I don't get it

I don't get it.

Hamas fires missiles into Israel.

No one complains.

No one descends on nations' capitols saying, as a woman said for tv cameras in Washington DC the other day that "we are peaceful people; see, we live here (in the US) with no problem."

Israel responds, granted with an intensity that was long overdue, and "Palestinians" - some of who probably can't SPELL "Palestine" let along have been there - along with their bleeding heart supporters mass in the streets complaining that Israel's attacks are unprovoked (never mind the barrage of Hamas missiles that fall every day on Israeli civilians).

Why, they ask, won't Israel stop attacking the poor innocent Hamas terrorists.

Why, they plead, won't The World condemn Israel and force it to quit defending itself.

Why, they know but don't say, won't Israel stop sending the planes so they can restock their arsenal of weapons to send death to Israeli civilians.

But no one asks why Hamas doesn't stop sending rockets into Israel.

No one seems to think it appropriate to tell Hamas to stop its provocations.

No pressure on Hamas.

None.

Zero.

Zip.

Nada.

Why won't Israel act in a humanitarian manner and allow supplies into Hamas' Aza?

It did - and got rockets in return.

For the liberals who believe Israel should be using a kid glove on Hamas and its supporters, I respond: Israel tried the kid glove. It only emboldened Hamas. To an Islamist, a kid glove is a sign of weakness.

Since the kid glove kindness was reciprocated by missiles, Israel struck with a steel fist.

Not, as it probably should have done, when the first Hamas rocket fell on Israel, but after days of attacks.

If Hamas wants Israel to ground its air force and call back the tanks and troops, it must stop shelling Israelis.

Simple.

Israel will - and I will tell you I think foolishly - cease its counter-attacks (which will allow Hamas to import more weapons to indiscriminately kill Israelis, Jews, Arab, and others.

While Hamas is promising to keep up the attacks until Israel withdraws from "Palestinian" land - that means all of Israel - Israel is allowing humanitarian aid into Aza and even accepting wounded from Aza into its hospitals.

Lousy Israelis.

They have the nerve to object to being shelled.

They get upset when a suicide murderer slaughters innocent civilians.

Stupid Israelis - giving aid to people whose primary goal is to kill them.

Idiot Israelis - if they wound you defending themselves, they will give you world-class medical care FOR FREE . . . the stupid Israeli taxpayer will foot the bill.

Those poor folks in Aza: Hamas and its supporters.

If only Israel would just disappear.

But, in the meantime, Hamas sends rockets toward Israeli cities. to fall "wherever." An elementary school is good. Hospitals, too. (Course what's a poor Hamas militiaman - or woman - to do when they need excellent medical care if the hospital is gone.)

I guess I'm missing something.

Hamas attacks Israeli civilians for days on end.

When Israel finally responds, Hamas wants the world to force Israel to stop the retribution.

Think about it.

Israel already "turned the other cheek" time after time.

After 9/11, when the US was attacked by Islamic terrorists, the US government went into attack mode, which is why US troops are in Afghanistan and US agents are hunting al-Qaida across the Indian subcontinent.

From my perspective, what Israel is doing is long overdue.

---

Looking for something else, I stumbled across the Heretical Librarian blog http://hereticallibrarian.blogspot.com/2007/07/ala-council-and-dina-carter.html and some comments about Dina Carter, a librarian working at the Mount Scopus Campus of Hebrew University, Jerusalem. Hamas murdered her - her "crime?" Was because she was a librarian or because she was an American in Jerusalem or was she simply a human being that Hamas could slaughter. The blog is worth a read, unless of course your point of view is that Ms. Carter was somehow attacking Hamas.

---

Yohanon
Yohanon.Glenn @ gmail dot com

Civilian causalities in Aza

29 December 2008

The "World" is, as expected, criticizing Israel for its aerial attacks on Hamas which, unfortunately, resulted in some civilian causalities.

The Arab world has generally taken to the streets to protest Israel's defense of its population.

It seems to me that this Israeli response to repeated rocket attacks by Hamas on Israel could easily, and quickly, be brought to a halt.

All it takes is for Hamas to cease its efforts to murder Israelis - with rockets, with suicide murderers, with whatever diabolical tactics it could devise.

Meanwhile, let's consider civilian causalities.

In truth, they are "collateral damage" that rightly should be laid at Hamas' feet - no attacks on Israel and Israelis, no counter-actions by the Israelis.

Beyond that, let's consider the nature of war.

"Civilians" are killed.

I put "civilians" in quotes because in some cases, these people were in bed with the perpetrators (e.g., Germans and Poles and Hungarians in recent memory) either as willing collaborators or as silent onlookers.

I include the US government in this group, in particular the FDR (WWII) and Eisenhower (Hungary) administrations.

I recognize that once a party comes to power it is hard to dislodge, but it can be dislodged if the people stop supporting it.

In the case of Aza, Hamas is dependent upon the good will of the Arab states - Iran, Saudi, and Syria in particular. If these countries wanted a cessation of attacks on Israel, Hamas would be forced to cease the attacks.

At the same time, if Iran and Saudi - the money countries - wanted to turn Aza into a place where "Palestinians" wanted to live, these two countries could fund and supervise the building of the cities (for which Arafat received millions) the previous (PLO) Aza regime promised when Israel withdrew. With cities, the camps - set up in 1948! - could be closed, at least in Aza.

In case anyone missed my point, the Arab states are largely responsible for the camps continued existence. To be fair, Jordan - truly a "Palestinian" state - did welcome those Arabs who got out of the way of the glorious invading armies (in 1948) or who were forced out by the Jewish defenders for fear they (the Arabs) were a Fifth Column.

Before anyone shakes a finger at the Jews who expelled their Moslem neighbors, consider the American Indian's plight (even today), and the people "relocated" to Siberian camps by the Soviets - never mind the Jews and Gypsies and others sent to Hitler's camps, particularly those in Poland.

Back to Jordan - after welcoming the Moslems who left Israel, the guests tried to kill the monarch and over-throw the government.

Jordan chased them out - and Lebanon became their next victim.

I specify "Moslem" vs. "Arab" because, as I understand it, the Druze are Arabs but not Moslem. Many of the Baha'i in Israel are Arab, but not Moslem.

By the way, what of the Moslems who elected to remain in Israel?

Last time I was there - when we were being shelled from the north - I shared a beach near Haifa with an obviously Moslem family (wondering if an obviously Jewish family could do the same in Syria or Iran). I also keep in the front of my mind the Arab - Moslem or ?? - who was the first to help my sister-in-law when she fell and broke her leg on a Haifa sidewalk. I am neither "anti-Arab" nor "anti-Moslem," but I am very much anti-Hamas and the people who, willingly or quietly, support it.

The bottom line is that civilian causalities in a war are unfortunate but to be expected even in attacks that do not target civilians (unlike Hamas' attacks that DO SPECIFICALLY target civilians).

Hamas is directly responsible for the injuries and deaths in Aza.

When it stops murdering Israelis then Israel will cease its counter-attacks.

Simple.

Parting question. Why is it that Israel is the only country condemned for reducing aid to an enemy? Note I wrote "reducing," not "refusing" aid to an enemy. Aza also borders the Med and Egypt. Egypt, like Israel, closed its border to its fellow Arab Moslems. Could it be the Egyptians have the same concern for Hamas as Israel? And why, given the billions poured in to Aza's politicians pockets over the decades, does Aza lack a decent port?

Things to consider as Hamas' friends and the safely-distant-from-Hamas-terrorists liberals condemn Israel for having the audacity to finally protect its population - Jewish and non-Jewish alike.

---

5:30 news bulletin 29 Dec 2008: There now are four Israelis killed by Hamas' rockets. One of those Israelis was an Arab who apparently preferred Israel's freedoms to Hamas' terror.

---

Yohanon

Yohanon.Glenn @ gmail dot com

Why Israel?

The voices in Aza (Gaza) once again are crying to the world that Israel has closed its border with Aza.

Why?

Aza borders Egypt.

Remember, the Azans recently broke through the physical barrier and invaded Eqypt.

Aza has a long border on the Medierranean Sea. With all the money poured into Aza (OK, Arafat & friends' pockets) an excellent port could have been built.

So why is the finger always pointed at Israel?

The Azans shell Israeli towns.

The Azans send in suicide murderers to kill innocent civilians.

And then have the chutzpah to complain that Israel closes ONE border.

Let Eqypt open its border.

Let Aza's despots develop a port; I'm sure the world will donate billions more to Aza's rulers.

Meanwhile Israel still provides electricity and, at a minimum, "humanitarian aid" to people who vow to destroy it.

Once again, "Why Israel?"

Yohanon

yohanon.glenn @ gmail.com

Holocaust Conspiracy - no surprise

I've known it for a long time.

Now I discover it is far worse, and far more pervasive, than I every expected.

What is it?

"It" is the world's reaction to the Nazi's holocaust.

I'm reading a smallish book - only 255 pages of fairly large (~12 point) print - by William R. Perl. The book is titled "The Holocaust Conspiracy, An International Policy of Genocide." We all know about the Nazi's attempt to make Europe free of Jews. We also know of the enthusiasm of the Nazi friends in Eastern Europe. We know because "they" lost the war.

We are starting to learn about the Vatican's role in the holocaust.

We know about the SS St. Louis*, the Hamburg-America Line (Hapag), ship that sailed from Germany to Cuba with a passenger list of Jews with Cuban entry papers, papers declared invalid by Batista. The Jews, refused entry, stayed on board as the St. Louis sailed up the coast of the United States, with the captain trying to convince the US government to allow the passengers entry. In the end, the St. Louis returned the passengers to the only country to accept them ... and to their deaths.

Some of us know - and many more have refused to acknowledge the reality - that FDR was anything but a "savior" of the Jews that many Jews of his time believed. Like JFK after him, he received credit for things he never did,

Perl's book, with an introduction by Claiborne Pell, chair of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee from 1987-1994, bares the US State Department's on-going anti-Jewish attitude with proof after proof. At the same time, it identifies those in the US government - mostly Treasury - who tried to move the US to save at least children.

