime experience when they march three kilometers from Auschwitz to Birkenau, the largest concentration camp complex built by the Nazis during World War II. The March commemorates Yom Hashoah, Holocaust Remembrance Day. You with be there – along with over 8,000 participants who will be part of this historic event.

As one of the Marchers, you will retrace the steps of the March of Death, the actual route which countless numbers of our people were forced to take on their way to the gas chambers at Birkenau. You will experience Jewish history where it was made. This time, however, there will be a difference. It will be a March of the Living with thousands of Jewish youth, like yourself, marching shoulder to shoulder. You will take part in a memorial service at one of the gas chambers/crematoria, in Birkenau, which will close with the singing of Hatikvah, reaffirming Am Yisrael Chai – The Jewish People Live.

Kaddish is a Jewish Prayer to Remember the Dead and normally said by Men. In the absence of a Male Member of the Family ( there are only your brother Jonathan and I left) when you place the Three Jerusalem Stones with the Names of Three Branches of your Family that were Murdered in the Holocaust  say Kaddish out Loud . Say Kaddish for the Drues of Kraków and your Great Aunt Hadasaeah that died in Belzec extermination camp   and all the other  Drues cousins of Kraków that died in Belzec,Treblinska and Auschwitz .Over 280 Drues s of Kraków  relations died. There are no known survivors.. Say Kaddish  for the Drues of Majzugola near Vilna who died in the  Vaivara and Auschwitz Camp if they were not murdered first in the Forest of Paneriai   .There are no known survivors . Say Kaddish for the Shabelshok/Fialkov Families of Riga  who were murdered between 30th November and 8th December  in the Rumbula Forest near Riga with  25,000 thousand other Jews from Latvia. Say Kaddish for the sisters and brothers of your Great Grandmother Freda Shabelstok Baker who died in the Forrest of Rumbula . Say Kaddish for Sarah , Robert, Michael, David , Gregor , Rachel , Lazer, Leah and Fredrich , Freda and Rosa Shabelstok’s older sisters and brothers and all their children and even grandchildren  Not one survived. Over 350 members of the Shabelstok / Fialkov Families died in the misty Forest of Rumbula with  other Latvian Jews mainly from Riga and surrounding areas. Say Kaddish for all the Shabelstok/Fialkov/Drues cousins and relations …there must have  been hundreds and hundreds, , if not thousands and thousands, in the extended Shabelstok / Fialkov families .Four Shabeltok Siblings married four Fialkov Siblings. None are no  known survivors.

Say Kaddish in Tears and then Scream … “We Survived and Are Here Now Again -Never Ever Again” , אנחנו שרדנו ואנחנו כאן עכשיו – לעולם לא עוד יהיה שם שואה חוזרת

Those that Survived The Holocaust but did not experience it first hand:-

Shabelskok: Freda and her younger Rosa . Freda was in Uitenhague ,South Africa married to Chaim Baker  and Rosa, her younger sister  in Norway taken there by the Danish Resistance with most of the Danish Jews.They were the youngest of 11 siblings . All the siblings were married with kids .all the siblings and their families were murdered in the Forest of Rumbuka

Fialkov: Twin Brothers Manny ( Mordechai) and Jay ( Josef) in Cape Town,South Africa . They were the youngest of 10 siblings . None of their siblings or their families survived the Holocaust..

Drues: Samuel  ( your great grandfather) and Naomi in Cape Town, South Africa and William in Chicago, USA survived the Holocaust.. The children of Hadaseah who died in Belzec, joined Shomer Hazair,immigrated to Israel in 1932 and survived in Israel . They were Freda and Hashya who married the Kurman Brothers , Max , who was wounded twice in Palmach operations and Chaim who was a teacher for 43 years before retiring.

Mourn and then Celebrate the Shabelstok/ Fialkov / Drues Survival when you March from Birkenau to Auschwitz… you are their Symbol of Survival .

 

  

 

 

Love You To Bits

xxx

Dad

On the Origin of our surname 

Stephen Darori ( Drori) 

Before I Hebrewized my surname on the 6th September 1986 I was Stephen Ellis Drus…the son of Fay Baker Drus and Morrie Drus  z’l

Fay Baker Drus was the daughter of Freda Shabelstol Baker and Hymie ( Chaim Baker) one of the 3 founders of Betar in South Africa in 1931 and Jabotinskyt stayed at him when he visited the Eastern Cape, South Africa in the same year.

Morrie ( Morris ) Drus is the son of Samuel Drues and Sarah Kaplan Drues. . They were married in Poland and then in 1921 immigrated to Cape Town , South Africa. Drues became Drus.

 

The logic of the Hebrewaization of Drus ro Darori. Drus דרוס pronounced Darus is the Gerund of “Ledareis”.לדרס..” to be trodden on to be run over”…. could not live with that when I came on Aliyah from Cape town, South Africa and a letter change דרוס -> דרור which became דרורי the Biblical word for a Sparrow. Cage a Sparrow and it will die wrote Acad Ha’am so Eliezer Ben Yehuda, the reviver of the Hebrew Language  in his New  Hebrew dictionary gave Drori a new metaphorical meaning  of “Freedom and Liberty”. The “a’ was added for Branding Purposes . Darori ( Drori) is very approproiate… Kim , your great Aunt Professor Ethel Drus led the committee of 12 ( 9 Jews and Nelson Mandela, Oliver Tambo and Z.K. Mathews ) who drafted the Freedom Charter , the most important document of the African National Congress. Both your Grandparents and I were very active in the Progressive Party of Helen Susman and Harry Oppenheimer which has evolved into the Democratic Alliance, the Liberal Opposition to the ANC, 

References

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rumbula_massacre

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Auschwitz_concentration_camp

http://www.jewishgen.org/forgottencamps/camps/auschwitzeng.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treblinka_extermination_camp

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Belzec_extermination_camp

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vilna_Ghetto#Liquidation

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kaddish

Advertisements

When Netanyahu grows up

Standard

Op-ed: What kind of prime minister does Netanyahu want to be remembered as in Israel’s history?

