This article seems to imply the opposite (”Only one group was not represented: the chareidim. In the four years of planning leading up to the conference, it apparently did not cross anyone’s mind that it might be a good idea to seek figures from the chareidi world to participate.”)

What are the facts?

Comment by Bob Miller — July 19, 2007 @ 2:39 pm

I believe the correct spelling is De Hartog, pronounced Hartokh. De H.’s family is probably originally Dutch.

The version of the story that was published in the local paper is that Mr. Cohen asked De H. why the animosity to to the frum, to which De H. responded, “You’re an animal, like the Nazis.” So Cohen fired back, “And you’re worse, because the Nazis wanted our bodies while you want to take Jewish souls.”

Yeah, it wasn’t nice to call De Hartog worse than a Nazi, but De Hartog’s language was certainly no nicer and having made the comment he did, what exactly was he expecting to hear in response?

Please allow me to expand on my comments. I do not believe that using the Nazis a a point of comparison is desirable or, on an objective basis, acceptable. But it is still part of the fabric of Israeli political discourse. Chilonim use it regularly. But since I am not Chiloni, I do not consider it my place to tell them to stop. The religious Zionist movement has used it, especially since Oslo. I am not a member of that community, and I don’t consider it my place to tell them to stop.

I am, however, nominally part of the Chareidi community, in my synagogue affiliations, where my children have gone to school, and in my other activities. I have written actively from the Chareidi viewpoint, including two articles in the Jersusalem Report. As such, I feel I am entitled to comment when someone from that community uses the Nazi language, and to say that it is inappropriate, no matter what anyone else does.

In his original post, Yonason Rosenbloom wrote “When Rabbi Yisrael Eichler referred to former Meretz Party head Shulamit Aloni as a Nazi, he was hit with a libel judgment of hundreds of thousands of shekels. When Aloni referred to Binyamin Netanyahu and others as crypto-Nazis and fascists, she was awarded the Israel prize.” His implication was clear: It’s acceptable for Chilonim, why not for Chareidim? And that was what I was trying to answer.

“Calling someone worse than the Germans over the issues involved constitutes a desecration of the memory of the Kedoshim. When that type of language is used purposefully, many would accuse the speaker of anti-semitism. In any case, referring to it as acceptable for a non-charedi politician is among the most intemperate comments I have seen”

I am only observing what passes for acceptable language in Israeli political discourse. Ben Gurion used to call Jabotinsky “Vladimir Hitler.” In our time, Shulamith Aloni and Yeshayahu Leibowitz both used the metaphor with abandon. I can agree with you that it desecrates the memory of the kedoshim, but in the context of present Israeli society, it has become acceptable. If you want to get Israelis to stop using it, I applaud you. For my part, I’d just like to get Chareidim to stop using it first.

One more thing. You note that “non-Hareidi institutions are being FAIRLY denied funds they are not entitled to.” Your list had better prove that Hareidi institutions were being unfairly treated as opposed to the others.

You write that “MK Gafni submitted a very detailed bill of particulars to substantiate his claim that Hareidi institutions are being UNFAIRLY targeted and denied funds that they were specifically allocated for Jewish education.” I suggest that someone publish that bill ASAP so as to document Mr. DeHartog’s bias. It would certainly clear a lot up.

“but we must admit that MK Cohen’s was wrong to call DeHartuch “worse than the Germans,” even if it fit within what would be acceptable bounds for a non-charedi Israeli politician. If we keep using this kind of language, no one will ever take us seriously.

Comment by Lawrence M. Reisman — July 18, 2007 @ 11:49 am”

I pray that you want to reword that!!! Calling someone worse than the Germans over the issues involved constitutes a desecration of the memory of the Kedoshim. When that type of language is used purposefully, many would accuse the speaker of anti-semitism. In any case, referring to it as acceptable for a non-charedi politician is among the most intemperate comments I have seen. Let me be dan lekav sechus and assume MK Cohen (and De Hartoch) acted in a moment overcome by passion / shigayon. Perhaps blogging may have a similar defense??

An FYI that during the Agudah convention the last Shmita year, one of highest attended speeches was from a clean-shaven Kipah Srugah outfitted Israeli farmer (also a Ba’al T’shuva and spoke in Ivrit) who detailed the unique challenges of keeping shmita and for the first time in his life.