On the other side of the pond, Churchill gets high marks although he was surrounded by those who were all too willing to let the Germans have their way with its own Jews and the Jews they inherited as they occupied their neighbors' lands. Many of the neighbors were, of course, all too willing to aid and abet the Nazis.

This is a book that ought to be in every Jewish home; every synagogue library ought to have several copies.

The one bright point is that we can, in the US, publish a book that embarrasses us as a nation so that we can learn and prevent a repetition.

FDR was a politician's politician and he did nothing to jeopardize his position. Many of the positive things he did - both domestically and internationally - can be laid at the feet of his wife.

Perl's book is well documented both with references and a mid-section that contains some of the damning documents cited by the author.

The table of contents is brief:

• Conspiracy: The Psychosocial Context
• Setting the Course: The Fiasco of the Evian Conference - An American-British Conspiracy
• Conspiracy in the American Hierarchy
• Conspiracy in the British Hierarchy
• Soviet Policies that Supported the Final Solution
Photographs and Documents
• How the Allies Kept Auschwitz Operating
• The Other Americas; Latin American - Canada
• The Moral Powers; The Vatican, the IRC, Switzerland
• Epilogue: Could it happen again?

The copy I read came from the local lending library, but I can assure you I will be searching the WWW for a copy to purchase.

---

*  About the SS St. Louis
http://www.nizkor.org/hweb/people/j/jarvik-laurence/Jarvic-01.html
http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/Holocaust/stlouis.html
Return to text

yohanon
yohanon.glenn @ gmail.com

Politically (in)correct Song

It's a funny thing, "political correctness."

This is prompted by a Disney decision - actually a continuing decision by the corporate mouse masters - to withhold distribution of "Song of the South" as a DVD or on other media.

Some of us know "Song of the South" as Uncle Remus stories. Uncle Remus was the main character, albeit overshadowed by the likes of Br'r Rabbit, Br'r Fox, and Br'r Bear.

An American Aesop Uncle Remus was.

Unfortunately, Uncle Remus was a black cartoon - sorry, "animated" - character.

The reason Disney officials present to the public is that they fear Uncle Remus might offend people with a permanent suntan.

I'm always amazed at "white" folk who look down on "colored" folk . . . and then go to the beach or tanning parlor to become as "colorful" as the "colored" folk. Boggles my mind.

The Disney people may be partially correct in their concern.

I used to live in Pinellas County in Florida. Pinellas is across the bay from Tampa.

What's the connection ?

This.

Pinellas County, with a fair sized Jewish population, has a Jewish museum with a boxcar said to have carried Jews to the extermination camps. The rail car is a physical reminder of our history.

Tampa had an opportunity to be a permanent host for the ship Amistad. The Amistad was a Portuguese sailing vessel that came to fame when its cargo of bound-for-slavery Africans overthrew the crew and took over the ship. Steven Spielberg turned the tale into a movie and brought the ship's history to a new audience.

The Tampa Bay black community, for whatever reason and unlike the Jewish community, considered the Amistad to be insulting, a reminder of a time they apparently would prefer to forget. (Forgetting slavery is a bit hard for a Jew to understand; we still recall, at least once a year, our slavery in Egypt. But, different strokes for different folks.)

Anyway, the Amistad finally found a home in New Haven CT.

Apparently the New Haven black community had a different view of the ship than the people of Tampa Bay.

I believe I saw "Song of the South" as a child. I know - no doubt about it - that I read Uncle Remus stories complete with "deep south" accents ("Lawd, don' throw me inta that briar patch, Br'r Bear"). I recall the tar baby story every time I say "Howdy" to someone who fails to respond in kind.

I knew a grandmother who searched and searched for "Uncle Remus Tales." Unlike this scrivener, she lacked Internet search experience or else sufficient nosiness. She was delighted when I told her the name of the book she sought was "Song of the South." Did she buy it? I never found out.

To paraphrase a phrase attributed to a mid-19th century president, "You can satisfy some of the people some of the time, but you can't satisfy all of the people all of the time."

There is, I read, the fear that youngsters seeing "Song of the South" or reading the book (do kids still read? do parents still read to them?) will develop prejudices or inferiority complexes.

I think we are being over cautious. I doubt any of the denizens of "Song of the South" inculcated racism in me. (Who knows, maybe there is a racial or political or, gasp, sexual undertone to Winnie-the-Pooh stories - Tigger does enjoy jumping on the other characters. Hummm.)

Uncle Remus is not a character who invites derision or scorn. Indeed, Uncle Remus is like the uncle, or grandfather, most of us would delight in having. I can't see why there are those who would feel lessened by a release of "Song of the South."

But then I still don't understand why some folks don't want history in their briar patch and others do.

yohanon
Yohanon.Glenn @ gmail.com

Holocaust - a Jewish PR mistake

From Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_War_II_casualties)

---

The Holocaust took the lives of between 5.1 to 6.0 million Jews.

Other groups persecuted and killed by the Nazis included

• Gypsies: 130,000 to 500,000
• Handicapped: 150,000 to 200,000
• Soviet POWs: 2.6 to 3 million
• Poles: 1.8 to 1.9 million
• Soviet civilians: 4.5 to 8.2 million
• Gay males: about 10,000
• Jehovah's Witnesses: 1,000
• Roman Catholics: 1,000 to 2,000
• Freemasons: unknown number

"The fate of black people from 1933 to 1945 in Nazi Germany and in German-occupied territories ranged from isolation to persecution, sterilization, medical experimentation, incarceration, brutality, and murder."

From 1933-1939 the number of German deaths in Nazi concentration camps were 165,415, primarily Communists, Socialists, Social Democrats, and trade union leaders.

---

The above is NOT to denigrate our loss.

It is an attempt to make a point that we were not the only group that the Germans - with plenty of help from their Eastern European friends - slaughtered "just because."

As long as we continue to remind the world that 6 million Jews were murdered and as long as we fail to also tell the world that these same "civilized" Germans, and their friends, killed others as well, the holocaust will remain a "Jewish event."

"Jewish events" only get our attention; the rest of the world already is forgetting.

It was not just a "Jewish event" and both we and the world need to acknowledge that and remember that.

There is no denying that 6 million (6,000,000) is a large number of lives lost - how many survived with lives destroyed, how many generations were lost - but we were not the only group to be singled out.

If truth be known, the Gypsies probably suffered, if not a greater proportional loss than we, then a similar loss. According to Modern History Sourcebook: Gypsies in the Holocaust (http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/mod/gypsy-holo.html), "It is known that perhaps 250,000 Gypsies were killed, and that proportionately they suffered losses greater than any other group of victims except Jews."

Like us, the Gypsies have a long history of persecution at the hands of the Germans, a history that precedes German unification. Indeed, some of the anti-Gypsy actions mirror anti-Jewish actions.

By the by, let's stop talking about "anti-Semitism." Our cousins, the Arabs, also are Semites. What we face is not "anti-Semitism"; what we face is either "anti-Jewish" or "anti-Israel" - there are no other options. True enough, there are those who are "anti-Arab" or "anti-Moslem" - which depends on (a) the price of oil (anti-Arab) or (b) the latest Islamic-sponsored terror attack, unless of course if the attack is against Jews in Israel or, it seems, any place on the globe.

A pretty good book about the Gypsies and the Germans is The Nazi Persecution of the Gypsies by Guenter Lewy. My copy was borrowed from the local lending library.

Most sources I've seen suggest that the Gypsies lack the capacity to tell their story. Add that to a reluctance to share anything with the "world outside the Roma world" and it is understandable that, compared to knowledge of the slaughter of our people, the Gypsy holocaust is unknown.

We, Jews, need to tell their story as best as we are able.

We, Jews, also need to remind the world that the Germans and their friends made it Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) to torture and murder anyone who was "not like" them, even if, as in the case of the Gypsies, the persecuted truly were "Aryans."

We may not agree with the philosophy or sexual or political preferences of the people the Germans and their friends sent to their deaths, but we must - must - tell the world again and again and again that while we lost 6 million, a number that excludes Jews serving in the armies and navies facing the Axis, many, many more millions also were persecuted - tortured and murdered - by the Germans and their friends.

We were not alone. It was not a "Jewish only" event and we all - humanity - must both remember and be vigilant to assure it doesn't happen again.

Not to us.

Not to any group.

yohanon
yohanon.glenn @ gmail.com

Old and new friends

I've been hittin' the books lately.

Heavy stuff.

Pooh Perplex (Frederick C. Crews, E.P. Dutton book, ISBN 63-15770) was first off the shelf. I remember Master Robin's adventures from when I was his age. Pooh Perplex is something else.

Pooh Perplex' premise is that "Though critics everywhere acknowledge A.A. Milne's Christopher Robin books to be great masterpieces, critics nowhere agree on what they mean."

The book's subtitle is "A Freshman Casebook." It includes 12 critiques including "A Bourgeois Writer's Proletarian Fables," "O Felix Culpa! The Sacramental Meaning of Winnie-the-Pooh," and, "A la recherche du Pooh perdu" (which I shall refrain from translating).

I recommended the work to a once-upon-a-time English major (don't call me "majorette!") and a librarian who is named neither Marion nor even Marian. Both ladies long have been acquainted with Pooh and Piglet and Eeyore and all the rest - although I didn't recall Tigger from my toddler days, but there he was in glorious orange and black in Chapter 2 of The House at Pooh Corner.

The English major recalled taking a stab at reading a Pooh work in Latin, which may be why she decided to major in English. She since went on to dabble in numbers and now is an Oracle of a sort.

There's a nice Pooh & Friends Web site at http://www.just-pooh.com.

Pooh Perplex is a short work, so I hied myself back to the local lending library, hereafter The 3 Ls, where I armed myself with a couple of P.G. Wodehouse works.

An aside: Microsoft's Word 2007 - the last version of Word that will take up disk space on my computer - has a spell check that, well, lacks a decent vocabulary. It tells me this word and that word are incorrectly keyed, but I know better. To get a warm fuzzy, I "confirm" my spelling at Merriam-Webster OnLine (http://www.merriam-webster.com. If I wasn't so lazy, I could as easily look in the unabridged; trouble is, I get lost in it . . . go looking for "hied" and never get past the D words.