 

If there is a compliment Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahudeserves it’s exercising caution in using force. Not being trigger-happy. That’s a valuable trait, in my eyes at least. In his first term, he got into trouble for a moment when he opened the Western Wall Tunnel. In his second term, he launched a limited and short-term operation in Gaza called Pillar of Defense. But in general, he has shown a lot of restraint in situations in which other prime ministers would have already opened fire.

This caution is seen by his rivals as cowardice. I prefer to see it as discretion and serious consideration. Senior army and defense establishment officials, who have worked and work with Netanyahu, say that even when approving operations and sudden attacks, close activities and activities far beyond the border, he thinks deeply and is fussy, weighing the options before giving the green light. More than once or twice, to the regret of the defense establishment heads who had already prepared the system and stormed the action, he rejected operations.

Peacemaker Sharon
End of the last chance 
Op-ed: Ariel Sharon was the last right-wing statesman capable of bringing peace to Israel
Full op-ed

The big question is what he wants to do when he grows up. As what kind of prime minister does he want to be remembered in the books of Israel‘s history. History has a habit of dividing leaders into three types: Pioneers, those who reverse trends, and those who fail the outcome criteria – what they received from their predecessors and what they left their successors.

David Ben-Gurion was a pioneer. Menachem Begin reversed a trend through a peace treaty with Egypt, one of the results of which was Israel’s return to the international border, while Egyptian President Sadat inserted the Gaza Strip as a bonus. Begin is also responsible for the following declaration: The Palestinians, their legitimate rights and their justified claims. Although in sub-letter he had the pleasure of referring to the Palestinians as the Arabs of the Land of Israel. Yitzhak Rabin and Shimon Peresreversed a trend with the Oslo AccordsAriel Sharon with the disengagement. It’s reasonable to assume that had Sharon stuck to his health rather than falling asleep and becoming silent, he would have extended the disengagement to significant parts of the West Bank.

Two prime ministers who got the country in a good state and left behind ruins were Golda Meir and Ehud Barak. Golda with the Yom Kippur War. Barak with the hasty escape from Lebanon and the Second Intifada. Golda felt ashamed and went home. For years, her associates are arguing argumentations of punishment. Barak looked after his own interests, his houses and his daughters. He still acts like he is entitled to change.

Of all prime ministers of the past, Netanyahu can be likened to Yitzhak Shamir. They both gained a lot of years in this position. Shamir served for three terms and Netanyahu is in his third term. They are both described as people with modest goals who only sought to play for time. And yet, it should be mentioned that Shamir practiced restraint during the first Gulf War and avoided an Israeli operation in Iraq so as not to harm the alliance between the United States, the West and Arab states. He was responsible for, or at least participated in, two major prisoner exchange deals. One of them was the infamous Jibril Agreement, whose code name was “new frame of mind.” Shamir also went, namely led by the American administration, to a diplomatic conference, the Madrid Conference, which he was forced to attend under protest. He realized then what Netanyahu likely realizes now: There are moments when you can’t say “no.” If you there say “no,” the results will be much worse than the results of saying “yes.”

These days, Netanyahu is facing an Israeli-Palestinian memorandum of understanding brokered by John Kerry. Out of the joint paper is expected to burst forth a willingness to remove settlements, an agreement to security presence in the Jordan Valley as opposed to sovereignty, and signs distinguishing between Jerusalem and east Jerusalem. It’s too early to know what the final document will look like.

Netanyahu saw himself, in his mind’s eye, striking in Iran and removing the nuclear threat. That will likely not happen. But also a peace agreement will add him into history. There is even a certain resemblance between the missions: The likelihood of both of them is quite slim. In Iran, the main thing was the message rather than the pointless execution. With the Palestinians the main thing is ending or reducing the occupation, lifting the threat of a bi-national state and returning to the family of nations. Not necessarily peace.

PA leader: Stages plan to eliminate Israel is basis of PA policy

Standard
Abbas Zaki, close associate of Mahmoud Abbas,
says a Palestinian state on the 1967 borders
is only first stage in the PA’s program
because “the inspiring idea cannot be achieved
all at once. [Rather] in stages”

In an interview on Syrian TV, senior Palestinian official Abbas Zaki said the PA will only agree to a treaty with Israel if the Palestinian state is established on the 1967 lines. However, he stressed that ’67 lines would only be the beginning. After that, the Palestinians will continue with the stages plan:

“Even the most extreme among us, Hamas, or the fighting forces, want a state within the ’67 borders. Afterward, we [will] have something to say, because the inspiring idea cannot be achieved all at once. [Rather] in stages.”
[Official Syrian Satellite TV Channel, Dec. 23, 2013]

Click to view

In an interview on Al-Jazeera TV in 2011, Zaki also mentioned this PA stages plan and referred to “the inspiring idea,” explaining that it means the end of Israel. He said that Mahmoud Abbas shares the goal of eliminating Israel in stages, but that the PA says it only wants a state along the 1967 borders because it is unacceptable politically to say you want to destroy Israel:

“You can’t say it to the world. You can say it to yourself.”

Zaki stressed that the goal is clear-cut because if Israel were to return to the 1967 lines, it certainly could not survive: “Israel will come to an end.”

This is Zaki’s full statement from 2011:

“The agreement is based on the borders of June 4 [1967]. While the agreement is on the borders of June 4, the President [Mahmoud Abbas] understands, we understand, and everyone knows that it is impossible to realize the inspiring idea, or the great goal in one stroke. If Israel withdraws from Jerusalem, if Israel uproots the settlements, 650,000 settlers, if Israel removes the (security) fence – what will be with Israel? Israel will come to an end. If I say that I want to remove it from existence, this will be great, great, [but] it is hard. This is not a [stated] policy. You can’t say it to the world. You can say it to yourself.”
[Al-Jazeera TV, Sept. 23, 2011]

Expressing his refusal to recognize Israel earlier this year during a public lecture, Abbas Zaki started to refer to Israel’s Ben Gurion Airport as “Israel’s Airport,” but then stopped himself and corrected himself:

“When Mr. Obama came to the region during his visit, as soon as he arrived at the airport of Isra… [corrects himself], I mean, the airport where the Israelis are. I don’t want… [corrects himself] this whole country is ours, and Allah willing, the airport will also return to us.”
[Official PA TV, April 8, 2013]

Click to view

Zaki sitting in place of honor one seat from M. Abbas at Fatah event in 2011.

