Wednesday, May 4, 2016

Zion Chocolatier Max Brenner takes on China ציון כובש את סין



Israeli chocolatier Max Brenner opened its first branch in China on Sunday, continuing its Asian expansion. The Beijing branch, located at THE PLACE mall in the city’s financial district, is the latest of 65 worldwide storefronts.

Last week the company opened the doors of its fifth Japanese branch, near Tokyo Disneyland.

Max Brenner was founded in 1996 and is currently owned by the Strauss Group. The majority of its global branches including the Chinese addition are operated as local franchises. The Chinese franchisee is MAAN COFFEE, which owns more than 100 restaurants and coffee shops in the country’s central cities; it is expected to launch additional branches of Max Brenner in the upcoming year.

The majority of Max Brenner branches are in Australia, where the chain operates 41 stores. The US hosts five branches, the same number as Japan though all five of the latter opened within a year. The chocolatier has two branches in Russia, one in Singapore, and a few in South Korea where a new branch will open in the coming weeks.

Israel is home to eight branches, with two opening in the past year: in Tel Aviv’s Sarona Market and in Petah Tikva.

The Beijing branch carries the same stylistic branding as the rest of the chain. As in its other branches, the Chinese store will offer Max Brenner products produced in the company’s Beit Shemesh plant and exported worldwide. The menu items are similar across the line, as are the prices, though the local franchises are given some leeway.

In 2015, Max Brenner drummed up NIS 109 million in global revenue, in comparison to NIS 111 million the previous year.

Max Brenner Chairman and Strauss EVP Michael Avner said: “Our expansion into China alongside the success of our operations in Japan, Korea, and Australia makes East Asia and Australia our primary growth engine. The penetration into additional countries, and growth in existing states, is a stamp of approval for the exceptional quality of the chain and its products on a national and international level.”

Caroline B. Glick, The Israeli Solution: A One-State Plan for. Peace in the Middle East, New York: Crown Forum




Caroline B. Glick, The Israeli Solution: A One-State Plan for. Peace in the Middle East, New York: Crown Forum

The Israeli Solution is a  radical break with current thinking that has a chance to completely change the conversation for the betterment of Israel and America…Glick proposes that given an enemy that has been dedicated to nothing less than the annihilation of Israel, in order to defend its borders and continue to flourish, Israel must claim its sovereignty over Judea and Samaria and grant all Palestinians, subject to Israeli law, with permanent residency and the ability to apply for full citizenship…Every person who cares about the fate of the West, regardless of political orientation, will gain something from reading Glick’s lucid, thoroughly researched and thought-provoking book


The Israel Solution by Caroline C. Glick is a manifesto that exposes the flaws in the two-state policy of the United States toward Israel and the Palestinians and offers a direct and powerful call for Israeli sovereignty in the region.


 The reigning consensus in elite and academic circles is that the United States must seek to resolve the Palestinians' conflict with Israel by implementing the so-called two-state solution. Establishing a Palestinian state, so the thinking goes, would be a panacea for all the region's ills. It would end the Arab world's conflict with Israel, because the reason the Arab world is anti-Israel is that there is no Palestinian state. It would also nearly erase the principal cause of the violent extremism in the rest of the Middle East. In a time when American politics are marked by partisan gridlock, the two-state solution stands out for its ability to attract supporters from both sides of the ideological divide. But the great irony is that it is one of the most irrational and failed policies the United States has ever adopted. 


Between 1970 and 2013, the United States presented nine different peace plans for Israel and the Palestinians, and for the past twenty years, the two state solution has been the centerpiece of U.S. Middle East policy. But despite this laser focus, American efforts to implement a two-state peace deal have failed--and with each new attempt, the Middle East has become less stable, more violent, more radicalized, and more inimical to democratic values and interests. 


