sabato 31 gennaio 2009

Olmert stops short of saying “ Israel controls US government”


Olmert stops short of saying “ Israel controls US government”
From Khalid Amayreh in Occupied East Jerusalem

Jan 13, 2009


Israeli Prime Minister has stopped short of saying that Israel controls the US government. Speaking to the Israeli media this week, Olmert said he had asked President Bush to order Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice to abstain in a key UN vote on the Israeli genocidal onslaught in the Gaza Strip.

"She was left shamed. A resolution that she prepared and arranged, and in the end she didn’t vote in favor," said Olmert, bragging about "our clout and influence" in the US .

"We didn’t want her to vote in favor of the resolution. And this is what we eventually got."

Olmert said he demanded rather aggressively to talk to President Bush and when Bush was on the phone, he told him to order Rice not to vote for the resolution.

"I said 'get me President Bush on the phone.’ They said he was in the middle of giving a speech in Philadelphia . I said I didn’t care. I need to talk to him now. He got off the podium and spoke to me.

"I told him the US could not vote in favor. It cannot vote in favor of such a resolution. He (Bush) immediately called the Secretary of State and told her not to vote in favor."

However, a State Department spokesperson has been quoted as denying Olmert’s claim.

"Mr. Olmert is wrong," the official said.

"Even if everything had gone according to plan, she would have abstained. That was the plan," said the official. "Israel does not make US policy."

In 2001, an acrimonious argument reportedly erupted during the Israeli cabinet
weekly session between then Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon and then foreign Minister Shimon Peres during which Sharon reportedly yelled at Peres, saying: "Don't worry about American pressure, we control America."

Peres reportedly warned Sharon that refusing to heed incessant American requests for a cease-fire with the Palestinians would endanger Israeli interests and turn the US against Israel.

At this point, a furious Sharon turned toward Peres, saying:

"Every time we do something you tell me America will do this and will do that . . . I want to tell you something very clear:

"Don't worry about American pressure on Israel. We, the Jewish people, control America, and the Americans know it."

Peres and other cabinet ministers reportedly warned Sharon against saying what he said in public, because "It would cause us a public relations disaster."

Israeli sources denied the story.

http://www.xpis.ps/






:: Article nr. 50796 sent on 14-jan-2008 05:25 ECT


www.uruknet.info?p=50796

:: The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this website.

http://www.uruknet.info/?p=50796

martedì 27 gennaio 2009

Outspoken Kirill elected new Russian patriarch

Outspoken Kirill elected new Russian patriarch
1 hour ago

MOSCOW (AFP) — The Russian Orthodox Church on Tuesday selected 62-year-old Metropolitan Kirill as its new patriarch, an outspoken figure who analysts say could prove a headache for the Kremlin.

A seasoned operator after long service as head of the church's foreign relations section, Kirill was elected by an overwhelming majority in a ballot of church leaders in Moscow's ornate cathedral of Christ the Saviour.

Kirill, Metropolitan of Smolensk and Kaliningrad, received 508 votes in a secret ballot of the Church Council in Moscow while his challenger Metropolitan Kliment of Kaluga and Borovsk won 169 votes.

"I accept and thank the Church Council for my election as Patriarch of Moscow and All Russia," Kirill said solemnly after the results were announced, before leading the congregation in an Orthodox liturgy.

Addressing the incense-filled gathering earlier, Kirill had made a strident call for church unity and urged the faithful to resist Protestant and Catholic proselytizing, dampening hopes of a transformation in poisonous ties with Rome.

About 700 bearded and robed bishops and laity from both Russia and diocese abroad had the right to participate in the first such vote of the post-Soviet era, following the death of Alexy II last month.

Gathered outside on the freezing Moscow street were about 100 of the faithful, some holding banners and icons and chanting.

Kirill's comments echoed the tough approach of his predecessor, who resisted attempts by late Polish pope John Paul II to reach out to Catholics in ex-Soviet lands and who refused to countenance a papal visit to Russia.

In the post-Soviet era "the most active proselytizing was by missionaries of all manner of Protestant denominations but we also noticed with bitterness representatives of the Catholic hierarchy," Kirill said.

"We must attentively follow developments and where necessary quickly and decisively react to threats," added Kirill, who after Alexy's death was appointed "Guardian of the Throne" temporarily in charge of the church.

Metropolitan Kirill, who has hosted his own weekly television programme "Words of a Pastor" for the past 10 years, is seen as something of a loose cannon in political circles, analysts say.

"Among the bishops, he's the only real politician. If I were president, I'd be afraid of such a man," said religious affairs expert Sergei Filatov of the Russian Academy of Sciences, referring to Kirill.

Russia's politicians "can't tell what he's going to do. If (the economy) all goes pear shaped they don't know what Patriarch Kirill would do. They'd prefer someone they had control over," said religious affairs analyst and journalist for the Forum 18 religious news agency Geraldine Fagan earlier.

Kirill, whose crushing victory had been widely predicted, takes over a church that went from strength to strength under Alexy after being repressed in the Soviet era.

Prime Minister Putin and President Dmitry Medvedev both attend church on feast days, as do other Slavic leaders such as Belarus' President Alexander Lukashenko.

The church's relatively rapid election of Kirill, without resorting to a run-off, and the withdrawal of a third candidate just before voting began were indicative of its desire to make a show of unity at a crucial moment.

The Cathedral of Christ the Saviour is a symbol of the church's resurgence. Dynamited under Stalin, it was then replaced by an open air swimming pool before an exact replica was rebuilt in the 1990s.

In an interview with the Trud newspaper published Monday, Kirill said the church was thriving but could still play a greater role in daily life, including education.

Hosted by
Copyright © 2009 AFP. All rights reserved. More »

http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5htauIi6LIsHzjy3GqEJSeOD4Ur8A

lunedì 26 gennaio 2009

I Escaped From Hitler Twice: The Fred Wertheim Story


I Escaped From Hitler Twice: The Fred Wertheim Story
September 1, 1983



This is an archived article. It originally appeared on September 1, 1983. Some information may be outdated.

When a Jew comes to believe in Jesus, it not only affects his life but the lives of those closest to him—his family. This was certainly the case when Steve Wertheim, the son of a Jewish immigrant, came to believe in Jesus.

Steve's father, Fred, was born in Germany in 1925. The son of a baker, he lived in a small village of 2,000 people. The town had very few Jews, ten families to be exact. Fred, as a young boy, had to look among the non-Jews for playmates because the only other Jewish children were his two older sisters and an older Jewish girl. It didn't bother him to have gentile friends, but it started bothering them to have a Jewish one.

By the time Fred was eight, the Aryan philosophy of Hitler was well on its way to acceptance by most Germans. Fred's best friends did not want to play with him anymore. His parents, who were prospering in the bakery business, held to the illusion that Hitler would lose his popularity and that things would get better once again for the Jews. Instead they got worse.

The Wertheim family finally decided to leave Germany for America. However, wanting to leave and getting out of the country were two different things. Because of immigration quotas, they needed to apply to the Consulate for clearance. The family had no papers prepared by a United States citizen for them, and that made emigration difficult. They were given a number—a very high one—48,878, which represented the number of people allowed to come from Germany before them. It would be a while until they could expect to go.

Meanwhile, on July 2, 1938 Fred became bar mitzvah. He was to be the last Jewish boy to undergo the ceremony in his district. Four months later came Kristallnacht. His synagogue, along with hundreds of others was destroyed. Six days later, it was ordered that Jewish children be expelled from the schools. At the same time, Jewish males that were thirteen or older were being conscripted for "labor camps." Fred was small for his age and because of his size was overlooked. Before long, entire Jewish families were being deported to the death camps. Yet, for some mysterious reason, his family was spared. Their immigration number came up, and in May of 1941 the Wertheims left what had become Hitler's Germany. They traveled by way of France, Spain and Portugal and arrived on the shores of what they saw to be heaven on earth—America.

Fred learned the English language quickly and after having been in the States only two years, he was drafted into the U.S. Army. The eighteen-year-old went through basic training and was shipped out to England. He was then given additional training and assigned to the First Infantry Division as part of the combat engineers. This was a front-line unit that was trained to remove mines or build emergency bridges so others could advance. Front-line units like Fred's had dangerous duty and high casualties.

Fred took part in the invasion of Europe on D-Day. He fought his way through France and across the Rhine River, ironically, into his native Germany. Then Fred and some of his fellow Army soldiers were captured there. Says Fred,

"I remember they had us lined up. The Germans were talking among themselves, loud enough for me to hear. Since I understood what they were saying, my body started to shake. Some of my buddies started asking me, 'What's happening? How come you're ready to pass out?' I told them, 'This is the way it's going to be. They don't know what to do with us and so they're going to shoot us."'

Yet, for some reason they changed their minds and took the group to a prisoner of war camp near Hanover—Stalag 11B. Fred was spared again.

Most of the prisoners at Stalag 11B had been there throughout most of the war and were very weak. Some couldn't even stand up. No work was assigned to the prisoners, for it would have probably killed most of them who were in a state of physical debilitation. Each morning, Fred and the others answered a roll call and then spent the rest of the day wandering within the boundaries of the high wire fences.

The conditions in the camp were not up to Geneva Convention standards. The clothes of the prisoners were burned regularly because they were lice infested. Many had their hair shorn very short to minimize the infestation. Their breakfast and lunch was combined into one "meal" which consisted of a tin can filled with black coffee. In the late afternoon they were given a stew which contained vegetables and occasionally a few strings of horsemeat. Fred remembers,

"It smelled so rotten that I literally held my nose while I was eating. Once in a while, very late at night, some Germans from outside the camp would throw food over the fence and run away." It proved that not all Germans were Hitlerites.

Meanwhile, back in the States, Fred's family had gotten a telegram delivered by a woman dressed in black. It was from the War Department saying that Fred was missing in action. Germany didn't turn over names of prisoners, so his family had no way of knowing if he was alive.

Eventually the Allied Forces conquered Germany and General Montgomery's Ninth Division liberated Stalag 11B. Fred first had to recuperate from tapeworm and other maladies received as a result of his imprisonment. Then, around Mother's Day of 1945, he was sent home.

"The convoy I was in was the first batch of American POW's to get back to New York City and we got a tremendous welcome—fireboats and everything. The following Saturday I got a big reception in the synagogue from the rabbi and the entire congregation."

Fred felt very grateful to be back in a safe place. He couldn't forget, however, the horrors of war or the miracle of his preservation. "God has done so many good things for me. He brought my immediate family out of Germany. He kept me alive in a prisoner of war camp. And there was the time that I was in a German halftrack that turned over on top of me. Two Germans lay dead next to me. The halftrack was so heavy with equipment that I couldn't move. Then water started to come up as we were pressed down in a field. I thought my life was over. I said the Sh'ma and I spoke to God pleading for His help. At that moment, several of my German captors were able to lift the halftrack and slide me out from under it. I was safe once again."

"First I escaped from Hitler as a Jewish refugee. Then I was liberated as an American prisoner of war. But I was never free until Messiah saved and rescued me."
Fred Wertheim believed in God and felt that God had preserved him for a purpose. He didn't know what it was, but reasoned that he should just go on living, that God would show him some day. Fred married a nice Jewish girl from his synagogue and he and Laura settled down in the Bronx. They raised two sons and things were going fine until he got a phone call from his oldest son Steve. Steve had moved to California after graduating from college. Fred could not believe his ears, but Steve's words were clear: "Dad, Mom, I've come to believe in Jesus as the Messiah."

Fred took the news very hard: "After all I had been through, here I saw my own flesh and blood had turned against me." Fred worked as a mail carrier, and for weeks after the phone call, he would just suddenly start crying on his route. People asked him what was wrong, but he couldn't tell them. He was ashamed to let them know that his son had become a Christian.

Steve tried to explain to his father that his decision to believe in Jesus was not intended to hurt Fred. It was a decision based on conviction—the conviction that Jesus was the Messiah of Israel. Steve told his father about a Mr. Goldstein who had originally told him about Jesus. Mr. Goldstein was a Jew for Jesus who Steve had met and through whose Bible study meeting Steve became more and more convinced of his spiritual needs and of Jesus' sufficiency.

Fred, while depressed over Steve's decision, became angry with Mr. Goldstein. When Steve told him that Goldstein was coming to New York and wanted to visit with him, Fred agreed. He said to his son, "I want to meet the man who did this to you and I want to kill him. I'm going to throw him off of our terrace!"

Goldstein and his wife visited the Wertheims and instead of a violent or angry interchange, the two couples discussed things over coffee and a danish pastry ring.

Says Mrs. Wertheim, "We asked them many questions. After a while, Mr. Goldstein pointed out prophecies in the Jewish Bible. I was a little shocked to see that my husband was very curious to know more."

Fred Wertheim's curiosity continued past that evening. He started attending Bible study meetings in New York:

"I became a very conscientious student. Each week we were asked to prepare for the next lesson by reading a particular passage from the Scriptures. One week the assignment was to read the first letter of John (in the New Testament), but I read the Gospel of John by mistake. I couldn't put it down. Then, on the morning of September 29, 1975, I woke up at four o'clock. I saw what was the outline of a figure standing in the doorway of my bedroom. I couldn't see a face, but I knew it was Jesus. I was convinced that he was real and that I wanted him in my life. I knew he was my Messiah. For me to become a believer, it took a supernatural event like this one. I know it's not that way for everybody who believes in Jesus, but that's how it happened to me. I didn't tell my wife until later in the day."

