Tuesday, August 31, 2010

Casting a bad spel cq

 

An old - make that "long time" - friend is a member of a SciFi fan club, one where writing is taken very seriously.

So seriously, in fact, that the organization - once known as the "Pittsburgh Area Realtime Scientifiction Enthusiasts Club," now simply PARSEC (http://www.parsec-sff.org/index.html) - has as its raison d'être "to promote awareness of the richness of speculative fiction as literature, art and music; further general education in the sciences and arts, support contribution, both scientific and artistic, to society and to espouse the enjoyment of speculative fiction as literature, art and music with others."

It even sponsors a well-received contest for budding authors, complete with critiques by both members (first cut) and published authors.

So one would think that the PARSEC web site would be typo free.

One would be mistaken.

For several months, the PARSEC page at http://www.parsec-sff.org/l has had the following contents:


Writing Contest Delay

16 July 2010

The winners of the writing contest would normaly have been anounced at this time.

Unfortunately, due to uncontrolable citcumstances, that announcement has been delayed.

Please be patient and stay tuned.


There are 36 words in the three sentences. Of the 36, four are, to be kind, typos:

    normaly (normally) anounced (announced) uncontrolable (uncontrollable ) citcumstances (circumstances)

Everybody makes mistakes; I've been known to fat-finger LOTS of words. Usually my spell check catches the typos - Me? Misspell a word? - but sometimes a word is corrrectly spelled but incorrect for the application, e.g., clothes vs. close; know vs. no or now. There are other "got'chas" that creep into any author's copy.

The difference is, when someone points them out to me I make an effort to correct the faux pas; I hate to be embarrassed - and trust me, I have been embarrassed in 60 point (that's BIG) type.

My friend at PARSEC knows about the "oops" on the PARSEC page; she alerted the Powers That Be. I also - before daring to mention the typos to my friend - tried to alert those Powers.

I know the page has been touched; the PARSEC Picnic copy - with map - was added after I tried to rattle the Powers' cage.

Granted I am a bit of a curmudgeon, but I think if I was a budding SciFi author, if I read PARSEC's page, I might wonder just how valid any critique by members of this organization might be.

Truth in blogging: My friend is the Writing Contest Queen and she DOES take her work very seriously; fortunately for her - and unfortunately for PARSEC - she does not create or maintain the organization's Web presence.

Yohanon Glenn
Yohanon.Glenn at gmail dot com

Are we safe from BP ?

 

Publication Date 08/30/2010
Source: The New York Times
http://tinyurl.com/25sg7hb

 

TEXAS CITY, Tex. -- While the world was focused on the oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico, a BP refinery here released huge amounts of toxic chemicals into the air that went unnoticed by residents until many saw their children come down with respiratory problems.

For 40 days after a piece of equipment critical to the refinery's operation broke down, a total of 538,000 pounds of toxic chemicals, including the carcinogen benzene, poured out of the refinery.

Rather than taking the costly step of shutting down the refinery to make repairs, the engineers at the plant diverted gases to a smokestack and tried to burn them off, but hundreds of thousands of pounds still escaped into the air, according to state environmental officials.

Neither the state nor the oil company informed neighbors or local officials about the pollutants until two weeks after the release ended, and angry residents of Texas City have signed up in droves to join a $10 billion class-action lawsuit against BP. The state attorney general, Greg Abbott, has also sued the company, seeking fines of about $600,000.

BP maintains three air monitors along the fence around the plant and two in the surrounding community, and they did not show a rise in pollution during April and May, the company said. ''BP does not believe there is any basis to pay claims in connection with this event,'' said Michael Marr, a spokesman for the company.

But scores of Texas City residents said they experienced respiratory problems this spring, and environmentalists said the release of toxic gases ranked as one of the largest in the state's history.

Neil Carman of the Lone Star Sierra Club said the release was probably even larger than BP had acknowledged, because the company estimated that more than 98 percent of the pollution was burned off by a flare, an overly optimistic figure in the eyes of many environmental scientists.

He also said there were too few air monitors to accurately assess what had happened. ''There are huge gaps in the monitoring network,'' Mr. Carman said.

Dionne Ramirez, 29, who lives about a mile from the refinery, said she had little doubt that elevated pollution harmed her family. Not only have both she and her husband had coughs, but all three of their young sons have suffered from severe chest congestion, sore throats and endless coughing since April. Her 4-year-old had to be hospitalized for two nights because he could not stop coughing, she said.

When the news of the pollution was made public on June 4, Ms. Ramirez was irate. ''I didn't know why they were getting sick or what was going on,'' she said. ''They are healthy little kids.''

Her experience was echoed by other families living in the shadow of the jumbled smokestacks, pipelines, cylindrical tanks and giant globes of the refinery. Nearly every household on one block of First Avenue, just a half-mile from the BP complex, had someone fall ill during May, residents there said.

''We all became real sick -- throwing up, diarrhea, couldn't keep anything down -- and we just thought it was something that was going around,'' said Khristina Kelley, who lives with her husband and four children on the street. ''But then everybody around here got it.''

