AxisMundi Jerusalem

Insulting the intelligence

Good morning, children.

Today we are going to learn about two common rhetorical tricks that help greatly with the cynical manipulation of arguments.

First, disingenuousness. The Oxford Shorter English Dictionary defines disingenuous as “lacking in frankness, insincere, morally fraudulent”, in the sense of pretending not to know what you in fact know very well.

Second, the straw man argument.  Wikipedia defines this as misrepresentation of an opponent’s position, to create the illusion of having refuted a proposition by substituting a superficially similar proposition (the straw man) and refuting it, without ever having actually refuted the original proposition.

Today, thanks to Mr Netanyahu, we have one handy slice of well-worn rhetoric to illustrate both rhetorical tricks.

from FaithWorld:

Who wrote the pope’s speeches for this trip?

Who wrote Pope Benedict's speeches for this trip? Why do his speeches to Muslims hit the spot and those to Jews seem to fall short? Does he have two teams of speechwriters, one more attuned to the audience than the other?

We don't know the answers (yet) but a pattern suggesting that has certainly emerged. Look at what he had to say today in Bethlehem to Palestinians, Christian and Muslim:

• To Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas: "Mr President, the Holy See supports the right of your people to a sovereign Palestinian homeland in the land of your forefathers..."
• To Palestinian Catholics at Mass: "In a special way my heart goes out to the pilgrims from war-torn Gaza: I ask you to bring back to your families and your communities my warm embrace, and my sorrow for the loss, the hardship and the suffering you have had to endure."
• At Aida refugee camp: "I know that many of your families are divided – through imprisonment of family members, or restrictions on freedom of movement – and many of you have experienced bereavement in the course of the hostilities. My heart goes out to all who suffer in this way."
• On the Israeli-built wall: "In a world where more and more borders are being opened up – to trade, to travel, to movement of peoples, to cultural exchanges – it is tragic to see walls still being erected... How earnestly we pray for an end to the hostilities that have caused this wall to be built!"

These comments stand in strong contrast to his speech at Yad Vashem, which was so abstract that his Jewish audience -- and commentators in the media -- were openly disappointed by it. They called it lukewarm, said he avoided speaking clearly about the Holocaust and said nothing about the fact he himself is German. He skirted the contentious issues that strain Catholic-Jewish relations, such as the possible beatification of the late Pope Pius XII or the recent lifting of the excommunication of an arch-conservative bishop who denies the Holocaust.

The latest gaffe came yesterday when his spokesman, Rev. Federico Lombardi, flatly denied to journalists that the German-born pope had ever been a member of the Hitler Youth (see our story). He was reacting to repeated mentions of this in the media and possibly a comment to that effect by the speaker of the Knesset Reuven Rivlin. But the pope, while he was Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, said in a book over a decade ago that he had been enrolled in the Hitler Youth by force. Reporters who had the book back in their office bookcases quickly found the quotes on the internet. Within hours, Lombardi had to eat humble pie and admit the book was right after all.

Coming after the uproar over the case of the Holocaust-denying Bishop Richard Williamson, where Vatican communications were chaotic, one has to wonder why some speeches work and others don't. Just imagine if Pope Benedict had added a line to his Yad Vashem speech saying there was no place in the Church's ministry for Holocaust deniers. Or cut and pasted that line from his speech in Auschwitz in 2006: " I come here today as a son of the German people." It would have been so easy. It would have been so effective.

Fr. Lombardi told us yesterday that Benedict had said all these things before and couldn't be expected to repeat them all in every speech. To criticism that he didn't mention the total number of Holocaust dead or the issue of anti-Semitism at Yad Vashem, he said the pope had spoken about them on his arrival at Tel Aviv airport -- hardly comparable to the Holocaust memorial as a place for a solemn statement. And his reaffirmation of the Vatican's support for a Palestinian homeland was also just a repetition of what had been said before. By these arguments, he could have skated over that issue today, but he didn't. Today's speeches had far more sense of the occasion and the location.

from FaithWorld:

Mixed Israeli press reaction to Benedict’s Yad Vashem speech

Pope Benedict was never going to please his critics in Israel, so it's not surprising that today's headlines were almost all negative about his speech at Yad Vashem yesterday. Reading the English-language press this morning, I was interested in seeing the nuances in the different reactions. Here are a few examples of what I found:

In Haaretz, the main headline read "Survivors angered by Benedict's 'lukewarm' speech.'" That story focused on the reaction from Yad Vashem officials as we reported yesterday. You can see a PDF of its front page here. The two commentaries were more nuanced than the main story.