Laura Wertheim was upset about the news. First her son and now her husband too! To compound things, their youngest son Robbie, announced that he too was a believer. He didn't want to say anything until his father came to believe because he was afraid that it would be too traumatic an experience for Fred. In Robbie's words, "I didn't think he could take another one."

But could Laura Wertheim take another family member believing in Jesus? Says Mrs. Wertheim,

"I was very stubborn. While I felt surrounded by believers, I kept reminding myself that so many people were killed in the Holocaust. So many Jews were killed. I couldn't betray my upbringing."

Then the Wertheim family went to see a movie called "The Hiding Place." Laura watched this true story about a Christian woman and her family in Holland during the war. Says Laura,

"It showed the suffering this woman went through, yet she kept her faith in God. It made me see that God was working during the Holocaust—through people like this dear woman. Because she believed in Jesus, she helped Jews—she had real reason to hope. I just sat there and wept and sobbed through the entire picture."

The next week, she too accepted Jesus as her Messiah. Four years later, Fred and Laura Wertheim renewed their marriage vows. Portions of the ceremony follow:

"Love and commitment have come to have a diminished meaning in today's world. Yet, we can see the true meaning of love and commitment as we behold Fred and Laura Wertheim, a couple united in God, showing forth His faithfulness. In a world where promises are seldom kept and faithfulness is scorned, they stand here to declare and reaffirm their love for one another.

"In Jewish tradition, it is considered a blessing and privilege to be an invited guest at a wedding. To be able to rejoice with a bridegroom and his bride as they begin a new life together is something that brings joy to the heart. How much more, then, can we rejoice with Fred and Laura as we witness the profession of their continued love. Thirty years ago on the 22nd day of October of 1949, Freed and Laura were joined under the chupah.

"Today, they reaffirm their vows in our presence. They rededicate their lives to one another with a new dimension and depth—that they are joined to God Almighty. He is the center of their union with one another. Their children have always been able to recognize the mutual devotion and deep respect that Fred and Laura have had for each other throughout their marriage. Yet, when the Wertheims met Jesus their Messiah, their relationship truly blossomed. The faith that they came to four years ago has made a good relationship far sweeter. Their relationship with Jesus increased their capacity to love each other in the everyday practicalities of their life together. Their relationship with Jesus increased their capacity to love others.

"Because God has been so faithful to them, they desire to publicly declare and demonstrate that faithfulness and have come today to dedicate their lives afresh in serving Him.

"Fred and Laura, God has given both of you much, and the Scriptures say, 'From everyone who has been given much, much will be demanded.' However, when God gives us a responsibility, He also promises to supply what we need to fulfill that which he requires. We have the great promises of God to rely upon as we live our lives in Messiah. 'Being confident of this, that he who began a good work in you will carry it on to completion until the day of Messiah Jesus' (Philippians 1:6).

"…As they stand before you, the Wertheims wish to reaffirm their commitment to one another in Jesus and their desire to reflect God's image together.

Fred: 'As the days seemed short to Jacob in serving for Rachel, so have the years seemed that we have shared. Laura, my wife, I promise you, as a child of God, that I will continue to love and respect you, honor and uphold you, and give of all that I have to you. As we continue to walk together in the love of Messiah Jesus, I pray that we will become a true reflection of the love and faithfulness Jesus has for the Holy Congregation.'

Laura: 'Fred, throughout our marriage you have been both my beloved and my friend, the one whom I can fully trust with all that I am. As a child of God, I promise you, my husband, that I will continue to love and respect you, honor and uphold you, and give of all that I have to you. I will faithfully stand with you and help inspire you, that God's will might be the focus of our lives.'"

"May God's love surround you, Fred and Laura, as the mountains surround Jerusalem; and may that love emanate forth to all who you touch with your lives. May your next thirty years together increase your joy and gladness as Messiah reigns in your lives."
Article Tools
54

Change Bible Link Translations
NIV NASB KJV ESV ASV MSG AMP NLT CEV NKJV NCV KJ21 YLT DARBY NLV HCSB NIRV NIVUK TNIV

Other Articles
The Holocaust Within
The Hand of God
The Dyer's Assistant
Related Topics
[+] Life Stories of Holocaust Survivors
Pointers to Jesus as the Messiah from personal experience by survivors of the Holocaust.
[+] Yom HaShoah
Holocaust Rememberance Day
[+] Holocaust

Copyright 2009 Jews for Jesus All Rights Reserved | Privacy Policy | Contact Us | Email Webmaster


http://www.jewsforjesus.org/publications/issues/3_1/escape

Is There Hope for Peace?


Is There Hope for Peace?
A Reflection from Tel Aviv by Dan Sered by Dan Sered
January 5, 2009

When we pulled out of Gaza in 2006, there was a feeling of anticipation in the Land, a hope that peace might be within reach. The Palestinians living in Gaza would now rule themselves. I even heard some Arabs commenting on the radio that with the occupation over, they were free. On the Israeli side, apart from a small group of religious extremists, the population was relieved. No more risk that the soldiers serving in Gaza would be harmed. The possibility of a peaceful, prosperous Palestinian populace was something that most Israelis believed would be good for Israel too.

But sadly, the situation did not improve under Hamas, and after years of that terrorist group shooting rockets at our civilians, Israel has now taken decisive action.

That is not to say that the Israeli army hasn't carried out operations and retaliations toward Hamas for its terrorist activities in the past few years as well. However, the current situation in which the Israeli army is trying to substantially weaken the infrastructure of Hamas so that her citizens can be safe from regular attack, is an all-out response. And it has the world's attention.

Should we despair? Or should we be hopeful once again? I'm not naive enough to think that if the IDF are successful in destroying the tunnels and weapons and the perpetrators of the terrorism, our problems are over. We have Syria, Iran, Iraq, Hezbollah, and others ready to take up the mantle to destroy Israel. On the other hand, does that mean we should stop believing in peace? That we should stop hoping for a better tomorrow?

As an Israeli, and more importantly, as a believer in the God of Israel who loves Jews and Palestinians, I have the faith to believe that the only hope for lasting peace is found in the one who was born in the Middle East­— Jesus. And I appeal to all who hold that same faith to pray earnestly and faithfully. Today I saw a report on Fox News about a young Muslim man who was part of Hamas. His violent terrorist way of thinking was completely eradicated by the powerful change God made in his life. He said that it was the words of Jesus: "love your enemies…" that changed him. Wouldn't it be wonderful to hear more such stories?

Jesus the Messiah is what my country needs to turn this situation radically around. Nothing but his supernatural intervention in the hearts of individual Israelis and Palestinians will do. At the close of this article there are some prayer requests for you to use as you think about what is happening in my country right now.

If you are not yet a believer in Jesus, let me challenge you. Read the prophecies in the Hebrew Scriptures that He fulfilled. These include the fact that He came and died for our sins and on the third day he rose from the dead. By believing and trusting in Y'shua we have hope that is not dependent on the political or economic situation. When we believe in him, he gives us a hope that is everlasting, that transcends our immediate circumstances. He promises us that we will spend forever with him. He gives us reason to hope.

Prayer requests:
Pray that this war will cause more people in Israel and Gaza to consider the gospel message.


Pray for the safety of all the innocent people in harm's way in the south of Israel and in Gaza.


Pray for the protection and safety of all the soldiers who are risking their lives serving in the IDF.


Pray for wisdom and courage for our Jews for Jesus staff in Israel as we continue to bring the gospel to our people. Especially pray for our efforts to minister to people who live in the south of Israel.


Pray for the enablement, protection and safety of believers in Jesus in Gaza and the West Bank as they minister to the many suffering Palestinians who need to know the love of Messiah.


Pray that many among the Hamas fighters will be radically changed through an encounter with Jesus, and lift up the sword of the Spirit instead of instruments of destruction.


Pray that all those seeking peace in the Middle East will find hope in the Prince of Peace Himself, Jesus.
Written By

Dan Sered
Read more articles by Dan Sered
Article Tools
17

Change Bible Link Translations
NIV NASB KJV ESV ASV MSG AMP NLT CEV NKJV NCV KJ21 YLT DARBY NLV HCSB NIRV NIVUK TNIV


Copyright 2009 Jews for Jesus All Rights Reserved | Privacy Policy | Contact Us | Email Webmaster

http://www.jewsforjesus.org/blog/20090105

Should Auschwitz be left to decay?


Should Auschwitz be left to decay?
On the eve of Holocaust Memorial Day, two experts on Auschwitz argue for and against the idea that the former Nazi death camp should be allowed to crumble away.

Historian Robert Jan Van Pelt says that once the last survivor has died it should be left for nature to reclaim, and eventually forgotten.

But former Polish Foreign Minister Wladyslaw Bartoszewski, once an inmate, says Auschwitz must be preserved to bear witness to the fate of its victims.

ROBERT JAN VAN PELT, HISTORIAN AND AUTHOR

Many Auschwitz survivors have told me that a visit to the camp can teach little to those who were not imprisoned there.
Their view is best summarised in the text of Alain Resnais' celebrated movie Night and Fog (1955), written by the camp survivor Jean Cayrol. As the camera pans across the empty barracks, the narrator warns the viewer that these remains do not reveal the wartime reality of "endless, uninterrupted fear". The barracks offer no more than "the shell, the shadow".

Should the world marshal enormous resources to preserve empty shells and faint shadows?

Certainly, as long as there are survivors who desire to return to the place of their suffering, it is appropriate that whatever remains of the camps is preserved.

Many of the same survivors who have told me that I can derive little knowledge from a visit to the camp acknowledge that it was good for them to return to the place, anchoring an all-encompassing nightmare back to a particular place.

The world owes it to them not to close such an opportunity for a return. As long as one survivor is still alive, the remains of the camp should remain available.


But what when there are no survivors left? In his autobiographical novel The Long Voyage (1963), former Buchenwald inmate Jorge Semprun considered what ought to happen with the remains of that camp after the death of the last survivor, "when there will no longer be any real memory of this, only the memory of memories related by those who will never know (as one knows the acidity of a lemon, the feel of wool, the softness of a shoulder) what all this really was."

Semprun hoped that grass, roots and brambles would be allowed to take over the camp, destroying the remainder of the fences, barracks and crematorium, effacing "this camp constructed by men".


As we commemorate the 64th anniversary of the arrival of the Red Army at the gates of Auschwitz - the term "liberation" is not really appropriate as most of the inmates had been evacuated a few days earlier in death marches - it is good to begin thinking about the future first anniversary of the day when the last Auschwitz survivor has died.
It might be that we will agree that the best way to honour those who were murdered in the camp and those who survived is by sealing it from the world, allowing grass, roots and brambles to cover, undermine and finally efface that most unnatural creation of Man.

At that future date, may the slowly crumbling debris of decay suggest the final erasure of memory.

Robert Jan Van Pelt is a professor at the School of Architecture, University of Waterloo in Ontario, Canada. He is a world-renowned authority on Auschwitz, and the author of several books on the subject, including Auschwitz: 1270 to the Present.

WLADYSLAW BARTOSZEWSKI, CHAIRMAN OF THE INTERNATIONAL AUSCHWITZ COUNCIL

The only people with a full and undeniable right to decide the future of the Auschwitz-Birkenau Memorial are the hundreds of thousands murdered in this concentration camp.


The prisoners whom I met as prisoner number 4427, when I was detained in Auschwitz between September 1940 and April 1941, are among them.
To some I owe my survival. They saved me, guided not only by the impulse of the heart, which was heroic at the time. They also believed that the survivors will bear witness to the tragedy which in Auschwitz-Birkenau became the fate of so many Europeans.

Thus I and numerous former prisoners fulfil the testament of the victims and convey to subsequent generations the truth about those days.

But the moment when there will be no more eyewitnesses left is inexorably approaching. What remains is the belief that when the people are gone, "the stones will cry out".

The ruins of crematoria and gas chambers in Birkenau, the empty bunks in barracks, the dark cells in Block 11 and the Wall of Death - all of them will cry out. Therefore, it is meaningful to save stones, ruins, and buildings, even if the price is high.

It lies in the nature of man that when no tangible traces remain, events of the past fall into oblivion.


We do renovate castles, preserve paintings and old libraries. The best example is the memory of ancient Greece and Rome - centuries have passed but it is still vivid, thanks, among others, to the remains of both civilisations.
Why then should we let be forgotten the Memorial to the suffering of thousands of prisoners from many countries, and to the extermination of Jews? The place which has grown to be a global symbol and a warning against all forms of contempt for mankind and of genocide?

There is no other place like that in the world - no other KZ [Konzentrationslager, or concentration camp] was a concentration camp and extermination camp at the same time.

Right after the war, there occurred ideas - which fortunately have not been implemented - to demolish the remains of Auschwitz-Birkenau and plough the area up. The justification given was that a place of such cruel murder should vanish from the face of the Earth.

I do not wish to say that the intentions were not honourable, but in my view disguised behind them were other, not entirely realised, motivations. When a man commits evil, he tries to obliterate its traces.

Auschwitz-Birkenau is like a continuous sting of remorse that torments humanity, especially Europe. It is a sting of remorse for every person who is indifferent to the suffering of others.

Auschwitz-Birkenau must forever remain an unhealed, burning wound, which wakes people up from moral lethargy and forces them to take responsibility for the fate of our world.