Ms. Kelley said the release of chemicals was less troubling to her than the company's silence. ''I'm worried that one day I'll take my kids to the doctor and something that could have been prevented wasn't prevented because we didn't know to the last moment,'' she said.

Officials in Texas City said they were not informed of the scale of the release until it was over. BP said it met the requirements of state law by informing state officials of the release in writing on April 7, then filing a final report on June 4, after the equipment was fixed.

That final report said the release of chemicals had gone on for 959 hours, until May 16. Among other pollutants, the plant had released 17,000 pounds of benzene; 37,000 pounds of nitrogen oxides, which can cause respiratory problems; and 186,000 pounds of carbon monoxide. Another 262,000 pounds of various volatile organic compounds also escaped.

''The state's investigation shows that BP's failure to properly maintain its equipment caused the malfunction and could have been prevented,'' the attorney general's office said in a statement.

Mr. Marr, the BP spokesman, declined to comment on those accusations.

The trouble started when a fire broke out on the seal of a hydrogen compressor, which traps noxious chemicals and returns them to be used as fuel in other parts of the plant. The compressor was part of the refinery's ''ultracracker unit,'' which can process 65,000 barrels of oil per day and mostly produces high-octane blending components for gasoline. The company sent the gases to a flare at the end of a smokestack, 300 feet in the air, hoping to burn off the hazardous chemicals. But a monitor at the top of the stack showed that the emissions were far higher than permitted.

The attorney general's office alleges in its complaint against BP that the fire started because workers had allowed iron sulfide to build up on the seal of the compressor.

Violations are nothing new at the plant, federal and state officials say. In 2005, an explosion at the refinery killed 15 people and injured more than 170, and BP was fined $87 million by the federal Occupational Safety and Health Administration for safety lapses that led to that blast. This month, BP agreed to pay $50.6 million, a record.

On air pollution, the refinery has a similarly checkered history, a pattern of breaking limits on air pollution and being slow to report those events, state officials claim in legal complaints. In 2009, Mr. Abbott, the attorney general, sued BP for violating clean-air standards 72 times in the previous five years.

Still, the refinery is a major employer in Texas City, a town with about 45,000 residents, modest frame houses, fast-food restaurants and dollar stores on the coastal plains across a channel from Galveston. The refineries dwarf the clapboard abodes of workers here, thrusting up into tropical skies in utilitarian ugliness and painting the azure with smoke. Those smokestacks mean jobs, and many people are skeptical about those claiming they have gotten sick.

''This is just money-hungry money grubbers is all it is,'' said Pete Fernandez, a longtime resident. He called the lawsuits ''frivolous -- completely, totally frivolous.''

Yet some longtime refinery workers are among those suing. Robert L. Sukiennik, 45, has worked at a refinery operated by Valero here for two decades. In early May, he started to cough and felt weak. He finally saw a doctor in mid-July, who became alarmed at his white blood cell count. A CT scan a week later revealed abnormal spots on his kidneys, and he was referred to an oncologist for more tests. Leukemia was a possibility, he was told.

It is impossible to know for certain if Mr. Sukiennik's sudden decline in health is connected to the emissions from BP, but he says that the refinery has had so many troubles over the years, he is filled with suspicion that it might be the root of his problems.

''Every day they have some problem over there,'' he said. ''I don't think BP itself really cares about the community. They are not trying for safety; all they care about is the big bucks.''

PHOTOS: Refinery smokestacks tower over homes in Texas City, Tex. Khristina Kelley, left, who lives a half-mile from BP's refinery there, said her entire family, and many of their neighbors, became sick after the refinery released huge amounts of toxic chemicals into the air. August 30, 2010, MondayLate Edition - Final Section: A Page: 9 Column: 0 Desk: National Desk Length: 1383 words
(c) 2010 The New York Times Company

Links

 

It is interesting to follow links.

My daughter sent me a link to Free Middle East (http://www.freemiddleeast.com/).

The blog du jour the day I first went to the page was titled "Palestinian Corruption and Humanitarian Aid."

There was a link to another blog entry, "Free Palestine" (http://www.freemiddleeast.com/phasedplan.php), a clip that discusses the palestinian leadership's (?) multi-phase plan to eliminate Israel.

In the beginning I thought it would document how the palestinians in Gaza destroyed synagogues, greenhouses, and infrastructure left when Israel withdrew - facilities the palestinians vowed to respect.

But then things got interesting.

There was a link titled "The Obsession with Israel; Overtly Skewed Media Coverage" (http://www.freemiddleeast.com/blog/free_middle_east/overtly-skewed-media-coverage/123/?

This linked to an entry that graphically compared deaths for various conflicts. Compared to the disaster in the Democratic Republic Of Congo (DRC), the Israel-palestinian conflict is minuscule - that does not mean the deaths of innocents in the Israel-palestinian conflict are less important, just far, far fewer.

