[JROD] THE GRAND OLD DUKE OF YORK

The following is a guest-post by Rabbi Jeremy Rosen (his message for this week to the JROD list, pasted below with his permission - to see more of his articles, please go here: http://www.jeremyrosen.com/ ).

It provides an encouraging perspective on the recent Lebanon situation which is not unreasonably optimistic. I would describe it as brutally positive.

------ ------ ------ ------ ------

THE GRAND OLD DUKE OF YORK
By Rabbi Jeremy Rosen


Oh the Grand Old Duke of York
He had ten thousand men
He marched them up to the top of the hill
And he marched them down again
And when they were up they were up
And when they were down they were down
And when they were only half way up
They were neither up nor down.


Now, I know I am no military expert. I know I don’t have the full picture, and I know I am a total armchair critic. But from where I am sitting, Israel’s campaign against Hezbollah looks just like the Duke of York’s, Go, Stop, Go, Stop, Up, Down, Up and back Down again. If Israel was given a carte blanche by the USA to go get Hezbollah, they failed and have proved a weak ally for America in the war against terror. We saw poor leadership, indecisive command, no plan, and a final capitulation to a settlement that cannot and will not, in a million years, work.


The UN motion 1701 is a pathetic joke and already a dead letter. As dead as all its previous resolutions on Lebanon, 425 (1978), 426 (1978), 520 (1982), 1559 (2004), 1655 (2006), 1680 (2006) and 1697 (2006), none of which was ever adhered to. It has never ever, ever succeeded in any peacekeeping mission, in any disarmament, in any role it has been given. Its motion has already proved to be dishonest and fake. As for the French, big on talk, weak on action, remember they ran out of Lebanon when Hezbollah last said ‘boo’ to them. And no doubt you know the shortest book in the world is the Italian Army Book of War Heroes. Anyway, they are not even empowered to disarm Hezbollah.
Who will? The Lebanese Army, that ‘Dad’s Army’ of incompetents who dared not confront Hezbollah up till now, and whose only fighting men actually happen to be members of Hezbollah, themselves? Indeed the Prime Minister (who looks permanently terrified) declared that Hezbollah IS Lebanon. And it has only given significantly added status, authority, and influence to Iran and Syria in the Arab world.


The kidnapped soldiers have not been returned. Hezbollah’s pretext of Israeli occupation of the Sheba Farms was rejected by the United Nations itself, time after time, on the grounds that they belong to Syria. Just watch, now how they will do a volte-face and declare they are Lebanese. I wrote a month ago that whatever the outcome is the UN must not be left in place. And lo and behold there they and Annan are, back in, licking the backsides of the Iranians, the Syrians, and Hezbollah.


Israel has descended into materialist corruption. We knew Olmert was just a manipulative and manipulated politician (and now apparently financially suspect too), but we prayed he’d grow into the job. We believed the Israeli Army was super efficient and well informed. Now we realize it is not. Its generals are more interested in their stocks and shares. Stores were stripped and apparently robbed. Soldiers were not properly trained or briefed. Equipment was ancient compared to Hezbollah’s. Olmert and Peretz have both been reminiscent of Levi Eshkol, the non-military ditherer who followed Ben Gurion and couldn’t decide if he wanted tea or coffee so used to ask for ‘half and half.’ Israel has had it too good, firing at stone throwers, and has taken its eye off the ball the way it did before the Yom Kippur war, except this time there was no Sharon to salvage some pride. Many of the soldiers didn’t have the f ight in them and some were happy to declare to the worlds press that they just wanted to get back to the night clubs of Tel Aviv.


This is no longer a struggle with the Palestinians. It is a battle for survival with a much larger and more powerful and more fanatical foe. Perhaps the religious black hats are right that prayer and study can achieve what arms cannot. Meanwhile, there had better be a really thorough postmortem. At least an intelligent army learns from its mistakes and will be better prepared next time.


OK, that’s one way of looking at it.

The other way goes like this. Most nations agreed Israel was provoked and had a right to respond. But no one wanted to get bogged down in alien territory again. In fact OImert wisely avoided committing too many men and thus avoided too many unnecessary casualties. The losses were in the main a painful necessity that revealed a great deal about the enemy’s tactics, strongholds, and behind-the-scenes support.


Thomas L. Friedman, who knows Lebanon extremely well, argues that after the dust and the chauvinism have settled, people will ask what Hezbollah’s fanaticism has actually achieved. They may even come to realize the despicable immorality of using women and children as cover for the storage and firing of missiles (though I wouldn’t bet on it).


Israel has shown that although it suffered significantly it can still bomb its enemy states to smithereens. Only by living in underground bunkers and coming up occasionally for a hit-and-run or by using remote controlled rockets could Hezbollah put up any kind of fight. Israel’s integrity as a state has not been undermined one iota. It has lost no territory. Hezbollah has not helped the Palestinian cause. It has not helped the Lebanese and it has shown to everyone that Iran is a real and present danger that must be confronted one way or another.


Olmert indeed was a canny politician. The Duke of York was not such a fool after all. It’s better to march up and march safely back down than do a Charge of the Light Brigade. He feinted and calculated to ensure that others get involved in Lebanon more seriously and obviously than up to now. Israel can still go back in if necessary, but at least it has cleared away a significant part of the Maginot line that the Lebanese clearly encouraged Hezbollah to build.


Frankly, if this is what the world calls defeat, I’ll take it any day. The Arab leadership have always been big loudmouths pretending everything is one glorious victory for Allah after another. Meanwhile, their countries slide farther and farther back into medieval barbarism. Israel still has its lands and army intact and fewer casualties than its annual roster of traffic deaths.


And as for world opinion, or the laughable UN Human Rights hypocrites, we have known all along where we stand. We have seen the dishonest biases and faked photographs and Der Sturmer caricatures and the craven politicians before. Israel itself was founded precisely because we knew we were the only ones who would fight for our own survival, and we have. We are commanded to remember Amalek in each generation and we know as soon as one threat is over another is spawned. It has always been thus. And our enemies are both hidden and revealed, overt and covert, throughout the world.


At least Israel and by implication the Jews, are empowered. Ben Gurion was right to insist on a nuclear deterrent. If people like Vanunu had their way, we’d be defenceless in the face of Iranian nuclear power. One must not take a short-term view. The full impact of this campaign will not be realized for some time yet. We must not give in to jingoism and the natural desire to have our enemies bloodied for all to see. God and History work according to their timetables, not ours. Mistakes ? A Jewish religious response is to ask where we could have done, should have done better in the military, in social attitudes and values and to try to put things right.


Often what looks like victory turns into a defeat and vice versa. What if this campaign leads improbably towards a genuine peaceful settlement? What if the realization that rockets and missiles can fly over the securest of borders, leads to a final agreement on national integrities? What if this is the moment when everyone finally agrees that force is not the answer for ever? What if it brings an end to occupation, assassinations, checkpoints, fences and homicide bombs? Some people on both sides have tried before and failed. But as our prophets (‘May they praised’… and why can’t we say it too?!!) tell us, ‘Out of agony springs hope.’ Out of the rubble a flower may grow. Can’t we dream?


And if not, at least we live to fight ( and hope) another day.


Shabbat Shalom



-----Jeremy

------- ------- ------- -------

More of Jeremy's writings and other information can be found at his website:
http://www.jeremyrosen.com
Feedback, comments, questions, and discussion are welcome!

Also read his latest blogpost:
http://www.jeremyrosen.com/blog/index.html


The JROD mailing list is hosted by Shamash: The Jewish Network (http://shamash.org), a service of Hebrew College (http://hebrewcollege.edu) , which offers online courses and
an online MA in Jewish Studies (http://hebrewcollege.edu/online/)

------- ------- ------- -------

A good place to start reading is here: http://www.jeremyrosen.com/writings.html

His books are listed here: http://www.jeremyrosen.com/bookstore.html

His take on Mel Gibson's horrid snuff-film is here: http://www.jeremyrosen.com/blog/2006/08/prejudice.html

[It's the most recent blogpost as of this date.]

------- ------- ------- -------

My own assesment of this war is that it will turn out to be a prelude to another clash. I believe that Syria (ruled by Hafez Assad's inexperienced pup) will manoevre itself into the Arab limelight, and by backing Hezbollah precipitate open conflict (and the word that comes to mind is 'hubris').

...

If I am correct, I am sure that I am not the only one to see it coming.

...

If it happens, Syria will have miscalculated - the Syrian Army is not capable of fighting a guerilla war like Hezbollah, and has not had an active role other than repression in a generation. And whereas Hezbollah had everything to gain merely by not being utterly destroyed, the Syrian regime has much to lose - not being utterly destroyed, in their case, will nevertheless most likely mean major changes in the current leadership, and a loss of prestige and power in the region. In addition to a significant degradation of their offensive capabilities.

...

[I also want to stress, that like so much that passes for either political rhetoric or anti-Israel action in the Arab world, neither the conflict which just ended nor a possible resumption of same (with or without the meddling of Syria), can in any way bring benefits or advantages to the Palestinians. As is sadly customary, their leaders will mis-guide them, and the cheap bombast from their cousins will give them a false sense of achievement and satisfaction. Though heady and intoxicating, these are no substitutes for actual progress towards nationhood.]