If we let the memorial cease to exist, we will take a great burden on our conscience. We will trample upon the testament of the victims.

I hope to be a false prophet in saying that, but if we allow Auschwitz-Birkenau to disappear from the face of the Earth, we might just be opening a way for a similar evil to return.

Prof Wladyslaw Bartoszewski is a historian, author, diplomat and former Auschwitz inmate. Two times Polish foreign minister, Prof Bartoszewski is currently secretary of state and plenipotentiary of the prime minister for international dialogue.


Do you think Auschwitz should be left to crumble away, or preserved as a memorial? Please use the form below to send your comment.

I have never visited Auschwitz but have been to Bergen-Belsen several times. Because it was demolished shortly after it was liberated, there is little at Belsen now beyond monuments. I feel it was a tragedy that the decision to demolish it was taken, albeit that the imperative preventing the spread of typhoid etc made the decision almost inevitable. To take a similar decision about Auschwitz when those sorts of pressures do not exist would seem to me to show a fundamental lack of humanity.
Dave, Hatfield


With a sea war grave we leave the ship to rest and we stop divers swimming the wreck. I would prefer to see something similar for Auschwitz - secured and left to be reclaimed by nature.

Future generations can learn of such atrocities (and this by far is not the only example of mass genocide) from visits to museums and through education. Spend the money on ensuring that it becomes part of our education and leave Auschwitz to rest.
Tom Calthrop, Bequia, Grenadines


As a child I remember the letters my mother would get from survivors of the camps looking for possible living relatives. In 1996, I went to Auschwitz to see the unhumanity that unbridled bigotry engenders. I am not a Jew, but the victims were not limited to Jews. Poles, Russians, and political unacceptables from all over Europe had their fates sealed at these camps. To shutter them from the public is to gloss over those failings of the human spirit that allow these camps to exist in the first place. We must be reminded of our failures as humans, just as we must be reminded of our successes. Failure to do that will allow bigotry to again reappear ... as in the Gulag ... Guantanamo ... the killing fields of Cambodia ... the refuge camps in the Sudan.
William Bloch, St. Charles, IL


Preserve it. If not, the lessons will be forgotten and evil will keep repeating. This should stand as a memorial for man's evil against man, not just the Jews and the victim of the Nazis
Gregory Natsch, Jefferson City,MO USA


It should be kept. Anything which serves as a reminder of the attempted destruction of a race, a faith, a belief system should be maintained ad infinitum.
Bill, Hemel Hempstead UK


Only when you stand inside a gas chamber and see the marks left by thousands of fingernails in the concrete walls as men, women and children blindly struggled for an escape can you even begin to comprehend the level of atrocity and suffering. The camp infrastructure must endure as a memorial and witness to inhumanity on such scale.
Frank McKay, St.Albans UK


As a non-Jew who visited Auschwitz last year I can only say that it should be preserved as a forceful reminder of man's inhumanity to man and a warning not to let this be repeated. If we simply abandon this site to the whims of nature, we would be denying that it was created as a result of human processes. Human processes must therefore preserve it.
Roy Kift, Castrop-Rauxel, Germany


It should remain, not only as a memorial to the thousands that died but also a reminder to the world what happens when dictators are ignored.
Jessie, Essex


My father was as political prisoner incarcerated and tortured in a German Concentration camp. He survived and as a child I heard his tortured nightmares in my bed next door. Having experienced the sufferings of an inmate in my own family and considering the enormity of the crimes to mankind committed by the Nazi regime I feel that these facilities should be maintained forever, and all costs. To remember the past, for the sake of the future.
Peter Brinkmann, Berlin/Germany


I can appreciate both sides of the arguement and have sympathy with both views.

However on balance I believe future generations would be amazed at us if we did not preserve something that has been so fundamental in shaping the post war world and politics.

I would vote to keep it
Ian Humphreys, Caterham UK


As a Jew whose great-grandparents dies in Auschwitz, I think it should be preserved. I went to Poland to learn more about what had happened, and though was it left is only a shell, it still has things to teach us, things that may be forgotten without physical evidence.

I know I want my daughter to be able to go there one day and to learn of the past as well as hope for the future.
Rachel, Israel


As a young soldger i saw the mass graves of belsen, all the remains of all these camps must be preserved!!.it will not stop such things happening again.it is happening now and will happen again.but it proves it did happen
arthur, manchester


As beautiful as letting earth grow over the remains of Auschwitz sounds, I think preserving the site will, in the long run, be more important.

Our memories are too short to risk letting the world doubt the existence of the Holocaust, especially Auschwitz, due to the lack of physical evidence. Let us not aid the Holocaust deniers; preserve Auschwitz even though it is only a shell of the horrors that took place within.
Anne, Canada


I don't agree that Auschwitz should be allowed to become overgrown and disappear. That would be too easy for us all. I also disagree that the stones have no value. Only this weekend I was moved to tears by a mere account in the Times of a group of school children visiting Auschwitz and other camps and memorials. It had obviously had a massive effect on that generation and will, hopefully inform their actions in the future.

I haven't been but I intend to do so one day.

Keep them and preserve the memories.
Lesley , Hope Valley


Crumble away? No. The memory of man is short. What is out of sight is often out of mind. Stalin said, "One death is a tragedy, a million is a statistic." But these were not just statistics. They were all real, live human beings. Historian George Santayana's famous quote is apt: "Those who do not remember the past are condemned to repeat it." If these burial grounds are allowed to fade, so to will the probability that it will happen again, by inverse proportion. In a very real sense they are open graves. Just like we must maintain places of beauty for the goodness they inspire, so these places must be maintained, and their horrific stories told anew to each generation, to prevent it from ever happening again.
Dannan Tavona, FR, DD, Eugene, OR, USA


I went to Auschwitz as part of the Learning From Auschwitz Project, and although it can be argued the full horror can never be converyed I would argue that it will still change people and their attitudes forever. There are ao many dreadful and inspirational stories to teach people how cruel mankind can be and jsut exactly what can be done about it.

Leaving Auschwitz as a blight on this earth will ensure people remember what happened last time and stop it.
Lucy Coulson, Nuneaton


Why keep an wounded soul open, let it seal it's faith by not reminding ourselves over and over again... last man stand, let it rest forever...
Clay Batt, Baulkham Hills, Australia


These camps should be left to crumble and be allowed to be consummed by nature.

Perhaps a more fitting memorial should be erected.

One that would stand the test of time and act as a reminder and a testament to those that suffered.
John Allen, basingstoke


I visited both Auschwitz and Auschwitz-Birkenau on Boxing Day last year. While I thought I knew what to expect it was the sheer scale of, particularly, Auschwitz-Birkenau that remains in my mind; no film can convey the size of Auschwitz-Birkenau that you can see standing in the tower above the main gate and to see the, admittedly, ruins of what is left stretching out in front of you. Polish school children are taken to one of the concentration camp sites as part of their schooling and it acts as a reminder as to what was done in their country.

For me both Auschwitz and Auschwitz-Birkenau acted as a horrifying example of what happens when a race attempts to carry out genocide. Genocide is still going on in parts of the world today. The Nazi concentration camps were not just about exterminating Jews but many other 'undesirables' too.

I think that Auschwitz-Birkenau should be kept as a reminder and a warning to future generations.
Simon Jones, Cambridge, UK


NO. Auschwitz is a part of our human history and should not be left to ruins. It is a reminder of the suffering and truimph of the human spirit in the midst of tyrrany and opression, just like we have the hiroshima memorial or the crosses of normandy. If it be left to ruins, there will be no évidence to mock those people who deny the holocaust. Auschwitz should be seen by generations for them to know that goodness always truimphs over evil in the end.
Dante, france


Obviously while there are still survivors who want it to remain, it should do. However, once there are no more, would it not be better to destroy the remains of Auschwitz and build something on the site as a memorial to those who suffered there? Perhaps a hospital or something similar, as a symbol of hope over (literally) suffering? Auschwitz has not yet disappeared, but genocide has still occurred after the end of the Second World War. We must never forget the evil that occurred, but we don't need Auschwitz's remains to keep the memories fresh.
HS, Cornwall, England


Auschwitz should be preserved as a reminder to all future generations of the failure of humanity to save innocent lives as well as demonstrating the evil of despot rulers. Auschwitz was also a POW Camp where British Soldiers were detained. Homosexuals, Jehovahs Witnesses, Gypsies, Anti-Facists, the mantally ill and freemasons all suffered at the hands of Nazis none of this should be forgotten
Mark Johns, Ottery St Mary, Devon, UK


No this place must be kept as a memorial to all those and their families. Perhaps just as important as a reminder of what happened at this time for tomorrows children.

This should be the same for all of these places.

One day i am going to take my children there and explain what happened.
John, West Sussex


It should be left to crumble but the ground should never be used for anything else; left as it is.

How could someone preserve this abomination ? To do so would mean actually repeating the building of it, albeit for a different reason.
T, UK


I believe that Auschwitz should be preserved. Humanity easily remembers its triumphs, but soon forgets its evils. To future generations, the Holocaust may seem too horrible to believe or remember. We need to preserve Auschwitz and other physical reminders of our past so that does not happen.
Lee, Japan


I have no connection to any victim of Auschwitz but visited it in 2002. The sheer horror of what went on there is still unimaginable but it does give a good account of it. I remarked that it should be a place that everyone should visit to appreciate what humans can do to one another as a reminder that we should never let this kind of things happen again.

I feel strongly that we should maintain Auschwitz so that I can show my son what happened and eventually so he can show his son. It is important that physical embodiments exist to help people who weren't there to grasp, even in a small way, the sheer inhumaness of what Auschwitz and other camps stood for.
Dominic Martinez, Manchester, UK


I have visited Auschwitz and was moved by what I saw. It was a harrowing visit but it did make me think alot about man's inhumanity to man. It should be preserved as a testimany to this inhumanity and for future generations to physically see an indication of what the camp was like rather than read about it. I think there is too much emphasis placed on the Jewish aspect of the "holocaust". There were other ethnic groups such as the Romanies who are never mentioned. There have also been other episodes of mass slaughter eg Cambodia and Rwanda, which are not treated with the same publicity or moral outrage. The concentration camps of Europe were an outrage to civilisation and should be remembered and not allowed to deteriorate.
Tom Ray, Stotfold, England


I think it should be preserved for generations to come as a solemn reminder of man's inhumanity to man and the horrors of genocide.
odette brightmore, nottingham


Having visited Auschwitz it is a truly moving place which in my opinion should be kept open. It does not matter how many books you have read on it nothing defines the horror of the place until you have visited. As was said in the article if we forget we will be forced to remember.
Dave, Edinburgh


I am disgusted and absolutely shocked that anyone would seek to canvas opinions like this.

Auschwitz is not just there for the survivors - it is there for all of us - Jew and Gentile alike.

A reminder to all humanity of just how dangerous politicians and their followers can become.
Dennis, Johannesburg South Africa


Places like these should be preserved - least we forget. The Colleseum in Rome has been preserved and that was a place of death. What happened in the Second World War should not be forgotten. I am in my early 50s and it amazes me that some 18 year olds do not know what a Death Camp was and have never heard of the Holacaust and that is bad. In the UK there are school trips to such places and I strongly believe that this is good as the next generations must learn from the past mistakes and horrors of previous generations and learn from them. I believe that too many of the younger generation are being shielded from the bad things in life and only experience the good. They need to know the difference between good and bad/evil.
Susan Berry, Tramore, Ireland


All actions have consequence, and wars are not fought by the generals who lead the armies. The only tribute to the fallen is their gravestones. What remembrance is there for the innocent caught up in the struggles of empires?

As long as the memorials of victorious war are preserved, so should the symbols of war's evils. As long as the weapons of war are lovingly preserved, so should the scenes of mass weeping be preserved - until there is no more war.
Realist, Los Angeles USA


This is a very delicate subject on which there will be many points of view, hence, I think it should be for the survivors, after which the families, to decide.
Julie Townsend, Eltham/London


I agree with Mr Bartoszewski, that whilst we preserve ancient ruins, we should preserve other important parts of our history that may not be so happily remembered. People take photographs of the good times, the weddings, the birthdays, but they rarely document those things which are unhappy... funerals, illness.. and yet these things are our history too. Preserve Auschwitz - it should be a sobering reminder of part of History which would all too easily be forgotten and like the funerals, the illnesses of life, Auschwittz is sadly part of our history too.
Christopher, Kendal


Auschwitz should be preserved because to do otherwise might give comfort to future generations of holocaust deniers. Of course the reality of the horrors experienced by inmates can not be fully appreciated by those of us fortunate enough to live in civilised democracies but I would say that a partial appreciation is better than no appreciation at all
Nigel Davies, Stockport UK


It should be preserved in my opinion. Future generations should be able to visit it and be warned against racism, and small mindedness, so that the atrocities should never happen again. It should stand as a testimony to all those who suffered. It deserves to stand and they deserveit to stand too!
Karen C., Luton, England


A few years ago I went on a school trip to Auschwitz. It was a humbling, and for many, upsetting, experience for our group of 14/15 year olds. Nothing that we had learnt in the classroom could have prepared us for the experience. The memories of the vast space, eerie silence and the fact we were merely standing in a place that had claimed so many lives will remain with me forever. I think it is so important that Auschwitz is preserved in order for future generations to learn about the past and as a reminder that nothing that terrible should be allowed to happen again.
Lyndsey, Nottingham


I believe Auschwitz should remain as a memorial to the incredible suffering experienced by so many. We retain graves of our loved ones why should we not retain a visible memory of the site of the death of so many innocent people? Shame that this happened should not come into the equation.
Lindsay MDowell, Darwin Australia


I visited the Auschwitz camp last summer, and whilst I agree that as visitors to the camp in modern times we could never gain a full insight to the full monstrosity or inhumanity of the crimes committed there, the experience was still a very emotional, sobering, and somewhat distressing one. People should never be allowed to forget the dark depths to which humanity sank in the holocaust, and the Auschwitz camp must remain, not only as a reminder of this, but also a shrine to those who survived the camps, and the millions of innocents that did not.
Simon, Sheffield


It is clearly important to keep Auchwitz. It is the physical proof of the events of the time and a necessity for educational purposes. It is only through education that we can learn about the horrors of the concentration camps. Like the dome at Hiroshima; it is a very powerful educational tool.
robert halse, Bendigo , Australia


Preservation of these places is vital, if only to prevent holocaust deniers the possibility of asking where the evidence is. I visited Dachau nearly 30 years ago, and it changed my life for ever, making me aware that such events must never be allowed to happen again. Where will future generations get this kind of experience if the evidence is destroyed?
Paul A, Brisbane, Australia


Auschwitz should never ever be forgot about, and should be looked after so that people in years to come can be reminded about how horrific and terible it really was.