This FreeMiddleEast page links to another blog, "Stealth Conflicts" (http://stealthconflicts.wordpress.com/2009/02/21/death-toll-comparisons/, a very interesting page.

Subtitled "How the World's Worst Violence Is Ignored," the primary page contains several links to other locations within the blog URL, all of which are worth visiting.

One in particular focuses on the amount of media attention the situation in Israel receives. According to the entry at http://stealthconflicts.wordpress.com/2009/01/01/israel-palestine-and-contagious-journalism/ , the blogger notes that "With little budget for foreign newsgathering, Zambia’s leading newspaper (the Post) buys its world news from foreign news agencies. The result is that it gives more coverage to the situation in Israel-Palestine than it does to the eight countries on Zambia’s border combined. In the year 2004, for example, it devoted 9 percent of its foreign coverage to Israel-Palestine, but only 4 percent to all of Zambia’s eight neighbours."

One of Zambia's neighbors is theDemocratic Republic of Congo, the world leader in conflict casualties.

It all makes for very interesting reading . . . especially when you dig a little bit and find out just who is doing the killing in Africa.

Yohanon Glenn
Yohanon.Glenn at gmail dot com

Sunday, August 29, 2010

While others risk their lives

 

We have for the duration a schnorrer, a Rosh Yeshiva - head of a religious school for students studying the Talmud.

I asked the gentleman if the young men at his yeshiva did their time with the Israeli armed forces? He answered with one word: No.

With that my wallet closed tightly.

Never mind that he is, allegedly, a Sefardi dressed as an Ashkenazi, with black kapote (but sans gartel even on Shabat) and tzit-tzit hanging out. (He had no noticeable peyot - ear curls - so there's no suspicion that he's a Yemenite.)

Here is an organization supported by state money (donated in large measure by non-Israelis often to massage their own consciences), teaching students getting a stipend from the state who are encouraged to have wives who receive welfare from the state and who have children, each one of which gets a stipend from the state.

But they give nothing - shum davar, efes, nada - back to the state.

No military service.

No national service.

They're "religious" and their duty for the state is studying Talmud.

Granted they DO have large families, but their children will follow in their paths of thumbing their noses at the state that provides for their welfare.

The contention that because they are "religious" is phony.

Joshua, Moses' handpicked successor and certainly "religious" not only went to war, he led the warriors.

Pinchas, the second high priest, went to war with Joshua.

In fact, in the period just after we entered Canaan, the only people exempt from going to war were (a) those under or over age, (b) those newly betrothed or married, (c) those who had recently built a new house, and (d) cowards.

The husband of one of my sisters-in-law is religious; he went to the army. His only son, also religious, went to the army (and still is a reservist). I have a brother-in-law who is religious and he not only went to the army, but he was in battles.

My sister-in-law's husband and her son, and my brother-in-law all work but find time for Torah study. They receive nothing from the state to study. In fact, the sister-in-law's husband spent his own money to learn to be a hazan - and had is son taught as well. When my #1 son visited them, he took him along for the class, a trip from Haifa to Jerusalem and back which was made every week for several years.

Most of the people in my congregation went to the military - either Israel's or the United States'. An 80-year-old gentleman tells of his service with the US Army; I can talk of my time with the US Air Force.

I have a sister-in-law who went into the Israeli army; she could have avoided it as many young women do, by opting for national service.

The Israeli army always has had rabbis in uniform. Some became famous; Rabbi Shlomo Goren, a"h, is an excellent example. My nephew was a masgeach (food preparation supervisor) - but in the army none-the-less.

There ARE yeshivot that do send students to the army or to national service.

There ARE yeshivot that insist learning be coupled with work, a real job.

The students who do their time - either with the army or in national service - and those who work and study have my greatest respect. It they become religious leaders, not necessarily rabbis, they will understand how the "average Jew" feels; they'll know something of the life of a typical Israeli.

The ones safely ensconced within the safety of yeshiva walls, who spend their life studying Talmud and increasing the population that will follow their fathers on the dole; these people are beneath contempt.

Until they give something back, not a prutah will they get from me.

Yohanon Glenn
Yohanon.Glenn at gmail dot com

Thursday, August 26, 2010

Wailing walls

 

No, not the Kotel, but the walls between the US and Mexico and between Gaza and Egypt, and the fence between Israel and Occupied Israel.

Why is it that the United States can build a wall along its mostly peaceful border with Mexico and most of the world yawns, but when Israel builds a fence to slow down terrorists' entry into Israel to slaughter its citizens, the world suddenly takes umbrage - how dare Israel prevent terrorists from entering the county to kill and main on a whim?

Egypt builds a wall to keep the Gazans - fellow Arabs - inside Gaza; Egyptian soldiers shot and kill people crossing in either direction. (They also shoot and kill Sudanese trying to escape to Israel for sanctuary.)

Where is the world's condemnation of Egypt?