...

...

But in the meantime, let us hope that things will be well.

...

A gitn und gebentshte shabbes, y'all.

...

...

-----B.O.T.H.

SHE EINO METZUVEH DE DAVAR VE OSEIHU NIKRA HEDYOT

"Anyone not commanded to do something, yet does it, is called an idiot"
--Yerushalmi Shabbat 2:1


No, I am not marvelously well-read in Talmud.

I found this splendid quote in an old posting by ADDERabbi (blog here: http://adderabbi.blogspot.com/ ; see the posting entitled 'ON CHUMRA' dated 02/08/05 here: http://adderabbi.blogspot.com/2005_02_01_adderabbi_archive.html).


He writes: "If one assumes that the content of a mitzvah is determined exclusively by God's commandment, then the act is rendered meaningless in the absence of command."


Which, of course, reminds me that a goy who keeps shabbes is according to some of Chazal, chayav misah.


Apropos thereto, a meise:

...Rav Yitzhok ben Shloime had an old friend with whom he would go out drinking during the week. One year he asked his friend to join him for Peysach, but his friend declined, saying that he could not come as he was not Jewish.

"You’re not Jewish? We’ve been studying Toireh together for years – vos meinstu, you’re not Jewish?!?!"

"Azoy", sogt der Goy, "who else should I discuss tiefe sheyles with in this farkakte village filled with ignorant mediaeval peasants, prior to the invention of printing, widespread literacy, and the internet?"

"But you’re shomer shabbes! A goy who keeps shabbes is chayav misah!"

"Actually, I never kept shabbes – I always put my keys in my pocket when I went out."

"Ober, ober.., mir hobn an eruv!"

"Myeh…., I don’t hold from that eruv".




-----B.O.T.H.

PEACE, LOVE, AND RABID BUTTERFLIES

I've been very firmly informed that my last two protest signs were racist and Nazi in nature. One showed a generic mullah image intended to be fright-inspiring, in half-shadow, using the Palestinian and Hezbollah flag colours, over the text "no peace with extremism", the other showed a fanged skull wearing a keffiyeh with the text "60 years of threats, lies, and hubris".

I wanted to express with these signs that extremist Shia Islam was what motivated Hezbollah, and that six decades of the Arab states denying the existence of Israel and swearing to destroy her and sweep her people into the sea was not conducive to peace, stability, and civilized discourse in the middle-east.


It turns out I am not an effective communicator.

Alas.


Our side is supposed to radiate peaceloving victimhood, rather than any belligerence or objection to Islam, Arab politics, mob mentality, 'valid popular forms of resistance', etcetera.


Before you know it, the Israeli flag will be banned at these counter-demos also. It's far too provocative, too Zionist. The peaceful tree-hugging Palestinian butterflies and wildflowers might spontaneously burst in to tears on seeing it. And that would not be good in the Bay Area, a bastion of peace, love, and gentleness.


Me, bitter and pissed off? Nooooooo.....


Let me quote from the latest circular from SF4Israel:

“We also want to take a moment address a problem which, although isolated, reflects badly both on our group and on the pro-Israel message which we are trying to project.

There were a very few signs that were displayed that were completely unacceptable...... Thank goodness none of these signs made it onto TV or into the Chronicle.

The media has enough trouble understanding the story (one of the TV reports Saturday evening ended with "after all, both sides just want peace"-- I don't know what rally THAT reporter was attending, but it sure wasn't ANSWER's!); we certainly don't want to make it seem like "it's just extremists on both sides." Of course, these signs are being prominently featured on IndyBay (an "independent" media site that functions as ANSWER's own propaganda machine) under the headline "SF Voice for Israel Sounds Like Old Fashioned Racism and Bigotry".

SF Voice for Israel leadership condemns those messages; those of you who brought them should not do so again. “


Translation: Zeyt azoy git und lek tuches.


Please imagine this dialogue:
PROTESTOR: "Terrorism is paid for by money from the Europeans!"
ORGANIZER: "No, we can't say that; we need the Europeans."
PROTESTOR: "Terrorism is paid for by money from the Arabs!"
ORGANIZER: "No, we can't say that; we need our SUVs."
PROTESTOR: "Terrorism is paid for by money from the Russians and the Chinese!"
ORGANIZER: "No, we can't say that; we need the co-operation of the foreign powers."
PROTESTOR: "Terrorism is paid for by money from Humanitarian assistance groups!"
ORGANIZER: "No, we can't say that; we need them to keep aid flowing."
PROTESTOR: "Terrorism is paid for by money from Muslim Charitable Organizations!"
ORGANIZER: "No, we can't say that; we don't want to cause anymore offense in the Muslim world. Look, just try not to offend ANYBODY, okay?"
PROTESTOR: "Terrorism is paid for by the Jews!"
ORGANIZER: "Perfect!"
PROTESTOR: "And the Palestinians are a bunch of peaceful sensitive tree-hugging dolphin-loving butterflies!!!"
ORGANIZER: "Now you're being sarcastic!"
PROTESTOR: "I wouldn't dare."


Okay, I can understand their point.

They don't want any controversial or potentially offensive signs on our side, because we're fighting an uphill battle, and the public has already sided with the Palestinians.
Israel, because it's an organized state and has a trained army with modern weapons, is considered the aggressor, irrespective of justification or provocation, irregardless of threats to the safety of her citizens or violence by the Arabs.
In the public mind, the Palestinians and the Lebanese are victims of circumstances beyond their control.

We have to appeal to the public, and try to sway them back towards a more rational point of view. So even though the counter-demos are confrontations with hate-filled Islamo-jugend, middle-class radicals, and terrorist-sympathizers, we should present a positive face to the public, passersby, and press.


You know and I know, that the Palestinians massively elected Hamas, and that the rest of the Arab world solidly supports them. We both know that there is much joy in Arab cities when Hamas commits another outrage and kills Israelis.

You and I know that Hezbollah murdered hundreds of Americans and thousands of Lebanese, and that Hezbollah is the proxy of Syria - who also murdered thousands of Lebanese, assassinated several Lebanese political leaders, and ruled Lebanon brutally for two decades. There are still Lebanese in Syria's jails, and there are Lebanese who were arrested by Syrians, whose families still do not know what happened to them. We both know that Hezbollah rules southern Lebanon as a Jihad-fiefdom, supported by and allied with Syria.

You know and I know, that the public has little clue and less interest in the issues, and prefers to stay with the comfortable assumption that because the Palestinians keep losing and the Israelis keep winning, the Palestinians are the underdog and the Israelis are somehow wrong. And we both know that when Jews win, they must have done so by dirty tricks and knavery, or whatever else Jews are always accused of.


We all know that the world prefers Jews to be victims - Europeans and their fellow-travellers in the US are extremely uncomfortable with the idea of aggressive Jews who stand up for themselves and kick their oppressors in the nuts. That just ain't right..... two thousand years of western civilization PROVE that that just ain't right. It goes against established custom.



But I want my side to win. So I'll try to be as nurturing and loving and all-round politically correct as they want me to be. I'll be soft and gentle.

With a loveable smile and child-like eyes.


Even though I really believe that Hamas and Hezbollah are murders and psychopaths, and the pro-Palestinian crowd is rabid with anti-Semitism and hatred for everything worthwhile.


Buncha dumbass!! stinkin'!! rabid!! murderous!! poison-fanged!! daemonic!! poxy!! butterflies......

DOVBEAR IS THE HEAD OF THE MUKHABARAT!

How else would he know that I do not own an SUV?


I can't recall mentioning driving, vehicles, means of locomotion, or stubborn attitudes towards wheelie things......


Yet in a recent posting (here: http://dovbear.blogspot.com/2006/08/suvs-are-for-weanies.html ) he correctly states that I do not own a SUV.

Quote:
Bloggers who certainly don't own SUVs:
MoChassid*
PsychoToddler*
Treppenwitz
ChayyaiSarah
Ren Reb
OrthoMom
Gil*
BOTH


There is no other possible explanation.
Dovbear is the head of the Egyptian / Saudi / Jordanian / Syrian / Iraqi secret service.


I actually don't even own a car. Of any type.

I used to own a car.

I no longer own a car.


Back in 1982, after a long lunch at a soul-food restaurant in West-Oakland with several friends (I can still remember that scrumptious corn-bread and collards with pot-liquor), I took a wrong turn on the way back to Berkeley. Somehow I ended up in Moraga - in a desolate area on a sand-road to nowhere. So I turned around and headed out, back to the noise of the freeway and the populated world.

At ninety miles an hour.

1. It is not advisable to drive ninety miles an hour on a dirt-road in the middle of nowhere at twilight.

2. It IS advisable to slow down when coming to a sharp bend in the road.

3. When you do not slow down, your car may turn over several times.

4. And come to a stop upside down.

5. Before slowly starting to slide down the slope.

6. And finally coming to a complete stop in a gravel pit fifty yards down-hill.

7. Where you have to wrestle yourself out of the passenger-side window.



At this point you may discover several things.