If anything the site should be re built as it was in the war so people can really understand it.
Nick, Shrewsbury


Not one camp or document should be destroyed. In the end the truth of what happened here will be discovered not by memories or the recollections of "survivors" but rather by forensic science. The holocaust is the world's greatest COLD CASE and no lobbyist or law of man will stop the eventual publication of the truth!
Lyn V, Perth Australia


We cannot allow the memory of those horrific events to be forgotten. A memory of a memory is better than no memory at all.

Would you have the events of 9/11 written out of history?

After the last survivor has passed, seal the area and let it stand as both a monument to the innocent people who perished there, and a warning of the grisly depths to which the human animal can stoop.

Let it also serve as a beacon of hope and inspiration, that after the ultimate price needlessly paid by so many at just this one camp, evil can be stopped, and punished.

For the times of Auschwitz to be forgotten, to me, is tantamount to condoning it.
David, Aberdare, south Wales


The place speaks for itself. It is a chilling reminder of mankind's inhumanity to itself, and in my opinion should be preserved at all cost.
Eduardo Martinez de Salinas, Barcelona, Spain


I think Auschwitz, should be preserved as a memorial and a constant reminder of the horror and atrocities that were carried out there, no one should be allowed to forget.

To many people are trying to put out that it never took place!
Graham Todd, Benoni, South Africa.


Under no circumstances. We must never allow this to be forgotton. I am a teacher and was horrified to find out last week that my school is taking the Holocaust off of the cirrululm as the head of departmet does not feel that it is relevant anymore. It will always be relevant and we should never forget.
Oldgirl, Wallington


I could never hope to understand the suffering and evil that took place in this camp.

However I do feel that although the final survivors are sadly now very few, those family members and others who were affected by the genocide can take some solace in visiting the remains of the site. A place to reflect and offer a prayer or thought can be very helpful in healing wounds. However to preserve the whole site would not in my opinion be the best use of the site and allowing parts to return to nature, would show everyone that the world moves on and heals itself in time
Lord B, Sussex


How will the newer generations remember the atrocities of such camps, if not through its preservation.... Granted it is only a building.... but stories told and retold need to be preserved..... making it into a ¨museum¨ should keep the realities of what occured there alive... if only as a reminder of what happened during those years..... Let history teach us what other atrocities humanity has allowed.... Slavery, for one.... And the destruction of reminders of this shameful reality are slowly dissapearing..... not only from the landscape but also from the minds of the world.... Let the shame be shown and shown again.... for we seem to never learn...
Neil A, Mauritius


Auschwitz should be preserved as a reminder and warning to furture generations of the evil mankind is capable of. This, at least for a few more generations, until time and the flow of history eventually forces it's finish, in hope that globalization will produce laws and conventions guaranteeing nothing like it will ever occur again.
david osborn, Weston, CT USA




Name
Your e-mail address
Town/city and country
Your comment


Story from BBC NEWS:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/2/hi/europe/7827534.stm

Published: 2009/01/26 09:50:14 GMT

© BBC MMIX



http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/7827534.stm

Donate online to the DEC's Gaza Crisis now


Latest Appeals
The situation
After an 18 month blockade of Gaza and three weeks of heavy shelling the humanitarian crisis in Gaza is now completely overwhelming.


Donate online to the DEC's Gaza Crisis now
Thousands of people are struggling to survive with many having lost their homes and most down to their last supplies of food and only limited amounts of fresh drinking water.
Just £25 can buy warm blankets for 8 children
Just £50 can provide a Food parcel for a family for one month
Electricity - supplies to Gaza are erratic at best with 75% of the area cut off completely. There is a significant public health risk arising out of the almost collapse of Gaza’s water and sewage system, the running of which is dependent on electricity.

Water - Around 500,000 people are without running water with 37% of Gaza’s water wells not working effectively and fuel reserves depleted due to restrictions on access and damage to pipes.

At least 412 Children have been killed and 1,855 injured

60% of the population is living in poverty

1.1 million people are dependent upon aid to survive.

Health - The capacity of the health system has been significantly reduced due to the damage of at least 21 clinics. Ten primary health care clinics are functioning as emergency clinics and hospitals and intensive care units continue to treat the mass casualties.
http://www.dec.org.uk/item/200

Sky News, BBC won't broadcast Gaza charity appeal

Sky News, BBC won't broadcast Gaza charity appeal



CTV.ca News Staff

Updated: Mon. Jan. 26 2009 10:35 AM ET



The British Broadcasting Corporation is standing firm in its decision not to air a desperate plea for donations to help those living in the bombed-out remains of the Gaza Strip.


On Monday, another British channel, Sky News, joined the BBC by announcing that it was also refusing to broadcast the appeal.


The ad was submitted for broadcast by the Disaster Emergency Committee, which includes the Red Cross, Oxfam and Save the Children.


The BBC decided not to air the ad following deliberations held over the weekend, said CTV's London Bureau Chief Tom Kennedy.


"It is saying if it does broadcast this film appealing for aid for the victims of the Israeli bombardment of the Gaza strip, it will in a sense be compromising its journalistic impartiality, not only it's journalistic impartiality but the appearance of it," Kennedy told CTV Newsnet.


The decision has triggered a powerful emotional response in the U.K. Roughly 60 MPs, including some cabinet ministers, have criticized the decision.


Several high profile religious leaders, including the Archbishop of Canterbury Rowan Williams, have also opposed the decision.


More than 11,000 complaints have been filed to the BBC, and a number of protests have been held in opposition to the decision, Kennedy said.


Those who oppose the BBC's decision say the humanitarian appeal must be aired in order to generate much-needed funds to help Palestinians recover from the heavy fighting.


More than 1,200 Palestinians were killed in the bombardment, and hundreds of homes and businesses were destroyed.


Israel launched the three-week offensive in order to halt Hamas rocket fire into southern Israel.


Other British broadcasters, including Channel 4, ITV and Five, have said they intend to broadcast the ad.



http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20090126/Gaza_BBC_090126/20090126?hub=TopStories

sabato 24 gennaio 2009

Obama reverses Bush abortion-funds policy


US President Barack Obama Set to Lift Abortion Restrictions


23 January 09-RV) U.S. President Barack Obama said that he will lift restrictions today on U.S. government funding for groups that provide abortion services or counselling abroad, reversing a policy first established in 1984, and reinstated by George W. Bush. President Obama vowed during his campaign to repeal restrictions on abortion while insisting that it should be less common. Yesterday marked the 36th anniversary of Roe v. Wade, the US Supreme court decision that enshrined abortion as a right. The Chair of the Foreign Affairs committee at United States Conference on Catholic Bishops, is Bishop Thomas Wenski of Orlando, Florida. He says the Bishops will continue to urge legislators to resist making abortion more available….

http://www.oecumene.radiovaticana.org/EN1/Articolo.asp?c=260930

Obama reverses Bush abortion-funds policy

By LIZ SIDOTI and MATTHEW LEE, Associated Press Writers Liz Sidoti And Matthew Lee, Associated Press Writers – Fri Jan 23, 6:29 pm E

WASHINGTON – President Barack Obama on Friday struck down the Bush administration's ban on giving federal money to international groups that perform abortions or provide abortion information — an inflammatory policy that has bounced in and out of law for the past quarter-century. Obama's executive order, the latest in an aggressive first week reversing contentious Bush policies, was warmly welcomed by liberal groups and denounced by abortion rights foes.

The ban has been a political football between Democratic and Republican administrations since GOP President Ronald Reagan first adopted it 1984. Democrat Bill Clinton ended the ban in 1993, but Republican George W. Bush re-instituted it in 2001 as one of his first acts in office.

A White House spokesman, Bill Burton, said Obama signed the executive order, without coverage by the media, late on Friday afternoon. The abortion measure is a highly emotional one for many people, and the quiet signing was in contrast to the televised coverage of Obama's Wednesday announcement on ethics rules and Thursday signing of orders on closing the Guantanamo Bay prison camp and banning torture in the questioning of terror suspects.

His action came one day after the 36th anniversary of the landmark Supreme Court ruling in Roe v. Wade that legalized abortion.

The Bush policy had banned U.S. taxpayer money, usually in the form of Agency for International Development funds, from going to international family planning groups that either offer abortions or provide information, counseling or referrals about abortion as a family planning method.

Critics have long held that the rule unfairly discriminates against the world's poor by denying U.S. aid to groups that may be involved in abortion but also work on other aspects of reproductive health care and HIV/AIDS, leading to the closure of free and low-cost rural clinics.

Supporters of the ban say that the United States still provides millions of dollars in family planning assistance around the world and that the rule prevents anti-abortion taxpayers from backing something they believe is morally wrong.

The ban has been known as the "Mexico City policy" for the city a U.S. delegation first announced it at a U.N. International Conference on Population.

Both Obama and Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton, who will oversee foreign aid, had promised to do away with the rule during the presidential campaign. Clinton visited the U.S. Agency for International Development earlier Friday but made no mention of the step, which had not yet been announced.

In a move related to the lifting of the abortion rule, Obama is also expected to restore funding to the U.N. Population Fund (UNFPA), probably in the next federal budget. Both he and Clinton had pledged to reverse a Bush administration determination that assistance to the organization violated U.S. law known as the Kemp-Kasten amendment.

The Bush administration had barred U.S. money from the fund, to contending that its work in China supported a Chinese family planning policy of coercive abortion and involuntary sterilization. UNFPA has vehemently denied that it does.

Congress had appropriated $40 million to the UNFPA in the past budget year but the administration had withheld the money as it had done every year since 2002.

Organizations and lawmakers that had pressed Obama to rescind the Mexico City policy were jubilant.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., said the move "will help save lives and empower the poorest women and families to improve their quality of life and their future."

"Today's announcement is a very powerful signal to our neighbors around the world that the United States is once again back in the business of good public policy and ideology no longer blunts our ability to save lives around the globe," said Sen. John Kerry, D-Mass., chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.

Population Action International, an advocacy group, said that the policy had "severely impacted" women's health and that the step "will help reduce the number of unintended pregnancies, abortions and women dying from high-risk pregnancies because they don't have access to family planning."

Anti-abortion groups and lawmakers condemned Obama's decision.

"I have long supported the Mexico City Policy and believe this administration's decision to be counter to our nation's interests," said Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky.

"Coming just one day after the 36th anniversary of the tragic Roe v. Wade decision, this presidential directive forces taxpayers to subsidize abortions overseas — something no American should be required by government to do," said House Minority Leader John Boehner, R-Ohio.

Rep. Mike Pence, R-Ind., called it "morally wrong to take the taxpayer dollars of millions of pro-life Americans to promote abortion around the world."

"President Obama not long ago told the American people that he would support policies to reduce abortions, but today he is effectively guaranteeing more abortions by funding groups that promote abortion as a method of population control," said Douglas Johnson, legislative director of the National Right to Life Committee.

___

AP White House Correspondent Jennifer Loven contributed to this report.

ocia





http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090123/ap_on_go_pr_wh/obama_abortion_ban

Challenges Obama Christianity Claims


News Analysis of 7 Reasons Campaign
Christian Anti-Defamation Commission

Challenges Obama Christianity Claims

Christian Group Reviews Obama History, Writings, and Interviews

To Expose Presidential Candidate’s Disingenuous Religious Proclamations

Barack Obama, the Democratic candidate for president of the United States, has repeatedly claimed to be a Christian, but there is more evidence disputing that declaration than affirming it according to Dr. Gary Cass, Chairman and CEO of the Christian Anti-Defamation Commission.

Dr. Cass observes, “From his speeches and his writings, even his personal history—despite protestations to the contrary—it appears that Obama’s ‘Christianity’ is carefully constructed to appease traditional American voters.”

Americans expect their leaders to embody Judeo-Christian ideals and beliefs, so it is important for Obama to be perceived as a practicing Christian. Every one of the forty-three United States presidents, regardless of political party, has mentioned God in his inaugural address. George Washington, the hero of the American Revolution, the first president of the United States, and often referred to as the ‘Father of Our Country’ stated: “It is impossible to properly govern without God and the Bible.”

