Justice Joubran, Arabs and Haredim in Israel: Loyalty, Hatikvah and Universal Conscription?

(Israeli Supreme Court Justice Salim Joubran - from Haaretz)

Justice Asher Grunis was sworn in on Tuesday as the new President (Chief Justice) of the Israeli Supreme Court. Among a range of impressive qualifications, Justice Grunis also has a Toronto connection - a PhD from York University. Justice Grunis replaces Justice Dorit Beinisch, who was the first woman to hold the post of President of Israel's highest court.

The induction ceremony was held at the residence of Israeli President Shimon Peres. Along with a number of speeches, the Israeli national anthem, Hatikvah ("the Hope") was performed and the panel of Israeli Supreme Court judges sang along. That is, with the exception of Arab Justice Salim Joubran. Justice Joubran apparently has idealogical objections to singing Israel's anthem. His public non-participation has touched off a debate in some circles about the level of loyalty to the State of Israel that ought to be required for a justice of the Supreme Court.

On one level, the issue that has been raised related to "Hatikvah." The Israeli national anthem speaks of the yearning of the Jewish soul to return to the Jewish homeland, the land from which the Jewish people were exiled. The anthem concludes with the dream of being a "free nation, in our land, the land of Zion, Jeruslem." The anthem is glorious and it captures the essence of the Zionist project - to build a Jewish homeland in which the Jewish people can live as a nation. For Israel, as a Jewish state, the anthem is appropriate and relevant.

But for Israel as a democratic State, which protects the rights of all citizens to live in the country, to practice their religious beliefs and to maintain their own national, cultural or ethnic identities and aspirations, it is understandable that Arab citizens would refuse to sing this particular anthem. I really don't see a problem with that. Other countries have equally offensive anthems. In Canada, the French version of the national anthem includes the line "they know how to carry the cross," suggesting that only Christians are true citizens. I cringe every time I hear it and would certainly refuse to sing it publicly at this type of induction ceremony, but I really don't believe that would be used as a litmus test to measure one's commitment to the country. In fact, in a country like Canada, it is particulary obnoxious because Canada purports to treat all Canadians equally, regardless of religious affiliation. Israel declares openly that it is a Jewish and democratic State, so there is a difference.

On the other hand, the issue of "loyalty" does have other aspects to it and is not confined to the question of whether or not a Supreme Court Judge should publicly sing Hatikvah. Israeli Jews are subject to universal conscription and must serve in the Israeli army or perform national service. There are currently exemptions to this requirement. Ultra-religious Jews, who are studying full-time in Yeshivas are exempt, for the time being. I have written about this in other blogs. Arab Israelis are also exempt, though Druze Israelis serve in the army. Overall, this means that approximately 75% of Israeli citizens of draft age are now eligible to be conscripted with the remainder exempt. Israeli army service can greatly affect a person's future employability with many employers placing a great deal of weight on the type of military service that a candidate performed.

The issue of military service is quite different than that of the public singing of Israel's national anthem. Here, changes should be made. If Israel, as a democracy, takes steps to ensure that rights and freedoms and all types of employment are open to all citizens, then all citizens should share the responsibility of protecting the State.

Steps are already being taken to conscript the Ultra-Religious Jews. This will assist the State of Israel and it will also improve the post-army employability of these Haredim. There may still be an exemption for a very small number of exceptional students, who are studying full-time in Yeshivas, as envisioned by Israel's founding Prime Minister David Ben-Gurion. However, the vast majority of Haredim should be expected to perform military or national service.

With respect to Israel's Arab population, this is another group that should also be expected to perform military or national service. Israel's Arabs work in Israel in every conceivable profession, from blue collar jobs to working as professors, judges, doctors and lawyers. Surely, as part of "equality," military or national service is a reasonable requirement in a country in which universal conscription is a necessity and a reality.

Israel's politicians and military leaders will need to take steps to ensure that the army or the national service can and will accomodate any unique needs of Arab conscripts, just as they have begun to take steps to ensure that Ultra-Religious soldiers can be properly integrated. They will also have to sort out security and loyalty issues. The flip side is that Israel's Arab minority population will also have to recognize that there is a price to be paid for living in the only truly free and democratic country in the Middle East. They should be prepared to participate in protecting that privilege. Ultimately, an army with full universal conscription in Israeli is likely to lead to better integration and understanding between diverent religious and ethnic groups.