1) You. Are. In. Moraga.
2) Your car used to have corners.
3) Your car now has NO uncracked or shattered glass.
4) The car-frame is bent.
5) The doors are hosed - one can't open, the other won't close.
6) Your pipe (a black sandblast panel with a taper-stem) is still in your mouth, the tobacco is still lit, and has reached perfect cruising temperature - the Turkish leaf is coming into its own.
7) Baruch Hashem!


A marvelous voyage of discovery.

I learned several things I did not know.

Never stop learning.


Eventually, with the help of some passers by, the car was turned right-side up. It still worked, so I did drive back to Berkeley that evening - pulling to the left the whole time, because due to the frame being severely bent the vehicle veered to the right. The driver-side door would not open, the passenger-side door could not close completely - in consequence the alarm went off for the entire drive back. Which is irritating.

The car was considered a total wreck by the insurance company.

I haven't driven since.

There's a connection there. A link, if you will. Perhaps causal.


A meise she-personal-hoyo:
A few years before that, for a family event, my father and his wife, and my uncle and his family, had all come to Berkeley. Where both my father and my uncle had lived before going off to war in the forties - my father to the Royal Canadian Air Force and three years of flying a bomber over Germany, my uncle to the US Navy, and three years of toodling around Hawaii.

So I drove 'em around.

My uncle and my aunt got out white as sheets, and did not ride with me again.

One of my cousins, who had been warned by my uncle and aunt, nearly had hysterics after her turn. And needed help getting out.

I shan't mention the reaction of the other cousin. That would be mean. I am not mean.


My father, when I drove him around, just had this big grin all over his puss. He rode with me several more times after that.

I think he approved of my no-nonsense style of manoevering.


Oh, I probably should mention that until he married the woman who a few years later was to become my mother, he had owned several small Italian sportscars and an aeroplane (she made him get rid of the dangerous things).


So anyhow, if I had my life to live all over again, I would do exactly the same thing.
Ninety miles an hour.
I just wish I still had that pipe (a black sandblast panel with a taper-stem) .
And a double (!) helping of collard greens with pot-liquor.

-------------

Oh, you also had questions about the asteriskoth next to some of the shmei bloggim?

I'll let Dovbear explain.....

"It's long been my opinion that a man who lives on a cul-de-sac only purchases a giant car for ego and image purposes. In the suburbs they serve no other purpose. I feel the same way about tables in shuls - because when you are sitting at one, surrounded by stacks of books, it's easy to deceive yourself into thinking that you're a scholar.

In a shul full of tables a yeshiva alum who hasn't read a word of Aramaic in 20 years can pretend that he's unmarried, unruined and immersed in the study of torah; behind the wheel of an SUV, its owner can pretend that he's something other than overweight, middle-aged and far less virile then he once was."


*Probably has tables in his shul.


Please note, there is NO asterisk following my name.
My table has no shul.

CIVIC CENTER AND THE MOONBATS

Saturday was a beautiful sunny day. And how would anyone rather spend it than face-to-face with vicious beasts?


SIGNS

I discovered within minutes of leaving the house that my two protest signs would not fit in a taxi. Shoot. Too big.

According to the Indymedia site my signs are also racist.

Quote: "Kinda looks like 1930s charactures of Jews -- You see a lot of racist charactures of Arabs at pro-Israel protests but these just look a little too close to the antiSemitic cartoons the Nazis put out in the 1930s".
[See here, tenth photo down: http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2006/08/12/18296586.php]


Well DUH!

Perhaps that was the point, moron!


I thought the irony and sarcastic 'in-yer-face' idea was so thick you could cut it with a knife. I was aiming for a 'right back at ya' message.

The kefiyeh-wearing daemon (text: '60 YEARS OF THREATS, LIES, AND HUBRIS') was an answer to the standard illustration of Sharon and others as baby-eating vampires. The generic mad mullah (text: 'NO PEACE WITH EXTREMISM') was supposed to look Iranian - sort of Kho- and Khameini mixed with a little Nasrallah laqnat-ullah-anhu (and notice particularly the colour-scheme). Because it deserves to be stressed that Hezbollah are proxies of the nutjobs in Tehran.


Apparently the photographer did not get it. Maybe no sense of humour.



REVOLUTIONARY RANTING

The speechifying on the other side illustrated how pitifully ignorant most of the crowd on that side were - simplistic history lessons based on half-truths and ideological interpretation. Lots of both suppressio veri et suggestio falsi. It reminded me of the Marxist cant I used to be forced to listen to in Holland, and had the same strident hatred of America, Western World Humanism, and Israel, coupled with anti-colonialist sentiment and white-guilt over the "horrible condition of the world it's all the fault of American pigs except us 'cause were actually fighting it what a pity those third-worlders don't grasp the correct political point of view bla bla bla".

Five hours of it. Inconsequential ranting, and venomous hatred.
[Except for the revolutionairy march through down-town, to yell anti-imperialist slogans at the tourists and shopkeepers. One and a half hours of relative quiet for our side. But by that time there were less of us, our point having been made.]

Rude gestures by a bunch of teenage brats on the other side of the street. La adab!

Praise for Sheikh Sayid Hassan Nasrallah (laqnat-ullah-anhu!) as a guerilla leader in a righteous war of liberation against the forces of transnational fascism, defending the poor upright oppressed peasants of Lebanon as they struggle to restore the beauty and grandeur of Arab civilization!

A call to arms! Destroy all borders, down with America, Palestine from the river to the sea!

Plus a flag-burning.



The truly great thing about such demonstrations is that their slogans and revolutionary agenda serve to turn people away from their message. I'm sure that there are many people on the fence, who have not given the matter anymore thought than 'war bad, poor dead civilians good', but decide against joining a demo once they hear 'America must be destroyed, and those who kill Americans are heroes'. So from my point of view, I sincerely hope the other side never comes down to earth. Their rhetoric will only serve to discredit their side, and highlight how dangerous they and their followers truly are.



RIVER DANCE!

But the group of Levantine maidens performing a heroic Irish-Palestinian jig a la riverdance, to a stirring hero-of-soviet-labour tune, made the price of admission ($0.00) worthwhile.
Strapping lasses, definitely worth a second glance.
Up on stage, with half-length skirts, and flashing calves.

Hippity, hippity. Hop, hop, hop!

Zesty.



IN FRONT OF THE CONSULATE THE DAY BEFORE

I should also mention the bunch in front of the consulate Friday around tea-time. Probably well over a hundred people, ninety percent of them post-friday services Islamites in a rabid frenzy. Fiery speeches in Arabic by true-believers, with a distinct tone of anti-Semitism.
Who made clear that they despise el yahud w'el amriki. My Arabic is bad, but their blistering hatred was unmistakable.

Of course some of the usual pro-Palestinian idiot fellow travellers were part of the crowd, cheering along whenever the rest of them roared responses to the preacher. They probably didn't have a clue what they were chanting. Which was a call to liberate all of Filistin from the heathens by means of jihad and hatred of el yahud.

I confess I did something utterly stupid. I went and stood on the opposite side of the street from them with my 'DESTROY HEZBOLLAH - NIX TO FILISTINIST ENTITIES' EXTREMISM' sign.
I guess I was just pissed as all git-out, but in retrospect being the only counter-protestor to a mob of Islamists isn't a rational thing to do (even with the riot squad out keeping an eye on things). Once they saw the lone representative of the "worldwide zionist plot to enslave the entire universe" across the street, their screaming reached fever-pitch. They quivered, they shook, they stomped their angry little muslim feet.


So I took off a shoe and waved it in their direction.

In my defense I would offer that these are not rational times.

I have promised Savage Kitten that I will be more sensible next time.

CRIMSON BLOSSOMS - TRIBAL RHYME

One of the things which distinguishes the terminology regarding headhunting is the depth of metaphor and the poetic description of the process. Heads harvested from rival tribes are described as bright red flowers, potent batteries, powerful totems, beloved friends, after death companions, and guardians against evil. They are considered to bring fertility to both fields and women; great power to both clans and houses; prosperity, happiness, and the absence of disease.
When the raiding party returns the heads are made welcome, chickens are slaughtered, the longhouse feasts, young maidens dance with the bloody heads and sing to them, and much rice wine is drunk from heirloom vats. Tomorrow the trophies will be prepared for long storage - cleansed of flesh, dried, polished, and woven into a wickerwork basket, for hanging in the rafters, where they will join the heads gathered in generations past, amid the boar-tusks and poison-bundles.
And next year, we will do it again.

While headhunting was most avidly practiced by upland tribes, even the civilized lowland polities had memories of headhunting, which under certain circumstances would either experience a sudden (joyfully) bloody resurgence, or be celebrated in song.