Tom Segev's front-page analysis "Someone in Rome chose 'killed'" focused on the way Benedict described the Holocaust victims' fate: "He inexplicably said Jews "were killed," as if it had been an unfortunate accident. On the surface, this may seem unimportant: Israelis often use the same term, and they do not need the pope to tell them about the Holocaust, which today is a universal code for absolute evil. But the word the pope used is significant because someone in the Holy See decided to write "were killed" instead of "murdered" or "destroyed." The impression is that the cardinals argued among themselves over whether Israelis "deserve" for the pope to say "were murdered" and decided they only deserve "were killed." It sounded petty.

Even the recurring use of the term "tragedy" seemed like an attempt to avoid saying the real thing. The verbal stinginess Benedict displayed last night also diminishes the impact of anything he might say about Palestinian suffering. Had he said what he needed to on the Holocaust, he could have said more to condemn Israel's systematic violation of the human rights of residents of the West Bank and Gaza..

In "Speaking to his own flock," Lily Galili said Benedict wasn't actually speaking to Jews in his address, but to Catholics. "It isn't his fault that we were disappointed. We don't understand the Catholic Church and its dogma. At Yad Vashem yesterday, he was not addressing the Jews. Like any leader he used words that would be understood by his support base, the Church's one billion adherents around the world." She said Benedict, as Cardinal Ratzinger, opposed the sweeping Millennium apology that Pope John Paul made for all the sins committed by the Church. But Benedict had become more flexible since becoming pope, she argued. "Considering his reputation as a conservative, his visit to Israel in itself is a big compromise."

Here's a video of some reactions yesterday, followed by more press comment from today below the screen. The video starts with a fiery speech by a Muslim cleric in the pope's presence, which led to criticism from both the Vatican and Israeli rabbis.

The headline on the Jerusalem Post's front-page news story read: "Pope stops short of Holocaust apology in Yad Vashem speech. The updated online version is here. Its "Pope in Israel" section online has links to several articles, including one asking "Was there a Jewish Pope?"

from FaithWorld:

Popes at Yad Vashem: comparing John Paul and Benedict

Pope Benedict's speech at the Yad Vashem today took a different approach from the speech his predecessor Pope John Paul delivered at the Holocaust memorial on 23 March 2000. Polish-born John Paul mentioned the Nazis twice while Benedict, a German, did not. John Paul recalled the fate of his Jewish neighbours; Benedict offered no personal wartime memories. John Paul spoke in a broader perspective, mentioning godless ideology, anti-Semitism, the "just" Gentiles who saved Jews and the shared spiritual heritage of Christians and Jews. Benedict took a narrower approach, meditating on the significance of names and speaking only of the Catholic Church rather than Christians in general.

Here are a few quotations comparing and contrasting the two speeches:

INTRODUCTION:

POPE JOHN PAUL: "In this place of memories, the mind and heart and soul feel an extreme need for silence. Silence in which to remember. Silence in which to try to make some sense of the memories which come flooding back. Silence because there are no words strong enough to deplore the terrible tragedy of the Shoah. My own personal memories are of all that happened when the Nazis occupied Poland during the War. I remember my Jewish friends and neighbours, some of whom perished, while others survived. I have come to Yad Vashem to pay homage to the millions of Jewish people who, stripped of everything, especially of their human dignity, were murdered in the Holocaust. More than half a century has passed, but the memories remain. Here, as at Auschwitz and many other places in Europe, we are overcome by the echo of the heart-rending laments of so many. Men, women and children cry out to us from the depths of the horror that they knew. How can we fail to heed their cry? No one can forget or ignore what happened. No one can diminish its scale. We wish to remember. But we wish to remember for a purpose, namely to ensure that never again will evil prevail, as it did for the millions of innocent victims of Nazism."