If Israel does implement truly universal military or national service, it will then make sense to ask candidates for high level positions, including Supreme Court positions, about their past military or national service. They will probably still not be required to publicly sing "Hatikvah" but it seems entirely reasonable to expect that a Supreme Court judge would have performed military or national service in a country with universal conscription, provided that minority rights are fully protected.

Blowing Winds in Israel - of Different Kinds

There are lots of different kinds of winds blowing these days in Israel and the rest of the Middle East.

At the most literal level, Israel is currently enjoying wind gusts of between 40 and 60 km per hour. Blowing winds in Ra'anana just a few moments ago were measured in the range of 50 km an hour. Coupled with on and off rain, it's quite the outdoor experience. Snow is expected to arrive today or tomorrow in Israel's northern-most regions.

Friendlier winds blew in from California just a couple of days ago. At the Academy Award ceremonies on Sunday night, the Israeli director and two of the stars of the film "Footnote," which had been nominated for an Oscar, met with the Iranian delegation, which was there on behalf of the Oscar winning film, "The Separation." Unfortunately, it is not that often these days that Iranian and Israeli delegations have the chance to meet anywhere under cordial conditions. For example, on July 25, 2011, an Iranian swimmer backed out of a swim meet rather than swim in a 100 metre breast stroke race in which an Israeli swimmer was competing. There are many other examples. Perhaps filmmakers see themselves as more independent than professional athletes. In any case, as reported in Haaretz, the Israeli filmmakers were quite happy to have had the opportunity to chat with their Iranian counterparts and the feeling seems to have been mutual.

Different types of winds are headed towards Washington next week as Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu sets off to meet with President Obama to discuss Iran and its nuclear threats against Israel. On this issue, information of every kind is swirling around, ranging from rumours of an imminent Israeli attack on Iran's nuclear facilities to alleged reports from Wikileaks that Israel was already involved in extensive covert operations to destroy Iranian facilities on the ground. These winds could soon develop into a much bigger storm though that remains to be seen.

There were some very foul smelling winds in Hebron over the weekend. Apparently a riot broke out while a funeral was taking place. Clashes occurred between Palestinians and Israelis, which resulted in the IDF using "the skunk" to disperse the crowd. "The skunk" is a non-lethal, foul smelling substance that Israeli forces have been using for a couple of years now to disperse demonstrators in certain situations. Given the variety of legal proceedings that some acting and former Israeli politicians have faced, the weapon may well have been developed accidentally by capturing the essence of some inappropriate Ministerial activity...but let's not go there.

Finally, the lethal and very hot winds of Syria have, fortunately, not reached Israel despite the close proximity between the two countries. While Syrian leader Bashar Al-Assad continues to use deadly force against rebel forces (primarily Sunni Muslims, according to a recent article in the New York Times) and anyone else who might be in the way, the world continues to sit quietly, even in the face of the apparent killing of large numbers of civilians. While the U.S. has raised some concerns and that very credible world body, the UN Human Rights Council, has also thrown its voice into the mix, the world response to Assad to this point appears to be nothing but a puff of smoke. This too could turn into a much larger fire that could spread to Iraq and other neighbouring countries given the sectarian nature of much of the fighting. For now, Israel's public engagement in this matter has been very limited.

Overall, while there is usually quite a bit of hot air blowing around in the Middle East, it is not always accompanied by such of variety of winds. But I suppose that is what keeps life interesting.

Buses in Tel-Aviv? Ultra-Orthodox to go to the Army? More on Secular-Religious Tensions in Israel

On February 13, 2012, I wrote about some issues of religious-secular tension in Israel. There have been some further developments and I thought I would comment.

Last week, the Tel-Aviv Municipal Council voted 13-7 to ask the Israeli Ministry of Transportation to permit buses to run in Tel-Aviv on Shabbat (Saturday). As I have discussed, buses do not run in most of Israel on Shabbat, which is the national day of rest. There are some exceptions. For example, Haifa, one of Israel's largest cities, does have bus service on Shabbat. At this point, the Ministry of Transportation has indicated that it will refuse the request and will maintain the "Status Quo."