These statements coming from Abbas Zaki are significant because he is a senior Palestinian official and a very close associate of Mahmoud Abbas. He was sent to Syria as Mahmoud Abbas’ personal representative a few months ago and has spoken at public events representing Fatah.

Another important statement reiterating that the PA is employing a stages plan to defeat Israel was expressed recently by PA Minister of Religious Affairs Mahmoud Al-Habbash in
a Friday sermon in the

presence of Mahmoud Abbas. Al-Habbash, speaking after the current round of peace talks was announced, said that the PA’s negotiations with Israel are modeled after the Hudaybiyyah agreement between Islam’s Prophet Muhammad and the tribes of Mecca. Recounting that Muhammad signed a 10-year truce, and yet two years later conquered Mecca, the minister stated: “This is the example and this is the model.”

Official PA children’s TV also teaches children to aspire to Israel’s destruction. Earlier this year the PA TV host told children:

PA TV host: “And of course we will never forget that we have land that was occupied in 1948, which will return to us one day. Remember well, children. Also [remember] to safeguard our folklore, our national games, the folklore in all its forms, our dress and our food and our games and anything that forms the Palestinian folklore – we have to safeguard it. If we don’t safeguard it, then the occupation might steal it as well, as it stole our land. Right? Do you agree with me? Bravo!”
[Official PA TV, Feb. 23, 2013]

Bringing up children to see all of Israel as “occupied” territory and as “stolen Palestinian land” that will “return” at some future time are significant components of Palestinian Authority ideology that are never expressed to Western leaders or Israelis, and are denied during peace discussions. Zaki’s description of the peace process as intended to lead to Israel’s destruction is consistent with these messages to PA children and many other internal messages the PA leadership sends to its population.

See more documentation here.
To read a detailed analysis of the PA’s continuing and ongoing deception and violations of its international commitments see PMW’s book, Deception which documents that the PA policy of saying it wants peace in English is contradicted by its internal political, social and cultural activities, its leaders’ statements and its education of youth in Arabic. Click to see reviews or to purchase Deception.

The following is an excerpt from Abbas Zaki’s recent interview:

Syrian TV host: “When they talk about [the US] imposing a solution, we know that it will be deficient.”
Member of Fatah Central Committee Abbas Zaki: “You can relax. We find ourselves united for the first time. Even the most extreme among us, Hamas, or the fighting forces, want a state within the ’67 borders. Afterward, we [will] have something to say, because the inspiring idea cannot be achieved all at once. [Rather] in stages.”
[Official Syrian Satellite TV Channel, Dec. 23, 2013]
The following is a longer excerpt of the sermon delivered by PA Minister of Religious Affairs Mahmoud Al-Habbash comparing negotiations with Israel to Muhammad’s Treaty of Hudaybiyyah:

“We hate war. We don’t want war. We don’t want bloodshed, not for ourselves, nor for others. We want peace. We say this because our culture is founded on this, and because our religion is based on this. Yes, we want peace, but not any peace. We want a peace based on justice, therefore the Palestinian leadership and the PLO have not missed any opportunity for peace…
The Palestinian leadership’s sense of responsibility towards its nation made it take political steps about 20 years ago (i.e., signing the Oslo Accords). Despite the controversy, despite much criticism and much opposition by some, it brought us to where we are today: We have a [Palestinian] Authority and the world recognizes the [Palestinian] state.
All this never would have happened through Hamas’ impulsive adventure, but only through the wisdom of the leadership, conscious action, consideration, and walking the right path, which leads to achievement, exactly like the Prophet [Muhammad] did in the Treaty of Hudaybiyyah, even though some opposed it…
The hearts of the Prophet’s companions burned with anger and fury. The Prophet said: ‘I’m the Messenger of Allah and I will not disobey Him.’ This is not disobedience, it is politics. This is crisis management, situation management, conflict management…
Allah called this treaty a clear victory…
Omar ibn Al-Khattab said: ‘Messenger of Allah, is this a victory? Is this logical? Is this victory? We are giving up and going back, and not entering Mecca. Is that a victory?’ The Prophet said: ‘Yes, it is a victory.’
In less than two years, the Prophet returned and based on this treaty, he conquered Mecca. This is the example, this is the model.”
[Official Palestinian Authority TV, July 19, 2013]
Previous Bulletin Next Bulletin

 PMW Bulletins Archive

10 Israeli Technologies That Are Changing The World

Standard

Israel has been coined the “Startup Nation”; the country with the highest concentration of startups in the world. Over the past 63 years, thousands of Israeli startups have given rise to innovations in fields as diverse as irrigation; GPS navigation; and cherry tomatoes.

But which are the Israeli startups that are truly changing the world?

We’ve picked 10 startups that we believe have impacted the world for the better or are in the process of changing lives forever.

(this essay was first published at nocamels.com HERE)

Stratasys

the 3D printed car
the 3D printed car

One technology that is gradually being integrated into an increasing number of fields is 3D printing, and no company has more 3D printing technology in its arsenal than Israeli-American giant Stratasys. Bringing printing to a new level, Stratasys is bridging today’s most innovative ideas with reality. The company’s printers (and scanners) can be used in various fields, ranging from 3D-printed cars to clothes andmedical devices. Already, Japanese fashion designer Yuima Nakazoto used Stratasys’ 3D printer for his latest collection, printing futuristic sportswear. Perhaps more importantly, 3D printing can be used in medicine for its geometric capabilities linked with patient care and advanced experimental work. In all fields, Stratasys seems to be adding another dimension of possibilities.