Here's a section from a Tamarao poem:

Jale sapuwang, kulo sametek,
Banta masurak, bala maketek;
Prawo sapasig, nente nagara,
Taralangtuwa Radja Bahara.
Takot ki banye, karana amok,
Ratos tan ribo, salaksa rampok;
Pangkod maadja, parong malisek,
Lalang taura, daga tapitek.
Li-ig na li-ig, terem takaga,
Tanggat pusaka, karga haraga;
Mayat ri hamog, lalo tararok,
Banye kapala, gantong marantok.

"Flowing like cloud drifts (the mass of warriors) altogether
Battled with war cries, conflicted monkey-like;
The boats along the river-bank sands, (arrayed) against the state,
Under the leadership of prince Bahara.
Fearful was the multitude, because of the blood-fury,
One hundred, one thousand, ten thousand in berserk rage.
The battle-standards erect, the war-swords sharp-gleaming,
The long grass crimson splattered, blood gushing,
Neck upon neck (till at last) sharpness became dull,
Seizing magically potent ritual heirlooms, and precious items;
Corpses in the battle-fog, recently swirled in motion,
A multitude of skulls, suspended and knocking together."


Now doesn't that just about get your juices flowing?

JOSTEIN GAARDER - AFTENPOSTEN

In today's Ha'aretz mention is made of an opinion piece by the author of Sophie's World which is causing quite a stench (see: http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/749493.html).

QUOTE:
The article compares Israel's government, the Afghan Taliban regime and South African apartheid, and states, "We no longer recognize the State of Israel" and "the State of Israel in its current form is history."


So I looked it up. The opinion piece. And translated it. I post the translation below. Please bear in mind that Norwegian is not a language that I am fluent in, wherefore my translation might be flawed. I have tried to represent the author's ideas accurately, but because I find his spew repellent I may have been handicapped.
[The original ('Guds Utvalgte Folk') may be found here: http://www.aftenposten.no/meninger/kronikker/article1411153.ece
For those who read Norwegian. And I would appreciate your letting me know of any mistakes I made in the translation. Thanks in advance.]

-----------------------------------

TRANSLATION:

GOD'S CHOSEN PEOPLE
By Jostein Gaarder

ISRAEL IS HISTORY. We no longer acknowledge the State of Israel. There is no way back. The State of Israel has violated the recognition of the world, and will get no peace until it lays down its weapons. The State of Israel in its current form is history, writes Jostein Gaarder.

It is time to learn a new slogan: We no longer recognize the State of Israel. We can't recognize the apartheid regime in South Africa, we didn't recognize the Afghani Taliban-regime. There were many who didn't recognize Saddam Hussein's Iraq, or the Serb ethnic cleansing. So now we must get used to the thought: the State of Israel, in its current form is history.

We do not believe in the pretensions of God's chosen people. We laugh at this people's misapprehensions and cry over its misdeeds. To pretend to be God's chosen people is not only stupid and arrogant, but an offense against all humanity; we call it racism.


LIMITS OF TOLERANCE

Patience has limits, and so does our tolerance. We don't believe in divine promises as a basis for occupation or apartheid. We have left the Middle Ages behind us. We are farklempt by those who believe that the god of plants, animals and galaxies had could make one people his favourite, and given them silly stone tablets, burning bushes, and a license to kill.

We call child-murders child-murderers, and shall not accept that such a people have a god-given or historical mandate that can excuse their reprehensible acts. We say: shame on all apartheid, shame on ethnic cleansing, shame on all terrorist strikes against a civilian population whether committed by Hamas, Hezbollah, or the State of Israel!


THE UNSCRUPULOUS ART OF WAR

We recognize and accept Europe's deep responsibility for the Jewish fate, for the scandalous mobbings (?), pogroms, and the Holocaust. It was historically and morally imperative that the Jews got their own home. However the State of Israel has, with its unscrupulous art of war and horrific weaponry, massacred its own legitimacy. It has systematically violated international laws, international conventions, and several UN resolutions, and can no longer expect amnesty from any responsibility. It has carpet bombed the world's recognition. But fear not - the perilous time is nearly over. Israel has seen its own Soweto.

We are at the brink, there is no retreat. The State of Israel has violated the world's recognition and will not have peace until it lays down its arms.


WITHOUT FORBEARING, WITHOUT SKIN

Let both wills and words blow Israel's apartheid walls over. The State of Israel does not exist. It is without forbearing now, without skin. May the world show mercy on the civilian population Our doomsaying is not directed at civilians.

We wish the people in Israel well, everything well, but with our reservation that we will not eat Jaffa oranges as long as they taste vile and poisonous. It was also easy to manage without the blue grapes of apartheid.


CELEBRATING TRIUMPH

We don't believe that Israel has greater sorrow for more than forty Lebanese children than f the three thousand years of lamenting over 40 years in the wasteland. We note that many Israelis celebrate such triumphs as once they celebrated the plagues, as appropriate punishment for the Egyptian people. (In this tale the Lord of Israel acts as an immeasurable sadist). We ask if for Israelis one Israeli life is worth more than that of forty Palestinians or Lebanese.

Because we have seen the pictures of Israeli girls who wrote spiteful messages on the bombs that were to be released over the civilian population of Lebanon and Palestine. Israeli girls are not charming when they rejoice in death and suffering on the other side.


VENGEFULL PAYBACK

We reject the rhetoric of the State of Israel. We reject the blood-drenched spiral of vengeance of "an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth". We reject the principle of thousands of Arab eyes for a few Israeli eye. We reject collective punishment or population purges as a political weapon. Two thousand years have gone by since a Jewish rabbi criticized the knackered doctrine of an "eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth".

He said: "do unto others as you would have them do unto you." We reject a state that is built on anti-humanitarian principles and the ruins of an archaic nationalist religion and warlike faith. As Albert Schweitzer explained, "humanity is to never sacrifice a human for a cause."


CHARITY AND MERCY

We do not recognize the old kingdom of David as being normative for the 21st century's map of the Middle-East. That Jewish rabbi asserted two thousand years ago that the kingdom of God is not a rebirth of the kingdom of David, but that the kingdom of God is within us and among us. God's kingdom is charity and mercy.

Two thousand years it has been since the Jewish rabbi unweaponed and humanized the knackered rhetoric of war, yet already in his time there the first Zionist terrorists operated.


ISRAEL DOES NOT LISTEN

For two thousand years we have stressed the concept of humanity, yet Israel does not listen. It was not the Pharisees who helped the man who lay on the side of the road because he had been attacked by robbers. It was a Samaritan, what today we would call a Palestinian. Because before everything else, we are human - whether Christian, Muslim, or Jew. Or as that Jewish rabbi said: "And if regard only your own, how are you different from others?" We reject the kidnapping for ransom of soldiers. But we also reject the deportation of entire groups of people and the abduction of lawfully elected parliamentarians or government functionaries also.

We recognize the State of Israel of 1948, but not of 1967. That is the State of Israel which doesn't recognize, respect, or yield to the legitimate state of 1948. Israel wants to have more - more water and more settlements. To achieve that some wish a final solution to the Palestinian problem, with god's help. "Palestinians have so many other countries", some Israeli politicians assert, "while we have just one".


USA OR THE WORLD

Or as the state of Israel's greatest protector puts it: "May God continue to bless America." A little child noticed this and turned to his mother, and asked: "Why does the president always end his speeches with 'God bless America'? Why does he not say 'God bless the world?'"

A Norwegian poet exclaimed the following childlike heart-sigh: "Whence mankind's slow progress?" He was the one who wrote so strikingly about "the Jew" and "the Jewess". But he rejected the the fantasy of a chosen people. He called himself a Mohammedan.


MERCY AND TOLERATION

We do not accept the State of Israel. Not today, not in this hour of writing, not in sorrow and wrath. If the nation of Israel should fall because of its own actions, and parts of its population must flee the occupied area and into another diaspora, then we say: May their hosts show them mercy and toleration. It is eternally an unjustifiable crime to lay a hand on refugees and the stateless.

Peace and the right of passage for an evacuating civilian populace that have no state shall protect them! Do not shoot at refugees! Do not target them! They are as vulnerable as snails without their shells now, vulnerable like the slow-moving columns of Palestinian and Lebanese refugees, defenseless as women, children, and old folks, in Qana, Gaza, Sabra and Shatila. Give the Israeli refugees shelter, give them milk and honey!

Don't let a single Israeli child die. Too many children and civilians have been murdered already.



Source: AFTENPOSTEN
Først publisert: 05.08.06 Oppdatert: 11.08.06 kl. 18:14

-----------------------------------

-----------------------------------

I'm not quite sure what he's getting at. But I will say that rather than exploring the causes of Middle-East strife in any depth, and examining the issues in detail, he shows the usual superficial judgementalism.

The inclusion of that reference to Jesus (whom he erroneously calls a rabbi) is disturbing, along with the accusations that immediately follow. Either one must assume a remarkably dense and blithering ignorance, OR, as is much more likely, he deliberately parrots the standard slanders of the church regarding Jews.

The mention of the Norwegian poet is baffling. Or a misapplied show of literacy.

The final part of his disquisition is vile. Utterly.