The "Status Quo" in Israel denotes the agreement entered into between religious and non-religious parties at the time of the founding of the State of Israel. The then-future founding Prime Minister of Israel, David Ben Gurion, wrote a letter in which he set out certain principles that the State of Israel would follow. Though the State would be democratic and would provide for freedom of thought and expression, it would recognize certain religious principles that would form part of the national law of the fledgling state. Included in this "Status Quo" was the idea that Shabbat would be a national day of rest and that all public institutions would have Kosher kitchens.

There was also an agreement that a certain number of highly observant Ultra-Orthdox Jews would be exempt from military service so that they could devote their full time and attention to furthering their religious studies. It was anticipated that this would be a very small number of students and would therefore be tolerable for the State to allow this exception to an otherwise universal system of military conscription.

Recently, this "Status Quo" has come under fire in different ways. Secular Israelis have perceived an increasing level of Ultra-Orthodox religious observance in certain public areas. For example, there has been a proliferation of gender-segregated buses (particularly in Jerusalem), Ultra-Orthdox opposition to women singing in the army (something women have done, without complaint, since the Israeli army began), other issues of the exclusion of women in billboard advertising, public state-sanctioned ceremonies and other fora. This attempt to set increasingly stringent boundaries by certain Ultra-Orthodox groups has led to a series of public protests, many of which have been organized by the "Yisrael Hofshit" ("Be Free Israel") Movement.

Perhaps, partially in response to these perceived attacks on the Status Quo by Ultra-Orthodox and some Orthodox Israelis, secular Israelis have felt emboldened to raise their own concerns about the Status Quo and to take steps to challenge it. One area of such concern has been the issue of public transportation, particularly in the Tel-Aviv area. As members of the Tel-Aviv Municipal Council have suggested, Tel-Aviv does not generally bar people from driving on Shabbat nor does it prevent taxis from running or even public passenger mini-buses. It is only large buses and trains that do not run. Mayor Ron Huldai and those who support him have argued that it is unfair that those who have the money to own a car or pay for a cab are free to do whatever they want on Shabbat whereas those who cannot afford car or cab fare, particularly students, soldiers and seniors, but including many other Tel-Aviv residents as well, are all "grounded" each Shabbat. Those who oppose the Tel-Aviv Municipality's request for Shabbat bus service have argued in favour of the Status Quo which has been in existence now for more than 60 years. They argue that it will further erode the Jewish character of the State and will commercialize Shabbat and negatively impact the quality of life in Israel.

The other "Status Quo" issue that is being publicly debated is the issue of military exemption for Ultra-Religious Israelis. A few weeks ago, the Supreme Court of Israel ruled that the exemption is now unconstitutional and cannot be continued. Israel's High Court held that the law created inequality in Israel. An article in Haaretz on February 23, 2012 noted that there now 62,000 Ultra-Orthodox Israelis taking advantage of the Tal Law to avoid military service. Israel's Supreme Court held by a 6-3 majority that this situation could not continue.

The move to eliminate, wholly or partially, the exemption from military service for Ultra-Orthodox and the movement to institute public transportation in many other areas of Israel are both signs that the long standing Status Quo is being challenged. There are certainly other challenges on the horizon including the challenge to the existing system whereby Jewish weddings, burials, conversions and ritual circumcisions are all within the exclusive jurisdiction of the Israeli Orthodox Rabbinical authorities.

All of these challenges are related to the issue of where to draw the line between democracy and freedom and the Jewish character of the State of Israel. These issues are likely to lead to continued considerable debate in the future as religious and secular Israelis seek to find a manageable compromise that will be workable for both sides.

Son of Hamas by Mosab Hassan Yousef - A Review

Mosab Hassan Yousef is a former Hamas member who began working for Israel while living in Ramallah. He eventually converted to Christianity and left Israel to seek political asylum in the United States. He is now living in California.