Dr. Cass summarizes: “Here’s a man, Obama, who desperately needs to convince half the voters in the United States that he believes in something that he doesn’t truly understand…even two decades after his alleged conversion to Christianity.”

Unfortunately for Obama, it is not his political opponents who expose this fiction, it is his own words, as well as those of his friends and family.



Obama’s Muslim Roots

Dr. Cass explains, “The most glaring misstatement of fact in the packaging of Obama for the presidency is assertion that—in his words—he is rooted in Christian tradition. The claim is unsubstantiated. His mother was, at best, an agnostic. His biological father was a Muslim. His stepfather was from a devout Muslim family. Throughout his formative years, Obama lived in Indonesia, the world’s most populous Muslim society where—according to a passage in his first memoir, Dreams from My Father—he studied the Koran. He lived his teen years with his maternal grandparents who, by his own description, were Universalists, not Christians.”

In a 2007 New York Times interview, entitled Obama, A man of the World, Obama fondly recalled the Islamic evening call to prayer as “one of the prettiest sounds on Earth at sunset.” According to the article, “Obama went on to recite its opening lines with a perfect Arabic accent: “Allah is Supreme! Allah is Supreme! Allah is Supreme! Allah is Supreme! I witness that there is no god but Allah! I witness that there is no god but Allah! I witness that Muhammad is his prophet!”

“A devoted follower of Jesus Christ would never say ‘Allah is supreme and there is no god but Allah,’” argues Dr. Cass. “Sitting in a pew from time to time doesn’t make someone a Christian. If anything, Obama is rooted in Islamic tradition.”

Obama On “My Muslim Faith”

On September 5th, 2008, in an ABC television network on-air conversation with former Clinton advisor turned political pundit, George Stephanopoulos, Obama uttered the line, “You’re absolutely right that John McCain has not talked about my Muslim faith.” Stephanopoulos quickly saved Obama from political disaster by reminding him that he meant to say his “Christian” faith.

“I have never met a Christian, especially one who claims to have been a Christian for twenty years, mistakenly confuse Islam with Christianity when referring to his or her personal faith,” notes Dr. Cass. “Perhaps this was Obama’s only candid public comment on his belief system since people started keeping track of the things he has said.”



Libyan Strongman Identifies Obama as Muslim

On June 11th, 2008, Libyan leader Mu’ammar Al-Qadhafi was videotaped and broadcast on Al-Jazeera TV at a gathering as he referred to: “A black citizen of Kenyan African origins, a Muslim who studied in an Islamic school in Indonesia. His name is Obama. All of the people in the Arab and Islamic world and in Africa applauded this man. They welcomed him and prayed for him and his success and they have been involved in a legitimate contribution campaign to win the American presidency.”

Dr. Cass observes, “Clearly one of the world’s most vocal anti-American Arab leaders is convinced that Obama is a Muslim and is cheering the possibility of having a brother Muslim named the leader of the free world. Just as troubling is the candid admission that Muslims in Arab countries and in Africa are making financial contributions to the Obama campaign. It is against U.S. election laws for foreign nationals to give money to any candidate for federal office, but that is apparently not a deterrent to Obama or to Qadhafi.”



Marketing Obama In America

At a time when the United States is at war with Islamic fundamentalists, it has been vital that the candidate obliterate any connection to his Muslim roots. For the American public to buy the Obama brand, it was pivotal that the candidate convince voters that he was a bona fide Christian.

As Dr. Cass observes, “Once he decided to run for president, Obama and his surrogates started attacking anyone who questioned his Christianity. So, for an accurate insight into his duplicity, we need to look at an interview he gave to Chicago Sun-Times religion columnist, Cathleen Falsani, on March 24th, 2004, a few days after he was nominated to run for the U.S. Sentate from the state of Illinois and three years before he was considered a presidential candidate.”

During the exhaustive interview with Falsani, Obama showed himself to be profoundly uninformed about the basic tenets of the Christian faith. Falsani, who currently also writes a blog for the pro-Obama website, The Huffington Post, authored the book, The God Factor: Inside the Spiritual Lives of Public People, a collection of spiritual profiles. (Published in 2006 by Farrar, Straus & Giroux.)



Obama’s Statement of “Faith”

To Falsani’s question, “What do you believe?” Obama answered: “I am a Christian. So, I have a deep faith. So I draw from the Christian faith.” Then he qualifies that statement by saying, “On the other hand, I was born in Hawaii where obviously there are a lot of Eastern influences. I lived in Indonesia, the largest Muslim country in the world, between the ages of six and 10. My father was from Kenya, and although he was probably most accurately labeled an agnostic, his father was Muslim. And I'd say, probably, intellectually I've drawn as much from Judaism as any other faith.”

Obama continued to distance himself from the teachings of Jesus when he finished his answer saying, “I'm rooted in the Christian tradition. I believe that there are many paths to the same place, and that is a belief that there is a higher power, a belief that we are connected as a people.”

“Nowhere in the Bible is there a reference to Obama’s many paths,” explains Dr. Cass. “Nor is there any biblical basis for his astoundingly erroneous assertion in the Falsani interview that, ‘All people of faith—Christians, Jews, Muslims, animists, everyone knows the same God’.”



Obama’s Alleged Christian Foundation Part One: His Mother

In his 1995 memoir, Dreams from My Father, Obama wrote derisively, "My mother's confidence in needlepoint virtues depended on a faith I didn't possess.” He continued, “She was a lonely witness for secular humanism, a soldier for New Deal, Peace Corps, position-paper liberalism."

In his 2006 book The Audacity of Hope Obama wrote, "I was not raised in a religious household.” He explained, “My mother's own experiences only reinforced this inherited skepticism. Her memories of the Christians who populated her youth were not fond ones.”

Yet a year later, in 2007, shortly after Obama declared his intention to run for president, he described his mother as "a Christian from Kansas." He went on to explain that, "I was raised by my mother, so, I’ve always been a Christian."

That statement is even further suspect when compared to his half sister’s description of their mother that same year in the July 16, 2007 edition of The Christian Science Monitor. When asked whether her mother (and Obama’s) was an atheist, Maya Soetoro-Ng answered, "I wouldn't have called her an atheist. She was an agnostic. She basically gave us all the good books—the Bible, the Hindu Upanishads and the Buddhist scripture, the Tao Te Ching—and wanted us to recognize that everyone has something beautiful to contribute."

Since Obama’s mother, Ann Dunham, married two Muslim men, it would be perfectly reasonable assume that her library also contained a copy of the Koran among “all the good books.”



Obama’s Alleged Christian Foundation Part Two: His Grandparents

In the 2004 Falsani interview, Obama was asked, “Have you always been a Christian?” Obama replied with the historically inaccurate assertion that, “I was raised more by my mother and my mother was Christian.”

That statement was in direct contradiction to a 2007 speech when Obama claimed, "My mother, whose parents were nonpracticing Baptists and Methodists, was one of the most spiritual souls I ever knew. But she had a healthy skepticism of religion as an institution.” Accepting the “my mother was Christian” statement at face value, Falsani next tried to narrow down Obama’s denominational influence by asking, “Any particular flavor?”

Without answering the question about his mother, the senatorial candidate replied that his Kansas grandmother was Methodist and his grandfather was Baptist. “This was at a time when I think the Methodists felt slightly superior to the Baptists,” he expanded. “And by the time I was born, they were, I think, my grandparents had joined a Universalist church.”

“Universalists aren’t Christians,” Dr. Cass counters. According to its own website (www/uua.org), “Unitarian Universalism (today’s version of the Universalist church which merged with the Unitarian church in 1961, the year Obama was born) is a liberal religion with Jewish-Christian roots. It has no creed. It affirms the worth of human beings, advocates freedom of belief and the search for advancing truth, and tries to provide a warm, open, supportive community for people who believe that ethical living is the supreme witness of religion.”

As Dr. Cass explains, “Although Unitarian Universalists tend to retain some Christian traditions from their Protestant history, they do not necessarily identify themselves as Christians, nor do they necessarily subscribe to Christian beliefs. Visit the Unitarian Universalist website. The name ‘Jesus Christ’ isn’t used a single time. This is clearly a case of misrepresentation by Obama’s of his past.”



Obama on Prayer

In the course of the interview, Falsani questioned Obama about his prayer life. To which the candidate responded, “Uh, yeah, I guess I do. It’s not formal, me getting on my knees. I think I have an ongoing conversation with God. I think throughout the day, I’m constantly asking myself questions about what I’m doing, why am I doing it.”

Few mature Christians confuse self introspection with praying to God as Obama suggests.



Obama on Heaven

When Falsani followed up the prayer question by asking Obama if he believed in heaven, the candidate needed clarification. “Do I believe in the harps and clouds and wings?” he asked.

“A place spiritually you go to after you die?” the reporter clarified.

Obama demonstrated a clear ignorance of the Bible’s teaching on the subject of the afterlife. He answered, “What I believe in is that if I live my life as well as I can, that I will be rewarded. I don’t presume to have knowledge of what happens after I die. But I feel very strongly that whether the reward is in the here and now or in the hereafter, the aligning myself to my faith and my values is a good thing.”



Obama on Sin

The next question from Falsani was, “Do you believe in sin?” To which Obama replied, “Yes.”

Since the answer provided little insight, Falsani asked him to define sin. “Being out of alignment with my values,” the Harvard educated former law professor answered.

Noting that Obama’s response was inconsistent with the Christian definition of sin, Falsani queried, “What happens if you have sin in your life?”

“I think it’s the same thing as the question about heaven,” Obama responded. “In the same way that if I’m true to myself and my faith that that is its own reward, when I’m not true to it, it’s its own punishment.”

“Again,” Dr. Cass points out, “Obama demonstrates a total disregard to the teachings of the Bible.”



Obama on Jesus

Perhaps the most telling exchange from Falsani’s interview of Obama was the simple inquiry: “Who is Jesus to you?”

To Barack Obama, “Jesus is an historical figure for me, and he’s also a bridge between God and man, in the Christian faith, and one that I think is powerful precisely because he serves as that means of us reaching something higher. And he’s also a wonderful teacher. I think it’s important for all of us, of whatever faith, to have teachers in the flesh and also teachers in history.”

The question about Jesus was the final proof Dr. Cass needed to determine the paucity of Obama’s Christian insight. “I’m more than a little skeptical of an avowed twenty year Christian who is so blatantly uninformed about the Bible and its teachings. How many of the two billion Christians in the world when asked ‘Who is Jesus?’ would get the answer wrong? How many couldn’t define sin as explained rather succinctly in the Bible? How many have no idea what heaven has promised in Holy Scripture? This guy is checking the box ‘Christian’ on an application form without any idea what he’s talking about. Unfortunately, the application he’s filling out is to be the president of the United States.”



Obama’s Political Christianity

Contrary to all available evidence, while ignoring two thousand years of Christian tradition, Obama has the audacity to hope that people will accept him as a Christian simply because he says so. Obama’s statement: “I believe that there are many paths to the same place” defines him as a non-Christian. Jesus says, “I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father but by me.”

Dr. Cass concludes with the observation that, “Judging the intent and the degree of Mr. Obama’s deception is above my pay grade. My greatest concern is that Christianity is being hijacked by a prominent individual purely for personal, political, and financial gain. There are two billion Christians in the world. Every one of them should be insulted that their Savior is being used as a hollow campaign promise.”

The Christian Anti-Defamation Commission is a not-for-profit 501(c)(3) education corporation whose purpose is to work constructively to advance a robust religious liberty in public opinion and policy so that Christians everywhere might fulfill their biblical duties to God and neighbor. The commission is dedicated to responding to attacks by any individual person or groups of persons, institutions, or nations that defame and/or discriminate against Christ, Christianity, the Holy Bible, Christian churches and institutions, Christian individuals, and Christian leaders.



http://www.christianadc.org/resources/69-news-analysis-of-7-reasons-campaign

7 Reasons Barack Obama is not a Christian




7 Reasons Barack Obama is not a Christian
Seven Reasons Barack Obama is not a Christian
There is a spiritual emergency in America.

Barack Obama is in the process of trying to recreate the Christian faith in his own, very liberal and unorthodox image.

Built on a foundation of radical Black Liberation Theology, theological liberalism and post-modernism, Obama is undermining historic, biblical Christianity while claiming his is a Christian. In the process, he is defaming the Christian faith.

By declaring he is a Christian, yet denying Christianities most essential truths and traditional morality, Obama is associating Christ with some of the most wicked practices imaginable, all of which are condemned in the Bible.

By any historic or biblical standard, Barack Obama is not a Christian.

With his incredible celebrity status, Obama's ideas about spiritual matters have become very significant, and they are very dangerous.

Now, more than ever, Christianity is under attack from without and within. We need your help to stand for Christ.

Over the next few weeks the Christian Anti-Defamation Commission will be releasing 7 short videos entitled, "7 reasons why Barack Obama is not a Christian."

If you want to receive all these timely videos, sign up for e-mail alerts on our home page.

It is critical that we spread the truth about Obama's fake Christianity so that Christians can defend the truth.

Our concern is only spiritual and we pray for Barack Obama to repent and turn to Christ and His Word.

Make sure you are signed up to receive all 7 videos and forward this vital information to your Christian friends and family.