US-Mexico Israel

The US has hundreds of armed troops stationed along the wall. That's OK with most of the world. The soldiers and Border patrol personnel are there to turn back or apprehend would be illegals and to try to reduce the flow of illicit drugs from Mexico into the US. No question, if there was no market for the illegals and no market for the drugs, there would be no over/around/under the fence excursions from the south.

There is a difference between trying to secure a border because of illegals (usually non-violent peons trying to improve economically) or because drugs are being brought over by "mules" working for a cartel - or to keep gun runners from the States on the north side of the border and trying to secure a border to prevent people sworn to kill your citizens from crossing with bombs and guns.

Unfortunately, the world turns a blind eye to America's wall and an eye filled with hatred for Israel's fence.

The Arabs in Occupied Israel complain that they are inconvenienced by the fence; made to feel inferior by the fence.

They apparently refuse to recognize, to admit, that the fence is there because of their collective actions against Jews and fellow Arabs in Israel. Taking responsibility for their own actions seems to be "anti-Arab" or "anti-Islam."

At the same time that the world condemns the fence, it also condemns Israel's blockade of Gaza and its limitation of good into Gaza from Israel. Yet, it is silent about Egypt doing the same thing.

Indeed, more aid enters Gaza via Israel - actually much supplied by Israel - than via any other entry point.

But the world is blind to this.

Yohanon Glenn
Yohanon.Glenn at gmail dot com

Monday, August 23, 2010

Mosque at Ground Zero - Part 2

 

I viewed a video from Jihad Watch (http://tinyurl.com/34o5n2r) this a.m.

Pat Condell, a Brit, talking about the Ground Zero mosque, asked: "Is it possible to be astonished, but not surprised?"

Mr. Condell made a lot of good points, most of which have been made before. He, of course, has the (dis)advantage of living in England where Islam has made major inroads into the native culture.

One of the points he made was that Islam builds on top of the holy sites of people this "peaceful" religion conquers by the sword.

One such place that comes to mind is the abomination over Solomon's and Herod's Temple in Jerusalem.

Of course the Islamists don't want to build on top of the World Trade Center buildings they destroyed; they'll settle - and New York's Jewish mayor is working to assure this - for a 13or 14 story structure looking down on the site where the NYC landmarks stood; where some 3000 innocent people were murdered by Islamists.

But what I found equally interesting in Mr. Condell's little presentation was his remark that only Islam gains by the sword, by violence.

That's not quite true.

Of the three "western" religions, Judaism and its incorrigible children, Paulism and later Islam, only one, Judaism, never - repeat never - attacked other peoples with the intent to force any form of Judaism on them.

Even captive women, a recent Torah topic, were not forced to accept Judaism. There was no requirement that the woman convert to Judaism before her captor took her to wife or concubine. (Turns out the lack of that requirement proved the undoing of several Jewish kings.)

Israel had its wars of conquest; the wars were to control the land. It had other wars in defense of its borders and G-d-given land. It never - repeat never - had wars to gain converts; it nevere was "Judaism or the sword."

On the other hand, the Paulists give us the crusades in which many European Jews were massacred by "noble"men on their way to wrest the holy land from the infidels (this time, "infidel"="Moslem").

The Paulists also gave us the inquisition and the auto de fe.

And pogroms.

Anytime someone sneezed in Europe, "the Jews caused it; kill them."

At their spring holiday, when their god allegedly "rose from the dead," the Paulists would go on a rampage, claiming we - not the Romans - killed their savior who, according to their own legend, had to die for their sins. (Since when do gods die?)

Actually, the Muslims treated Jews, and Paulists, a little better.

We were - are - second class citizens with many restrictions on commerce and in legal matters in lands controlled by the Islamists. The Moslems inherited the legal handicaps from Jewish law. Even some of the punishment the Islamists use even to this day, stoning and lashes as examples, the borrowed from Judaism; the only difference is those punishments were long ago discarded and remain, even in modern Israel, only historical facts never to be practiced again.

Still, for many - including a few Jews and Paulists, some Moslem fanatics offered only the choice of "Islam or the sword."

While the Paulists gave us the holocaust in Europe - if you are honest, you must admit many - most - that good Paulists of Germany, Poland, Hungary, Romania, et al, ran to murder us as individuals and in groups - synagogues turned into funeral pyres for too many Jews. There were, to be fair, some - a few - Paulists who helped us; and some appeared to help our children by hiding them . . . and then forcing the children into their belief.

While the nazis laid waste to European Judaism, the Moslems were having pogroms of their own - in North Africa, in Iran and Iraq - throughout the middle east.

About the only safe haven for a Jew was the far east - India, China, and Japan. There was no safe haven in the U.S.; despite thousands of acres of empty land, the U.S. congress and president denied entry to those few Jews who managed to escape. Of course now the U.S. welcomes illegal immigrants and gives them benefits many of its own citizens lack (but pay for). This situation, by the way, can be laid at the feet of both parties.

It may come as an unwanted surprise to Mr. Condell, but his coreligionist are as guilty of "Jewicide" - not genocide, since it is targeted largely at us * - as the Islamists who are taking over Europe and making inroads into the Orient.