Venues over lunch meetings can be negotiated without compromising Halacha or appearing triumphalistic. Have a meeting at a neutral venue and allow everyone to order in-like a regular business luncheon. This way, the subject is business rather than the quality of the meal or the cost of a pocketbook.

Here is an excerpt from Sara Yocheved Rigler, interviewing Rebbezin Chaya Sara Kramer:

She asked me about my background. I told her about the ashram. Then I asked her about her experiences in the Holocaust, a subject which had always absorbed me. She described how, on that first night in Auschwitz, a veteran inmate had pointed to the smoke issuing out of the chimney of the crematoria and told her, “That’s your parents.”

Nevertheless, she asserted, “Auschwitz was not a bad place.”

What? I must have misunderstood. I asked her to repeat her statement.

“Auschwitz was not a bad place,” she repeated clearly. “There was a group of religious Hungarian girls. We stuck together. And all the mitzvot we could do, we did do. For example, one girl kept track of the days, so we knew when it was Shabbos, and we avoided doing any forbidden work whenever possible. On Passover, we didn’t have any matzah or wine, of course. But one of the girls had memorized the Haggadah. She would recite a line, then we would all repeat after her. In this way, we were able to fulfill the mitzvah of reciting the Haggadah.”

The holy woman fixed me with her pale blue eyes. “A bad place is a place where Jews can do mitzvot, but don’t do them. For you, the ashram was a bad place.” (http://www.aish.com/spirituality/odysseys/Holywoman.asp)

The detailed blow-by-blow account is in Mishpacha magazine (Hebrew edition) of last week in an article written by their political reporter Yossi Elitov. He writes that Cohen blacked-out after the slap/puch and was taken to Hadassah/Ein Kerem hospital, hardly characteristic of a mere “slap.”

Here is an article which hints at what really happened:
http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3423581,00.html

Gevaldig!!
Right before Tisha b’Av you were m’kaim bim’lo hamuvan “Kal ha’m'lamed zchus al chareveiro, Hamakom y’daneihu l’chaf z’chus!”

Slapping wives also used to have some acceptability in certain circles.

The olam needs some clarity here, or at least I do.

Until now, I never read that MK Cohen fell to the floor, as you write Hillel. Can a face slap do that? Source please, from you or anyone?

JR says that MK Cohen was “slugged”. Never read that either, only that he was slapped. Source please, again from you or anyone?

I too believe the slap was wrong, no question, particularly comong from a lawyer. But he was greatly provoked, in the incident itself, and it was ongoing for years. The provocation goes to mitigation of punishment. There is also tradition to a slap in the face, which is also a mitigating factor. A potch in the punim is a common Yiddish phrase. Parents slap children. Rebbes slap talmidim. A lady slaps a vulgar man. A gentleman removes his glove, and slaps his opponent in the face with the glove. These things mostly don’t go on today, but they used to have some acceptabiity in certain circles.

I am satisfied that Rav Eliashiv, who is a great Torah leader, clearly implied that DeHartog is attacking the Hareidi community. That’s enough for me.

However, for your information, MK Gafni submitted a very detailed bill of particulars to substantiate his claim that Hareidi institutions are being UNFAIRLY targeted and denied funds that they were specifically allocated for Jewish education.

(That does not foreclose the possibility that non-Hareidi institutions are being FAIRLY denied funds they are not entitled to. I presume that DeHartog would stop bank robbers from doing their work, regardless of their religious orientation.)

“Would you have welcomed the non-chareidi or non-frum?”

Please remember that the JCC represents the broader Jewish community and should not be reflecting personal bias’s. Whatever Garnel would have done for a non-frum family is irrelevant. He does not represent the entire community. The JCC does and it should extend the very same courtesies and services to the Frum as the Non-Frum.
Incidentally, where I live the JCC does exactly that and are to be greatly commended. They’re very sensitive to the needs and sensibilities of the frum community and they receive much support from them as well. It is an all-around positive and fruitful relationship and the same goes for the Federation.

Mishpocha details “DeHartog’s novel and contradictory interpretations of the law, with repect to Hareidim.” It’s been shown that he has been hard on non-Hareidim as well. Is Mishpocha claiming that he has been harder on Hareidim than he has been on others? If applies the same “novel and contradictory interpretations of the law” to such organizations as HaBima theatre or National Religious insititutions (and there has been indications that he has) then he’s not anti-Chareidi in his job, just thorough, difficult, and ornery.