POPE BENEDICT:“I will give in my house and within my walls a memorial and a name … I will give them an  everlasting name which shall not be cut off” (Is 56:5). This passage from the Book of the prophet Isaiah furnishes the two simple words which solemnly express the profound significance of this revered place: yad – “memorial”; shem – “name”. I have come to stand in silence before this monument, erected to honor the memory of the millions of Jews killed in the horrific tragedy of the Shoah. They lost their lives, but they will never lose their names: these are indelibly etched in the hearts of their loved ones, their surviving fellow prisoners, and all those determined never to allow such an atrocity to disgrace mankind again. Most of all, their names are forever fixed in the memory of Almighty God. One can rob a neighbor of possessions, opportunity or freedom. One can weave an insidious web of lies to convince others that certain groups are undeserving of respect. Yet, try as one might, one can never take away the name of a fellow human being."

INTERFAITH RELATIONS:

POPE JOHN PAUL: "Jews and Christians share an immense spiritual patrimony, flowing from God’s self-revelation. Our religious teachings and our spiritual experience demand that we overcome evil with good. We remember, but not with any desire for vengeance or as an incentive to hatred. For us, to remember is to pray for peace and justice, and to commit ourselves to their cause. Only a world at peace, with justice for all, can avoid repeating the mistakes and terrible crimes of the past. As Bishop of Rome and Successor of the Apostle Peter, I assure the Jewish people that the Catholic Church, motivated by the Gospel law of truth and love and by no political considerations, is deeply saddened by the hatred, acts of persecution and displays of anti-Semitism directed against the Jews by Christians at any time and in any place. The Church rejects racism in any form as a denial of the image of the Creator inherent in every human being."

Speak softly and carry a big staff

As a long-time visitor and resident of the Middle East, I often feel a twinge of sympathy for visitors who might not be as inured as I have become to the rough-and-tumble of a region where religious, political and cultural sensitivites permeate every aspect of daily life, where arguments can blow up from the seemingly trivial and where, confusingly, remarkable levels of co-habitation and co-existence still show up against this explosive backdrop.

Pope Benedict, with his army of advisers and counsellors, is better prepared than many visitors for what the region might hold in store during his week here. But he must be acutely aware of the delicate nature of his trip – and that any gesture, word or act could become a major international issue

After the gentle warm-up of his visit to Jordan the main event started today when he landed at Tel Aviv’s Ben Gurion airport.

The atmosphere in the region in the build-up to the visit has been typical of this part of the world – intense security preparations, high expectations, huge media coverage of a VIP visitor who puts the region back at the centre of world attention where everyone here thinks it belongs, some folk rolling out the welcome mat, other folk saying ‘Go back to Rome’, and, of course, spin doctors from all sides filling up my e-mail inbox with explanations of how the Pope’s visit categorically backs up what they’ve been saying all along.

Stepping in to this cauldron for anyone can be daunting – when you’re the leader of the world’s largest religious denomination it’s a tightrope act of, dare I say it, biblical proportions.

Branding Israel

For many Israelis the sight of European delegates walking out during a speech by Iran’s president at last week’s U.N. conference on racism was a rare moment of solidarity by countries often critical of Israel’s policies towards the Palestinians.

“Defeated” read a front-page banner headline in one Israeli newspaper next to a picture of Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, who had to face the mass walkout by Western diplomats at the forum in Geneva when he called Israel a “racist state” in his speech.

In a bid to improve its image, Israel, which has always worried greatly about its international standing in public opinion, has launched a campaign called “Brand Israel”.  You can read about it and the obstacles that the Jewish state faces by clicking this link  .

Ahmadinejad’s speech was seen in Israel as doubly insulting as it came on the eve of the annual Holocaust Remembrance Day when the country remembered the six million Jews killed by the Nazis in the Holocaust.