Mr. Condell makes many good points, including a few he perhaps did not intend.

* Moslems also, of course, are murdering Kurds in Iraq and Turkey, and animists in Africa; Paulists explorers managed to decimate or entirely eliminate, either by disease or sword, numbers of indigenous peoples "for the glory of the cross."

Yohanon.Glenn
Yohanon.Glenn at gmail dot com

 

Sunday, August 22, 2010

All your taste is in your mouth

 

All your taste is in your mouth.

Insensitive.

Unkind.

Hurtful.

Given the tone in which it was said, certainly the words were not heard as a compliment.

But at the same time, not totally inaccurate, and not necessarily intended to be hurtful.

There is in the statement a bit of truth - the charge at least suggests that the speaker acknowledges, and appreciates, the hearer's culinary expertise but at the same time has a problem with other features of the hearer's taste, be it authors, color, music, associates, whatever.

That, of course, made no difference when the words were said, and makes no differences now.

The words remain insensitive, unkind, and hurtful.

Over the years the speaker of those words created a new mantra, one probably known at the time but certainly not practiced.

"It's what the audience perceives that is important, not [so much] what is said."

Perhaps by trying to be "politically correct" we fail to say what we mean; we "weasel word" what comes out of our mouths.

That doesn't mean a callous remark is acceptable; it simply means we need to find an honest way to state, clearly and unambiguously, what we think.

But not "clearly and unambiguously and hurtfully."

Hind sight is a wonderful thing, but fore sight would have been better.

I'm not sure if the situation is unusual, but both the hearer and the speaker remember, and regret, those words spoken more than 30 years ago.


Friday, August 20, 2010

Thoughts on "The Mosque at Ground Zero"

 

The U.S. constitution guarantees freedom of religion.

The U.S. constitution guarantees freedom of assembly.

The U.S. constitution guarantee freedom of speech.

The U.S. constitution DOES NOT guarantee freedom to shout FIRE in a crowded theater.

The U.S. constitution DOES NOT guarantee freedom to establish a facility - religion-related or otherwise - in any location deemed desirable by the organization that wants to build.

The U.S. constitution DOES NOT totally eliminate "state's rights" and local authority.

Injecting the White House into this discussion is improper; it is a matter for the City of New York, not the State of New York, and certainly not the Federal government. POTUS is a resident of Chicago IL and a temporary resident of Washington D.C.; he is NOT a resident of New York City or even New York State.

There are more than 100 mosques in greater New York City. Obviously no one is restricting the right of Muslims to practice their religion. In the Constitution's's terms, the right to worship is not abridged even if the mosque disallowed at Ground Zero.

The right of freedom of assembly has long been restricted by the general good of the community. That's why there are zoning laws.

So much for "rights."

There is, as can be discerned by anyone who reads or listens to media, a broad base of people who are very much "anti-mosque-at-ground-zero." Although we generally are what the Moslems claim to be, peaceful, putting a mosque at this site will incite people to put aside their feelings of "live and let live." In other words, the Moslems are shouting FIRE in a crowded theater.

What I fail to understand is why Islamists want to seemingly thumb their noses at America? It was Islamists - Moslems - who murdered thousands of people working or visiting the New York City landmark Twin Towers.

It was Islamists - Moslems - who murdered more people at the Pentagon in Virginia.

It was Islamists - Moslems - who tried, unsuccessfully, to highjack a fourth plane to crash it into the White House. The passengers fought back until they, too, were murdered.

If the Islamists - Moslems - have ANY sense of public relations they MUST know that putting up any type Islamist structure will be considered an insult to America.

The ONLY conclusion that can be drawn from the Islamist - Moslem - determination to put a mosque/community center in close proximity to Ground Zero is to show absolute distain for America and its citizens.

Putting the mosque where the Islamists - Moslems - propose is akin to flying a Japanese flag at Pearl Harbor or a nazi flag over a German embassy in Israel.

COMMENTS must be directed to the blogger's email.

Yohanon Glenn
Yohanon.Glenn at gmail dot com

 

Thursday, August 19, 2010

Conversion factor

 

Comment appended to post Thursday, August 19, 2010 5:25 PM

 

I was changing the Comments status and I happened to see one of the comments from the "early days" of this blog.

The comment was from Rabbi A.Z. Haber in response to "About those Avot" (http://yohanon.blogspot.com/2008/05/about-those-avot.html).

The discussion was about converts to Judaism who made a name for themselves, notably in one of the Talmuds.

Rabbi Haber thought the person was Yehudah ben Torsa, but it turned out his answer was "close, but no cigar." The good rabbi followed up his initial comment with a correction, and with the correction, a story - which is why this entry is about converts.

Rabbi Haber wrote, in his update comment that "Actually it was Yochanan ben Torsa from a Yerushalmi and the Midrash (Pesikta Rabbasi 14):(The rabbi was a colleague of Rabbi Akiva; thus, this story probably took place in the era right after the destruction of the Second Temple)."