In The Israeli Solution, Caroline Glick, a Senior Contributing Editor to the Jerusalem Post, examines the history and misconceptions behind the two-state policy, most notably:


  • The huge errors made in counting the actual numbers of Jews and Arabs in the region. The 1997 Palestinian Census, upon which most two-state policy is based, wildly exaggerated the numbers of Palestinians living in the West Bank and Gaza.
  • Neglect of the long history of Palestinian anti-Semitism, refusal to negotiate in good faith, terrorism, and denial of Israel's right to exist. - Disregard for Israel's stronger claims to territorial sovereignty under international law, as well as the long history of Jewish presence in the region.
  • Indifference to polling data that shows the Palestinian people admire Israeli society and governance. 


Despite a half-century of domestic and international terrorism, anti-semitism, and military attacks from regional neighbors who reject its right to exist, Israel has thrived as the Middle East's lone democracy. After a century spent chasing a two-state policy that hasn't brought the Israelis and Palestinians any closer to peace, The Israeli Solution offers an alternative path to stability in the Middle East based on Israeli sovereignty over Judea and Samaria


Glick's solution to the disputed territories of Judea and Samaria (often improperly called “the West Bank”) is to follow actions taken by Prime Minister Begin who placed the Golan Heights and Jerusalem under Israeli law in the 1980’s.  Although technically those areas were not annexed to Israel, placing them under Israeli law was a de facto annexation.  They were no longer administered by the military.   


Palestinian Arabs, and many Western journalists seem to think that Israeli military presence means territories are “occupied,” but it does not.  The military is there to protect Israeli interests while the disputed territories are engaged in ‘dispute resolution’ with interested parties.  Once Israeli law is put into effect, Israel would be unilaterally affirming the end of ‘dispute’ and settling the question of control.


With passion and care, the author reviews the pros and cons of taking such a step.  She expresses a great deal of concern about the European reaction to such a move.  Also, there would certainly be fallout from increasing the number of Arab permanent residents and/or citizens as part of Israeli demographics.  Yet, this big step will give relief from the cul-de-sac Israel now finds itself in, where she endlessly negotiates for a two-state solution that the Palestinian Arabs do not want.  


The endgame for Mahmoud Abbas is the destruction of Israel.

The Israeli Solution projects an alternative to the dangerous gamesmanship and perpetual war we have witnessed in the quest for a so-called two state solution.  Yet, is it really wise to try to absorb a fiendish population – people mired in rage, mental instability, and rigid ideology – into one’s country?  Their co-Arabs have kicked them out of three different countries (Jordan, Lebanon, and Kuwait), so it seems unlikely they can be absorbed, even on a gradual basis, into the legal structure and fabric of Israeli society.


The expulsion of the Palestinian Arabs from Judea and Samaria, although not suggested in Glick's book, would be much more effective in bringing peace to Israel.  Yet, before doing so, an aggressive public relations campaign against the Palestinian Arabs is needed to counteract Arab and Soviet-era propaganda about Israel.  This campaign would put the moral onus where it belongs – on the attitudes, beliefs, and behavior of the Arabs, who were and still remain, an implacable enemy.


Tuesday, May 3, 2016

Alter Egos: Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, and the Twilight Struggle Over American Power,” by Mark Landler, Random House