I am acquainted with Bertie and Jeeves, but I am now being introduced to Uncle Fred - all 25 chapters and 448 pages of "The World of Uncle Fred." Next up is a book of about the same heft but having several "short" stories, including a visit with the aforementioned Bertie and Jeeves.

When I was very young - probably well before your time - I used to spend hours at The 3 L in my hometown where, funny enough, my librarian friend now shares her wealth of knowledge. By the by, can anyone provide a good answer why "doctor," "lawyer," "librarian," and other professional titles are all lower case while "realtor" - a title for people who need no formal education and who pass a single test (often after the third try) , rate a CAPITAL R? I know I'm jousting at windmills; it ranks right down there with Things To Worry About with PhDoctors (and any other "doctor" that lacks an MD or DO suffix to his or her name).

I have not given up "serious" reading and my two Wodehouse books are paired with two with heavier subjects. The second Wodehouse book will be Shabat recreation since it is more easily put down (between stories) than the other books.

I remember reading books back when Amos-n-Andy were white and once again books are becoming a favorite pastime. It's like coming home and greeting old friends again.

Sitting down with a book is almost as good as sitting down with long-time (I think I'll pass on the "O" word here) friends who challenge each others' minds; absolutely the best way a geezer can keep his wits about him.

Yohanon
Yohanon.Glenn @ gmail.com

Just like "them"

The following is from Yahoo.

---

Settlers clash with Israeli troops, Palestinians
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20081202/ap_on_re_mi_ea/ml_israel_palestinians

By NASSER SHIYOUKHI,
Associated Press Writer

HEBRON, West Bank – Dozens of Jewish settlers rioted Tuesday in the West Bank town of Hebron, clashing with the Israeli troops who guard them but who may also soon evict them from a disputed building they've occupied.

In two villages elsewhere in the West Bank, Palestinians said groups of settlers burned animal feed and slashed tires in what appeared to be part of a broader tactic meant to deter Israeli authorities from dismantling unauthorized settlements or attempting to rein settlers in.

Israeli soldiers used stun grenades against the Hebron settlers, most of them teenagers, in clashes near a building which settlers took over early last year.

The building's ownership is under dispute in a Jerusalem court. But the settlers moved in without government authorization and the Supreme Court has ordered them to leave immediately.

On Monday evening, rumors were circulating that the Israeli military would evict the settlers by force and hundreds of extremists flocked to the site to help resist eviction. No attempt was made to evacuate the building.

The military says rioters broke windows of cars and homes and defaced a Muslim cemetery in the area near the house. Settlers in several other locations in the West Bank also blocked roads and threw stones at Palestinian cars.

In recent months some West Bank settlers have pioneered a policy they term the "price tag," in which they attack Palestinians and security forces in response to any attempt to evacuate unauthorized settlements.

Apparently in keeping with that tactic, several dozen settlers burned animal feed in the West Bank village of Kablan at around 3 a.m. Tuesday and slashed the tires of dozens of cars, according to resident Abdallah Snobar. In a neighboring village, Assawiyah, settlers who arrived at around the same time slashed tires and spray painted the "Death to the Arabs" and an anti-Islamic slur on the local mosque, according to village official Mohammed Mahamdeh.

---

Several things came to mind as I read the article.

One: How fast will "The World" condemn Israel as a whole for the actions of a few? Will it treat this as casually as it does Moslem murderers who slaughter Israelis at home and abroad? Slashed tires and burned feed hardly equates to murder of non-combatants, but time will tell how "The World" will react.

For my part, I can understand the "settlers" frustration both with the government and with their neighbors. The article fails to provide any excuse for the attacks on the neighboring villages, but given the author and the level of journalism today, the reason may have been omitted or deleted somewhere between the action and the published report.

Two: The "Death to the Arabs" and the "anti-Islamic slur" painted on a mosque are out of line for Jews. Never mind that Islamic rhetoric regularly calls for death of all Jews, or at least Zionists, and never mind that the synagogues of Yamit which the Arabs promised to respect were desecrated. Jews don't DO that. Raze the building to the ground, perhaps, but to paint it like a street hoodlum is indeed desecration and it's not what we do.

Again, how will The World react to what amounts to a minimal reaction to continued Moslem provocation?

There was a time in the United States when the expression "The only good Indian is a dead Indian" was common. That was stupid. Replacing "Moslem" for "Indian" is equally stupid. There are Moslems in Israel who are in Israel because they want to be there; they are better off than they would be in the neighboring Moslem countries. They may not be Israel's most loyal citizens, but they are not pressing for the country's destruction, either.

A brief note about "second class citizenship." It's the norm for most peoples.

Non-Moslems in Moslem controlled countries are, at best, second class citizens.

Not too long ago in the U.S., non-Anglos had to surrender the sidewalk to Anglos.

That doesn't, of course, make it "right" or "OK," but it does show us it is a fact of life. In Israel, a Moslem is a second class citizen, primarily because fellow Moslems deem it a worthy goal to kill Jews . . . and if they murder some non-Moslems as well (as in 9-11).

Not all Moslems are murders or potential murders. I know that. Most Jews know that, albeit those who lived in even "tolerant" Moslem-controlled countries tend to distrust them.

I understand the frustration of the Jews living in Arab-occupied Israel at both the Israeli Army and their neighbors, but there are limits to which we should not descend.

Yohanon
Yohanon.Glenn @ gmail.com

Headline writers - a dangerous breed

I was looking at what I presume (dangerous thing to do) a Yahoo headline over an Associated Press article.

The headline reads: "Rice: Pakistan must cooperate in terror probe"

MUST cooperate? MUST ?

Most parents know that if you tell a child he or she "must" do something the child is less than enthusiastic about, the child will resist. Likewise countries' politicians.

The U.S. already has a "bad rep" with many counties around the world - deserved or not, its how the U.S. is perceived by others that counts - so a headline such as the one on Yahoo is either a match to ignite anger or fuel to further inflame anti-U.S. sentiment.

To be fair, the article fails to support the head writer's "must" wording. Rice is "sending a message" in very clear terms to the Pakistani government, but I never saw the word "must" in her admonishment.

Back when Hector was a pup, I got a management lesson from a U.S. Forest Service officer named John Glenn - no relation to the Marine; the manager of the local Forest Service office said a good manager (by extension Secretary of State) should never need to "tell" someone to do something; it should be enough to "suggest" a job needs to be done.

A variation of the honey vs. vinegar to catch flies admonishment.

There was a time when I wrote "heds." I wrote them for "major metropolitan dailies," suburban dailies, and weeklies. Since it also was an era when reporters wrote headline leeds (leads), hed writers were expected to write titles that accurately reflected the article.

Granted, that was sometimes trying and it helped to have both a large vocabulary and neighbors with equally large vocabularies to ferret out "right-size" synonyms. Euphemisms were discouraged.

I wonder how a person in Pakistan would react to the Yahoo headline. Especially a person with English as a Second Language.

Add to the above that most non-US and Canadian newspapers I have seen use passive voice in their heds; they "back in" to the subject. Drove me nuts when I lived overseas.

Taken altogether, the "Pakistan must cooperate in terror probe" hed is inflammatory and could be, indeed probably will be, counter-productive. Or maybe because I am who I am, I am over reacting. Maybe the Pakistanis will read the Yahoo headline and ignore the words and tone.

It is both what we say and how we say it.

I agree with Ms. Rice that Pakistan's government should look into a government connection (even if only ignoring a threat) to the terror in India if only because the same mentality can work against the government. But I don't believe we - the United States - should tell Pakistan, as a parent might with a small child, to "do" anything.

Just a thought.

Yohanon
Yohanon.Glenn @ gmail.com

From the lending library

This erev Shabat I will be returning several books borrowed from the local lending library,

Two are of special interest.

The first is Alan M. Dershowitz' "The Genesis of Justice" in which he looks at Genesis as a lawyer, sometimes for the defense, most often for the prosecution.

The book's subtitle gives us a clue to the barrister's direction: "Ten stories of Biblical injustices that led to the ten commandments and modern law."

Dershowitz is a knowledgeable gentleman with a yeshiva education. I don't know where he fits into "modern Judaism" - and in any event that depends on our personal perspectives from where WE fit into the grand scheme of things - but his book is thought provoking.

It probably will drive some folks' blood pressure through the roof - especially if they quit before the last page - while others will feel vindicated in their distance from those who accept the Torah (in this case, specifically Beresheet/Genesis and some commentaries on same) literally.

The attorney, whether you are in agreement with him or not, is in good company. We have long challenged HaShem, certainly from Avrom's time. This week's parasha - Vayeira - provides ample example.

Dershowitz' contention is that G-d is not always a "just" god. In fact, much of the book is the prosecutor laying his case before the court of our opinion. He raises good points that, I think, deserve attention.

Agree or disagree - he loses some cases so leaving people in disagreement probably won't surprise the author - it's an interesting way to spend a summer Shabat afternoon - or maybe two in the winter.

For the record, the effort is ISBN 0-446-52479-4, published by Warner Books, copyright 2000.

The other book of special interest is titled "Misquoting Jesus" by Bart D. Ehrman. Ehrman chairs the Religious Studies department at UNC in Chapel Hill NC.

As with the Dershowitz book, this one also has a subtitle: "The story behind who changed the bible and why." "Bible" for Ehrman in the gospels and epistles from Paul and other early church leaders ("early" covering several centuries CE).

No surprises. We know that "things" happen when copyists copy. Changes creep in - sometimes accidently, sometimes on purpose.

This book ferrets out both and provides some interesting cross-century exchanges, much as the Talmuds record debates between the luminaries.

Change a letter here, omit or add a word there and suddenly a comment takes on a completely different meaning.

Ehrman's effort is ISBN 13:978-0-06073817-4, published by HarperCollins, copyright 2005.

Both books are recommended reading for Sunday school teachers.

yohanon

New president, new concerns?

President-elect Obama told the world he is willing to sit down with anyone.