I do not think Jostein Gaarder ignorant. I cannot forgive him because he might not know what he is saying. This is an educated man, who is more than capable of becoming informed and doing the necessary reading. Yet he deliberately chooses to write such a hateful, shallow, and glibly moralistic condemnation, playing on well-known imagery and canards, with an unmistakable bias.

Some have defended this man as merely trying to discuss the policies of the state of Israel.

Balderdash!

He is an anti-Semite.

He's something rotten in the state of Norway.

TUMULTUOUSLY UPDATED

YESTERDAY EVENING - UPDATE ON SITUATION IN THE LAND - JCC & ISRAELI CONSULATE



Nothing surprising was said.

The consul comes across as a likable and intelligent person, thrown into a role where he has to assure people without saying much. He choses his words with care. Forthright yet guarded. There are nuances.


The auditorium would have fit a much larger crowd. But there were plenty of people there..... most of us in our thirties or older. Plus some people who look intense. Or just tense.

Security is tight but transparently variable. Several people are patted down thoroughly, their bags checked inside, out, sideways and upside down. Electronics examined, batteries tested, pockets emptied. Me, just a cursory rooting around in my backpack without really examing anything (everything feels like a book, nothing has edges or a suspicious weight). Shook the box in which I keep pipes for smoking, didn't open it, or any of the pockets of the pack. I guess I just don't project a troublemaker aura. Either that or my snoot is recognized (it's a possibility).

Or maybe I smell.

Let's not go there.


The introductory words are finally said at around 9:20. Devorah who has been back from the land for 72 hours gives a short talk. Then the consul, who has only been back for 48 hours, comes on stage.

His talk is punctuated a various points with disruptive action by disagreeable people.



Disruption one: Three women chanting loudly about occupation and holding a Jews for a Free Palestine banner stand up in the audience, ten minutes after the consul had started talking. Boos, hisses, loud yells in Russian-accented English. Plainclothes and a rabbi finally pursuaded them to leave.
They were very strident.

Disruption two: Large hairy monster female stands up and starts yelling. There is vituperation. By this time the SFPD on hand, and she is 'pursuaded' out. Her incomprehensible exclamations echo down the side passage into the unknown, and muffle as a door closes.

Disruption three: Agent-provocatrice filming the disruptions, and her goonish male companion, are pointed out, confronted, told to get out. With sneers and gloats, they evaporate.

Disruption four: A man and a woman stand up and loudly declare that they are Jews and 'as Jews bla bla bla'. Loud long confrontation, followed by the police escorting them out.

Disruption five: Indignant blonde (?) proves herself a member of the troll contingent. Out.

Disruption six: Person of indeterminate gender stands up, becomes a wherewolf, and is escorted out by the cops.


During the question and answer period a few people turn out to have a bug up their chamor, not to say rhetorically blessed points of view, that, because of a surfeit of commas, semi-colons, parentheses, and codicilliary amendations and sub-clauses, prove quite unintelligible.
The consul bravely resists the temptation to call queries containing semi-colons half-assed, and answers the first clear part of the question.

Many questions are actually the ones that everybody wants to ask - simple, straightforward, to the point, and well-informed. The answers are to the point, and reasonably informative.


As we leave I recognize at least one person - an Israeli who is probably in some way connected to something. Who has certain habits that are recognizable as inculcated and precautionary.

TAGGED! [A meme iz mir!]

OH NO!


The search for emes in the known universe (E-kvetcher: http://search-for-emes.blogspot.com/ ) has tagged me with a meme.


Now, a year ago I would not have had a clue what that means. I have since then seen the meme-tagging process in full bloom. And I think I grasp its zen-like verity. And beauty like the cherry blossoms in the cold wind of spring.

Or something equally interekshurul sounding, yes.



Book Meme
1. One book that changed your life?
Two books: Peppers: A Story of Hot Pursuits, by Amal Naj.
Indian Food : A Historical Companion, by K.T. Achaya


2. One book you have read more than once?
Ada, by Vladimir Nabokov.
The Torah.


3. One book you would want on a desert island?
The Ambonese Curiosity Cabinet, by Georgius Everhardus Rumphius.
Either in Dutch or English.


4. One book that made you laugh?Confederacy of Dunces, by John Kennedy O'Toole.


5. One book that made you cry?
I'm sorry, I seem to have a mental block - I cannot remember any such book.


6. One book you wish had been written?
"Crimson Blossoms: The Vocabulary of Headhunting Among the Tribes of Borneo".

One of the things which distinguishes the terminology regarding headhunting is the depth of metaphor and the poetic description of the process. Heads harvested from rival tribes are described as bright red flowers, potent batteries, powerful totems, beloved friends, after death companions, and guardians against evil. They are considered to bring fertility to both fields and women; great power to both clans and houses; prosperity, happiness, and the absence of disease. When the raiding party returns the heads are made welcome, chickens are slaughtered, the longhouse feasts, young maidens dance with the bloody heads and sing to them, and much rice wine is drunk from heirloom vats. Tomorrow the trophies will be prepared for long storage - cleansed of flesh, dried, polished, and woven into a wickerwork basket, for hanging in the rafters, where they will join the heads gathered in generations past, amid the boar-tusks and poison-bundles. And next year, we will do it again.

While headhunting was most avidly practiced by upland tribes, even the civilized lowland polities had memories of headhunting, which under certain circumstances would either experience a sudden (joyfully) bloody resurgence, or be celebrated in song.

Here's a section from a Tamarao poem:
Jale sapuwang, kulo sametek,
Banta masurak, bala maketek;
Prawo sapasig, nente nagara,
Taralangtuwa Radja Bahara.
Takot ki banye, karana amok,
Ratos tan ribo, salaksa rampok;
Pangkod maadja, parong malisek,
Lalang taura, daga tapitek.
Li-ig na li-ig, terem takaga,
Tanggat pusaka, karga haraga;
Mayat ri hamog, lalo tararok,
Banye kapala, gantong marantok.

"Flowing like cloud drifts (the mass of warriors) altogether
Battled with war cries, conflicted monkey-like;
The boats along the river-bank sands, (arrayed) against the state,
Under the leadership of prince Bahara.
Fearful was the multitude, because of the blood-fury,
One hundred, one thousand, ten thousand in berserk rage.
The battle-standards erect, the war-swords sharp-gleaming,
The long grass crimson splattered, blood gushing,
Neck upon neck (till at last) sharpness became dull,
Seizing magically potent ritual heirlooms, and precious items;
Corpses in the battle-fog, recently swirled in motion,
A multitude of skulls, suspended and knocking together."

Now doesn't that just about get your juices flowing?


7. One book you wish had never been written?
The Abu Ghraib Investigations - because Abu Ghraib should never have happened.


8. One book you are currently reading?
T'ang Shi San Pai Shou (Three Hundred Poems of the Tang Dynasty).

This is one of my frequent revisits. There are many editions of this classic anthology, some with commentary in modern Chinese, some with only explanations of the more abstruse words in a demotic literary lashoin. The poems that are easiest to understand have, not surprisingly, become well-known favourites over the centuries - among these are verses by Wang Wei, Tu Fu, Li Shang-yin, and Li Po (Li Tai-Bak). There is a clarity and conciseness to Chinese poetry which gives intense pleasure, and under the pen of someone like Li Po the phrasing achieves exquisiteness - though I'm still pissed at him for forcing me to learn a word of NO. USE. WHAT SO EVER!, that even in his day was impossibly archaic and eccentric, and it turns out that it referred to an alcoholic barley slurry used during Shang and early Chou as an offering in ancestral rituals; nowadays that word is never used, except when a) quoting that particular poem, and b) discussing odd cultic details from three thousand years ago.

Does Li Po really think that I'm going to have discussions on Dupont Street in which I'll be able to slyly slip in this word? Maybe I'll ask a shop-keeper for Pearl River Brand Mushroom Sauce, dried balutong, and his recommendation regarding rotten barley soup that smells like fruity liquid Limburger? He believes perhaps that late-night drunken conversations at Candy Wong's place are going to evolve into high-fallutin' literary discussions? Good heavens, man, what is your blessed T'ang era presumption of the richness of my life? What on earth were you thinking twelve centuries ago? Pretentious git.


9. One book you have been meaning to read?
Halachic Man, by Joseph B. Soloveichik


10. Now tag five people

Steg (http://boroparkpyro.blogspot.com/)
Labrab (http://labrab.blogspot.com/)
Balabusta in Blue-Jeans (http://www.balabustabluejeans.blogspot.com/)
Tafka (the artist FORMERLY known as Purple Parrot: http://goingslightlymad.blogspot.com/)
The Curious Jew (http://curiousjew.blogspot.com/)

This choice is based on both the chances of their taking the meme-tag, and on the likelihood that their reading material will contain some very interesting surprises. Oh, and the fact that they have blogs. That seems a crucial part of this.


Note: Others I would like to see take this up, in no particular order, are Respondingtojblogs, Chardal, ADDERabbi, Baal Habos, Charlie Hall, Classmate wearing yarmulke, Lipman, Margabriel, Jameel, Lakewood Yid, and a large numbers of others. Unfortunately I do not see them enthusiastically jumping all over this idea like fire ants on a cadaver.