Alter Egos: Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, and the Twilight Struggle Over American Power,” by Mark Landler, Random House
A new book about the relationship between U.S. President Barack Obama and Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton paints her as politically much closer to Israel’s skeptical view than the Obama administration which she served, even claiming she was swayed by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu over the lifting of sanctions after she left the State Department.
The New York Times published an excerpt of the volume called “Alter Egos: Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, and the Twilight Struggle Over American Power,” by Mark Landler, on Monday, which show her as much more ambivalent than President Barack Obama was through the process of negotiations.
Clinton has since claimed a share of credit for the deal and yet from the outset her skepticism has been plain to see, the article said.
According to the book, during the negotiations, Clinton was swayed by many in Congress, as well as by Netanyahu, who argued Iran was so desperate for a deal that tightening the vise would have extracted better terms, the newspaper said.
“She would have squeezed them again,” a person who has worked with her for several years said, “and the only debate is what they would have done.”
Obama feared then though that ratcheting up the pressure would undercut Rohani, unravel the sanctions coalition and doom his diplomatic efforts. He persuaded the Senate to hold off on new sanctions.
Clinton never made her differences with Obama public, and she has publicly endorsed his nuclear deal, though with more caveats than her former boss, the newspaper said.
“It’s not enough just to say yes to this deal,” Clinton said in October. “We have to say, ‘Yes, and.’ Yes, and we will enforce it with vigor and vigilance. Yes, and we will embed it in a broader strategy to confront Iran’s bad behavior in the region. Yes, and we will begin from Day 1 to set the conditions so Iran knows it will never be able to get a nuclear weapon.”
Other less remembered remarks by Clinton about Iran include how during the 2008 presidential campaign she famously ridiculed Obama’s pledge to hold talks with Iran’s leaders.
She also warned at that time that if Iran ever launched a nuclear strike on Israel, the United States would “totally obliterate” it, the article said.
Karim Sadjadpour, an expert on Iran at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, quoted by the Times, said that Obama and Clinton “shared the same tactic, which was engagement, but they envisioned different endgames.”
”Clinton had a more cynical view of the endgame,” Sadjadpour said. “‘We’re going to engage them not because we think they’re going to reciprocate, but because when they rebuff us, it will expose the fact that the problem lies in Tehran, and not in Washington.’”

Israel Book Review: The Hangover: The Conservatives' Road to Recovery ...

Israel Book Review: The Hangover: The Conservatives' Road to Recovery ...: The Hangover: The Conservatives' Road to Recovery by R.Emmett Tyrell,Thomas Nelson Inc Although Sam Tanenhaus, editor of the New York ...

Israel Book Review: The Hangover: The Conservatives' Road to Recovery ...

Israel Book Review: The Hangover: The Conservatives' Road to Recovery ...: The Hangover: The Conservatives' Road to Recovery by R.Emmett Tyrell,Thomas Nelson Inc Although Sam Tanenhaus, editor of the New York ...

The Hangover: The Conservatives' Road to Recovery by R.Emmett Tyrell,Jr by Herbert I. London, Thomas Nelson Inc

The Hangover: The Conservatives' Road to Recovery by R.Emmett Tyrell,Thomas Nelson Inc

Although Sam Tanenhaus, editor of the New York Times Book Review, argued the Conservative movement is "dead" and buried, the redoubtable R. Emmett Tyrrell in his latest book After The Hangover tells us that reports of conservatism's death are greatly exaggerated. With his usual panache, Mr. Tyrrell offers a remarkable distillation of conservative history and, most significantly, how it is unfolding in the United States circa 2010.


Sitting on his perch at The American Spectator, Tyrrell has offered a valuable critique of both contemporary liberalism and conservatism, their wisdom and their failures. In what can only be described as a tour de force, Tyrrell chronicles the flow of contemporary politics from the Republican success in the '94 congressional elections to the defeat in the 2008 presidential election.

Despite an inclination to embrace conservative ideas, and what Tyrrell calls the conservative "temperament," he includes a scorching indictment of conservation as often "pinched by a smallness that has set the movement back and encouraged intramural squabbling."

Without the heavy-handed club that conservatives sometimes employ to attack the media, Tyrrell notes that amusing gaffs by President Obama and Vice President Biden are given scant attention by members of the press.. While Tyrrell recognizes the obvious bias, he does not dwell on it; what he does dwell on is the difference between the "elites" and the man and woman in the street. He recalls with nostalgia a time when there was genuine solidarity among conservatives, the height of what might be called the William F. Buckley era and the founding of the National Review.

owever, the political ascendency of conservatism in the 1950's and '60's occurred in large part because the movement was small, united and virtually powerless. Fragmentation insinuated itself into conservatism with the political success of the Reagan years. At that point YAF conservatives saw themselves as the genuine article as opposed to the arriviste neo-cons and the paleos of yesteryear. Liberals, as Tyrrell points out, have "silenced disagreement," a conspicuous difference from conservatives. Yet even after Obama's election, roughly twice as many Americans claim to be conservative as opposed to liberal, a legacy presumably of the first principles on which conservatism was founded. Nonetheless it is important to note, that many, if not most, of these conservatives are not registered Republicans.