He is being told by a Pakistani that he should sit down with the Taliban, to deal with the organization famous for 9-11, "diplomatically."

He may try to do that.

But I can almost guarantee that only the Taliban will benefit.

Based on what?

Based on the constantly displayed mentality of the people who populate the Taliban - and Hamas and similar organizations.

If Mr. Obama thinks he can deal with the mid-east mentality as he would with a European mentality, he is making the same mistake France and the US made in Indo-China - whose population has a similar lack of concern for human life.

Mr. Obama needs to understand - and frankly I doubt he does understand this - that leaders and followers of the Talban, Hamas, Iran, Iraq will promise anything and deliver nothing.

The Oslo Accord was supposed to benefit both Israel and the Arabs in Aza and other parts of Israel.

Israel gave and gave and gave. In return Hamas gave Israel missiles; it gave it suicide murderers.

What Mr. Obama needs to understand - and what Israel's politicians need to understand - is that you must deal with the "audience" on the audience's terms.

That's Journalism 101.

Funny that journalism offers a lesson to be learned by politicians.

If Mr. Obama is the Pollyanna he appears to be, the US may become at once both the darling of the world and the patsy to the world's demigods.

While I am not a one-issue voter, I am concerned that Mr. Obama will pressure Israel to surrender more in exchange for . . . nothing.

I have other concerns about Mr. Obama's presidency, but most of those concerns are mitigated by the fact that he needs congress to agree to his plans.

His foreign policy, however, is a different matter, and with a notoriously anti-Israel State Department (some things never change), Israel must be prepared to stand alone.

That might be the best thing that could happen to Israel, but at the same time, an appeasing president will embolden Israel's foes.

Puts me in mind of a fellow named Chamberlain, Neville not Wilt, who promised the world that "there will be peace in our time."

I hope that Mr. Obama does better than Mr. Chamberlain.

We'll have (at least) four years to find out.

yohanon

Goy!

When did the word "goy" become an insult?

Abraham is told he will be the father of a "goy gadol."

Israel is supposed to be a "goy kadosh."

Goy means "nation."

Nothing derogatory about that.

So why do some Jews use the term to put others - Jew and non-Jew alike - to shame?

There is a perfectly good word for a non-Jew.

It's specific.

It's neither complimentary nor insulting.

Nokar (no care) - absolutely neutral.

Not "goy" and not "ger" which is interpreted either as resident (from the same shorish/root as gar/reside) or the noun, "convert," the latter usually (hopefully always) in conjunction with "tzdek" - righteous.

Hebrew has perfectly good words for non-Jews and new Jews - although it must be said that pointing a finger at someone and mentioning that he or she is a "ger" ("georet") - tzdek or otherwise - is forbidden. Once a convert comes dripping from the mikveh, he or she is a Jew and, unless the convert elects to open the issue, it is forbidden to bring up the matter for fear is might cause the new Jew discomfort. (Unfortunately, too many Jews-by-birth don't know that.)

Next time we find ourselves muttering that "so-and-so is behaving like a goy" we should stop and think - which goy? Goy kadosh? We would do well to strive to be members of a "goy kadosh."

We - Jews - are far from being a "goy gadol" so the only thing we can aspire to be - at least until we are a "goy gadol" - is a "goy kadosh," a holy nation or, better, a nation of holy people.

We can start on that journey by no longer using the term "goy" as a derogatory term.

If we can use the word as it appears in the Torah we might be on our way to becoming a "goy kadosh" and who knows, if we can become a nation of holy people - a light unto the nations, the task for which we were chosen - perhaps the other part of the promise, to be a "goy gadol" will come to pass.

Hebrew is a sparse language with, compared to English, few words.

Granted many of the words are used in many contexts - ger as temporary resident (although "toshav" is better) and ger as convert (a person who has come to live with us and as one of us). But we do have words that are appropriate; they should be used as the Torah intended.

With Rosh haShanah behind us and Yom Kippor before us, let us be worthy to be a member of a goy kadosh.

yohanon

Open letter

to (alphabetically) Senators Bidin, McCain, and Obama and Gov. Palin,

Politicians

This one accuses that one of something.

That one points an accusing finger at the other.

We are being told why NOT to vote for "the other guy."

Frankly, Scarlett, I don't want to know why NOT to vote for someone.

Convince me why I should vote FOR someone.

There are some headlines worth talking about.

North Korea, for one.

North Korea apparently threatens (promises?) to re-start its nuclear plants, claiming the US failed to meet its agreement with it.

How, lady and gentlemen, would you handle the situation?

How about Iran, which HAS reactors AND claims to have bombs and delivery vehicles (missiles) AND claims to be ready to use them, if not on the US mainland, then on US allies, both Arab and otherwise.

How , lady and gentlemen, do you react to the Saudi Muslim cleric who calls for vigilante murder of owners of tv stations that show what the cleric considers improper material? Is this strictly an "internal-to-Saudi" issue or does the fatwa threaten tv station owners and employees here as well as in Islamic states?

How, lady and gentlemen, would you handle financial recovery - remember it's an international issue - and what would you do to avoid or mitigate a similar situation on your watch?

Stop telling me what "my worthy opponent" would do - tell me what you would do.

Stop telling me your "worthy opponent" changed his/her stance on something - actually, I can respect that, it shows the person is open to new information and able to react accordingly - and tell me what could cause you to re-evaluate an issue and your stance on that issue.

Don't tell me what you will do if elected when, if elected, you don't control the issue. Case in point, abortion. The executive lacks the authority to issue a fiat banning it; that's a matter properly for the States, and if not the individual states (we went to war for that once), then the federal House and Senate (and not, in my opinion, the Court). Don't want to talk about abortion? How about same sex "marriage," another issue properly left to the States (I think).

The executive can, and should, have an opinion and it can and should (try to) influence both the legislature(s) and the general populace.

But it lacks the authority to issue a fiat, (papal) bull, or iman's fatwa.

If you are pro-life or pro-choice, that's fine and if you insist on telling me, that's OK, too. But don't tell me "If elected I will ..." because you can't.

Attacking each other is dishonest - few attacks are 100% truth.

Attacking each other is covering your own trail.

Tell me about you and your opinions and your desires and what you would (want to) do in the event that (pick a subject) occurs.

Tell me what you would do to avoid a future financial crisis - not what you would have done to prevent this one. Hindsight is wonderful, but mostly worthless - my portfolio has lost too much already.

Tell me how you would help the States reduce their welfare roles -how you'd like to see the Federal government help people help themselves.

Tell me how you would discourage people from succumbing to their own stupidity and rebuilding in environmentally threatened areas (e.g., on gulf coast beaches).

Give me a reason to vote FOR you, not reasons to suspect the other candidate.

Be honest with yourself and with me.

Try it.

It might actually help get you elected.

yohanon

Friendly IRS

Over the course of the years, I have filed more than a few US tax returns.

Earlier in my life I was a newspaper reporter/photographer/editor.

With a wanderlust.

I worked newspapers in California, Florida, Indiana, Nevada, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, and Wyoming. I've crossed the country coast to coast and from north to south.

Some times the papers paid mileage, some times not.

Some times the papers paid relocation, some times not.

One (Newhouse's Harrisburg Patriot-News) charged me to park in the lot.

Back in the day, mileage was a tax deduction.

So my tax returns went from 0 mileage to "lots" of mileage.

When I did a cross-country jaunt - Florida to California, for example - my mileage was high.

Each time I filed by 1040 (there was no "EZ" in those days) I'd staple a note to the form telling the person who got it for review why it was different from the previous year.

To the best of my knowledge, my returns never were audited.

At least I was never "invited" to come in for a chat with my friendly IRS auditor.

But earlier this year I got a message from IRS telling me it reviewed by 2006 return and the IRS decided to disallow a deduction.

Why?

One phone call to the IRS to define the problem.

Turns out I did a very brief contract gig for a company and the company, despite my instructions to the contrary, set me up in its pension plan.

The IRS reviewer saw a contribution to a personal pension plan and also saw that the W-2 from the contracting house had the pension plan box checked, indicating I was in the company's plan.

What to do?

I called the company and explained the problem. The person on the other end was sympathetic. She said that the company contracts with another company to do the payroll and that the "pension" box is automatically checked. (Remember, I specifically told the company to exclude me from its pension plan.)

I asked for a corrected W-2.

We can't do that, she said.

"But," she offered, "we can send you a letter stating that you were not in the pension plan."

Well, OK, I replied, adding that if that fails to satisfy the IRS I'd be back.

Her letter, on letterhead as requested, arrived a few days after the call.

I put my cover letter to it and sent it all to the IRS.

Worst case, the IRS rejects the letters.

Time goes by.

No word from the IRS - neither positive (all is OK) or negative (pay up).

The Financial Manager and I were discussing it and wondering.

The day after our discussion we received The Letter From the IRS.

In the great IRS-Glenn Tradition, the IRS reviewer accepted the (documented) explanation and its letter to us said, basically, "Thanks, everything is cleared up."

Bottom line: once again the feared IRS proves to be, at least for this taxpayer, "human."

I know it has its detractors, and no one enjoys paying taxes (and compared to other countries, we pay a pittance, but then there's not much ROI), but credit where it's due; the IRS isn't (always) the ogre its made out.

We complain, loudly and publicly, about organizations when they fail us; I think we should acknowledge them when something goes right, as well.

Yohanon
Yohanon.Glenn @ gmail.com

I'd stay but . . .

My - our - daughter is, B"H, getting married in February.

In Israel.

She lives in Rehovoth.

My - our - son-in-law to be also lives in Rehoboth and his parents live nearby.

We are in The States.

My wife went to Israel with her parents when she was about 9.

I got there in my 30s.

We met in Zefat and, as a married couple, lived in Holon. She taught school and I worked first as a flack for a university and later as a technical writer for the electronics division of a mega-firm.

We were doing OK until Tnuva went on strike and fresh milk for my first born son disappeared from the makolet.

One straw and then another and we decided to follow Ramb"am's example and leave Israel.

Since then, I held more than a few tech pubs jobs and I drifted into disaster recovery, then business continuity, and now enterprise risk management.