For a more in-depth look at the campaign, click here.

http://www.christianadc.org/resources/seven-reasons-campaign

Barack Hussein Obama




Barack Obama
aka Barack Hussein Obama, Jr.
(1961–)


Breaking News: After meeting with top Democratic and Republican leaders from Capitol Hill on Friday (January 23rd, 2009), President Barack Obama says Congress appears to be "on target" to approve the new stimulus package by February 16th. Obama has publicly declared his hope to have the plan approved by early to mid-February.

"I know that it is a heavy lift to do something as substantial as we're doing right now," Obama told lawmakers, some of whom objected to the structure of the $825 billion plan. "But I think what unifies this group is a recognition that we are experiencing an unprecedented, perhaps, economic crisis that has to be dealt with, and dealt with rapidly."

President Obama says the rescue package will create 3 million to 4 million new jobs.

Biography: Barack Hussein Obama was born Aug. 4, 1961, in Honolulu, Hawaii. His father, Barack Obama, Sr., was born of Luo ethnicity in Nyanza Province, Kenya. He grew up herding goats with his own father, who was a domestic servant to the British. Although reared among Muslims, Obama, Sr., became an atheist at some point.

Obama’s mother, Ann Dunham, grew up in Wichita, Kansas. Her father worked on oil rigs during the Depression. After the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor, he signed up for service in World War II and marched across Europe in Patton’s army. Dunham’s mother went to work on a bomber assembly line. After the war, they studied on the G. I. Bill, bought a house through the Federal Housing Program, and moved to Hawaii.

Meantime, Barack’s father had won a scholarship that allowed him to leave Kenya pursue his dreams in Hawaii. At the time of his birth, Obama’s parents were students at the East–West Center of the University of Hawaii at Manoa.

Obama’s parents separated when he was two years old and later divorced. Obama’s father went to Harvard to pursue Ph. D. studies and then returned to Kenya.

His mother married Lolo Soetoro, another East–West Center student from Indonesia. In 1967, the family moved to Jakarta, where Obama’s half-sister Maya Soetoro–Ng was born. Obama attended schools in Jakarta, where classes were taught in the Indonesian language.

Four years later when Barack (commonly known throughout his early years as "Barry") was ten, he returned to Hawaii to live with his maternal grandparents, Madelyn and Stanley Dunham, and later his mother (who died of ovarian cancer in 1995).

He was enrolled in the fifth grade at the esteemed Punahou Academy, graduating with honors in 1979. He was only one of three black students at the school. This is where Obama first became conscious of racism and what it meant to be an African–American.

In his memoir, Obama described how he struggled to reconcile social perceptions of his multiracial heritage. He saw his biological father (who died in a 1982 car accident) only once (in 1971) after his parents divorced. And he admitted using alcohol, marijuana and cocaine during his teenage years.

After high school, Obama studied at Occidental College in Los Angeles for two years. He then transferred to Columbia University in New York, graduating in 1983 with a degree in political science.

After working at Business International Corporation (a company that provided international business information to corporate clients) and NYPIRG, Obama moved to Chicago in 1985. There, he worked as a community organizer with low-income residents in Chicago’s Roseland community and the Altgeld Gardens public housing development on the city’s South Side.



http://www.biography.com/featured-biography/barack-obama/index.jsp

venerdì 23 gennaio 2009

That Jewish voters supported Barack Obama's historic election in overwhelming numbers says a lot about this community at this time.

Forward 50, 2008


Lessons in Leadership

One of the benefits of the never-ending presidential campaign that Americans were treated to this year was a lesson in leadership. On stage before us were aspiring leaders of different races, genders, backgrounds, temperaments, debating skills and political persuasions. That the final winner was a man with an uncommon intellect and breathtaking rhetorical skills, unnerving calm and a bracing vision for the future says a lot about this nation. That Jewish voters supported Barack Obama's historic election in overwhelming numbers says a lot about this community at this time.

Searching for that breadth of leadership within the community is a more challenging task. Rather than parading before us, some of the American Jews highlighted in this year's Forward 50 earned their distinction quietly. Although theirs were not the loudest voices, nor the usual ones, by words and deeds they shaped American life as Jews, largely for the better, sadly sometimes for the worse.

The task of selecting these 50 names was aided by you, our readers. Every year there's a certain degree of input — shall we say lobbying? — on behalf of some candidates, which the journalists who choose these names take into account appropriately. But this year, for the first time, the Forward directly asked readers to submit nominations and, much to our delight, the process surfaced a number of strong candidates we might otherwise have overlooked. Thank you to all who participated. You can be sure we will ask you again next year.

Two narratives dominated the Jewish story this year, and, naturally, are reflected in the Forward 50. Jews played an outsized role in the presidential election campaign and, by the looks of it, will continue to do so in the new Obama administration. Some of the most intriguing developments came from unexpected places: a young lobbying group that shook up the Washington establishment; a brash video that was viewed by more than 1 million on YouTube alone and introduced new words into the mainstream political lexicon.

This was also the year the kosher meat industry faced its greatest legal, consumer and ethical challenges. Led by the courageous reporting of our Nathaniel Popper, the saga of the now-bankrupt company that once was the country's largest producer of kosher beef and poultry exposed major lapses in the U.S. justice and immigration systems, and prompted rabbis of all denominations to examine the moral dimension of a central Jewish tenet.

The importance of this story is underscored by the inclusion — a rare one — of a non-Jew as the 51st name on this list. Father Paul Ouderkirk, the priest of the Catholic church in Postville, Iowa, displayed unusual leadership and compassion by helping displaced workers and their families to survive. Indeed, at times it has seemed as if Father Ouderkirk and the good members of St. Bridget's were among the few in this sad story willing to do the right thing.

The Forward 50 celebrates leadership, creativity, impact. It also reminds us how far we still have to go to truly repair the world.

What do you think about our choices? Weigh in here.


http://www.forward.com/forward-50/

OBAMA AND THE JEWS


OBAMA AND THE JEWS: A look at why some Jews love him and some don't trust him; and at the key role Chicago Jews played in getting him to where he is
By Pauline Dubkin Yearwood (10/24/2008)
Abner Mikva, the former Chicago congressman, federal judge and White House counsel to President Bill Clinton, puts a 21st-century twist on the notion that Clinton was "the nation's first black president."
"I think when this is all over, people are going to say that Barack Obama is the first Jewish president," he said.

Mikva, a powerful figure in local and national Democratic politics for decades, was one of Sen. Obama's early admirers, beginning in 1990 when he tried to hire the brilliant student and first black president of the Harvard Law Review for a coveted clerkship. (Obama turned him down, saying he was going to move to Chicago and run for public office. "I thought that showed a lot of chutzpah on his part," Mikva says with a laugh.)

Since then, Mikva's support for and nurturance of the presumptive Democratic presidential nominee has never wavered. He is one of many influential Chicago Jews who have been among Obama's earliest and most ardent backers.

One longtime Jewish observer of the political scene, who did not want to be identified, said admiringly that "Jews made him. Wherever you look, there is a Jewish presence."

Yet outside of Chicago, there has been a significant amount of Jewish resistance to Obama's candidacy, although that may be lessening with Sen. Hillary Clinton, a favorite among Jews, out of the picture.

The Jewish community has been a particular target of e-mails declaring Obama a secret Muslim who attended a madrassa in Indonesia, took his Senate oath of office by swearing on a Quran, and is aligned with Muslim terrorists. Those allegations have been thoroughly disproven by mainstream media and other sources. But even aside from the crackpot right, there is still distrust of the Illinois senator from some Jewish quarters, much of it centering on Israel and on some former and current advisors who are perceived to be unfriendly to the Jewish state.

Typical of the naysayers is Joel Sprayregen, a Chicago attorney who is a former chair of the Jewish Community Relations Council and a current member of the executive committee of JINSA, the Jewish Institute of National Security Affairs.

"My skepticism about Obama derives from both his lack of experience and his alignment up to recently with the far left," Sprayregen said while acknowledging that the candidate "has moved more to the center once he secured the nomination."

Sprayregen believes that "a number" of Obama's foreign policy advisors "have views which would jeopardize American national security. His association with left-wing views and advisors gives me apprehension as to how firm his support for Israel would be in a crisis," he said.

Obama is "baffled" by the resistance to him from some Jews, a key advisor, former California Rep. Mel Levine, said recently, and has stepped up outreach efforts to the Jewish community, including making a well-publicized trip to Israel earlier this summer, his second visit to the Jewish state. Washington correspondent James Besser, writing in The New York Jewish Week, declares that the senator "is acting as if Jews hold the keys to 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue."

In a way, they do. "The Jewish vote is important because of the states (Jews) are in," Paul Green, a Roosevelt University professor and longtime political maven, said. While Jews make up only about three percent of the national voting public, they vote in greater proportion to their numbers than almost any other group and are gathered in key states, particularly Florida, a swing state with 27 electoral votes, he said.

"That's the most interesting and important. The Jewish vote will matter the most there," Green said. "New York, Illinois, California - they'll go for Obama. But my guess is right now he has some work do with (Jews in) South Florida."

Levine, the Obama advisor, says that more than anything, the nominee-to-be "wants people to realize what his record is and his closeness to the Jewish community in Chicago."

That closeness can hardly be exaggerated.

Obama's Chicago Jewish roots
"Some of my earliest and most ardent supporters came from the Jewish community in Chicago," Obama told the Jewish Telegraphic Agency in 2004, just after his keynote speech at the Democratic National Convention had galvanized the party and made his name a household word overnight.

That was not hyperbole.

Typical Obama first came to Chicago in 1985, after he graduated from Columbia University, and spent three years in the city as a community organizer. In 1988, he left for Harvard Law School, and in the same year met Newton Minow, a Jew and a longtime Democratic powerbroker who served as chairman of the Federal Communications Commission under President John F. Kennedy. He is currently senior counsel at the Loop law firm of Sidley Austin.

Minow's daughter Martha ("She's not just Jewish, she's very very Jewish," her father said) was a professor at Harvard Law School at the time. "She called me in 1988 to say that the best student she ever had wanted to spend the summer in Chicago and she wanted me to meet him," Minow relates. "I said what's his name, and when she said 'Barack Obama,' I said, you gotta spell that."

Minow asked a partner in his firm to look up Obama when he visited the law school. "He started to laugh," Minow said. "He said, we hired him already."

Obama worked at Sidley Austin as an intern that summer; the firm is where he met attorney Michelle Robinson, and they married in 1992. Minow later offered him a second internship followed by a permanent job, but Obama turned it down because, he said, he was planning to go into public service or politics.

Minow and his wife have remained friends with the couple and supporters of Obama's political career. "We introduced him to a lot of our friends and held fund-raisers for him," Minow said. "We find him to be truly outstanding. If you just look around, you can see he's got many many Jewish friends. He is very much at home with Jewish people, their values and interests."

He believes that many in the Jewish community supported Clinton over Obama because "they didn't know Barack Obama. They were not informed about him. They had a loyalty over the years to the Clintons. It's not that they were negative about Barack; they were just committed elsewhere."

Minow continues to actively support Obama's candidacy; a nephew serves as one of his speechwriters.

In Chicago, meanwhile, the Obamas settled in Hyde Park and Obama became a popular lecturer at the University of Chicago law school. Abner Mikva, whom Obama already knew from Washington, also taught there, and the two renewed their acquaintance and became close. "We would have lunch and breakfast together and talk about a lot of things, different issues," Mikva said.

Through Project Vote, a voter registration drive that Obama worked on in 1992, he met two key future supporters, both Jewish. One was David Axelrod, a former Chicago Tribune reporter and chief consultant to Chicago mayors Harold Washington and Richard M. Daley who has been Obama's chief strategist since 2002.

The other is a largely behind-the-scenes champion who has been there since the beginning of Obama's political career and played a quietly crucial - perhaps the most crucial - role in it. She is Bettylu Saltzman, a longtime liberal activist whose father, Philip Klutznick, was a legendary Chicago developer, Jewish leader and statesman who served as secretary of commerce in the Carter administration and played a leading role in the development of the State of Israel.

Saltzman recalled that when she first met the 30-year-old Obama, "I don't know what I saw, but others saw it too. I'm impressed by the numbers of people who said the same thing. He was clearly brilliant and articulate. I don't know what it was, but there was something about him that was clearly destined to be something very special."

She was working in Bill Clinton's presidential campaign at the time and, perhaps because she was thinking in presidential mode, "I immediately thought, he's going to be president some day. I said to my husband and to a lot of other people, he is going to be our first black president. Why I don't know, but I will never ever forget it."

Later, she said, as she got to know Obama, "I would sort of tease him about it. I always said to him, this is what I think is going to happen, and I think in his own mind he always thought that was what he was going to be, too."

While Saltzman said she "never thought about (her support) Jewishly," she added that "obviously I'm not going to support someone who is opposed to Israel and what it stands for. He's right on all the issues when it comes to Israel. He's in exactly the same place (Hillary) Clinton is, maybe even stronger. He's a clearer thinker."

She was also impressed with Michelle Obama and says that "we could have two great people in the White House."

Saltzman supported Obama during his campaign for the state Senate, which he won in 1996, and in his failed bid for Congress against Bobby Rush in 2000. And when Obama was contemplating a U.S. Senate run in 2002, she introduced him to a group of powerful Chicago women who call themselves the Ladies Who Lunch. Many became his supporters.