Predicting the future

A graduate of the Technion, 27-year -old Dr. Kira Radinsky has developed software that can predict pandemics and genocides several months in advance. By scanning 500-years-worth of literature, including all the materials published in the New York Times from 1880 onwards, she was able to find strong correlations between various historical events. Among her other findings, Radinsky also discovered that the combination of droughts and storms is a good indicator to a potential Cholera outbreak. Already, her software predicted the Cholera pandemic in Cuba last year, several months before it actually happened. Radinsky started university at 15, earned her PhD at 26 and founded two startups on the side. She even landed a spot in this year’s MIT list of Top 35 Innovators Under 35, alongside the likes of Google’s Larry Page and Sergey Brin and Facebook’s Mark Zuckerberg.

“Disk-On-Key” (USB flash drive)

Yes, that USB memory stick you just saved your assignment on hails from the Holy Land. This world-famous portable storage device was first made by M-System’s, the company of now legendary Israeli entrepreneur Dov Moran as an upgraded version of disk and diskette technology. Moran went on to sell it to SanDisk for a cool $1.6 billion. This miniature life-saver, rescuing us from panic on many occasions, uses flash memory and USB interface for connection to personal computers. Not only can it fit our pockets, but the USB flash drive can store up to 11,830 times more data than the floppy disk (remember that?). This invention made our computer files infinitely more portable and secure. Yay for USB!

ReWalk

The ReWalk aims to give those with lower limb disabilities, such as paraplegia, an experience that resembles walking. ReWalk consists of an exoskeleton suit, developed by a granduate of the Technion, Israel’s Institute of Tcehnology, which uses patented technology with motorized legs to power knee and hip movement. Battery-powered to allow all-day use, ReWalk is controlled by on-board computers and motion sensors, restoring self-initiated walking and stepping without the need of tethers or switches. ReWalk controls movement using subtle changes in center of gravity, mimics natural gait and provides functional walking speed. The system senses a forward tilt of the upper body, which triggers the first step. Repeated body shifting generates a sequence of steps, which allows natural and efficient walking. The ReWalk also sits, stands, turns and can even climb and descend stairs. ReWalk does more than make people walk – it gives hope. “It is an amazing feeling to be walking again,” said Dan Webb, a client from the US, who is paralyzed. “Doing the Rewalk, it’s cutting edge, it’s very exciting for me that I’m part of something that might be the future.” Dan was paralyzed after a spinal cord injury and is now on his feet again.

Storing electricity in the air

Phinergy has created an aluminum-air battery designed for electric vehicles, which allows a significant increase in travel range (three times that of a regular electric vehicle). With this more eco-friendly and efficient battery, Phinergy‘s technology could allow for a dramatic reduction in global oil consumption and greenhouse gas emissions. The system is based on metal air technology, including aluminum air and zinc air. A metal-air battery contains an air-electrode that breathes oxygen from the surrounding air, instead of the conventional cathode. This means that the battery consumes only the required oxygen from the air, rather than having heavy materials that bound oxygen inside it. Metal-air batteries therefore have a huge potential for delivering high capacity with low weight. Some other advantages of the technology are zero CO2 emissions, full recyclability, safety and low cost. The company has currently developed metal-air batteries that are customizable and can provide energy solutions for a wide range of applications, such as cars, boats, portable electronic devices and smart grid storage. Imagine a world with zero CO2 emissions and multiplied efficiency.

Drought-resistant “superplant”

Israeli researchers at the Technion in Haifa have engineered drought-resistant plants that could be game-changers in the current global food crisis. Currently, 40 countries worldwide are suffering from food shortage and 870 million people, or one in eight, are chronically undernourished. Many of these countries’ food shortages are linked with drought. It appears as though the time is right for a change of strategy. The engineered plants require less water, yield bigger harvests and stay fresh for longer. They can go on for a month without water and only need 30 percent of the amount of liquid that normal plants do, so are therefore able to survive droughts. Could this be a big step in the direction of a hungry-free world?

Car-to-car communication

Do talking cars seem like a thing of the future? Well, the era where cars communicate with each other in order to enhance driving safety is nigh. Autotalks, founded by Nir Sasson and Onn Haran, has developed a smart chipset that enables cars and traffic infrastructure to literally “speak” via electronic messages. This technology should be able to predict the chances of road accidents and traffic jams, with vehicle-to-vehicle alerts being sent in real time to notify incoming drivers to slow down or to stop the driver entering the junction. The system is set to be in use by 2015.

The everlasting solar battery A battery with infinite power…yup, we’ve got it. Haifa-based company Sol Chip has developed the world’s first solar battery that is able to recharge itself to power wireless sensors and mobile electronics devices. Through a cross pollination of solar-cell and microchip technologies, the company now offers the missing technology that will improve batteries’ life or in many cases completely eliminate the need to recharge or replace the power source. Although currently limited to an output of 8.4 volts of power, the solar battery can provide power to a vast array of outdoor devices. Right now, the company is working on integrating their technology into the fields of agriculture, farming, weather testing and security-related applications.

Robot Snake

Rescuing victims of natural disasters is a lot easier than before with the Robot Snake. This robot is designed to enter spaces in collapsed buildings and assist in location and rescue operations. Developed in association with the Technion, the machine is unique in its manner of crawling and is very flexible thanks to its large number of segments. Each joint is equipped with a motor, a computer, sensors, wireless communications and batteries. The head carries a camera. Thanks to its flexible structure, the robot can crawl through wreckage without further damaging the collapsed structure and provide vital information about inaccessible areas, including the status of people who might be trapped or the location of hazardous materials.

Hacking the human brain

ElMindA has developed Brain Network Activation technology (BNA) in association with Bar Ilan University. Basically, this technology is a major step towards “hacking” the human brain, and gaining control over specific brain functionalities, such as rehabilitation from injuries, reactions to treatment, psychiatric and neurological problems and pain. The company has made significant progress in drug research, utilizing the BNA technology in detecting and quantifying drug-induced neural response and changes in brain network activity. They’ve also used the technology to reveal differences between the effects of a drug and a placebo. All in all, ElMindA has opened our eyes to a never-before-seen dimension of our brains.