The wife, who spoke "only" Hebrew and Arabic and French and "a little English" when we met in Zefat now corrects my grammar (which delights me greatly).

Our two boys remain in the States, but over the years the Spouse and I talked of returning. Usually one talks of going back and the other isn't ready.

Now we're both ready.

But we still can't go back.

Why?

Even though the children are out of the house, we still have every day bills to pay. Minor things like food and utilities and . . . Basic household expenses.

Translation: As much as we'd like to come back - with the exception of our two sons, all of the family is in Israel, some near Haifa, most in Bet Shean - we can't make the move.

Bottom line - kav ha'takton - is we need employment. I need employment if only to keep from going stir crazy. My Spouse gets "cabin fever" when she is "trapped" in the house. We need to work, not just to pay those household expenses, but to Save Our Sanity.

---

This, then, is a blatant Job Wanted advertisement.

• Writer (marketing, proposals, pr, technical, user guides) - American English mother tongue
• Enterprise risk management (business continuity, disaster recovery, "COOP")
• Consultant and staff
• Experience in Israel and experience in the US with Israeli (and other) companies
• Dual national

---

We will, B"H, be in Israel in February.

I really hate the flight and I'd love to cash in the return trip.

How can you get a resume? Yohanon.Glenn@gmail.com .

Just a little theft

It's not a "big deal."

It goes unnoticed by most.

We are told to "find a rabbi" and follow the rabbi's lead.

But while we are told to "find a rabbi" - actually "get yourself a teacher (rav)" (Joshua ben Perachicah, Avot, 1:6) we are not told to "follow blindly."

It is a two-way street.

I am fortunate enough to have several books on halakah. Almost without exception, a ruling is followed by the details of how the rav arrived at his decision. This is what Maran wrote, this is what Ramba"m wrote, this is what Rem"a added, on and on. Each time an author is cited, the author of the book I am reading cites exactly WHERE his source made the statement.

The reader knows - because it is there before his or her eyes - who said what and, if the reader cares to check it out, exactly where to look - book, chapter, and verse.

Occasionally I'll have a question and I'll ask a living source, often an on-line rabbi since in theory at least they have access to and use that access to pass my query along to rabbinical Subject Matter Experts (SMEs).

But I find that the answers I receive from many are "this is the way it is, accept that."

Each generation has its "poskim b'dor," rabbis whose rulings are generally, if not universally, accepted. Recent personages who fall into this category, at least for Ashkenazi Jews, include Moshe Feinstein, Yosef Soloveitchek, while for Mizrachim there is Ovadya Yosef and for Sephardim of North Africa, the Messas and Abuhatzera dynasties. The list is hardly "all-inclusive."

I can pull from the shelf works by the North African poskim and each one CITES HIS SOURCE.

Aside from lending credence to their works, these gentlemen prove they are not thieves.

We are told in The Big Ten that stealing is prohibited. We also are told to return a lost item to its owner.

As a former newspaper reporter, I consider plagiarism stealing.

As it happens, US civil law also considers plagiarism stealing.

If you take the property of another - physical or intellectual - that's stealing.

Understandably, because we all have at least a little vanity, we don't object - at least not enthusiastically - if someone cites our thoughts PROVIDING CREDIT IS GIVEN THE THOUGHT'S ORIGINATOR.

Ramb"am, the story goes, was roundly criticized for failing, in one of his works, to "cite his source." Ramb"am having to "cite his source?" Apparently inquiring minds of his age wanted to know.

I confess to sometimes taking things too far. When someone tells me "the Talmud says" I usually have two questions: which one and what is the Torah (bik-tav) source.

I don't challenge the authority of poskim such as Ramb"am or Maran, but I want to know how they arrived at their decision.

If I insist on challenging the "gedoli b'dor" (giants of the age) you can imagine that I take umbrage when I'm told "this is the way it is, accept that."

I visited a synagogue Web site the other day and read an article on mezuzah klaf, specifically when to check it.

Interesting article. Nothing new.

But the article cited "poskim" and "rabbis." Not one name.

I wrote a note to a rabbi friend noting this.

He replied that the original article cited the sources and the article could be found at such-and-such a Web site.

I went to the site and sure enough, the authorities were cited.

In a copyrighted article - the copyright statement appeared several times on the Web page.

I contend that the synagogue management is guilty of theft - plagiarism, in fact, blatant plagiarism given the bold copyright notices.

The synagogue management "stole" from the article's originator and it, indirectly, stole from the poskim and rabbis cited in the article.

Is this "theft" OK because "everyone does it?"

I don't think so.

Unlike some, I don't hold rabbis and hazans - professional Jews - to a higher standard, but I DO expect them to set an example for us - the "average" Jew.

We - Jews - are charged to be "ore l'goyim," a light to the nations.

We ARE held to a higher standard, by ourselves and certainly by the goyim.

A quick aside. I never understood how "goy" became a term of derision.

Abraham was told he would be father to a "goy gadol," a great nation (for which we still long).

Non-Jewish individuals were never, in Bik-tav, "goyim"; they were nok'rim.

We "elect" our leadership and our leadership - the board - "elects" the professional leadership, our rabbis and hazans akin to the Electoral College's election of the president.

We need to elect professional Jews who hold themselves to a higher standard and who will be an example to us, the average Jew.

In the Greater Picture, plagiarism is a minor issue; hardly on par with murder or rape.

But, at least as this scrivener sees it, plagiarism IS theft and theft is forbidden.

Ore l'goyim.

yohanon

Common courtesy

A funny thing.

Fellow sent me an email asking me to review and comment on a document he wrote.

I responded to his email and asked where I could find the document.

I received an almost instant auto-response telling me

---

I apologize for this automatic reply to your email.

To control spam, I now allow incoming messages only from senders I have approved beforehand.

If you would like to be added to my list of approved senders, please fill out the short request form (see link below). Once I approve you, I will receive your original message in my inbox. You do not need to resend your message. I apologize for this one-time inconvenience.

Click the link below to fill out the request:

---

Now this person is not the only correspondent I have that has a similar set up and, frankly, I don't blame them.

But it seems to me if I am invited to respond, the spam catcher should be told to pass my mail to the person's inbox.

Often when we signup for a list we get an email telling us to add the list FROM address to our address book - apparently some email services can be told to look at the address book and to redirect to the Spam folder any email from an address not found in the address book.

I consider it common courtesy to open the gate for someone I invited to come in (send me an email).

Maybe it's an "age" thing.

Like holding a door for a lady.

Or walking between a lady and the curb ("kerb" to my friends on the other side of the pond).

I know young women today who find it "sexist" if a man rushes to be a "gentleman."

Whatever the case, I took umbrage when I received the email telling me my post was rejected. (Turns out it got through anyway.)

Common courtesy.

It's not a big deal to BE courteous, but it could be a big deal to someone who is on the receiving end.

Yohanon
Yohanon.Glenn @ gmail.com

Looking for book on avelut

I am looking for a book on North African customs (minhagim) on bekur holim and avelut (visiting the sick and mourning).

Specifically, I'm trying to find

Zichron Yitzhak - Bikur Holim v'Dinei Avelut (shel Yahadut Tzfon Africa)

It could be

Zichron Yitzhak - Dinei Avelut v'Bikur Holim

but it makes more sense to visit the sick first.

It is a small (about 5*7 inches or so), not-very-thick book in Hebrew.

If you know where I can find/buy this book, please share the information. My email is

Yohanon.Glenn @ gmail.com

Thanks

Israeli companies in the US

Over the years - and they are many - that I have been in the work force, I have been employed by US firms in the US, Japanese companies in the US, British companies in the US, and Israeli companies in the US.

I've worked all manner of jobs - since '79, mostly "white collar" but an occasional "blue collar" job in the mix. Sometimes as a consultant, sometimes as a staffer.

With the exception of the Israeli companies in the US, my immediate boss' were non-Jewish Americans. (At the Japanese company, my boss' boss was Egyptian, but that's another - interesting - story.)

I also worked for Israeli organizations - Tel Aviv University and Tadiran Electronics (then) - in Israel.

In all cases but two, when I announced that I would

• be leaving early on Fridays during the winter months
• be taking off for a Jewish holy day

management's reaction was positive.

In one case, when I was at Oki Electronics (the Japanese firm), John Orr, my boss, would appear at my desk Friday afternoons around 4 p.m. (this was in Florida and the sun set later), pointing to his watch and reminding me to "go home."

John wasn't Jewish. I don't even know what he is, if anything.

But I do know he respected my observance.

In Israel, "back in the day," there was no question about working on Shabat.

At the university, I worked 5 and a half days and hoped I caught the first bus back to the apartment. At Tadiran, I worked 5 days (Sunday-Thursday) and did the pre-Shabat chores while the Spouse did a half day at her teaching job.

Even under pressure of proposal development, come Friday afternoon, Tadiran shut down.

Holidays? Closed.

'Course we only had one first/last day, so that made it a little more tolerable for the employer.

In the US, I'm forced to use up vacation days for observances. But people are understanding when they see time off requests scatted across the calendar.

Except

Except for the two Israeli companies.

In both cases, management wanted the company to be an "American" company.

Management was, by and large, not observant. Most of the Israelis sent over were not observant. (There was the guy who, on Yom Kippur, took a cigarette break at the front entrance of the synagogue. Ah, but to his credit he DID come to services on Kippur.)

In management's effort to "be American" they overlooked the basic American principle: respect others' beliefs.

Mind you, when it came to an American holiday (e.g., Thanksgiving) or a non-Jewish religious holiday, THAT was different. Shut the shop.

I have no problem with that; most of the other employees were not Jewish and celebrated those holidays either as religious events or simply days off.

But come Friday afternoon, one Israeli boss and his #1 assistant would take umbrage when I left early.

At the other company, all employees were invited to the annual Christmas party - that's how it was billed. The party always was at a restaurant where my spouse and I could not eat, yet we were expected to participate.

On the flip side, when I worked for DMR Consulting Group (now Japan's Fujitsu Consulting), my wife and I always were served kosher meals - not always fancy, but always kosher.