The following year, Saltzman may have played an even more crucial role in Obama's political rise when she asked him to speak at a downtown Chicago rally against the Iraq war that she was organizing. The speech he gave there became famous, and Obama's early opposition to the war served as a centerpiece of his primary campaign for president.

Saltzman has remained a supporter and now devotes her time to Obama's presidential campaign. "What he did in his early life in Chicago proved that he has a great commitment to people who are less well off," she said, adding that she is encouraged by how many young people are working to get out the vote for him. "People don't always understand the fact that he thinks so clearly," she said. "He is deliberative but not indecisive." And as for Israel, "I think his (recent) trip to the Middle East proved how well accepted he was there."

Meanwhile, after he finished his work with Project Vote, Obama took a job at a civil rights law firm, Davis, Miner, Barnhill & Galland, led by Judson Miner, a well-known Chicago civil rights attorney and Mayor Harold Washington's former counsel. Miner said he met Obama when he read an article in the paper about Obama's wanting to join "a silk stocking law firm." He called Obama, Obama called him back and Miner's young son answered the phone. "He said a guy called me with a very funny name," Miner related. "I had forgotten all about him, but just by chance I called him back."

They agreed to meet and have lunch. Afterwards, "I called my wife and told her I just had lunch with the most impressive person I've ever met," Miner said. "He was truly extraordinary in all sorts of ways. He had a unique comfort with who he was and no pretenses. He was not trying to impress you with who he was. He had a lot of questions and wanted to talk seriously about things he was giving a lot of thought to."

Obama worked for Miner's firm for close to 10 years in two different stretches. When he decided to take time off to run for the state Senate, Miner said, a telling incident occurred. Under a fairly common arrangement, Obama planned to work for the firm part-time while serving in the Senate, considered by many to be a part-time job, and Miner agreed to pay him.

"On about his third day in Springfield, he called me up and said, Judd, this is unfair to you guys. I'm going to be putting in a lot more time than I thought I was going to, and I wouldn't feel right about being paid" by the law firm, Miner related.

Today, Miner is a firm supporter of his former employee's presidential bid. "He has plenty of life experiences that have sensitized him to the things that matter most," he said. "He has enormous self confidence but it is not arrogance. He is not a person who feels he has to hide things. He has very strong views but is very flexible."

Obama's "great strengths" are that he is "most comfortable dealing with people who he respects, who he thinks are dealing with him as equals, are sharing their true opinions. He is not interested in people who are yes men," Miner said.

"I don't know a blemish the guy has. We had many conversations about how do you engage in what you care about professionally while balancing your family obligations and commitment, and he has been quite successful in working it all out. He would be very effective in anything he wanted to do," he said.

Working at Miner's firm introduced Obama to many in the city's liberal community, and during his state Senate tenure, he gained other supporters, including Illinois Sen. Ira Silverstein, an Orthodox Jew who shared an office with him in Springfield. They also shared carpooling duties when both their children attended the secular pre-nursery at Akiba-Schechter Jewish Day School.

When they first met, Obama "never knew what an Orthodox Jew was," Silverstein said. Although his Hyde Park district had a large Jewish community, there were few Orthodox Jews. "Down there (in Springfield) on the Sabbath, he didn't understand my restrictions at first but he offered to help if I needed anything. He was very respectful and curious to find out. We talked about religion a lot. He is a very religious person," he said.

Silverstein continues to support Obama and said he is disturbed that "there is lot of bad information out there, a lot of miscommunication, misinformation that has been proved false" about the senator. He said he and Obama often shared their pro-Israel feelings and that when Silverstein sponsored numerous resolutions condemning PLO bombings, Obama eagerly signed on as a co-sponsor.

"I know him," he said. "People can read what they want to in the press, but I know him personally and I can testify to" his pro-Israel views. "That's different than hitting a blog," he said. "If people don't want to listen to me they don't have to, but there's a lot of hearsay out there."

In the state Senate, he said, Obama impressed him by his ability to work with the Republicans when the Democrats were the minority party, and by his ability to "bring people together."

Rabbi Arnold Jacob Wolf, rabbi emeritus of KAM Isaiah Israel Congregation and a legendary Hyde Park liberal, is Obama's neighbor and longtime supporter. When Obama was running for the state Senate, Wolf held a fund-raiser for him and told him that "some day you will be the vice president of the United States. He said, why vice president, then he laughed. But we were all thinking this guy isn't going to stay in the state Senate."

"He moved across the street from a synagogue," KAM, he said. "He didn't have to do that."

In fact, Obama even has a Jew in his mishpocheh, albeit on his wife's side. Rabbi Capers Funnye, the spiritual leader of Beth Shalom B'nai Zaken-Agudath Achim Congregation on Chicago's South Side is Michelle Obama's cousin - her grandfather and the rabbi's mother were sister and brother.

Funnye, an enthusiastic supporter of Obama's presidential bid, said he met him before the couple married and "thought it was a good match." Later he worked with Obama when he was in the state Senate and Funnye was the director of a South Side youth services center and found him helpful and "always reachable."

"Despite some of the things that have been said, I certainly believe (Obama) has a genuine affinity for the State of Israel and the Jewish people," Rabbi Funnye said. "I'm hopeful that the broader Jewish community and the rest of the country will simply grow to understand they have nothing to fear from Obama on the State of Israel and Jewish issues in general."

His own congregation is "extremely supportive," and, he said, "throughout the black Jewish community in the United States, there's great enthusiasm and support for his candidacy. This is a historic moment in time in the history of our country." If Obama is elected president, "I think we will have achieved the ideals for which this country really stands," he said.

When Obama ran for the Senate in 2004, he had not yet visited Israel - one scheduled trip coincided with the birth of his daughter - but he has since been there twice, in 2006 and earlier this summer. Michael Kotzin, executive vice president of the Jewish Federation of Metropolitan Chicago, was along on the January, 2006 trip, part of the federation's "ongoing agenda to help public officials better understand Israel," he said. (The organization is nonpartisan.)

On the trip, "we exposed him to aspects of Israel that might not otherwise be noted, aspects where this community and the federation are actively engaged," he said. The senator discussed Ethiopian aliyah with the head of the Jewish Agency "to understand aliyah, how basic that is to Israel," Kotzin said, and visited an Israeli-Arab-Christian village, among other sites.

The visit "gave him insights into Israeli life and society that are not commonly known, and that registered for him when he gave his main speech in Chicago on Israel and the Middle East," he said. "He ended up talking about the trip he took and how he connected with aspects of the Israeli population and people and understanding the importance of Israel to our community."

Another longtime Chicago supporter, philanthropist, community leader and member of one of Chicago's Jewish royal families, Lester Crown, has known Obama since his first days in Chicago, when Minow called Crown and "said we have in our office a young man who I think is really going places, and I'd like you to meet him." Crown has been a supporter ever since; his son James heads Obama's Illinois financial campaign.

Crown said that despite Obama's "rock-star, amazing popularity," he has not changed fundamentally in all the years they have known each other. "He's the same person, even though there are tremendous pressures on him. In the last six or eight months, he hasn't gotten a swelled head. If he ever got a little bit of one, his wife would bring him back in two minutes." Michelle Obama, he said, is "absolutely brilliant."

Crown said he is "bothered" by portions of the Jewish community that express concerns, particularly, about Obama's position on Israel. "From the time I met him, the times we talked about Israel, and we talked about it several times, he has been an ardent backer of Israel's defense position, Israel's security position," he said. "He has been a proponent of the two-state solution, but only on the hopes that you will have a demilitarized peaceful Palestinian entity, which you do not have now."

Most important, Crown said, is that "knowing him long before he got into politics, I know he is completely supportive, without any question or equivocation, of Israel's security. He is only interested (in a two-state solution) if Israel's security is absolutely assured, and that was his position long before he ever went into politics. His speeches to AIPAC are not new positions, merely the vocalization of what he has always believed," he said.

The doubters
Not everyone in the Jewish community agrees.

Jewish criticism of Obama - aside from the lunatic fringe that still harps on his middle name, Hussein, and supposed Muslim "credentials" - centers on four factors: his positions on Israel, several of his foreign policy advisors, his foreign policy inexperience and his apparent willingness as president to talk to the Iranian regime. His domestic agenda is little mentioned in these debates.

Emily Soloff, area director of the nonpartisan American Jewish Committee, said that is natural since "the Jewish community is passionate about many things but particularly about Israel. People for whom Israel is the issue or the primary issue look with a magnifying glass at everything a candidate says or does. The nature of campaigning in America makes it difficult for any candidate to hold up to that kind of scrutiny."

In addition, she said, "Jews are well educated, they're readers, there are many Jewish bloggers, all of which means the amount of information that comes out about a candidate, there is tremendously more information coming out than there has been in the past."

In such an environment, "people tend to shrei (Yiddish for yell) a little bit louder to get their voices heard," she said. "In terms of this election, Obama's youth and his newness also has put him under greater scrutiny than candidates who have been in the public eye for much longer and have longer records of action as well as words."

Even former Israeli cabinet minister Natan Sharansky has expressed his concerns, telling a Shalom TV interviewer that Obama has no record on foreign policy and that an Obama presidency would be a "risk" for Israel.

Closer to home, Rabbi Victor Weissberg, a local Israel activist and chair of To Protect Our Heritage PAC, which works to promote a closer alliance between the United States and Israel, said Obama is "flawed.

"He is suddenly forced to become specific and not use a lot of gloss words like change; that isn't working for him any more," he said. "He's a very bright fellow but he's sort of a hollow man, and America really needs somebody of substance who will say what he means and won't change," he said. Obama has changed his position on offshore oil drilling and other issues, he said. "We're not dummies, we can think straight," he said. "The people who are going to lead us need to think straight too and not shoot their doggone mouths off."

"At the AIPAC conference, he was a wow." Weissberg said. "He had people standing up on their seats cheering. He has tried to say all the right things about Israel, but because he flip-flops, people are really at sixes and sevens with themselves about him. Israelis think he's not the right candidate at the right time for their situation. We were there for Pesach and almost unanimously they were in favor of (presumptive Republican nominee John) McCain."

Polls have, indeed, shown that McCain is perceived in Israel as a staunch friend of the Jewish state, and that some Israelis have been wary of Obama's statement, during a meeting with Jewish leaders in Cleveland in February, that "there is a strain within the pro-Israel community that says unless you adopt an unwavering pro-Likud approach to Israel that you're anti-Israel."

One Israeli native and longtime Chicagoan, attorney and community activist Chaya Gil, said she is "definitely worried" about an Obama presidency, for several reasons.

One is the candidate's "very close intimate relationship" with the Rev. Jeremiah Wright, his longtime pastor who gained notoriety for his inflammatory statements and is widely perceived to be anti-Semitic and anti-Israel. Obama denounced Wright earlier this year and eventually severed his ties with him and his church.

"Wright doesn't love America, he speaks against his country and he said awful things about Israel. He's no good for the Jewish community and it's not good that he is the role model for Obama," Gil said. She said that when Obama said he wasn't aware of some of Wright's positions, "he was lying. There is a character issue."

In addition, she said, Obama "said he will talk to Iran and other countries. That says to me that he will be manipulated by Iran and others."

She said she is also concerned about Obama's relationships with some advisors perceived to be anti-Israel, including Zbigniew Brzezinski, national security advisor in the Carter administration; Samantha Power, a Pulitzer Prize-winning author and lecturer at the John F. Kennedy School of Government at Harvard University, who was forced to leave the Obama campaign after making a derogatory remark about Hillary Clinton but is said to still be advising him; and Robert Malley, another Clinton administration advisor.

Gil's worries parallel those of right-wing media outlets that have recently taken aim at the advisors. Brzezinski was perceived as unfriendly to Israel during the Carter administration and, more recently, initially endorsed the views of Stephen Walt and John Mearsheimer, authors of articles and a book blaming the pro-Israel lobby for American foreign policy failures. They are anathema to most Jews. Brzezinski later said their book overstated its case.

Power has drawn the ire of Israel activists because of her stinging criticism of Israel's first Lebanon War. Malley was perceived as blaming Israel for the breakdown of the U.S.-brokered Israeli-Palestinian talks at Camp David in the summer of 2000, which he attended as a senior adviser to President Clinton.

Another frequent target of conservative bloggers has been George Soros, the billionaire philanthropist who has often been critical of Israel's policies. He has contributed to the Obama campaign.

The campaign has said that the three advisors, who are among hundreds, have a peripheral role in the campaign and do not advise Obama on Middle East policy. Soros, although he has donated to Obama, has no role in the campaign, an Obama spokesperson has said.

Gil said that Obama "has put these people on ice lately, hushed up their relationship. But they're not dead, they will pop up the minute he's elected." Israelis, she said, although they were impressed with him during his recent visit to the Jewish state, "know he is not coming in good faith."

She said that "at a time of pressure," Obama "loses his balance. He is very good when he is prepared, but once in a while he is asked a question that he does not expect, and he stutters. He would say whatever suits him."

Another Israeli-born Chicagoan, who did not want to be identified, said she is "very very uncomfortable" with Obama, "not because he is not a good man" but because "he knows very little about Israel."

She added that she doesn't believe Obama has enough experience to be able to run the country in difficult times. "If you ask me, we need a strong person who can move things around to what they used to be, a strong America, a great Israel," she said. That person is not Obama, she said.

Much of the concern over Obama's perceived anti-Israel advisors has been spurred by Richard Baehr, the chief political correspondent of the American Thinker, an online conservative magazine that Jewish Telegraphic Agency political correspondent Ron Kampeas calls "the principle redoubt of Obama-Israel skepticism."