Yousef's book Son of Hamas is an autobiographical account of his life growing up in Ramallah. Yousef's father, Sheikh Hassan Yousef, was one of the founders of Hamas. Yousef, the oldest child, with five brothers and three sisters, traces his life growing up in Ramallah. He provides a detailed discussion of a very observant Muslim lifestyle in which he was raised. His book, written years after these events, is highly critical of Islam and, in particular, as Yousef sees it, of the propensity for violence that is taught and expected of children, even from a very young age.

Arrested as early as age 10 by Israelis for throwing rocks at settlers, Yousef became increasingly radicalized as he grew older. He was arrested by age 18 after purchasing guns that he intended to use in some type of operation against Israelis. During the first part of the book, he is highly critical of Israel and of the manner in which Israel treated his community. He justifies his early activities and details his arrest and alleged abuse at the hands of Israeli soldiers and officials.

As the book progresses, Yousef details the increasingly violent and dangerous escalation of the conflict between Israel and the Palestinians between 1986 and 1997. He begins to question some of the Palestinian tactics and is particularly upset at the Palestinian decision to support Iraq after it invaded Kuwait in 1990. He details the corruption and moral bankruptcy of the PLO leadership and Arafat and describes how Arafat, in particular, was concerned more with lining his pockets than of advancing the cause of the Palestinians. He writes about the PLO's covert but direct support for terrorist attacks against Israel, even while the PLO was publicly renouncing violence. And he describes the horrific Hamas suicide bombing attacks that were carried out in Israel, killing large groups of civilians.

Yousef's father was in and out of Israeli prisons for his own role in inciting or participating in terrorist activities. Yousef himself was a senior member of Hamas. Yousef claims that he began to have doubts about Islam and about Hamas as he watched Hamas carry out these horrible attacks against civilians. He was also troubled by Hamas' brutal vigilante justice against any perceived traitors, many of whom were often innocent.

Yousef claims that in 1997, he agreed to work for the Shin Bet, and become an informant. Known secretly as the "Green Prince," Yousef details how he provided information to Israel that led to the prevention of suicide bombings and assassination attempts. He claims that he provided information to Israelis only if they agreed to arrest rather than kill those about whom he provided information. According to Yousef's account, he seems to have been instrumental in almost every single Israeli counter-terrorism operation between 1997 and 2005. One gets the sense that his account is somewhat exaggerated. Yet he claims it was all with the goal of reducing violence in the region and had nothing to do with the significant sums of money he was paid.

By 2000, Yousef, had been introduced to Christianity, to which he converted by 2005. In the process of converting and ultimately revealing his collaboration with Israel, Yousef's father disowned him. Yousef was eventually granted political asylum in the United States, with the evidentiary support in court of the Shin Bet agent who had worked with him over a number of years while he was in Ramallah and with whom he remained friends after these events. Much of the later part of Yousef's book is filled with his description of the oversimplified version of Christian religious dogma that he came to accept and embrace.

Yousef's story is an interesting one and there is certainly a great deal of information of about Hamas, its activities and the activities of the PLO that make for fascinating reading. It is at times highly critical of Israel and challenges Islam repeatedly. The earlier sections of the book provide a thoughtful description and Palestinian viewpoint of day to day life in the late 1980s and early 1990s.

At the same time, something just doesn't sit right about Yousef's account.

At times, he appears to suggest that his activities were all related to his conversion to Christianity. He finally saw the light and decided to adopt non-violence as a political viewpoint. According to Yousef, it seems, if all of the Jews and Muslims would simply convert to Christianity, there would be peace across the Middle East. Of course that doesn't sound very realistic. One wonders if Yousef's change, and his eventual conversion, has much more to do with finding a way to escape from his overbearing, fanatically religious father.

Certainly, Yousef's story is not a model for bringing peace to the region. One would hope that Muslims and Jews, without the fanciful prerequisite of being required to renounce their families and religious affiliations, could find ways to sit down and negotiate a peaceful co-existence. Maybe this is just as a unlikely as Yousef's proposed solution, but we have to remain optimistic.