In their effort to become "American" companies, the Israelis overlooked one key item: respect for individuals.

Most American managers understand this, although some consider personnel a "renewable resource."

The Israelis apparently never learned the basic American lesson.

Pity.

Given the choice of working for an Israeli company in the US or any other company in the US, I'll go with the "any other company" option.

It's a sad day when you're made to feel like the late Rodney Dangerfield at your own work place.

Yohanon

9th of Av

For the uninitiated, the 9th of the Jewish month of Av commemorates a number of disasters, including the destruction of the two Temples in Jerusalem.

During the first 9 days of the month, semi-mourning practices are in place.

Tisha b'Av, the 9th of Av, is surpassed only by Yom Kippor as a day of restraint, and most Jews give at least a passing acknowledgement of the day.

I like to think of myself as an observant Jew. (I dislike the terms "orthodox," "conservative," reform" et al - in the end, a Jew is a Jew is a ...)

But I don't observe Tisha b'Av for the destruction of the Temples.

I don't observe Tisha b'Av for the dispersion of the people to all parts of the planet.

I don't even observe Tisha b'Av for the other, later, events tacked on to the rabbinically ordained fast day.

Yet I do observe the fast.

If not for the Temples and the dispersion and the "other, later events" than why?

We are told that the reason the Temples were destroyed was "senot henam" - senseless hatred.

Not idolatry, which was rampant in Jerusalem even in Solomon's time.

Not for lack of religious practice or enthusiasm.

Because we hated one another.

The Sadducees vs. the Pharisees.

The learned vs. the unlearned.

The "pious" vs. the "less pious."

The "city folk" vs. the "country folk."

The priests vs. the simple, untitled person.

That's why the Temples were destroyed, the rabbis say. That's why the later events occurred.

But that's history.

Unfortunately, it still is "history in the making."

We still have not learned our lesson.

We still indulge in "senot henam."

As I wrote earlier, I dislike the labels applied to us.

Helonee (non-observant), datee (religious), hasid (pious), tzdek (righteous); orthodox, conservative, reform, liberal, humanist, reconstruction.

We need to get rid of all the labels and recognize the common denominator: we all are Jews.

Outside the "clan," we all are human beings, "bnai adam" with a lower case "a", or "bnai Adam" - children of Adam.

There is a reason the Torah teaches us that we all spring from the same parents (and science seems to agree - but that comes as no surprise to me); it is to tell us that we all are the same, albeit with individual capabilities and talents.

I see far too many "orthodox" Jews behave in a way contrary to Torah - I'm thinking of the haradim of Mea Sharim who go out of their way to throw rocks on travelers who violate Shabat - a person could be murdered because of a thrown rock; even the act of picking up the rock on Shabat is forbidden.

Likewise I see many "reform" who loudly denigrate observant Jews for their "outdated" practices. "Keeping kosher was something for hot climates" as if avoiding pork is the essence of kashrut and Judaism.

As long as we - first Jews because we are "chosen" to be an example to the world (sometimes a very heavy burden) but in the end, all of humankind - continue to hate each other for our differences, Tisha b'Av will have its place in our lives.

When will we ever learn?

Yohanon
Yohanon.Glenn @ gmail.com

Should'a been a surgeon

I do several things everyone thinks he or she can do.

I am a writer. At one point I was a "journalist" which for me is a fancy title for reporter.

From newspapers I went into PR and from PR into technical writing.

Everyone is a writer.

If you don't believe me, do a search on almost any subject and you'll come up with pages and pages of blog entries.

I am a photographer.

Although I took my first pictures long before I became a reporter (and those with a fixed everything "620" box camera), I bought my first "real" camera - a Honeywell Pentax H3v - when I was a reporter for Gannett's Titusville FL newspaper. I bought a Canon F1 while working as a reporter-slash-editor at the Harrisburg Patriot-News, a Newhouse property. I still have the F1 and an older FTb I "picked up" along the way.

I also own a Cambo 4*5 technical camera with both Polaroid and 6*7 cm ("120") film backs. I wish I could afford to take pictures with it.

I have a Minolta digi-cam that cost a lot but never worked; I should have waited for the Canon digi-cam with interchangeable lenses (I've got this beautiful 20mm that would be great on a digi-cam).

Anyway, as with writing, everyone who owns a camera is a "pro."

Still using an antique "still" camera? No problem - put a motor on it and rip through 100 feet of film in no time. Surely there will be at least ONE good shot in the bunch.

Digi-cam? Put it on video and again, there will be at least one image worth saving.

Everyone is a photographer.

I am, professionally, an enterprise risk management - slash - business continuity - slash - COOP practitioner.

Funny thing is, even though many people lack basic comprehension of what I do, they know that they, too, can do it and just as well, thank you.

The fact that not everyone can write a grammatically correct sentence doesn't bother anyone - not even some people working in the "media."

The fact that there is a pipe growing out of Little Johnny's head - well, we'll crop it out later.

Finally, the little matter of overlooking risks to our lives and livelihood - hey, not to worry, the risk never will occur.

I should'a been a surgeon. I love the commercial where a "doctor" is instructing his patient by phone to "make an incision above the rib" to start some do-it-yourself surgery. How many of us are going to practice medicine on a loved one without the benefit of med school, internship, and residency?

But I LIKE writing and taking pictures and even helping people avoid risks (and respond when the risk insists on occurring despite our best efforts).

I have a long-time friend who went from being an English major to a statistician to a tech writer (I told you everyone thinks they can be a tech writer) to being a programmer.

Mind, my friend was/is good at all of the above - although I seem to recall "helping" with the tech writing, but perhaps my friend has a different opinion about my "help."

As I wrote at the beginning of this tirade, everyone seems to think they can do what (I think) I do.

Maybe they can do what I do, but I like to think I do it better.

An old story comes to mind.

Geezer finally retires from the rag trade (no, no translations) and moves to Florida with his wife of many, many years.

Geezer buys a boat and a suitable outfit.

He then invites The Wife to see the boat and maybe go out for a little cruise around the bay.

The Wife looks at the boat and the Geezer and says:

"To you you're a captain.

"To me you're a captain.

"But to a captain are you a captain?"

That's about how it is with my professions.

Everyone thinks they are a "captain" when they've never even been a Seaman Apprentice.

I should'a been a surgeon.

Yohanon
Yohanon.Glenn @ gmail.com

Of "gooder grammer"

I have a couple of email addresses.

For the most part, the hosts do a pretty good job of identifying spam and isolating it.

Sometimes - most of the time - I trust the host and delete the spam folder contents without checking it.

But sometimes, just to be sure the host isn't dumping desired mail into the spam folder, I check it myself.

Which I did today.

I am left wondering how anyone could be conned into some of the things that appear in their mail box.

I give you the following subject lines as examples:

---

Cheap price Degree/Bacheelor/MasteerMBA/PhDD certificate

I want sale you rolex . Do you want one?

SOLD OUT -- -Gucci or Louis Vuitton products

SOLD OUT -- - I Selling Rolexes and other watches? DO uou want?

---

The one selling degrees caught my eye first - OK, it was at the top of the list.

Whoever created the subject line had stuttering fingers. BacheElor/MasteErMBC/PhDD. And what, pray, is a PhD "certificate." (I'm sure it is "suitable for framing.")

Grammar seems to be too much of a bother for many spammers.

"I want sale you rolex." If the initial "I" had been lower case, I might think this was a message from Don Marquis' pal, Archie (the cockroach), save that Archie used "gooder grammer."

I always am amused by SOLD OUT screamers.

If the item is sold out, why bother me?

That's akin to seeing gasoline advertised on the tube for $1.99/gallon (remember when we thought that was outrageous?). When you pull into the station the price on the pump is $3.99 (alas, now considered a "good" price). Go into the office (if you can) and complain "I want $1.99/gallon gas." The attendant, if he or she can comprehend your obviously ludicrous request, will tell you "go buy the gas from your tv."

Granted, I went to "grammar" school when Hector was a pup, and I know things have changed over the years, but good grief, are idiots "educating" our young? Are our young incapable of learning and applying basic English skills? Are French speakers equally ill-prepared to communicate?

It's one thing to create a minor grammar faux pas, e.g., subject:number errors, but some of the subject lines that violate our vision are beyond laughable; they are pathetic.

Life in the fast lane.

Yohanon
Yohanon.Glenn @ gmail.com

Bil'am - G-d's prophet a bad guy?

This week we learn about a fellow named Bil'am who is a lead player in Parasha Balak. B'Midbar (Numbers) 22:2 - 25:9

The rabbis have painted Bil'am as a bad as they come.

Yet, at the very beginning of the portion we learn that Bil'am is a prophet of HaShem.

When Balak, Moab's king, first set of messengers pay Bil'am a visit, he tells them to cool their heels while he checks with his Boss to see if he should go with them back to Balak's place.

When G-d tells him "No way," he relays the message to the messengers and send them packing.

So far, no complaints from the rabbis.

Balak, convinced that Bil'am is one powerful dude, sends a second set of messengers, this group more important - at least in Balak's eyes - than the one that went before.

This group tries to win Bil'am over, but he tells them that no matter what Balak may offer - a room filled with silver - he can only speak the words G-d puts into his mouth.

But wait, since HaShem previously told Bil'am he should stay home, Bil'am tells the second group to spend the night while he asks G-d if He's changed his mind.

Mind you, Bil'am - unlike Abraham with whom he is negatively compared - is not arguing with G d, he's simply asking if maybe G-d has decided to "stick it" to Balak by turning Balak's wishes against Balak.

Abraham argued with HaShem over S'dom. Abraham managed to get G-d to "change His mind" about wiping out the city if there were but 50, 40, 30, even 10 righteous people in town.

Moses challenged G-d - frequently. If You're going to blot out this people, I don't want to be in Your Torah! So there! How many times did Moses remind HaShem that if he did what the malcontents whined about - "You took us from the fleshpots of Egypt to let us die in the wilderness" - He would be playing into the hands of the unbelievers.

Compared to Bil'am's double-checking with his Boss, Moses was a master of chutzpah . . . and the rabbis tell us Moses was the most humble person to walk this earth.