But if they do, so much the better.

RANTING......., VENTING......., AAAAH, MUCH BETTER NOW!

[Note: the text immediately below was sent to a small mailinglist whose members speak both Dutch and English. The text in Dutch underneath that was directed to a mailinglist whose members speak Dutch, English, and several other languages. The smaller list started as a subset of the larger list. Identifiers have been excised, spleen left in.]

Gentlemen,


I have just vented my displeasure at the pretense of neutrality and perspective that reigns on the "S" mailing list.

What particularly galls me is the intellectualized and disdainful sneering that both sides are wrong but Israel is of course ever so much more wrong. Nor do I appreciate the attitude that if only Israel weren't being stubborn there would be complete and perfect peace - which is tantamount to saying that if only Israel didn't exist, there would be complete and perfect peace.

Though that would be a complete and perfect peace acceptable to many on the list, it is not a complete and perfect peace that is acceptable under any circumstances.


I shall of course ignore the mailing list for several months. They can stew in their own politically correct effluvia.

---- - --- - --- - --- - ----

Lijst,


Hadden we maar met de Japanezen en Duitsers onderhandeld in plaats van hun te bestrijden!

Ten eerste zou ik nu geen Nederlands spreken, daar mijn familie nooit tijdelijk naar Nederland zou zijn gegaan.
Ten tweede zouden u allen ook geen Nederlands spreken.

Dit gesprek zou niet plaatsvinden - het zou niets eens kunnen plaatsvinden (hetgeen ulieden waarschijnlijk zou verheugen).


De suggestie van sommigen dat men immer neutraal mot wezen is een van die typische rot-Nederlandismes, zowel hypocriet als opportunistisch. Men kan niet anders verwachten van een handelaren volkje dat in nauwelijks vijf eeuwen bij elke oorlog zowel bankiers als wapenventers waren. Te beginnen bij hun eigen zogenaamde vrijheids oorlog - 1564 tot 1648. Zelfs wanneer zelf betrokken werd met de strijdende partijen overvloedig gehandelt.

Die hauteine afzijdigheid verklaart natuurlijk hoe het komt dat enerzijds Nederland de Amerikaansche reet likt wat internationale politiek betreft, anderzijds met liefde extremisten omhelst. Die pretensie van neutraliteit heeft propaganda waarde - het zal ulieden zeker baten.


En jawel, ik weet heus dat gijlui uzelve niet als allemaal Nederlanders ziet, en dat er ook veel te prijzen is aan Nederland. Wat dat eerst betreft, y'all gone too damn native, buncha Dutchmen wannabees and oreos, en wat dat tweede betreft, daar hebben we het hier niet over en ik vertik het om elke keer als ik kritiek heb dat te moeten verzachten met een portie vleijerij omdat ik een andere opinie dan de weldenkende sociaal bewuste meerderheid blijk te hebben.
Stroopsmering kunt ge uw eigen aandoen - met de keuze van mond, oren, of elders.


De suggestie dat iemand die of voor het leger kiest, of aan de oproep gehoor geeft, bewust denkt met wapens oplossingen te verkrijgen is van een dusdanig gore gehalte dat ik zowel de opmerking en de auteur ervan terzijde schuif. Daarmede heeft men niet alleen mijn directe familie een grove belediging toegediend, doch ook minstens een andere lijstlid, en tevens grote getallen die gediend hebben. Getuigt temeer dat suggereerder nooit familie in uniform heeft gehad, of tenminste juist die familieleden veracht (en men zou zelfs aan collaborationisten denken).
Go tell it to the graves in Normandy, you unmentionable!


Dat doen alsof men bijde zijden fout acht, wijl men wel degelijk het voor de verkeerde partij opneemt, in zowel ge-uite mening als nep-neutraliteit, is iets dat mij van vele verlichte Europeanen de strot uithangt. Wees verdomme eens eerlijk en geef gewoon toe dat men partijdig dan wel bigoot is - dat heeft Mevrouw ( -- ) tenminste gedaan. Ik weet waar ik aan toe ben met haar, en hoewel ik weiger ooit weer een gesprek met haar aan te gaan en haar gedachten-goed repulsief vind, kan ik wel degelijk haar forthrightness waarderen.


Ik weiger hier verder op de lijst over te spreken, en heb nauwelijks zin om zelfs verder met de lijst in gesprek te raken. Dat zal waarschijnlijk wederzijds zijn.
Ik ga in lurk mode wijl ik overweeg om de lijst op te zeggen. Na acht jaren heb ik weinig aan u, u evenveel aan mij.


Whatever.


------

---- - --- - --- - --- - ----

Update slash afterthought: the title on this post is factually incorrect, as I am not "much better" now.

I still want to clobber some pustulent Dutch-speaker whom I have never met in person with a baseballbat, still wish to kick some smarmy know-it-alls in their self-satisfied prissy rears, and still wish that at least two members of the list get food poisoning and lose multi-coloured fluids from both ends for up to a week.

WHO AND WHAT? FIND OUT HERE!

.
.
Dutch-American.
.
Leftie-liberal Dutch-American.
.
Multi-lingual left-coast liberal Dutch-American.
.
Compulsive reader multi-lingual Asian food eating pipe smoking left coast liberal Dutch American.
.
Multiply hyphenated angry compulsive reader multi-lingual Asian food eating non-musically inclined veering in the direction of Judaism pipe smoking left coast liberal Dutch American.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Errrm.....
.
.
.
.
.
.
Bearded.
.
.
.
.
.
Yes......, that's it........
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
No, I am NOT the Papa Smurf!
.
.

REMINDER: COUNTER DEMO THIS SATURDAY (08/12/06)

PLEASE FORWARD WIDELY

Counter Protest the Anti-Israel demonstration at San Francisco Civic Center Plaza

Polk Street between McAllister and Grove, San Francisco
Saturday August 12th, 10:30AM

------------------------------

International A.N.S.W.E.R.will be holding a rally specifically to oppose Israel's efforts to defend its citizens and its territory against rocket attacks and kidnappings by the terror groups Hezbollah and Hamas.

San Francisco Voice for Israel/Stand With Us will counter the anti-Israel/pro-terrorism voice. It's expected to be the biggest anti-Israel event in Bay area. That's why it's so important for us to be there to show our strong support for Israel.

Our presence at these events has proven highly effective at making sure that the anti-Israel activists can not push their propaganda on the public unopposed!

Please join us! Details can be found at www.SFVoiceForIsrael.org

P.S. To answer the frequently asked question: Yes, SFPD is aware about our presence. Police will provide a safety zone. Also we have our own security team, ready to prevent any troubles.

---------------------------------------------------

Before the rallyMike Harris (StandWithUs/SFVoiceforIsrael) will be appearing on Ronn Owens' show on KGO AM 810 next Friday, August 11, between 10 and 11 AM.

Mike will be in a live, in studio debate against Richard Becker, West Coast director of International ANSWER, about the current situation in the Middle East.

Please be listening to call in support of Israel and against ANSWER's demonization of Israel.

Those of you without a radio but with computer access can listen live at http://www.kgoam810.com/home.asp


StandWithUs/ San Francisco Voice for Israel
www.SFVoiceForIsrael.org
www.StandWithUs.com

-----------------------------

Shomrei shabbes may want to overnight with friends and relatives who live in San Francisco.

Please encourage friends and coworkers to come - we'll need all the people we can get.

Remember to bring water.

And bring boffo signs.

NEGATIVE OPINIONS OF CHRISTIANS AND CHRISTIANITY

In a comment thread on Dovbear's blog (see this post: http://dovbear.blogspot.com/2006/07/another-of-of-our-very-best-friends.html ) I responded to a defense of Christianity by a visitor (RR).

Now bear in mind, bloggers truly like visitors. But there are visitors, and there are visitors..... And sometimes the visitor's comments veer so far off agenda that it is better to continue the discourse elsewhere -- such as right here, for instance. Welcome.


[My previous posting regarding this comment thread was here: http://atthebackofthehill.blogspot.com/2006/08/false-religions.html]


Now, let's take up the conversation where it was left off the last time.
What follows in large Italic is RR speaking, the text in regular type underneath is my response.



RR: "Like South Park, I declare "shenanigan" on the notion that atheism is in any way "an acceptable belief", especially since many atheists are required to hold "unacceptable beliefs" in order to deny God. "

[B.O.T.H.] Actually, atheists are not required to do so - there is no agency requiring anything at all of them. They merely do not believe.



RR: " "(Deut. verses 11/26 through 16/17)" That is just more evidence that it is possible to be Jewish and Christian "just as long as you do not tell anyone", and it is CERTAINLY preferable to being a proud, publicly declared, and evangelical atheist or secularist."

[B.O.T.H.] Not from within the context of those verses it ain't. It specifically refers to holding or doubting Jewish beliefs in one's public expression. Though Christians may have their own interpretation (as indeed they do about nearly everything), those verses can only be seen in light of the long speech by Moses, at the end of his years, to the Jews who will enter the land, telling them what they must do. And what they must do is be Jews. The Torah is not a book of random rules - everything in it must be seen in the context of the rest of it. And there is no other context to it than a Jewish context. What non-Jews do with the text has no validity in a Jewish context.