Once there was a Jewish man who owned a cow with which he plowed his field. He and the cow would rest, however, on the holy Shabbos, the day which is dedicated to the Creator.

This Jewish man went through a difficult period where he was forced to sell the cow to a non-Jewish neighbor. The new owner plowed with it for six days. On Shabbos, he also took it out to plough, but it lay down beneath its yoke. He began to beat it, but the animal would not budge from its place. Seeing that his efforts were in vain, he went to his Jewish neighbor and said, "Come take your cow, for she grieves after her former master. No matter how much I beat her, she refuses to budge from her place."

The Jewish man realized that the cow refused to work because it had been taught to rest on Shabbos. He said, "I will get her to stand up." When he came, he whispered in her ear, "Heifer, heifer, you know that when you were mine, you plowed all week and rested on Shabbos. But now because of my sins, I was forced to sell you, and your new owner is not Jewish. Therefore, I beseech you, stand up and plough." She immediately arose and began to plough.

The new owner said, "I beg you, take back your cow. But before I leave, tell me what did you whisper in her ear? I wore myself out with her, and even beat her, but she did not get up."The Jewish man told him what he had whispered in her ear.

Immediately, the other man began to tremble when he realized that this cow, who did not have human intellect, recognized the Creator. He therefore proclaimed, "How can I, a human being whom my Maker formed in His own image and to whom He gave intellect, fail to recognize my Creator?"

Straightaway, he went and converted to Judaism. Eventually, he became an accomplished Torah scholar who was known as Rabbi Yochanan ben Torsa (Yochanan, son of a cow), and to this day, our rabbis cite his rulings. Why is he called the "son of a cow"? It is because the elevated behavior of this cow led to his spiritual rebirth.

You can read more from Rabbi Haber at http://www.torahlab.org/outoftheloop/

If we can assume this is not a "sepur savta" (grandmother's take), here we have a person who knew - at best - only ONE - count'em, one - mitzvah, keeping Shabat, and he was converted. I'm sure the mikveh and brit came immediately after the man's decision.

A conversion in line with Ramba"m. A conversion in line with Hillel. A conversion in line with halakah.

Did the convert-to-be study for 6 months to a year? No indication of that.

Did the convert know all the major and minor mitzvoth, both the positive and the negative commandments? Not likely.

Did the convert agree to accept all 613 mitzvoth, even though there is no way any one person can practice them all? Hardly.

The Moabite convert - did she know all the mitzvoth? Obviously not - Naomi still was teaching her when they arrived back in Israel. Still, she was good enough to be the mother of kings.

What about Tzipora, Moses' wife. The Torah tells us she knew some mitzvoth, certainly about brit melah, but what about kashrut? That came with Sinai and Sinai came after the brit (a mitzvah that dates to Abraham's time). Yethro, Tzipora's father, allegedly converted after telling his son-in-law to set up an administrative system in the wilderness. Did he spend six months to a year studying with the rabbis?

When we accepted the "yoke of the Torah" we were standing under Har Sinai. Since the rabbis of today can't hold the mountain over a prospective convert's head, perhaps that is the reason for the extended study period. Perhaps not.

I understand the reluctance of some rabbis to accept a person who wants to convert - do they want to convert to be a "bagel Jew" - one who worries only about man's relationship with man at the expense of man's relationship with G-d?

I also can understand the reluctance of some rabbis to consider a person who wants to marry a Jew a suspect candidate. 'Course that doesn't speak well for the Jew who wants to marry the non-Jew . . . will the Jewish partner abandon Judaism once the glass is crushed (or the light bulb broken)?

But I cannot comprehend why the rabbis - and here I refer to the present religious establishment in Israel - insist on making conversion so difficult . . . and beyond the requirements of the Torah and it's luminaries. Is this a money-maker for the rabbis? How much do they charge a prospective convert for lessons? Do they charge by the hour or the lesson or do they charge for the course? Is it even proper to charge? A mohel isn't allowed to charge - demand a fee - for his handiwork. He is allowed to accept a gift. Both the mohel and the rabbinical board (va'ad) welcome a person into Judaism; why should the rabbis make a profit from a mitzvah. (Maybe we should pay our kohanim to bless us every morning for doing what the Torah commands them to do.)

The current religious establishment in Israel - both Ashkenazi and Sephardi/Mizrahi - bring no honor to the rabbinate, to Israel, or to Judaism.

One final thought: Maybe the "establishment" could learn from colleges and universities that let students "CLEP out" of some classes by proving the students already have the knowledge they would learn in class? The colleges and universities still charge, albeit a lesser fee, for the testing; if the rabbis had something similar, rather than lose income, they probably could make a greater profit by freeing up classroom space for other candidates.

COMMENTS ARE WELCOME in English and Hebrew.

Yohanon Glenn
Yohanon.Glenn at gmail dot com

 

From R. Haber, Thursday, August 19, 2010 5:25 PM

I am flattered to be quoted and you make (as always) a good point. I would rush to point out that almost every field recognizes the need for protocol. One year of study seems like good protocol. The only danger is when people confuse protocol with halacha. Protocol can change on a case by case basis; halacha generally cannot.