Photo: Business technologies today by Bigstock

 

Here’s a related article that might interest you: Israeli Neurologists Reverse Brain Damage With Mega-Doses of Oxygen

Stephen Darori’s Baked Zucchini Chips

Standard

Baked Zucchini ChipsINGREDIENTS:
1 large zucchini
2 tbsp. olive oil
Kosher salt

INSTRUCTIONS:
Preheat oven to 225 degrees. Line two large baking sheets (I used two 17″ baking sheets) with silicon baking mats or parchment paper.
Slice your zucchini on a mandolin. Mine had 1, 2, or 3 for thickness and I used 2.
After you slice your zucchini, place the slices on a sheet of paper towels and take another paper towel and sandwich the zucchini slices and press on them. This helps draw out the liquid so it’ll cook a bit faster.
Line up the zucchini slices on the prepared baking sheet tightly next to each other in a straight line, making sure not to overlap them.
In a small bowl, pour your olive oil in and take a pastry brush to brush the olive oil on each zucchini slice.
Sprinkle salt throughout the baking sheet. Do NOT over-season, in fact, it’s better to use less salt initially because the slices will shrink; so if you over-season, it’ll be way too salty! You can always add more later.
Bake for 2+ hours until they start to brown and aren’t soggy and are crisp.
Let cool before removing and serving.
Keep in an airtight container for no more than 3 days.

The Peace Index – December 2013

Standard

(N=606)
30-31.12.2013

1. What is your position on holding peace negotiations between Israel and
the
Palestinian Authority?

General Public/Jews/Arabs
1.   Strongly in favor    38.7/29.4/84.7
2.   Somewhat in favor    24.3/27.6/8.1
3.   Somewhat opposed    12.5/14.5/2.7
4.   Strongly opposed    19.4/22.8/2.7
5.   Don’t know/Refuse    5.1/5.7/1.8

2. Do you believe or not believe that negotiations between Israel and the
Palestinian Authority will lead to peace between Israel and the Palestinians
in the coming years?
General Public/Jews/Arabs
1.   Strongly believe    7.4/4.5/21.4
2.   Somewhat believe    21.9/18.8/37.2
3.   Somewhat don’t believe    22.1/21.6/24.5
4.   Don’t believe at all    46.7/53.3/14.3
5.   Don’t know/Refuse    1.9/1.7/2.7

3. Recently there have been a considerable number of terror attacks in which
Israelis were harmed. The official position of the Israeli defense
establishment is that this does not constitute a third intifada but, rather,
an assortment of attacks by lone individuals. Do you agree or disagree with
that assessment ?
General Public/Jews/Arabs
1. Strongly agree    18.0/19.9/8.8
2. Moderately agree    27.4/29.0/19.5
3. Don’t agree so much    19.1/19.0/20.1
4. Don’t agree at all    29.3/25.8/46.4
5.  Don’t know/Refuse    6.2/6.4/5.3

4. To what extent is Israel’s official policy toward the Palestinian
residents of the territories affecting or not affecting, in your opinion,
the recent upsurge of
attacks?
General Public/Jews/Arabs
1. It is not affecting it at all    15.9/17.6/7.0
2. It is not affecting it so much    18.4/21.8/1.6
3. It is moderately affecting it    28.7/29.0/27.3
4. It is strongly affecting it    30.5/24.9/58.1
5.  Don’t know/Refuse    6.6/6.7/6.0

5. To what extent is the presence of the Israeli settlements in the
territories affecting or not affecting, in your opinion, the recent upsurge
of attacks?
General Public/Jews/Arabs
1.  It is not affecting it at all    19.6/23.0/3.1
2.  It is not affecting it so much    20.1/22.8/6.7
3.  It is moderately affecting it    28.3/29.4/22.6
4.  It is strongly affecting it    29.2/21.8/65.8
5.  Don’t know/Refuse    2.8/3.0/1.8

6. Some claim that the only way to get the two sides, Israel and the
Palestinians, to sign an agreement is through strong external pressure
mainly from the United States, since otherwise they will never reach
agreements by themselves. Do you agree or disagree with this view?
General Public/Jews/Arabs
1.  Strongly agree    31.4/27.0/53.2
2.  Moderately agree    22.7/22.5/23.7
3.  Don’t agree so much    14.5/15.6/9.5
4.  Don’t agree at all    29.1/33.0/9.9
5.  Don’t know/Refuse    2.3/2.0/3.7

7. Do you support or oppose the United States exerting pressure on both
sides, Israeli and Palestinian, to push them toward an agreement?
General Public/Jews/Arabs
1.    Strongly oppose    29.0/32.8/10.4
2.    Moderately oppose    18.3/20.5/7.4
3.    Moderately support    27.2/27.0/28.3
4.    Strongly support    22.0/16.2/50.5
5.    Don’t know/Refuse    3.4/3.4/3.4

8. And if the United States were indeed to start exerting strong pressure on
the sides, and if the Israeli government saw the peace plan laid on the
table as not being good for Israel, would, in your opinion, the
Netanyahu-led Israeli government be able or unable to withstand such
pressure?
General Public/Jews/Arabs
1.  I’m sure it would be able    16.5/14.3/27.3
2.  I think it would be able    34.4/33.8/37.8
3.  I think it would not be able    24.6/28.1/7.7
4.  I’m sure it would not be able    17.9/18.7/13.7
5.  Don’t know/Refuse    6.5/5.1/13.5

9. According to your impression, to what extent is the United States, and
particularly its secretary of state John Kerry, committed at present to
bringing about the signing of a peace agreement between Israel and the
Palestinians?
General Public/Jews/Arabs
1.  Very committed    24.5/22.0/36.7
2.  Moderately committed    37.0/37.2/35.6
3.  Not so committed    21.1/22.9/12.0
4.  Not committed at all    12.4/12.3/13.1
5.  Don’t know/Refuse    5.1/5.6/2.5

10. And to what extent is the United States, and particularly its secretary
of state John Kerry, committed to ensuring Israel’s security in the context
of the negotiations with the Palestinians?
General Public/Jews/Arabs
1.  Not committed at all    11.1/11.7/8.0
2.  Not so committed    18.7/20.4/10.2
3.  Moderately committed    34.2/36.0/25.4
4.  Very committed    31.7/27.5/52.3
5.  Don’t know/Refuse    4.3/4.4/4.1

11. Some claim there is no chance of reaching a peace agreement with the
Palestinians, and therefore the negotiations should be regional, with an
active role for Arab states including Saudi Arabia, the Gulf states, and
others. Do you agree or disagree with the claim that the negotiations should
be regional and not
just bilateral?