Consider for a moment that if HaShem had not wanted Bil'am to go with Balak's messengers why were the messengers allowed to arrive at Bil'am's door in the first place.

Now, having warned Balak's messengers - both sets, in fact - that he could (would?) only speak the word's HaShem puts into his mouth, Bil'am saddles his donkey and sets off.

Suddenly, without any obvious provocation, HaShem seems to have changed His mind - something at least one commentator insists G-d will not do - and becomes angry with Bil'am.

It's not clear, by reading the Torah, why G-d suddenly was wroth with His prophet.

The commentators have a field day with this sudden change of heart on HaShem's part (again, if G-d won't change His mind, what happened here?) and, a few verses later when Bil'am's donkey speaks.

Do any other animals speak in Torah bik-tav? I think the donkey is unique in this respect.

Why was the angel standing in the way with drawn sword? Why was the donkey able to see the angel and not Bil'am - or anyone else? Why would the angel need a sword, an earthly weapon?

Ba'al pei (Talmud) and the commentators have their answers, but the Torah (bik-tav) is silent.

Maybe the angel, which Bil'am finally discerned, was like the cop on the corner - a reminder for us to obey the law, or in Bil'am's case, The Law.

We recently concluded Hukat where we were reminded that there are laws we are meant to understand and laws which are beyond our comprehension.

I think Bil'am's story is, at least for me, something "beyond (my) comprehension."

Given what preceded the donkey tale and what followed - Bil'am blessing Israel - there is "reasonable doubt" that the rabbis may have erred in condemning this man who the Torah (bik-tav) clearly states is G-d's prophet.

But I'm not a rabbi and I don't play one on tv.

Yohanon
Yohanon.Glenn @ gmail.com

Politically correct

The United States has become so "politically correct" that criminals have the upper hand.

Profiling is a "no-no."

Checking a non-citizen's background is a "non-no" (but it's OK to investigate a white American male).

People are "mobility impaired" - never handicapped or crippled.

I'm 5'9" and shrinking - I suppose I'm height challenged.

Now I can understand that "deaf and dumb" is offensive in this day and age, although at one time "dumb" meant "unable to speak." A person who would be considered "dumb" today was "simple" or "stupid" or "crazy" - now PC "mentally ill" or "mentally challenged."

The background of a recidivist - look it up; a judge made me search for the word when I was a young reporter - must be hidden from a jury.

"Gay" used to mean happy - and then it somehow got high jacked by homosexuals - and how come men are "gay" or "homosexual" while females are "lesbians"; they don't all come from Lesbos which, as a bit of trivia, is supposed to produce some of the best ouzo available.

I have seen "people of color" go from Negro to Black to African-American (which, given the various shadings, seems more generic); what's the PC term du jour? Seems only the pejoratives remain the same. While on the subject of color, can anyone explain the logic of some people who at once denigrate "people of color" and then risk skin cancer to acquire a "tan" that in many cases is darker than the people they look down upon.

And what is wrong with the "n" word? Granted, it is insulting, but so are "kike" and "spick" and "chink" and "wop" and a bunch more, but while people take offense when someone from the "outside" (that is, someone who is not a member of the group with the tag) uses the term, few people become enraged or refer to the word as the "k," "s," "c," or "w" word. Sort'a like telling an ethnic joke - I can tell jokes about MY people, but shame on you if YOU tell them about my people. Human nature.

Marriage used to be a sanctified union between a man and a woman. I have no problem with same sex couples having a legal status, but let's let "marriage" maintain its definition. While on the subject of marriage, what ever became of pre-marital blood tests, VDRLs? They were a requirement for all food handlers and all hoping to marry - no one complained, at least not when I was a high school-age pearl diver (dishwasher to the uninitiated) or when my wife and I were about to wed. Has venereal disease disappeared? Rhetorical question; I know STDs are more prevalent now than when I was - well - "younger."

When I was a kid, if you came down with a communicable disease - measles or smallpox as examples - you were quarantined; a big QUARANTINE sign went up on the front door. Anyone seen a quarantine sign recently? Not quite a Scarlet Letter or Mark of Cain, but attention getting.

There was a big flap over a presidential hopeful failing to put hand-over-heart when the national anthem was played. It's possible the photo was taken out of context, but next time someone plays the Star-Spangled Banner, look around and see who places hand or hat over heart and who doesn't (some of our most highly paid athletes - but since many are not US citizens, should they?). OK, it's a difficult song to sing and just between us, I'd prefer America the Beautiful, but until there's an Act of Congress to change it, I'll continue to stand and "salute" when the anthem is played or when the flag passes by in a parade - or even if I'm passing by a flag pole as the banner is raised or lowered.

Maybe I'm "sensitive" to poor flag etiquette because I lived overseas for several years and came to value the red, white, and blue more than even when I wore "Shade 84" blue.

Yohanon
Yohanon.Glenn @ gmail.com

When silence is not golden

I was reading some commentaries on Sh'lah Lakah (B'Midbar/Numbers 13-15) - we have several in the house and I don't recall which one I had open at the time - and I came upon a comment that addressed the newly freed slaves preference to believe 10 negative reports versus 2 (Caleb's and Joshua's) positive reports.

The commentator was trying to make the point that even those who didn't rally 'round the reluctant-to-enter Canaan reporters were at least as guilty of supporting them as those who vocally stood with them.

The point was well made, albeit not on line with what the Torah reports - that all the people (save for Caleb, Joshua, and Moses) agreed with the reports.

Too often we see something that is wrong.

It might be something small, like a person littering (and currently there's a great tv commercial on that topic) or something major - I'm thinking of the Kitty Genovese murder (see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kitty_Genovese) .

We don't "want to make waves."

I'm a red, white, and blue American from the midwest. I do "make waves."

I taught my children to "make waves." They do.

When they see a perceived injustice, they try to do something about it. One's a cop so he has the power of the law in his hands. The other two take "appropriate action," sometimes confronting the offender, sometimes calling someone "in authority."

We, Jews, are taught that we must do everything we can, including forfeiting our own life, to protect the life of another. Most of us never will be in that position but consider for a moment Ms. Genovese.

According to reports in the NY Times (Ms. Genovese was murdered in the Kew Gardens section of Queens NY), the 28-year-old woman was stabbed while 38 people looked on.

Although the Wikipedia article calls the NYT report less than 100% accurate, the bottom line is that different people at different times were aware that something was seriously wrong and did nothing - not even call police.

If one person had acted, could Ms. Genovese have been saved? Probably.

But no one did.

Not my job.

Out of sight, out of mind.

What do you do if you see a small child in an unattended vehicle? It doesn't have to be summer and the engine doesn't have to be running.

What do you do?

Wait a while to see if an adult returns - and if not, what? Go looking for the missing adult? Call the cops?

Or would you keep silent and walk on?

If the child was a dog and you were a PETA volunteer, you'd call the cops in a heartbeat.

If you're Jewish, there is no option: you MUST act.

Silence may be golden in the library, but when a person is in danger, silence makes us a contributor to the danger as surely as if we were the threat ourselves.

Think about it.

Yohanon
Yohanon.Glenn @ gmail.com

Sunday school hypocrisy

I used to "davin" at a synagogue that sponsored an afternoon and Sunday school.

Aside from Shabat (and haggim), the only time I could make a morning minyan was Sunday.

Sunday school started about the same time as the minyan, so as I arrived, I could see parents dumping off their kids and beating a hasty retreat.

To do what?

I often wondered what was more important to the parents than the double mitzvah of being part of congregational prayers.

Double mitzvah because (1) they could pray with the congregation and (2) their children would see that Judaism was more than having the parents burden the children with afternoon and Sunday school.

But what would the parents do between the end of the morning service and the time the children were freed?

How about study with the rabbi or other knowledgeable person - Torah, maybe the week's portion or Rashi or . . . , perhaps Talmud, or Ramba"m, or ... There are options beyond number. But STUDY.

If we stop learning in our profession, we may as well retire - or find a new profession. For most of us, Judaism is not a profession, but it does demaand on-going studies. Meir tells us we can learn from anyone and everyone - he did (and defended it nicely).

Seems to me the kids could see the hypocrisy of it all.

Mom and Dad send ME to a place I don't want to go to learn (about) a religion they don't practice and a language they can't comprehend - their prayers are said by rote or by reading a transliteration but in either case, have no meaning for them.

I always felt sorry for the kids and I felt sorry for Judaism. Both were getting gyped.

(We used to have Greek Orthodox neighbors who sent their daughters to "Greek School" and I suspect they felt the same way about "Greek School" as Jewish kids feel about "Hebrew School." Maybe all religions have the same problem.)

I made a suggestion to The Spouse this morning. In order to get the parents to attend services and study a bit, offer a discount for the kid's tuition, say 25% off if both parents regularly participate in Sunday services and study; 15% off if only one parent participates. (Single parents get the full discount . . . who knows, maybe they'll meet someone during the study sessions!)

Yohanon
Yohanon.Glenn @ gmail.com

Shavuot

There we were, standing together under a mountain, with G-d asking us: "Do you want my Torah?"

What a question.

Look up and see the alternative.

'Course we just woke up, having overslept a bit. Definitely a "wake up call."

Wouldn't it have been more convincing if, rather than having a mountain held over our heads, HaShem had just whispered in our ears: "Shall we share the Torah."

No threats.

No "MY" Torah possessiveness.

After all, when the Torah came down to us, it became OUR Torah.

One of the Shavuot articles I read made note, as many do, of the story of us oversleeping on the day we were to receive the Torah.

The author suggested that perhaps we put ourselves into a deep sleep because of fear.

Fear of G-d's presence?

Fear that we couldn't or wouldn't measure up? (We're still working on it; thank G-d that G-d's patient.)

---

When we lived in Holon we had neighbors who had two children.

The parents fought a lot.

One day the young (maybe 7 years old) daughter came to visit us.

Somehow, The Spouse and I got into a spirited conversation. It must have seemed to our visitor that we were behaving like her parents.

So our little visitor shut it out and ... went to sleep.