RR: "Now be perfectly honest with yourself: people can talk about Christianity and Jesus as much as they want around you so long as they are being negative about it. Right?"

[B.O.T.H.] Wrong. I much prefer not to even hear the name of that man, far less listen to any discussion about him. Stating negative things about him would scarce qualify as conversation - in that hardly anything at all of his life can be proven, and it is doubtful that he even existed. Lashon hara about a mythical personage would be rather silly, don't you think?



RR: "If you desire to hold onto negative opinions of Christianity and Christians so strongly that you cannot countenance someone objecting to blanket condemnations and correcting outright untruths, well then your problem is not with Christianity or Christians but with yourself."

[B.O.T.H.] My opinions of Christianity and Christians are based on much exposure to and familiarity with Christianity and Christians. So much so that I feel I have had enough exposure and familiarity, and do not need more.

I am sorry (but NOT repentant) that it seems that it seems to you that I have negative opinions - I merely meant to convey that I have no positive opinion of Christianity and Christians.

-----------------------------------

Charlie Hall (whose blog is here: http://charliehall.blogspot.com/ ) wrote this in the comment thread:

RR,

WADR, you clearly do not understand Judaism. Several of us have tried to explain some basic concepts to you and you have rejected them. In particular, there is NO Jewish group that is accepted as Jewish that accepts the idea that it is possible to be both a Jew and a Christian. A Jew who rejects part or even all of the Jewish tradition is still a Jew. But a Jew who actually joins a different religion is no longer considered a Jew for most purposes.

You don't have to like that. You don't have to think it makes any sense. You don't even have to accept it. But that is irrelevant. It is the way it is. We didn't make it up. And we aren't going to change it.

But if you can't accept it, please comment on other kinds of blogs than Orthodox Jewish blogs. We aren't here to debate religion with non-Jews. In fact, according to some of the most distinguished rabbis of our times, we can't -- it violates Jewish law. All we can do is state the facts.

I'm not anti-Christian. But many Jews are, in part because of the refusal by many Christians to accept Jewish teaching as legitimate. Please don't help to create more anti-Christian Jews.
Charlie Hall 08.04.06 - 2:48 am #



I am sorry - I just felt I had to gild the lilly, and expand a little on Charlie Hall's message.

I wrote:


RR,

One thing which Charlie Hall failed to mention must also be said. Namely that arguing from a pro-Christian point of view here does not advance our understanding of Jewish issues, and could well make those who are only marginally negative about Christianity much more so.

I will not claim for myself to be a halachic or hashkafic expert - but debating Christianity with you will certainly not make me one. Nor will it make you one either.

Again, I cannot speak for others here.... but you are certainly not the first convinced Christian I have encountered. I've already been exposed to the Christian points of view regarding these matters. I suspect (and correct me if I'm wrong, folks) that the others here have also been through versions of this before.

Lastly, I am not Rabbi Moises ben Nachman, and you are not Pablo Cristiani - is it not ridiculous to even have this conversation?

With each iteration I become more convinced that Christianity is utterly defective, whereas you merely become more convinced that I am wrong.
The Back of the Hill Homepage 08.04.06 - 6:14 pm #

------------------

The main reason why I've posted about these matters is because to a certain extent I needed to clarify my own point of view. Secondarily, of course, I often have this slightly tingly feeling in my solar plexus everytime that someone gets defensive about Christianity - it isn't like it's a religion in any great danger, except from its practitioners. Why then must one vociferously defend it?

Those who truly wish to delve into its mysteries can surely find a host of welcoming websites, libraries, and ritualariums, in addition to all manner of outreach?


Unlike Judaism, Christianity is a missionary religion. It has a marketing department.

SINAS CHINAM

Several bloggers have delved into Sinas Chinam (baseless hatred) over the past several days, in relation to Tisha b'Av (which, here in San Francisco, will end in an hour or so).

Sinas Chinam, it will be recalled, is posed as the stated cause of the destruction of the Second Temple 2000 years ago -- defined in this context specifically as baseless hatreds among Jews.


I do not take issue with that interpretation.


I shall instead bring up Mel Gibson. No, I won't quote what that man said - you've probably already seen the animated cartoon too, as well as the hysterical scene from South Park.

What I wish to quote is this: "Please know from my heart I am not an anti-Semite. I am not a bigot. Hatred of any kind goes against my faith."

Okay......

Dat's so nice......

Charming......

He says his faith tells him not to hate......


THAT'S THE ONLY REASON HE DOESN'T HATE THE JEWS??!!?


He can't come up with a single more convincing reason?

Anything?


Talk about baseless love.


This smacks too much of the 'love the sinner, hate the sin' line of thinking.
There is no acceptance there. Mere tolerance is perhaps too good a description. The sin and the sinner are probably still despicable, but he refrains from despising, presumably out of the goodness of his heart, and his sheer all flowers and butterflies Christian love for bugger-all everybody. His faith tells him not to hate.


Is that really the only reason he knows not to hate Jews?

That isn't very re-assuring, is it?



My dearly beloved blue-faced friend, those of us who think little of you do not hate you either, though we have, it appears, more than enough "base" to do so.
Except for those times when your drunken tantrums get you back in the public eye, we prefer not to think of you.

Just one question......

Who else do you love so baselessly?

And are they safe?

-----------------------------------

Please know from my heart I am not a bigot; innocent trust in the 'faith' of others goes against my realism.

FALSE RELIGIONS

On Dovbear's blog (here: http://dovbear.blogspot.com/) there was recently a posting about our friend Mel Gibson, his drunken tantrum, and his defenders from two years ago.
[See this post: http://dovbear.blogspot.com/2006/07/another-of-of-our-very-best-friends.html ]


One of the commenters (a recent visitor) got a little upset about a perceived anti-Christian slant to both the blog and the comments.


Perhaps I'm just too jaded, I honestly didn't notice an anti-Christian slant.
Or maybe I'm just too used to the anti-Christian message, as in my environment Christianity is as much up for debate as someone's execrable taste in single-malt Scotch.

But the commenter, who goes by the nomen 'RR', not only got a little steam up, but also veered off into Christian theology of sorts.


[I should mention that Dovbear is not a Christian. I'm sure you already figgered that out, but it must be stressed. Not a Christian. ]


Often, communicating with dogmatic Christians is much like communicating with Communists and Fascists. They have the same linguistic rigidities, the same entrenched ideas, and the same legitimacy granted to certain ideas and definitions - just because their preprogrammed responses differ does not mean that they don't swim in the same swamp.


RR asked: "Explain to me how it makes ANY SENSE THEOLOGICALLY for it to be OK to be a secular or atheist but not a Christian, Muslim, Hindu, Buddhist, Kabbala, or whatever? Since either way you are turning your back on Judaism."


Me:
Wellllll, let's give it a shot.

A secular Jew remains a Jew. One is a Jew through either being born of a Jewish mother AND niplet snipping, OR conversion and niplet snipping.
The Torah expresses that it is both a contractual issue (between a deity, the party of the first part, and a people, party of the second part, who serve as the paradigm of all peoples), and an issue of being sanctified - the people in question are to remain sanctified to the deity (which, upon intermarriage, is in doubt, upon conversion, utterly negated).

The niplet snipping serves as the token and reminder of the consecration of the males of the tribe to Hashem. If it was done with that intent.


A Jew is not a believer in a particular theology (although there is indeed a particular range of theologies which are desirable for a Jew to be vested in), but a theologically defined people.

Either you inherit it and stay with it, OR you convert to it and stay with it. With "it" being more a negative characteristic - not worshipping other gods, not following other religions - than a positive characteristic. One is required to hold certain beliefs - but UNTIL you prove that you do not, you are Jewish. Though sometimes just not a particularly good Jew.

A Christian, on the other hand, is absolutely not a Jew. Though he may be of Jewish ancestry. Adderabah, Muslims, Buddhists, or whathaveyous.

Now, you wanted a theological explanation. Theology is a symbol system. Which means that this either makes sense to you if you understand the symbol system, or it doesn't if you do not understand the symbol system. The symbol system of Christianity and the symbol system of Judaism are not the same, just so you know.

As regards Christianity having or not having it's very own virulent strain of anti-Semitism, I wonder what the Sefardim who went to Amsterdam thought of that? What about the survivors of the several pogroms in Germany (Rindfleish et seq.) throughout the middle-ages? What about the Polish Jews (Chmielnicki), Russian Jews (Czarina Catherine the 'great'), Ukrainian Jews (Petliura)?

No offense, my dear RR, but they probably would agree with Dovbear on that score. And yet consider his condemnation too mild.

There is much within the structure of Christianity that can and has been interpreted in an anti-Semitic way. Just as Communism has a version that is related to the Christian version, deriving ideas from many of the same sources and from the same cultural layers. Which the Muslims imported into their environment scarce changed - Mein Kampf and the Protocols both sell well in Arabia, and it has been conclusively shown that the blood libel did not exist in the Arab world until the French became involved in the Levant.