Religious-Secular Tensions in Israel

Israel faces many different types of issues, some of which are distinctly more problematic than those with which other countries have to contend. There is the ongoing threat from Iran of a nuclear attack; Threats of missile attacks from Hezbollah to the north and from Gaza to the southwest; and the uncertain impact of events in Egypt, Syria and other surrounding countries. Internally, Israel has had to deal with a variety of criminal charges against various politicians and is constantly threatened by or actually paralyzed by (even if only for a short time) general strikes.

But bubbling beneath these issues, some of which are genuinely existential in nature, Israel is still grappling with another crucial issue - the balance between being a Jewish state and a democracy and the need for people of diverse religious viewpoints to find a way to get along.

Two incidents over the weekend in Israel caught my attention in different ways. The issues are very different but they are clearly related.

On Shabbat (the Sabbath), in Kiryat Yovel, YNET news reports that some people put up posters of naked or semi-naked women, depicted in well known art. One poster was Sandro Botticelli's "The Birth of Venus," reproduced above. The other was "Tahitian Women" by Paul Gauguain. Both posters were apparently labelled the "beautification of women." In Hebrew, the wording would be very similar to the "exclusion of women," an issue which has been in the public spotlight in Israel for many months now.

Kiryat Yovel is a neighbourhood with an increasingly Haredi (ultra-Orthodox) population. Yet it is not an exclusively ultra-Orthodox neighbourhood like Mea Shearim or B'nai Brak. It still has a sizable population of secular residents.

At first blush, it sounds like a needless provocation. The posters are not connected to some upcoming event, for example an art exhibit. Nor does there appear to be any real purpose to putting them up other than to strike back at the perception of increasing Haredi influence in this Jerusalem community.

On the other hand, the context is more complex. This incident comes after reports of some companies removing women (even modestly clad women) from advertising posters in Jerusalem, as a result of Haredi pressure, in some cases where the very same photos were used with the women included in other parts of Israel. The poster incident comes in a city in which there have been some very public disputes taking place over the issue of gender-segregated buses and even gender segregated streets. Viewed in light of many of the incidents that have occurred, while the incident may be provocative, it is also responsive. Much like the Scandinavian Muhammad cartoons, in some ways, the posters can be seen as a free speech statement by some who view gender equality as very much under attack. Ultimately, I'm not sure that this is the best way to deal with Haredi threats to freedom and gender equality, but it certainly made an interesting point.

On the same Shabbat, in Tel-Aviv, a group of protesters from the "Be Free Israel" movement gathered to protest the lack of public transportation on Shabbat and Jewish religious holy days. This is also a fairly complicated issue. The "Yisrael Hofshit" (Be Free Israel) movement has held a number of rallies around the country protesting the exclusion of women. They have invited women to sing and have pushed back against a number of public incidents in which women were shunned. Of course the movement received overwhelming support from the majority of Israelis for its stance on this issue. But now the movement has looked to expand the range of its attacks on perceived religious coercion by railing against publicly supported religious laws.

As a Jewish State, Israel has many public manifestations of Jewish influenced law. The State holiday calendar revolves around the Jewish calendar with the addition of certain national Israeli holidays. Saturday is the official day of rest and in many areas, all of the shops and restaurants are closed. In many areas, there is no public transportation or other public services. You certainly won't find any cars on the road on Yom Kippur, even in the most stridently secular neighborhoods.

Some argue that these state-supported Jewish laws are unfair and should be changed. One source of argument is that the "democratic and free" nature of Israel should trump the Jewish nature of the State. Given that the majority of the population is secular, these people argue that the ban on public transportation is an imposition of minority religious values on a non-religious public. It is a form of religious coercion in that it forces people to observe the Sabbath on some level.

Others argue that the ban on public transportation in many areas of Israel disproportionately affects the poor, the youth, students and soldiers. Since there is no general restriction on driving a car, taking a cab or using a large mini-van or mini-bus on Shabbat in Israel, the lack of public transportation primarily impacts those without the means to use these other forms of transportation.

There is certainly merit to both of these arguments but there are other points to consider as well.

Some have argued that the country's bus drivers have the most to lose and will now be forced to work while much of the rest of the country continues to take a day off. Even if they are paid overtime rates or given an option, this will still impact Shabbat for many drivers, some of whom may feel that they have no choice but to accept Shabbat shifts.