---

'Course, when asked if we would accept the Torah, we replied in a very extraordinary way: We will do and we will hear.

"Hey, son, I need your help."

"OK, Abba; here I am."

It could have been different.

"Hey, son, I need your help."

"To do what?"

Since G-d had been feeding us for all those years - OK, so it was the same thing day in and day out except for those birds that "dropped in" - as we wandered around in the wilderness (not "desert," thank you; where do you think we got material for the sukkot; we didn't make sand castles, you know!), you'd think we'd be like the first response; G-d's not really asking us to DO a lot - at this point, mostly keep Shabat and get rid of those foreign gods.

That's another point. G-d tells us to have "no other gods" before HaShem.

Someone suggested that could mean G-d "admits" there are other gods. I don't think so; I think it means what other people considered to be gods . . . maybe like many of us treat money as a god.

I don't know that we really needed the "threat" of a mountain over our heads. On the other hand, we often behaved like two-year-olds (the "terrible twos"). Whining because all we had was manna; whining if the well was a little distant; whining because we were not all cohanim (frankly, Scarlett . . . ) - maybe the mountain-over-our-heads was appropriate.

Final thought.

Shavuot means halavie - dairy - foods.

I love dairy foods.

Dairy foods for Shavuot are like liquor for Purim. (I'm fond of arak and Bourbon.)

But we know that while it's a tradition to get so inebriated we don't know Mordecai from Hamas - sorry, Haman - we also know getting to that stage is as foolish as a Purim spiel.

For some of us, it's "ditto with dairy." High cholesterol means controlling consumption of the dairy delights. But, with an eye on the labels (kashrut and cholesterol), most of us should be able to at least nosh a nibble.

Shabat shalom, hag Shavuot samach, and b'tayavon

Yohanon
Yohanon.Glenn @ gmail.com

STROKE: Remember 1st 3 Letters: S-T-R

If everyone can remember something this simple, some lives might be saved.

It only takes a minute to read this...

A neurologist says that if he can get to a stroke victim within 3 hours he can totally reverse the effects of a stroke... totally . He said the trick was getting a stroke recognized, diagnosed, and then getting the patient medically cared for within 3 hours, which is tough.

---

RECOGNIZING A STROKE WITH "S - T - R"

---

Sometimes symptoms of a stroke are difficult to identify. Unfortunately, the lack of awareness spells disaster. The stroke victim may suffer severe brain damage when people nearby fail to recognize the symptoms of a stroke

Now doctors say a bystander can recognize a stroke by asking three simple questions:

S * Ask the individual to SMILE

T * Ask the person to TALK and SPEAK A SIMPLE SENTENCE (Coherently) (e.g., It is sunny out today)

R * Ask him or her to RAISE BOTH ARMS

If he or she has trouble with ANY ONE of these tasks, call 911 immediately and describe the symptoms to the dispatcher.

---

Extra Sign of a Stroke: "Stick out Your Tongue"

---

Another "sign" of a stroke is this: Ask the person to "stick" out his tongue.. If the tongue is "crooked," if it goes to one side or the other, this also is an indication of a stroke.

I'm not a doctor and I don't play one on tv, so I invite all medical professionals to add their comments. If they agree with the foregoing, I encourage them to post the advice in their anterooms and examining rooms so patients and others will have a chance to become "stroke conscious."

Yohanon
Yohanon.Glenn @ gmail.com

Half truths - are they lies?

I've been casually watching the primary politicos' press posturing and I have to tell you, I am (once again) disappointed in our choices - and in some of the folks supporting them.

It's not that any of the candidates are telling blatant lies about their opponents, at least as far as I can tell, but innuendo and half truths are flying about more than feathers from a torn pillow in a hurricane.

---

Most of us know the story of the prevaricator who slandered his rabbi.
Later, filled with remorse, he went to his rabbi and asked how he could make amends.
Rabbi tells him to take a feather pillow, rip it open, and throw the feathers to the wind.
Our miscreant does as he was told and returns to the rabbi expecting forgiveness.
Instead the rabbi instructs the slanderer to collect all the feathers and put them back into the pillow.
"It's impossible to retrieve all the feathers; they were blown away by the wind."
"Exactly," replies the rabbi, "it's the same with your words; they have scattered (by one person gossiping to others) beyond retrieval."

---

One candidate claims to be in favor of something; the opponent takes the remark out of context and, like a tv sound bite (of which we all should be suspicious), presents it as the full remark, adding his or her on twist own the other person's words.

Of course each candidate plays to the audience of the moment. While there may be a lack of a documented promise, there are "suggestions" about the candidate's feelings toward this group, or against the groups real or perceived foe.

To be fair to the candidates, many of us are "single issue" voters who will vote for anyone who claims to think as we do on "our" special interest.

Has everyone forgotten everything they learned in their high school Civics classes? Presidents can say whatever they want, but Congress and the Court can frustrate any president's wishes. Elect me and everyone will have a lifetime supply of "free" high octane gas - never mind that Congress won't fund the promise and I'm certainly not going to pay for it from MY pocket.

There are Web sites that attempt to fairly present a candidate's views, but it's hard to hit a moving target.

One thing that amuses me about politicians - they attack each other for having a change of mind.

Are we all frozen in time, never changing when new evidence is presented or different situations occur?

I know I wasn't always as I am today. I would hate for someone to say I was "wishy-washy" because I drive a Chevy when I used to drive a Ford. (Actually I don't drive either, but I hope I make my point.)

I think it would be great if we could develop a list of concerns with input from all special interest groups, carefully craft the questions to avoid "weasel worded" answers, and present them to candidates sequestered in separate rooms and away from their advisors and "spin doctors."

No debate.

Just the answers; as complete as the candidate cares to provide (for even that tells us something about the person).

Spare me the negative half truths; I won't listen to one candidate attempt to discredit another. I want to know where the candidate stands on the issues.

Civility and truth on the campaign trail: the stuff of which dreams are made.

Yohanon
Yohanon.Glenn @ gmail.com

Aza and the Heights

I am amused that Iran's Ahmedinajad is upset by Syria "talking" with Israel about the "return of the Golan Heights."

Never mind, for a minute, that the Heights are not Syria's or that Syria's (and Israel's and Lebanon's and Jordan's and ...) current borders all were drawn by France and England for their political convenience.

Let's focus instead on what lies ahead for Israel if Syria - with Hezbollah and Hamas in its bed - takes the high points.

According to most non-Jewish pundits - and a few Jewish as well - Syria will be happy with the arrangement and there will be peace to at least match that between Israel and Egypt and Jordan.

But let us, for a moment, look at an area Israel "gave back" to the "indigenous" population: Aza (Gaza).

Israel acquired Aza from Egypt; Egypt didn't plan it that way, but it happened.

Aza is, basically, a jail for the Arabs living there. Their jailers are - not Israel as the media might lead us to believe - but Hamas; before Hamas, Arafat's PLO.

Israel gave back the Sinai to Egypt in return for a peace agreement; it cost Sadat, a true hero in my book and a terrorist like his Israeli counterpart with whom he visited in Jerusalem, his life at the hands of Arab murderers.

Israel decided to "give back" Aza - forcing Jews out of the area and destroying their homes as part of the agreement, allegedly so the PLO could construct high-rise apartments for the "refuges" whose parents left their homes to make way for the "glorious invading Arab armies."

The IDF - Israel Defense Force - withdrew and the PLO, later Hamas - took over.

And attacks, which the PLO assured the world never would happen, happened.

So Israel built a barrier.

And the world castigated Israel for its "chutzpah."

It would be even more upset by Israel's fence to separate its enemies from its population.

Never mind that the US is building a wall between itself and a non-threatening neighbor, Mexico.

Never mind that Aza has a border with Egypt - which the Egyptians have sealed with a wall recently made famous by Azans who tore it down to get into Egypt - and it has access to the Med (which, with all the millions the world has given the area's political leaders Azans could have built a world-class sea port - but didn't). Likewise, the Arabs in occupied Israel (Judah and Samaria) share a border with Jordan. Look at the maps! Hardly an "island jail." (Click on the title link for a map.)

Since Sharon pulled Israel out of Aza - don't ask about the synagogues the Moslems desecrated - southern Israel has been the target of infiltrators and almost daily rocket attacks.

Now, who is in charge in Aza?

Hamas.

Back to Syria and the Heights.

Syria is in bed with - Hamas.

Syria is aligned with Ahmedinajad who repeatedly calls for Israel to be wiped off the face of the map.

Syria is in bed with Hezbollah, the rapists of Lebanon and, like Hamas and - in Arabic, anyway - the PLO - sworn to Israel's annihilation.

Maybe I am foolish or a warmonger or, well, pick your term, but I can't work up much support for a "return" of the Heights - or anything else - to Syria.

Unlike Sadat, I don't see any Syrian leaders visiting Israel with a peace agreement.

Unlike Hussein, there is no history of toleration.

I do see aggression and continuing threats to Israel's safety from all the parties (including, sad to say, some Israeli politicians).

My immediate family is in Israel - near Haifa, in Rehovot, and in Bet Shean, and the extended family all over the country, including places within range of Hamas' rockets. I lived in Zefat, so I know what it's like to be shelled. I also was in Haifa when the rockets fell on that town a couple of years ago.

Maybe I'm prejudiced. But if that's the case, I would have done something abusive to the Israeli Moslem family sharing a close-to-Haifa beach with some of my family as the rockets were being fired at us from a Hamas-controlled zone. (I found it hard to believe a Moslem woman would walk on an Israeli beach in full garb given the events of the time, but she did and did so confident she was safe. Would, could, a Jew with a colorful kippa stroll a Lebanese or Azan beach with any feeling of security? I would not.)

I honestly have seen nothing in Syria that would suggest that giving Syria the Heights is wise; on the contrary, giving a government with Syria's mentality a position to shell its enemy - Israel - and to murder its people, is stupid.

Why Israel's current - or previous - PM is willing to sacrifice Israelis, both Jews and Moslems since missiles are indiscriminate - is beyond my ken.

Why would Israel invite another Aza?

Yohanon
Yohanon.Glenn @ gmail.com