As an aside, I would humbly suggest that very few of us would be Hillelians on this subject. The chutzpadik attitude of the fellow who demanded to learn it all on one foot or to become Cohen Gadol would have gotten him thrown out of any court of any religion or denomination. Even if the halacha is like Hillel, you can't blame the Batei Din for leaning toward Shamai here. Especially when we (presumably) lack Hillel's ability to judge the character of the man in question.

 

Washington's blinders

 

I sometimes think our elected representatives think everything can be solved with taxpayer dollars.

I sent a fairly detailed post to Florida's junior, and unelected, senator, George LeMieux regarding a way to provide at least "semi-permanent" shelter to thousands of Haitians while removing the blight of empty 20- and 40-foot long cargo containers taking up space at our ports.

Photo by Timothy Schenck

I suggested that the containers, once if not now a drag on the market - it's less expensive to stack them at ports than to return them to their point of manufacture, typically China - could be converted to serve as housing and schools and clinics and any number of other useful structures.

There are several firms in the United States whose business is converting containers to residential and office use.

I told the Charlie Crist appointee where containers were located and I provided some contact information for companies doing conversions.

I thought it was a win (clear out unwanted containers) - win (business for US companies) - win (facilities for Haitians) situation.

My message to the Republican novice senator received an answer today.

The reply talked about government assistance for the Haiti. It talked about tax breaks for people donating funds to Haiti.

It failed to mention containers or housing. Not one word.

I suppose the approach was too simple.

Maybe it didn't cost enough of our tax dollars.

To his credit, his staff DID respond to my suggestion. Other Florida politicians failed to do even that much.

Sadly, it appears that the aide who checks incoming mail saw the word "Haiti" and put it into the "Send Haiti reply" queue.

I didn't vote for Mr. LeMieux and, based on his response, I'm certain I'll vote for his opponent if he decides to take his chances with an election. (His amazing rise-to-power official biography is at http://lemieux.senate.gov/public/?p=Biography.)

The people DO have a voice.

The trouble is, no one is listening.

 

COMMENTS ARE WELCOME in English or Hebrew; all others will be deleted.

Yohanon Glenn


Yohanon.Glenn at gmail dot com

 

Wednesday, August 11, 2010

One thing leads to another and ...

 

I received an email that linked to a Web site called "Armageddon Online" (http://www.armageddononline.org/disasters_list.php.

The site lists disasters from prehistoric times (how can that be if we have a history of them?). Fascinating stuff.

I worked my way down to "Medieval disasters" and clicked on the "The Black Death first appears in Europe in 1347." That link brought me to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_Death.

The link to the Wikipedia page (ibid.) was a tad misleading since the Black Death spread beyond Europe; it was known in Islamic states and central Asia as well - "The Black Death ravaged much of the Islamic world Plague epidemics kept returning to the Islamic world up to the 19th century. The cities of North Africa were especially hard hit by the disease. 30,000–50,000 died in Algiers in 1620–21, 1654–57, 1665, 1691, and 1740–42. Plague remained a major event in Ottoman society until the second quarter of the 19th century. Between 1701 and 1750, 37 larger and smaller plague epidemics were recorded in Istanbul, and 31 between 1751 and 1800. Baghdad has suffered severely from visitations of the plague, and sometimes two-thirds of its population has been wiped out."

The Wikipedia entry includes several graphic, including the one here.

Which caused me to wonder. Of all the Black Death victims, how many were Jews who were healthy - or at least free of the disease - but were murdered at the hands of their neighbors, often at the urging of the dominant religious group. We know the Paulists' reaction - burn the Jews at the stake as the graphic illustrates.

The article fails to comment on the murders and offers nothing on life for us in Islamic dominated lands; were we also the scapegoats for the Moslems? We know there are pogroms in Islamic countries and the Shoah was not limited to the Paulists in Europe.

Jews allegedly escaped the full wrath of the plagues in large part because of the mikveh. I wonder if the mikveh may not be credited over much, however.

Let's "assume" that the men visited the mikveh on a weekly basis; before Shabat. But the average woman probably went once-a-month, and unmarried girls not at all. That would constitute a large portion of the Jewish population.

Perhaps the lower infection rate has to do with isolation, "ghettoization," and sanitary practices; in most Jewish communities, the streets and alleyways were neither latrines not garbage dumps. From the time of the giving of the Law we have kept excrement and filth away from our quarters, be they tents, hovels, or mansions.

The basic question remains - how many Jews dies as a direct result of the plague and how many Jews died as an indirect result of the plague; murdered by their neighbors.

Might be an interesting challenge for someone with a historical interest and resources.

===

COMMENTS NO LONGER ARE ACCEPTED thanks to someone who repeatedly posts comments in an Oriental language. If you care to comment, contact me directly.