What appears to enjoin liberal loyalty is a general cultural understanding ratified by moral sentiment, etiquette and reflexive cues. "Bush lied," "McCarthy destroyed civil liberties," "trickle down economic theory adversely affects the poor," are homilies that drip from liberals without the slightest regard for historical accuracy or context. Here is a herd of "independent thinkers" incapable of nuanced thought. These views, sculpted into the national culture through textbooks such as Howard Zinn's A Peoples History of the United States, represent the conservative challenge for the future -- what Tyrrell describes as overcoming "Kultursmog."

A new generation of conservatives face a challenge their predecessors did not need to consider. Fifty years ago the ideas that threatened America came from outside our borders; now the threat is from within: the servants of a command economy are attempting to impose a gigantic government on every American. They do so with the conviction this helps the poor and downtrodden, but as conservatives understand, dividing the economy does not multiply the wealth.

It is difficult to convince youthful idealists that the road to serfdom (nod to Hayek) is paved with good intentions. The conservative attitude is predicated on individualism and anti-utopianism, both of which ideas do not awaken youthful enthusiasm. As the ship of state moves relentlessly down an ocean of icebergs, however, there will be many looking for a helmsman who can provide a different direction. They need look no further than After The Hangover. R. Emmett Tyrrell has outlined a remarkably sensible agenda for the future with his policy prescriptions, particularly his reassertion of American exceptionalism. At a time when "declinists" are on the rise, it is refreshing to read that with all our imperfections, the United States is still the beacon of hope for mankind.

As his conclusion, Tyrrell notes the nation's political center is shaped by conservatism. This is true, but there is a major task ahead in reclaiming the culture from radical elitists who dominate it. That is the mission this book explores and the reason it should be read.

Monday, May 2, 2016


A Descriptive Catalogue of the Medieval Manuscripts at Corpus Christi College, Oxford: Hebrew Manuscripts Hardcover – November 15, 2015
by Peter E. Pormann (Editor) Boydell & Brewer

Corpus Christi College was founded at a time when universities were putting considerable effort into providing better facilities for the study of Greek and Hebrew. Bishop Richard Fox, the founder of Corpus Christi, and John Claymond, the college's first President, therefore ensured that the library should be adequately stocked with the necessary printed books and manuscripts. 
In a famous letter to Claymond in June 1519, Erasmus predicted a great future for the College and alluded to its well-stocked library. Although few in number, the College's Hebrew manuscripts are outstanding in rarity and value. Seven Hebrew manuscripts donated by Claymond were probably produced in Oxford in the thirteenth century. They include texts from the Hebrew Bible - the Tanakh - presented in parallel Hebrew and Latin versions, often with a literal translation into Latin written directly above the Hebrew text. It is thought that the manuscripts were the product of co-operation between Jewish and Christian scholars, and were used by non-Jews to learn Hebrew and understand the primary texts of a shared scriptural tradition. In addition to the Claymond bequest, the collection contains a second, nearly complete copy of Rashi's commentaries, and an Ashkenazi prayer book both produced in northern Europe in the twelfth century. The prayer book is one of the oldest surviving prayer books produced in Europe. It later came into the possession of a Sephardic Jew who settled in England, and who used some of its blank pages to record business. He did this in Judaeo-Arabic (Arabic written in Hebrew letters). This document is the only one written in this language in England during the Middle Ages to survive. Taken together, the Corpus collection forms one of the most important collections of Anglo-Jewish manuscripts in the world.