General Public/Jews/Arabs
1.  Strongly agree    18.2/14.2/38.0
2.  Moderately agree    21.6/22.0/19.4
3.  Don’t agree so much    16.6/17.5/11.8
4.  Don’t agree at all    37.8/40.5/24.6
5.  Don’t know/Refuse    5.8/5.7/6.1

12. How do you rate the degree of trust on the Israeli side as a whole
toward the Palestinians at present? Please give a grade for trust on a scale
of 0 (no trust at all) to 10 (full trust).
General Public/Jews/Arabs
0    32.7/35.7/17.8
1    6.3/6.5/5.4
2    11.1/12.0/6.7
3    11.0/12.2/5.4
4    10.9/10.0/15.7
5    16.7/14.2/29.1
6    4.1/3.2/8.4
7    3.6/3.2/5.3
8    0.3/0.1/1.0
9    0.0/0.0/0.0
10    0.3/0.2/1.2
Don’t know/Refuse    2.9/2.7/3.9

13. How do you rate the degree of trust on the Palestinian side as a whole
toward the Israelis at present? Please give a grade for trust on a scale of
0 (no trust at
all) to 10 (full trust).
General Public/Jews/Arabs
0    34.4/35.5/28.9
1    7.6/8.1/5.4
2    9.7/10.8/4.5
3    8.8/9.7/4.1
4    8.9/8.8/9.4
5    12.6/10.7/21.9
6    4.7/3.0/12.9
7    3.0/2.3/6.7
8    2.0/2.1/1.7
9    0.4/0.0/2.2
10    0.9/0.9/1.3
Don’t know/Refuse    7.1/8.3/1.0

14. What is the degree of trust you personally have toward the Palestinians?
Please give a grade for your trust toward the Palestinians on a scale of 0
(no trust at all) to 10 (full trust).
General Public/Jews/Arabs
0    43.2/49.9/10.4
1    5.7/6.4/2.5
2    6.0/6.7/2.7
3    5.6/6.4/2.1
4    4.7/5.5/0.7
5    9.5/8.5/14.7
6    5.7/4.6/10.7
7    6.3/5.4/11.0
8    5.0/2.3/18.0
9    1.7/0.8/6.2
10    3.4/0.9/15.7
Don’t know/Refuse    3.2/2.7/5.4

15. In your opinion, given the history of the relations between the two
peoples, is it possible or impossible at present to build trust between the
Israelis and the
Palestinians?
General Public/Jews/Arabs
1.  I’m sure it is possible    11.7/8.0/30.2
2.  I think it is possible    36.5/35.1/43.6
3.  I think it is impossible    21.5/23.3/13.0
4.  I’m sure it is impossible    28.0/31.2/11.9
5.  Don’t know/Refuse    2.2/2.4/1.2

16. To build trust between the Israelis and the Palestinians, which side has
the responsibility to take the more significant steps?
General Public/Jews/Arabs
1.  Mainly the Israeli side    14.5/11.1/31.5
2.  Mainly the Palestinian side    23.4/27.0/5.4
3.  Both sides to the same extent    58.7/58.4/60.3
4.  Don’t know/ Refuse    3.4/3.5/2.8

The Peace Index: December  2013
Date Published: 07/01/2014
Survey dates: 30/12/2013 – 31/12/2013
http://www.peaceindex.org/indexMonthEng.aspx?num=259#.UsvD1sfxu00

This month the Peace Index focused mainly on two interrelated issues: the
American peace initiative and Israeli-Palestinian relations.

U.S. commitment to reaching an agreement: A considerable majority (59%) of
the Jewish public believes that the United States is committed to bringing
about the signing of a peace agreement. The rate of those who think so in
the Arab public is even higher—72%. A segmentation of the Jewish sample’s
responses by the interviewees’ self-definition on a political right-left
spectrum reveals that a majority of all the camps believes the United States
is committed to achieving an agreement, but this majority is smaller on the
right (52%) than among the moderate right and the center (60%), the moderate
left (71%), and the left (75%).

U.S. commitment to Israel’s security: An even larger majority of the Jewish
public (63.5%) believes that the United States, and first and foremost
Secretary of State John Kerry, is committed to ensuring Israel’s security in
the context of the negotiations with the Palestinians. The majority of the
Arab public that thinks the United States is committed to Israel’s security
in the context of those negotiations is even larger than for the Jewish
public—78%. A segmentation of the Jewish interviewees’ responses according
to the same right-left spectrum shows that on the right as a whole, the rate
that sees such a commitment comes to 60%, in the center about two-thirds,
and on the left as a whole, 85%.

The significance of external pressure toward signing an agreement: We asked:
“Some claim that the only way to get the two sides, Israel and the
Palestinians, to sign an agreement is by exerting strong external pressure
on them, mainly from the United States, since otherwise they will never
reach agreements by themselves. Do you agree or disagree with this claim?”
It turns out that the Jewish public is divided into two almost equal camps,
with 49.5% agreeing with the claim that only external pressure will lead to
an agreement and 49% disagreeing. A segmentation of the responses here by
the respondents’ self-placement on the right-left spectrum uncovers profound
disparities: on the right, the majority (60%) disagrees with the claim, the
center is evenly split between the two positions, while on the left as a
whole a large majority—75%—agrees that without external pressure the sides
will not reach an agreement. The rate of those in the Arab public who agree
with the claim is very high—77%.

Support for U.S. pressure: As for positions on the U.S. exerting pressure on
the two sides, in the Jewish public 53% opposes such pressure and 43%
support such pressure. A segmentation of the responses by self-placement on
the right-left spectrum shows, as expected, that a majority on the right
(69%) and on the moderate right (64.5%) is against pressure, the center is
split, while on the moderate left and the left the support for such pressure
is high at 73%. Among the Arabs, not surprisingly, a majority (79%) supports
U.S. pressure aimed at reaching peace.