====

Yohanon Glenn
Yohanon.Glenn at gmail dot com

 

Monday, August 9, 2010

How to discourage aliyah
and frustrate young couples

 

According to JerusalemOnline (http://www.jerusalemonline.com/dhome.asp) on Sunday and Monday, 8 and 9 August, apartment prices in the major cities have soared. As examples:

   Haifa, up 20%

   Jerusalem, up "only" 19%

   Tel Aviv, up 32%

That's bad enough, but, according to the video, the government is proposing additional new - and "high" - taxes on apartment buyers.

As much as I would like to see housing prices in the Several States increase by those amounts, I don't think Israel can afford the move (of levying substantial additional taxes on buyers).

This will stifle the economy and that boggles my mind. But then I am not an economist and I don't play one on tv.

My daughter and her husband are trying to buy a place of their own and the grandparents-to-be are seriously considering a return (if I can just find employment). Given the still falling prices of property in the U.S. and the increases in Israel, the "Second Aliyah" as it were becomes less likely.

I can't imagine what the government hopes to accomplish by the threat of new taxes.

Perhaps it believes adding to the cost of an apartment will, in the long run, drive prices down by reducing the demand. At the same time, if it allows organizations such as Nefesh b'Nefesh and the Jewish Agency to bring in new olim (that's redundant), the demand will remain high but unless highly subsidized by someone , the demand will go unfulfilled due to the total cost of ownership.

If the government plans to offer subsidies, adding the tax burden seems foolish; taking with one hand and giving with the other.

Rental properties in Israel still are a rarity - one reason people tend to remain in one location rather than moving to new opportunities. I can't write abut Europe and the Island, but in the States, it's easy to move from place to place - even across the country - and have a rental waiting.

I need two things in order to succeed in Israel: a job and a place to live (in that order).

One of those things - housing - shortly may be out-of-reach.

 

COMMENTS MUST be in Hebrew of English to be considered.

 

Yohanon Glenn
Yohanon.Glenn at gmail dot com

 

Tuesday, August 3, 2010

The wedding

 

I was disappointed in the recent celebrity nuptials.

Realistically, I know some Jews marry non-Jews, so while the Clinton-Mezvinsky (and -that's how he'll be known - "Chelsea's husband Marc" - is not entirely unusual, there was a lot to bewail.

I understand there was a "rabbi" present - James Ponet who received his "masters and doctoral degrees from Hebrew Union College, where he was ordained in 1973" (http://yale-68.net/Bio-Jim-Ponet.htm). According to Allison Kaplan Sommer, who wrote "In Praise of the Rabbi Who Married Chelsea Clinton" on the Sisterhood blog (http://blogs.forward.com/sisterhood-blog/129761/), "The guy does great intermarriages."

I would suggest that "interfaith" be changed to "non-faith" since in most such marriages neither "faith" survives - or else the marriage dissolves, hopefully before children are involved.

But, because I know that such unions are a fact - albeit a very sad one - of life, I find the trappings of this particular extravaganza particularly galling.

Here is the groom, kippa (yarmulke) on his head and a half-tallit - in the photo it looks just big enough to qualify as sufficient to enwrap (להתעטף) the wearer. I would have preferred the groom not show ANY signs of a heritage which obviously has no value for him. Ditch the kippa, ditch the tallit. Don't embarrass those of us who DO care about who we are, what we are.

In one photo, there is what appears to be a katubah (wedding contract) in the background.

Keep that in mind for a minute - a wedding contract.

Chelsea came to the pseudo hupah (wedding canopy) - in fact simply an arbor - in a wedding gown that, despite its cost, was less than "Jewishly modest." That's not to say some Jewish brides dress equally inappropriately for what is supposed to be a holy event. Suffice to write that many non-Jewish brides show more respect for what in most cases is a religious ceremony.

The nuptials took place on Shabat - we know the day from the media blitz and we know the hour based on the photographs.

Now, back to the katubah. The katubah is a contract, and contracts made on Shabat are invalid - Jewishly, they "never happened." Granted there are several ways a man can claim a bride, the katubah being but one. I wonder if the groom and his new bride had private time together after the seven blessings were recited and if the couple did have a private moment, was it still Shabat - a moment that, like a signature, would "validate" the contract (except, of course, on Shabat).

In the end, Marc and Chelsea had either a non-Jewish "religious" wedding or a civil wedding. Never mind that Chelsea remains in her religion, Jews simply don't marry on Shabat. From a Jewish perspective, there was no marriage, ceremony and "rabbi" not withstanding.

From the standpoint of an observant Jew, the event was an insult to Judaism; hillul ha shem may be too strong, but it did cross my mind.

One thing is certain; it will give the far right rabbinute more grounds to suspect all non-(Ashkenazi) "Orthodox" Jews' Jewishness, especially those from countries such as the United States.

The Clinton and what's-his-name nuptials were not good for Judaism.

Comments in English and Hebrew are welcome; all others will be DELeted automatically.

Yohanon Glenn


Yohanon.Glenn at gmail dot com