(Photo caption: Iran’s President President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad addresses the High Level segment of the Durban Review Conference on racism at the United Nations European headquarters in Geneva April 20, 2009.  REUTERS/Denis Balibouse (SWITZERLAND POLITICS IMAGES OF THE DAY)

The Holocaust’s untold toll

As Israelis prepare for their annual Holocaust commemorations on Monday, one scholar has taken a different tack on the tragedy by estimating how many Jews might have been alive today were it not for the Nazi genocide.

According to demographer Sergio DellaPergola, the systematic slaughter of 6 million Jews during World War Two more than halved the potential global Jewish community in the long-run. Rather than numbering some 13 million now, there might have between 26 million and 32 million Jews, he says in an article to be published in the journal of the International School for Holocaust Studies at Yad Vashem in Jerusalem.

“The Holocaust struck a deep blow to the demographic, cultural and social fabric of the Jewish people in many ways,” DellaPergola said in a statement issued by the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, where he is professor of Israel-Diaspora relations.

DellaPergola speculated not only on the number of offspring that those who perished by the Nazis never had, but also how many Jews might have been “lost”, nominally, to low birthrates and intermarriage in Eastern Europe — the Ground Zero of the Holocaust.

Unmentioned in the Hebrew University statement is the possibility that the State of Israel might not have been set up were it not for the Holocaust, which mobilised world opinion behind the Jews’ quest for a sovereign haven. Israel is now home to 6 million Jews and a million Arab Muslims and Christians. Many demographers believe the country will soon have the majority of world Jewry given rates of assimilation in the diaspora.

Israelis mark Holocaust Remembrance Day by standing silently as sirens sound nationwide. Broadcasters air educational programmes and news media report on the conditions of Holocaust survivors in Israel.

The music stops for ‘Waltz’

In one of the biggest surprises on Oscar night, the animated Israeli documentary Waltz with Bashir did not walk away as many expected with the famed statuette in the Foreign Film category, which instead went to Japanese film Departures.

Even the star of Departures acknowledged he was expecting Waltz with Bashir to win the Academy Award.

The hype in Israel surrounding the movie- which won a Golden Globe earlier in the year – had provided a spark of optimism in the country where politics, regional relations and the economy have been weighing heavily on the public mood.

Some are already suggesting the failure of Waltz on Hollywood’s biggest night was some form of censure for the recent Israeli offensive in Gaza.

An editorial cartoon in the Israeli press made the connection - showing Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert presenting director Ari Folman with a consolation prize and saying “We made you a statuette out of Cast Lead”. Operation Cast Lead was the Israeli code name for the Gaza offensive launched late last year with the stated aim of countering militant rocket fire from inside Gaza. It provoked much international criticism of Israel, notably over hundreds of civilians killed and wounded.

Echoing the glum mood elicited by Waltz’s failure – another cartoon in Israel’s leading Yedioth Ahronoth newspaper has a man reacting to the headline “Disappointment at the Oscars” saying “There’s another failure of the Lebanon War” – a reference as much to the broadly unpopular and inconclusive 2006 battle with Hezbollah in southern Lebanon as to the 1980s invasion of Lebanon that is the subject of Ari Folman’s astonishing animated flashback.

Joint campaign…

Its no overstatement to say that politics in Israel – particularly at election campaign time – is a lively and occasionally surreal affair.

While Israeli politicians have shied away from debates and rallies – there’s a lot going on in cyberspace.

Israeli politics is notorious for the plethora of small, single-issue parties – men’s rights, gambling and putting an end to banking fees are all issues that have motivated people in past elections to run for a Knesset seat.

In less ‘connected’ times - these campaigns would have stayed out in the margins while the big parties duked it out. But in the YouTube era - the political playing field hasn’t been levelled so much as completely dug-up. 

Take this video – promoting a campaign, indeed a joint campaign, bringing together Holocaust survivors and the pro-marijuana Green Leaf party. There may be a certain Israeli logic in here. Somewhere.

Here’s another campaign spot making waves…this one in support of the “Power to Change” party that promotes rights for the disabled.