All of these things originate in the Christian world. None of them originated with secularists, or atheists, or humanists. The roots of all current forms of anti-Semitism lie with the church. Who may have inherited the anti-Semitist drang from the Romans, Greeks, and Egyptians - but Lordy did they expand upon it.

One might even argue that good old fashioned Muslim anti-Semitism has ceased to exist since the importation of the superior Christian version - something that must give many retrogrades a glow of pride, I imagine, though only the Klan and the Nazis would publicly kvell about it.

Oh, and just for the record, so that you understand where I'm coming from,
I am not a Jew, nor am I intending to convert. I am too much a doubter and a cynic to commit to any religion - I never 'had' Christianity, and refuse to 'have' anything else. Consider me however in many ways a fellow traveler - a Ger perhaps, sort of dancing in and out of the gate, and dithering around the outskirts of the city staring at all the interesting edifices.

[Oh, and the only thing I seek to convert people to is hotsauce. I love hotsauce. Hotsauce is great. Hotsauce saves. Hotsauce HAS saved me..... it made English food bearable while I was there. I have complete and perfect faith in the salutory quality of hotsauce.]





RR: "So, you would have me to believe that atheist and secular Jews are niplet splitting? And you just contradicted the "lost forever" nonsense, as all they have to do is convert back to and niplet - split, right?
------[cut]------
Now, if it is a matter of niplet splitting, then fine ... encourage Jewish converts to Christianity to niplet split themselves and their kids. As a matter of fact, I have read that Hebrew Christians are niplet splitting and keeping all of the other Jewish traditions as well. That would make them just as Jewish as any Marxist who lives his entire life laughing at, mocking, and living in rebellion to God, right?"
Me:

My dear RR,

Converting (back) to Judaism, for those born of mixed marriages, or those who accidentally fell into Christianity, would be a good thing.
But a belief in Jezus as anything other than the Graecified version of an originally Hebrew name (with or without a loaded and dangerous set of associations), is absolutely incompatible with Judaism - as Saint Paul understood well, which is why he aimed his propaganda at the Greeks and Romans primarily.
A Jew who combines adherence to the law AND a belief in Jezus is not a Jew, merely misguided.
A Christian who obeys the law is a Christian, with mighty strange habits for a Christian.
Jews for Jezus, Hebrew Christians, and other variations on Messaianic Judaism, are not Jews. There is indeed much in their makeup that may be considered Jewish. But al pi halacha they cannot be considered Jews.
Now if they completely give up their meshune ideas about Jezus, formally renouncing that error, and formally state their desire to return to Judaism......
It's not just hair-splitting. Believing in a god made flesh and separate as the son of that same god, along with a personal saviour who died and (was) resurrected, just cannot be fit into any form of montheism, let alone so specific a form as Judaism.
The deity is unknowable, indefinable. Christianity claims to know, and defines in several ways. The two cannot be reconciled, no matter how much material they share.
The pantheic insistence on fitting Jezus into ones beliefs is probably the major stumbling block. It is in multiple ways a heresy, idolatrous, rank superstition, and absolutely odious.
Sorry.
On a personal level, I also feel it too much a fairy-tale to take any part of Christianity seriously, other than the dictum that 'salvation is by faith alone'. I attempt to have faith that there is a divine. I refuse to go beyond that point with any certainty.




RR: "The Back of the Hill:You have done a great job of explaining why Jews reject the legitimacy of Christianity, but you have not explained why a mixed marriage between a Jew and a Christian is any worse than a mixed marriage between a Jew and an atheist.
------[cut]------
And then there is this issue: the incontrovertible FACT that atheism and secularism ARE INDEED RELIGIONS! They cause man to worship himself and to worship the earth and the things in it: humanism, naturalismm and mammon. THOU SHALT NOT HAVE NO OTHER GODS BEFORE (BESIDES) ME! There isn't a person on the planet who believes in NOTHING and worships NOTHING because we all know that the world existed before we got here, it will exist when we leave here, and that we have to cope with life while we are here. So "you can still be a Jew so long as you do not worship another religion" my foot."





Me:
My dear RR,

Firstly, Jews do not reject the legitimacy of Christianity. Jews do not accept that Christianity has any legitimacy to begin with. There is no question, therefore, of rejection. Do not take this as a sign of rejection.
Now then, an atheist can still be Jewish (in the sense of NOT being not a Jew), a Christian is by definition not Jewish (in that a Christian does not adhere to acceptable beliefs).
If that atheist was not Jewish to begin with, OR, as you put it, worships the earth and the things in it, then he is not Jewish.
There are some pretty horrific passages in parshas re'eh (Deut. verses 11/26 through 16/17) that make clear that the focus in Judaism is one of group adherence - private doubts, as long as they do not lead others astray, are 'sort of' accepted as an unnecessary evil, albeit one that might get one into hot water. The doubter can improve, learn more, come to a different understanding, or repent of his error.
But publically, one sticks pretty much to the party line, partially because one is an example to one's brethren.
I mentioned parshas re'eh in this context because it is one of my favourite bloody-minded parshayos.
Verse 13/7 If your brother, the son of your mother, or your son or your daughter, or the wife of your bosom, or your friend who is like your own soul will incite you secretely, saying let us go serve other gods, which you did not know of, and your fathers did not know of 13/8 of the gods of the surrounding peoples, close or far, from one end of the earth to the other 13/9 you shall not take kindly to him and you shall not listen to him, nor shall you be mercifull 13/10 Rather, you shall surely kill him; your hand shall be the first against him to put him to death, and the hand of the entire people afterwards.
One could also argue that there are many other aspects of Judaism as practised that stress group ideology over individual intellectual variances, the examples are infinite.
But what must also be kept in mind is that there are many ways of understanding Torah and Talmud. A famous phrase (shivim ponim le Toireh) expresses it as seventy faces to the Pentateuch (and seventy, as you undoubtedly know, expresses the concept of a multitude). There is a flexibility there that is deliberate - one must find one's own understanding of Torah, merely absorbing what one is taught is not considered enough. Passivity is not intellectual or spiritual involvement.
Your assertion that secularism and humanism are religions is an interesting tack... as a secular humanist, I don't quite know how to respond. I am as flabbergasted as I would be if you accused me of being an alien from a distant galaxy.
I shall have to ask some of the commies I know how they worship the earth.... pray for me as I do that, as I'm sure I'll get slapped.
Lastly, three things:
1. Please stop using so much upper case. When I see nothing but majuscule, I feel that I am being shouted at. That merely gets my dander up.
2. "So "you can still be a Jew so long as you do not worship another religion" my foot." I do not worship feet. I am not perverse.
3. Rabbi Chananiah Ben Teradion said: "If two sit together and no words of Torah pass between them, theirs is the conversation of scoffers" (Pirkei Avos, prk 3 psk 3). With that in mind, what can be said of a conversation in which there is little Torah, but far too much of Christianity? I fear that arguing about Christianity (for or against) may make some of the other readers here unwell, especially as one should not know too much about the false religions, nor study them save for the purpose of defending against them. Let us, therefore, shy away from so much Jayzits. I too am getting a little unwell.

--- --- --- --- --- ---

Now then, dear readers, please comment, and point out the holes in my ideas. Be my sounding board. Points of halocho and hashkofo are most welcome.
And feel free to keep in mind the famous line from Rav. Shakespeare, in Melech Richard Ha Shlishi: "A chizzuk, a chizzuk, my malchus for a chizzuk"

DUTCH POLL RESULTS: SUPPORT FOR ISRAEL DWINDLING

Results of a poll in the Netherlands conducted by TPS NIPO on behalf of RTL Niews.

Six hundred people eighteen years old and above were polled. Of these 24 percent voted for the Christian Democratic Appeal (centrist) in the last election, 22 percent for the Labour Party (left), 14 percent Liberal Party (rightwing by Dutch standards, centre-left by American standards). Of the remainder 14 percent did not vote.



59 percent believe the Netherlands should provide troops for a peacekeeper force, provided that peacekeeping is limited to rebuilding and excludes force entirely.

58 percent think Bush has not done enough to resolve the situation.

57 percent is 'informed to well-informed' regarding the current situation.

55 percent want the Dutch gov't to demand an immediate cease-fire.

39 percent are more negative about Israel than before.

33 percent 'supports' (has understanding for) Israel.

18 percent 'supports' (has understanding for) Hezbollah.




The article in the Volkskrant (in Dutch) can be found here:
http://www.volkskrant.nl/binnenland/article335613.ece/Steun_Nederlanders_voor_Israel_brokkelt_af?source=rss).



Even though more people are said to support Israel (33%) than Hezbollah (18%), the degree of support is not mentioned.
[I expect that the support for Hezbollah comes from more committed and activistic sections of the populace than the support for Israel - Muslims, urban youth, and left-wing organizations, versus older and more religious people out in the provinces.]


'Houston, we got a problem.......'


One out of six Dutchmen backs terrorists whose platform includes erasing Israel from the map.

There is something very rotten in the Western liberal democracies.
.
.
.
.