In a recent phone conversation, Baehr, who is a member of the Republican Jewish Coalition, reiterated his concerns about Brzezinski, Power and Malley, calling them "Jimmy Carter retreads."

"If you have one or two bad apples, OK, but this team is full of them from top to bottom," Baehr said. "This is what the pro-Israel community is most nervous about."

Kampeas, the JTA correspondent, writes that "much, if not the vast majority, of the material targeting Obama's advisors is distorted and even false," and many Jewish Obama supporters agree.

One, former Chicagoan Gidon "Doni" Remba, president and co-founder of the Jewish Alliance for Change, which advocates for Obama in the Jewish community, has dedicated his Web site and newsletter to rebutting what he calls "lies that are spreading virally. A lot of Jews are getting concerned on the basis of a fear and smear campaign, and they're not looking at the facts. This is politics at its worst," he said in a recent conversation.

He said that information in the American Thinker by Baehr and Northbrook's Ed Lasky "looks like a very serious essay, but it is all based on distortions, misleading information, twisting statements, statements taken out of context and downright false information."

For instance, Remba said, Brzezinski "was not an advisor to Obama on Israel, just somebody who had a couple of conversations with him about Iraq." (The Obama campaign confirmed that neither Brzezinski, Power nor Malley advised Obama on Israel-related issues.)

"The critics ignore the fact that McCain had as much or more of a relationship with these same anti-Israel advisors. McCain said he would consider appointing seasoned hands, people like Brzezinski and James Baker (secretary of state for the first President Bush). Obama said he would never consider using Baker. People ignore that.

"The most prominent smear is that he is secretly not pro-Israel, but everything he has done and said, his entire record of years of public life, all the legislation he sponsored is pro-Israel," Remba said, accusing Obama's Jewish detractors of "bringing up very tangential things and twisting them in such as way as to arouse people's fears.

"I saw it in my own family," he said. "A lot of Jews, they are getting these e-mails. I got them from my uncle, my cousins, my family in Israel and other parts of the country. People are saying, is this true? Their fears have been aroused."

On the Israel question, some Jews see the fact that Dennis Ross, President Clinton's Middle East envoy and chief negotiator who served in both Democratic and Republican administrations, is advising Obama on Israel as a reassuring sign. Joy Malkus, research director for the Joint Action Committee for Political Affairs, a Chicago-based political action committee that supports Israel, church-state separation and reproductive choice, said members of the PAC "are comfortable with where (Obama) stands as far as Israel is concerned. Especially now that Dennis Ross has come to work for him, we have no concerns whatsoever as far as his position on Israel goes." The PAC has endorsed Obama but will not be supporting him financially because he is not accepting money from PACs.

Malkus said the PAC decided to support Obama because "McCain's voting record (on Israel) is perfect so there's no reason to think he would not be excellent on Israel but he does not meet our domestic criteria."

She said she thinks some Jews are uncomfortable with Obama because of his shorter voting record, but said that "I find it disappointing. I don't think you can just base (your vote) on the length of a voting record. He's surrounding himself with people who care about moving the process forward and having a two-state solution that works. If people have questions, they should look back at what (Dennis) Ross has written. He is quite a strong person to have in your corner." The PAC, she said, is "strongly in favor of the U.S. facilitating whatever is necessary to move the peace process forward, and that's where Obama stands on Israel."

Baehr counters such arguments from Jewish supporters. "I don't see the fact that some major scions of the Jewish community support (Obama) as meaning he is pro-Israel," he said. "In the Senate, he has behaved more traditionally and signed on to most resolutions that AIPAC would consider pro-Israel. But now and then something slips out." He cited a 2004 interview in which Obama was critical of the Israeli security wall and his more recent statement, to Cleveland Jewish leaders, that being pro-Israel doesn't mean being pro-Likud.

"I don't think an American president should decide who he should be for in the Israeli government," Baehr said. "His view of being pro-Israel doesn't mean being sympathetic to the elected leaders of the Israeli people. That's a difficult position to put yourself in."

He said another "bothersome factor" is that people in Obama's Hyde Park neighborhood said "he wasn't reticent about arguing that American policy is too pro-Israel and needed more balance. The general perception is that he was a Palestinian sympathizer. That doesn't mean he is hostile to Jews or Israel but he is not a strong Israel supporter.

"Now he's saying all the right things and voting the right way, but there are a whole bunch of little threads out there that make people nervous," Baehr said. "Nobody questioned whether McCain or Hillary (Clinton) was pro-Israel, but with Obama, there are questions."

Joel Sprayregen, the Chicago attorney and Israel activist, said that he worries about Obama's lack of experience, his foreign policy advisors, and "the fact that he was so wrong on the surge in Iraq," which Obama opposed. Many Americans believe that the added troop deployment known as the surge has made Iraq safer.

Sprayregen said that while he is encouraged that so many thoughtful and committed Jews are in Obama's camp, he believes that "Jews still tend to vote Democratic in knee-jerk fashion thinking they're still voting for FDR's New Deal. Too many Jews do not take into account the fact that President Bush has been enormously supportive of Israel. I think we have no better guide than (Connecticut senator) Joe Lieberman, a true liberal on domestic issues, as to which of his senatorial colleagues is more qualified to be commander-in-chief." Lieberman is supporting McCain.

The supporters
If Obama has a way to go to garner solid Jewish support in other parts of the country, in Chicago it seems solid and growing.

Some of his champions are longtime friends like Rabbi Wolf of KAM, who worries that Jews who don't know Obama think of him as "remote." "It may be the Muslim element in his background, it may be that he's black. Jews are like everybody else, they have some questions about a black president," Wolf said.

But he may understand Obama's background better than most. When people ask him if Obama is "tough enough," he says, "When you come up in Chicago politics, you better be tough."

He believes Obama is "very cautious. Whenever we talked about issues, I would always be more radical than he. He listened a lot but said very little. He'll listen and listen and you don't always know what he thinks. He knows as much as any of us about the Middle East, and he hasn't said a word about the Palestinians that President Bush hasn't already said."

Many Jews may have been more friendly to Hillary Clinton, he said, because "she is more of a known quantity. You know, the Jews can't stand not to worry. Nobody (in politics) is against Israel, they can't afford to be, why should they be? He knows more than most people do about the (Middle East) situation, but he's going to go very cautiously and not do anything that shakes up the Jewish community. I'm not sure I agree with that, but that's what's going to happen."

He would advise Obama to "make his Jewish supporters more visible. He could mention them, put them forward, be proud of the Jewish community's support."

The rabbi's own feeling is that Obama is "sort of Jewish in a way. His overachieving is Jewish, his intellectualism is Jewish, even his charisma has a Jewish side. Maybe I feel it more strongly than others do, but I feel like he's one of us.

"I like McCain too, but he ain't one of us," he added.

One of Obama's most ardent Chicago supporters is Jack S. Levin, an attorney practicing international law and a longtime community activist who said he is not a Democrat but an independent who "supports candidates I think are superior. I am not a down-the-line Democrat or Republican and I don't support mediocre candidates. I support Barack because I think he would be best for our country," he said.

Levin has known Obama for more than 15 years, since Levin served on the Harvard Law School Visiting Committee and met the young law student. "Members of the Visiting Committee don't typically take much note of students, but he was outstanding, an absolutely standout student," he said.

He became reacquainted with Obama when he served in the Illinois Senate and sponsored legislation that would help to create jobs by bringing more private equity and venture capital to the state, one of Levin's areas of expertise. He continued to be so impressed with Obama that now he serves on his campaign finance, tax policy, Jewish community and Middle East committees.

He calls Obama "a brilliant, far-thinking, organized, thoughtful super kind of person. He has wonderful thoughts and ideas and he soaks up experiences in moments that it would take other people years to get. He is jumping in knowledge year by year. His grasp of ideas and concepts and ability to understand what other people are thinking is wonderful."

Having served in the office of the Solicitor General in Washington, Levin said he has many friends who have worked in the White House, and believes that "the most important attribute of a president is the ability to think, reason, absorb information and make decisions when there is conflicting advice, and Obama is just terrific at that.

"You can give all the speeches you want to about how you would handle issues, but (as president) 100 times a day things cross your desk that you had never thought of, and (a president needs) a great ability to think and grasp, to do the right thing, to analyze the conflicting advice being received and work it out and say, this is the course we should take.

"No one is as good as Obama at hearing conflicting views, thoughts, advice and ideas, at looking at a complex problem and implementing solutions," he said.

Levin said he does much international travel and what those trips have shown him is that "our country has turned into a pariah on the world stage. For the last few years, our leaders have not been people who could interrelate well with other world leaders. We are reviled, not respected."

Obama, he said, "is going to be the closest there is to someone who is able to restore some modicum of respect internationally."

Levin said he has worked with Obama for years on many issues and that the senator has always been a strong supporter of Israel.

As for Jewish community support, he said that "here in Chicago, people know him better than other places, and the vast majority of the Jewish leadership of Chicago support him wholeheartedly. We know he would be best for Israel and for the United States. I think it is an issue of Obama getting better known in Florida, New York and other places where the Jewish community hasn't yet had the opportunity to touch hands with him and realize how wise and capable he is and how strongly he supports Israel."

Why the distrust?
A number of Obama's Jewish supporters have set about figuring out why some Jews - especially in other states - are distrustful of him. Abner Mikva said that the "unknown" factor is strong. Jews "were distrustful of (John) Kerry, (Al) Gore, (Bill) Clinton before he ran, Jimmy Carter, Lyndon Johnson. It goes all the way back. The first time I was campaigning for John F. Kennedy, I stopped at somebody's door, a Jewish voter, and he said, you know he's an anti-Semite. His father was, so he must be."

Another factor, Mikva said, is one that "always bothers and embarrasses me about my co-religionists. A piece of our community still thinks of African Americans as schvartzes - somehow not sufficiently educated or smart enough to occupy the White House. All I can say to that is, they're wrong. I think (Obama) will turn out to be one of the greatest presidents we've ever had."

He said he once tried to explain to Obama why some parts of the Jewish community didn't support him. "I said, Barack, it wouldn't matter if your name was Sholem Aleichem, there's some segments of the Jewish community you wouldn't get. He said, well, my name is Baruch Obama." (During his 2004 campaign, Obama, visiting a Jewish center for the aged in Boston, discussed the etymological relationship of his first name, which means "blessed" in Swahili, to its Hebrew counterpart, Baruch.)

On the racial issue, Remba, the president of the Jewish Alliance for Change, agreed that "some people from an older generation have a very different experience in their lives with black Americans than people even in their 40s and 50s. Middle-aged and younger people have grown up in integrated America and are very comfortable and used to working with blacks, knowing them as friends and neighbors, viewing them in a way that race doesn't matter."

To some people, including Jews, who grew up in an older era, "your whole experience of black people is they come from the wrong side of the tracks, they're associated with crime, with danger, they're poor, gang related. If your whole experience of black people is the South Side of Chicago - not Hyde Park - you would have a sort of fearful set of associations."

He said he believes some "holdover of these associations and biases" may be in play with Obama's candidacy, but many Jews may be able to overcome it. "The vast majority of Jews, including older Jews, can judge Obama as an individual, an American, someone who has been so close to so many people in the Jewish community of Chicago for so many years. When they get to see who he is, I hope they'll put aside their fears," he said.

Those fears have been stoked by e-mails to pro-Israel activists warning that if Obama is elected, Revs. Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton will have prominent places in his administration, as well as a cartoon published earlier this year in the Israeli newspaper Maariv showing Obama painting the White House black.

Still most of Obama's Jewish supporters believe it is the Israel issue, not racial politics, that may be keeping some Jews from endorsing him. Alan Solow, a Chicago attorney, community leader and former chair of the Jewish Community Relations Council who has known Obama for many years, said he would like to put those fears to rest.

He has known Obama since both lived in Hyde Park and began actively supporting him during his U.S. Senate bid. "Working on his behalf, I had the opportunity to have many discussions with him on a wide range of issues," he said. "I have always been delighted with the way he approaches problems and I've become more impressed as time has gone on."

On the Israel question, Solow said Obama's entire public policy approach, statements and votes "all consistently point to a position that is very helpful to strengthening the relationship between the U.S. and Israel. There isn't one single action or vote that anyone can point to that would cast any doubt on what his position would be," he said.

Beyond foreign policy, Solow said, "I think his positions are much more consistent with the vast majority of the Jewish community - the right to choose, separation of church and state, social justice issues generally. The Jewish community ought to be looking at those issues as well." He said that although many Jews don't feel they know Obama as well as they do Hillary Clinton or John McCain, he has a "long consistent record" of pro-Israel support. "People should look at what his record is and not say, we still don't know," he said.

On the question of inexperience, Obama's old friend Ira Silverstein said, "Look, McCain has been around longer, but we've had President Bush in there and he was a governor, the head of a major league baseball team, and look at our economy. I've seen (Obama) work in the Senate. I've seen him. He can bring people together. I know him personally. Leadership? I can testify to it."

Another old friend, Rabbi Wolf, gives another kind of testimony. Obama, he says, is "embedded in the Jewish world."

















© Chicago Jewish News 2005 Contact Chicago Jewish News Design by jesterjames Code by Remington Associates, Ltd.



http://chicagojewishnews.com/story.htm?sid=1&id=252218