The Israeli government’s ability to withstand pressure: Here too the Israeli
Jewish public is divided: 48% say the government will be able to withstand
pressure and 47% that it will not be able. A segmentation by self-placement
on the right-left spectrum turns up small, unsystematic gaps between the
political camps. The Arab public credits the Netanyahu government with
greater ability to withstand pressure; 65% think it can hold up under U.S.
pressure if it is exerted.

A regional peace agreement: In light of the diagnosis of some Israeli peace
groups that the chances of reaching a bilateral peace with the Palestinians
alone are low and hence a regional approach should be adopted, we asked:
“Some claim that there is no chance of reaching a peace agreement with the
Palestinians, and therefore the negotiations should be regional, that is,
they should also include an active role for Arab states, such as Saudi
Arabia, the Gulf states, and others. Do you agree or disagree with the claim
that the negotiations should be regional and not only bilateral?” It turns
out that the Jewish public also has little yen for the regional possibility:
only 36% support including the regional states in the negotiations while a
majority (58%) opposes doing so. A segmentation by self-placement on the
right-left spectrum shows that only on the moderate left is there a small
majority (52%) that supports the regional approach, while in all the other
camps, including the “deep” left, the majority is against it. In the Arab
public a certain majority (57%) supports broadening the negotiations to
incorporate more of the region’s states.

(Mis)trust toward the Palestinians: Despite the trust that a majority of the
Israeli Jewish public feels toward the United States regarding its
commitment both to Israel’s security and to achieving a peace agreement,
this population’s trust toward the Palestinians is very weak both as a
personal position and as a group assessment. On a scale of 0 (no trust at
all) to 10 (full trust), the average grades for trust are 3.09 (personal
trust) and 3.29 (interviewees’ assessment of the general Jewish population’s
trust toward the Palestinians). It is notable, though, that the Jewish
public does not delude itself about the degree of trust felt by the
Palestinian population. Actually, this is a “mirror” assessment: the average
grade of the Jewish public for the Palestinian population’s degree of trust
toward Israel is 3.25. Nevertheless, as a segmentation of the responses to
the following questions shows, the Jewish public does not completely absolve
itself of responsibility for the Palestinian mistrust.

Is there a chance that trust will be built?: Despite the gloomy picture
regarding Israelis’ trust toward Palestinians, a considerable minority (43%)
of the Jewish public believes that, even in light of the history of the two
sides’ relations, it is possible to build trust between them, while 54.5% do
not see it as possible. The Arab public shows greater optimism, with 74%
seeing a chance to build trust in the future.

Who has the responsibility for building trust?: To the question of which of
the two sides has the responsibility to take the significant steps toward
building trust between the Israelis and the Palestinians, the majority (59%)
thinks the responsibility is held equally by the two sides (though the rate
of Jews who put the responsibility on the Palestinians is higher than the
rate assigning it to the Israelis—27% and 11%, respectively). In the Arab
public, 60% think the effort should be divided evenly between the two sides,
31.5% say Israel should invest more effort, and only 5% believe the
Palestinians need to make more of an effort for trust to be built between
the sides.

The influence of Israeli policy on the increase in terror attacks: A
majority, not large, of the Jewish public (54%) think Israel’s official
policy toward the Palestinian residents of the territories has an effect on
the recent increase in terror attacks. Surprisingly, dramatic disparities
between the political camps were not found on this question, perhaps because
they interpreted the term “official policy” in different ways. The majority
of the Arab public that thinks Israeli policy has an effect on the terror
attacks is much larger than for the Jewish public—85%.

The effect of the presence of the Israeli settlements in the territories on
the increase in attacks: In the Jewish public a small majority thinks the
presence of the Jewish settlements has an effect (51%) compared to 46% who
hold the opposite view. The gaps between the right and the left on this
question are huge (right—39% think the presence of the settlements has an
effect on the increase in terror attacks, moderate right—46%, center—53%,
moderate left—83%, left—91%). In the Arab public 88% see the presence of the
settlements in the territories has having an effect on the recent increase
in terror attacks.

Is a third intifada occurring?: We asked the interviewees for their opinion
on the defense establishment’s view that the recent terror attacks are an
assortment of incidents and do not indicate the beginning of a third
intifada. It turns out that the Jewish public is divided on the question of
the accuracy of this assessment: 49% agree with the stance of the defense
establishment while 45% do not agree with it.

Negotiation index: General sample—46.1 (Jewish sample: 40.3)
===========
The Peace Index is a project of the Evens Program in Mediation and Conflict
Resolution at Tel Aviv University and the Israel Democracy Institute. This
month’s survey was conducted by telephone on December 30-31, 2013, by the
Midgam Research Institute. The survey included 606 respondents, who
constitute a representative national sample of the adult population aged 18
and over. The survey was conducted in Hebrew, Arabic, and Russian. The
maximum measurement error is ±4.5% at a confidence level of 95%. Statistical
processing was done by Ms. Yasmin Alkalay.

PA leader: Stages plan to eliminate Israel is basis of PA policy ( Reblogged)

Standard
Abbas Zaki, close associate of Mahmoud Abbas,
says a Palestinian state on the 1967 borders
is only first stage in the PA’s program
because “the inspiring idea cannot be achieved
all at once. [Rather] in stages”
by Itamar Marcus and Nan Jacques Zilberdik

Senior Palestinian official Abbas Zaki posted on his Facebook page an interview he gave to Syrian TV in which he said the PA will only agree to a treaty with Israel if the Palestinian state is established on the 1967 lines. However, he stressed that ’67 lines would only be the beginning. After that, the Palestinians will continue with the stages plan:

“Even the most extreme among us, Hamas, or the fighting forces, want a state within the ’67 borders. Afterward, we [will] have something to say, because the inspiring idea cannot be achieved all at once. [Rather] in stages.”