Others look to the balance between democracy and a Jewish State. Trying to balance these two values has necessarily involved certain compromises. In Ra'anana, for example, all of the stores and restaurants on the main street are closed on Shabbat. At the far end of the city, there is a small commercial area with a number of restaurants and shops that are open on Shabbat. For now, the city seems to manage well with this compromise.

The general operation of buses throughout Israel on Shabbat will have a significant effect on the Jewish character of the state, even though there are already many cars on the road. It will likely lead to many more stores and restaurants opening up, a significant increase in commercial activity and a decrease in the number of Israelis who are able to enjoy a day of rest each week. In some ways, it will mirror what has occurred throughout North America as shops have opened up on Sundays and vastly increased the general commercialization of society. But North America is a different case. Since it is not predicated on the religious values of one group, the impact of having Sunday closings was simply unfair in a society which claimed to treat all religious groups equally.

Israel must grapple with different issues than those in North America. Since it is trying to continue to define itself as a "Jewish State," it makes sense that there will be some public laws that reflect the Jewish character of the State. It is tricky to find the right balance. There are certainly many areas in which it would now be prudent to take away monopolistic power from the religious authorities - in areas such as marriage, divorce, funerals, conversions and even Kashruth (Kosher certification laws). It may also make sense to expand public transportation in areas that are overwhelmingly secular. But at the same time, the only way that the State will continue to be a "Jewish State" is if there are at least some aspects of that Jewish character that are publicly promoted.

As I have argued in other blog posting on this point, one thing that would certainly assist Israelis across the spectrum from religious to non-religious would be the move to a two day weekend with Sundays as a general non-working day. Buses would run and stores would be open but Israelis would be able to enjoy a much needed second day of rest with no restrictions.

In any case, the challenge presented by both of these incidents is to continue to look for a balance and a compromise and ways for religious and non-religious communities to find common ground despite their often diametrically opposite points of view.

Where's the Beef? Israel's Purloined Sirloin...

Where’s the beef? That’s what some cattle farmers in Israel are asking. More importantly, where’s the beef from? That’s what Israeli consumers should apparently be asking.

Earlier this week, Haaretz reported that a truck packed with 70 calves was hijacked at gunpoint on Tuesday February 7, 2012. The cattle, which had been imported to Israel from Australia, were being taken from Eilat to the Golan Heights to be fattened up. Instead, the driver was ordered to drive the cargo to Ramallah. Most of the cattle were apparently slaughtered in Ramallah and Nablus. Palestinian police recovered 17 of them and returned them to their Israeli owners. The remaining purloined sirloins were apparently not recovered. The driver was released by the thieves and the truck was located near Nablus.

Haaretz also reported that more than 2,400 sheep and cattle were stolen from Israeli ranches in 2011. Most of these animals were slaughtered in the Palestinian territories and the meat was then smuggled back into Israel and sold to butchers across the country at very low prices, according to the article. This incident and the many others over the past few years raise serious questions about the regulation and quality of beef in Israel. One would have thought that with such pervasive Kosher regulation of much of the meat industry in Israel, it would be very difficult to trade in uninspected tref beef.

It is worth noting that there are many non-Kosher purveyors of meat products across Israel. The supermarket chain Tiv Ta’am is the largest. With 32 locations across Israel, it is Israel’s largest producer and supplier of non-Kosher meat. I’m not suggesting that there is a link between these incidents and that particular chain although one might think it would be easier to sell uninspected beef to non-Kosher resellers. There are many other non-Kosher butcher shops across the country.

Even on the Kosher side of things, there is the oft-repeated joke that if you pay a mashgiach (a Kosher food inspector) enough, you can Kosher a pig. Although I’m not suggesting that this is what is occurring, there must be a compromised link somewhere along the chain if beef that was slaughtered in Ramallah and Nablus is regularly being sold in Israel, particularly if is labelled as Kosher.

Brussels Air and Air Canada: Tel-Aviv to Toronto

In my never ending search to find the best way to fly back and forth between Tel-Aviv and Toronto, I tried something different. Using Expedia, I put together a mix and match flight. I flew from Tel-Aviv to Toronto via Brussels, with a direct flight back to Tel-Aviv on Air Canada.