Click to view

In an interview on Al-Jazeera TV in 2011, Zaki also mentioned this PA stages plan and referred to “the inspiring idea,” explaining that it means the end of Israel. He said that Mahmoud Abbas shares the goal of eliminating Israel in stages, but that the PA says it only wants a state along the 1967 borders because it is unacceptable politically to say you want to destroy Israel:

“You can’t say it to the world. You can say it to yourself.”

Zaki stressed that the goal is clear-cut because if Israel were to return to the 1967 lines, it certainly could not survive: “Israel will come to an end.”

This is Zaki’s full statement from 2011:

“The agreement is based on the borders of June 4 [1967]. While the agreement is on the borders of June 4, the President [Mahmoud Abbas] understands, we understand, and everyone knows that it is impossible to realize the inspiring idea, or the great goal in one stroke. If Israel withdraws from Jerusalem, if Israel uproots the settlements, 650,000 settlers, if Israel removes the (security) fence – what will be with Israel? Israel will come to an end. If I say that I want to remove it from existence, this will be great, great, [but] it is hard. This is not a [stated] policy. You can’t say it to the world. You can say it to yourself.”
[Official PA TV, Sept. 23, 2011]

Expressing his refusal to recognize Israel earlier this year during a public lecture, Abbas Zaki started to refer to Israel’s Ben Gurion Airport as “Israel’s Airport,” but then stopped himself and corrected himself:

“When Mr. Obama came to the region during his visit, as soon as he arrived at the airport of Isra… [corrects himself], I mean, the airport where the Israelis are. I don’t want… [corrects himself] this whole country is ours, and Allah willing, the airport will also return to us.”
[Official PA TV, April 8, 2013]

Click to view

Zaki sitting in place of honor one seat from M. Abbas at Fatah event in 2011.

These statements coming from Abbas Zaki are significant because he is a senior Palestinian official and a very close associate of Mahmoud Abbas. He was sent to Syria as Mahmoud Abbas’ personal representative a few months ago and has spoken at public events representing Fatah.

Another important statement reiterating that the PA is employing a stages plan to defeat Israel was expressed recently by PA Minister of Religious Affairs Mahmoud Al-Habbash in
a Friday sermon in the

presence of Mahmoud Abbas. Al-Habbash, speaking after the current round of peace talks was announced, said that the PA’s negotiations with Israel are modeled after the Hudaybiyyah agreement between Islam’s Prophet Muhammad and the tribes of Mecca. Recounting that Muhammad signed a 10-year truce, and yet two years later conquered Mecca, the minister stated: “This is the example and this is the model.”

Official PA children’s TV also teaches children to aspire to Israel’s destruction. Earlier this year the PA TV host told children:

PA TV host: “And of course we will never forget that we have land that was occupied in 1948, which will return to us one day. Remember well, children. Also [remember] to safeguard our folklore, our national games, the folklore in all its forms, our dress and our food and our games and anything that forms the Palestinian folklore – we have to safeguard it. If we don’t safeguard it, then the occupation might steal it as well, as it stole our land. Right? Do you agree with me? Bravo!”
[Official PA TV, Feb. 23, 2013]

Bringing up children to see all of Israel as “occupied” territory and as “stolen Palestinian land” that will “return” at some future time are significant components of Palestinian Authority ideology that are never expressed to Western leaders or Israelis, and are denied during peace discussions. Zaki’s description of the peace process as intended to lead to Israel’s destruction is consistent with these messages to PA children and many other internal messages the PA leadership sends to its population.

See more documentation here.
To read a detailed analysis of the PA’s continuing and ongoing deception and violations of its international commitments see PMW’s book, Deception which documents that the PA policy of saying it wants peace in English is contradicted by its internal political, social and cultural activities, its leaders’ statements and its education of youth in Arabic. Click to see reviews or to purchase Deception.

The following is an excerpt from Abbas Zaki’s recent interview:

Syrian TV host: “When they talk about [the US] imposing a solution, we know that it will be deficient.”
Member of Fatah Central Committee Abbas Zaki: “You can relax. We find ourselves united for the first time. Even the most extreme among us, Hamas, or the fighting forces, want a state within the ’67 borders. Afterward, we [will] have something to say, because the inspiring idea cannot be achieved all at once. [Rather] in stages.”
[Official Syrian Satellite TV Channel, Dec. 23, 2013]
The following is a longer excerpt of the sermon delivered by PA Minister of Religious Affairs Mahmoud Al-Habbash comparing negotiations with Israel to Muhammad’s Treaty of Hudaybiyyah:

“We hate war. We don’t want war. We don’t want bloodshed, not for ourselves, nor for others. We want peace. We say this because our culture is founded on this, and because our religion is based on this. Yes, we want peace, but not any peace. We want a peace based on justice, therefore the Palestinian leadership and the PLO have not missed any opportunity for peace…
The Palestinian leadership’s sense of responsibility towards its nation made it take political steps about 20 years ago (i.e., signing the Oslo Accords). Despite the controversy, despite much criticism and much opposition by some, it brought us to where we are today: We have a [Palestinian] Authority and the world recognizes the [Palestinian] state.
All this never would have happened through Hamas’ impulsive adventure, but only through the wisdom of the leadership, conscious action, consideration, and walking the right path, which leads to achievement, exactly like the Prophet [Muhammad] did in the Treaty of Hudaybiyyah, even though some opposed it…
The hearts of the Prophet’s companions burned with anger and fury. The Prophet said: ‘I’m the Messenger of Allah and I will not disobey Him.’ This is not disobedience, it is politics. This is crisis management, situation management, conflict management…
Allah called this treaty a clear victory…
Omar ibn Al-Khattab said: ‘Messenger of Allah, is this a victory? Is this logical? Is this victory? We are giving up and going back, and not entering Mecca. Is that a victory?’ The Prophet said: ‘Yes, it is a victory.’
In less than two years, the Prophet returned and based on this treaty, he conquered Mecca. This is the example, this is the model.”
[Official Palestinian Authority TV, July 19, 2013]
Previous Bulletin Next Bulletin

 PMW Bulletins Archive