As I have explained previously, Air Canada only offers three flights a week from Tel-Aviv to Toronto. All three flights leave around 12:30 p.m. and arrive in Toronto around 6:30 p.m. That means 12 1/2 hours of daytime flying time on route back. Secondly, they currently fly on Mondays, Thursdays and Saturdays. For me, that leaves Monday or Thursday, neither of which are particularly appealing. It would be much better if they were to fly direct on Saturday and Sunday night from Israel to Canada. But the only Star Alliance partners to offer this alternative are Continental and US Air, and the fares for these flights are often significantly higher.

So I took this crazy flight. It left Tel-Aviv on a Saturday night around 1:20 a.m. That part of it was fine. We arrived in Brussels at about 5:10 a.m. The plane was comparable to Austrian Air's service between Tel-Aviv and Vienna. They had wafer thin chairs cramped closely together. No in-flight entertainment of any kind. And of course, since airlines are now charging for baggage, the passengers all tried to cram as much luggage as they possibly could into the passenger compartment.

I had ordered a Kosher meal and I was served a sandwich of questionable origin and unidentifiable content. But I wasn't particularly hungry at 2:30 a.m. anyways, so it wasn't a big deal. The flight was uneventful and arrived slightly early in Brussels.

I have to say that I enjoyed the Brussels airport. I found it to have a "warmer" feel than the airports in Frankfurt or Vienna. There was a decent lounge, equipped with a nice espresso machine and a selection of croissants. The staff were quite friendly and ensured that I had internet access and the right adapter for the electrical sockets. The difficulty was that the lay over time between flights was 5 hours. So I wound up having to spend about 4 hours in the Brussels airport lounge and the various duty free shops.

On a positive note, the prices in the duty free shops were quite reasonable. They had some great chocolate and a nice selection of single malts. But 5 hours is an excessive time to have to wait for a connection.

The flight back to Toronto was an Air Canada flight which left Brussels at about 10:20 a.m. Its route included a stop in Montreal, which added yet another irritating layer to this flight schedule.

I was lucky enough to get an upgrade so I managed to sleep for a while during the course of this 8 1/2 hour flight. The only complaint I have about this part of things relates to the food.

I had ordered the Kosher meal. This was singularly the most horrible airplane meal I have ever ever had the misfortune of receiving. First, the staff brought out a tray with three small plastic containers, each with an aluminum seal. The first container was a tuna fish compound. I have no idea what was mixed with the tuna or how long ago the atrocity took place. It came with three large crackers. I had a quick sniff and tasted a tiny flake of it. There was no way I was going to eat this stuff.

The second container was labeled tapioca. It was easily as offensive and even less edible than the first container. So now I'm 0 for 2.

Container number three contained red, super sweet, apple sauce. Perhaps it had been mixed with raspberry flavouring or maybe it was just red dye. I"ll never know. I only know that it was not something anyone other than a three month old baby would really want to consider eating.

Finally, the piece de resistance arrived, the hot component of the meal. Lucky me, I was finally going to get something to eat. When I opened the multi-layered aluminum sealant, I found something that resembled a big square hunk of meat loaf. But it didn't look or feel like beef. It might have been chicken... though it had the texture of tofu. In any case, it was simply rancid.

I note that I had asked the staff if there was any chance of getting the regular European Sea Bass meal - or the vegetarian lasagna. Both were sold out and I couldn't eat the chicken or beef alternatives. So I was left struggling with this grotesque culinary faux-pas.

With about two hours left in the flight, the attendant came around and served, believe it or not, a second helping of the entire first meal, minus the simulated meat loaf. Great way to lose some weight.

On arriving in Montreal, we had to take everything off the plane, collect luggage, pass through immigration and customs and then wait for about another hour and a half to get back onto the plane. I finally arrived in Toronto at about 3:20 p.m., having left for the airport in Tel-Aviv approximately 24 hours earlier.

Overall, this was less than an ideal way to fly, though it was certainly inexpensive. And despite the length of the flight, it was probably still more enjoyable then flying through Vienna or Frankfurt, both of which mean getting to the airport in Tel-Aviv at 3:30 a.m. and still arrive in Toronto at about the same time.