Winnie THE Pooh

 

I've been reading several "Jewish" books lately.

They are popular (vs. "religious:) works "about" Jews written by people who claim to be Jews. All have one thing in common: the use of the term messiah for the person Jesus.

It's "Christ" this and "Christ" that, as if "Christ" was Jesus' offical last name.

If writers, especially Jewish authors, must refer to Jesus as "Christ," let it be in correct language - in English as Jesus THE Christ.

"Christ" is a title applied by Jesus' followers, although I doubt based on my limited knowledge of his followers if those who claimed to know him considered him the messiah. Obviously he had a following, enlarged by a man - Paul nee' Saul - who never met the historical Jesus and I suspect it was Paul who deified Jesus as a christ/messiah.

I see no difference, in so far as language goes, between Winnie THE Pooh (Edward Bear to those in the know), Sparky THE Fire Dog, Richard THE Lionhearted, Ivan THE Terrible, and Jesus THE "Christ." "THE" is a required word. It defines the following word(s) as an attribution.

It's bad enough when I see Jesus and "Christ" written together, as if "Christ" was Jesus' surname/family name. (Parenthetically, family names were not common in Judaism during the Roman occupation and only came into international use during Napoleon Bonaparte 's reign in the early 19th century when last names became a requirement by fiat.)

It seems to me that any even semi-observant Jew would realize that "Christ" is hardly a family name and that constant - oft-repeated - references to "Christ" sans either "Jesus" or the article "the" suggests that the author either (a) accepts Jesus as his or her messiah, (b) is cowed by the dominant religion in America, or (c) assumes most readers will be followers of Jesus and will feel comfortable with the attribution-as-name.

If it is "David HaMelek" and "Elihu HaNavee" why do Jews insist on omitting "the" between Jesus and "christ."

K4P (updated)

 

Updated 26 Adar II/1 April, adding third Sefardi K4P list.

Passover, Passover, what is kosher for Passover?

UO has its list.

Star-K has its recommendations.

Chicago Rabbinical Council has its list.

And more . . .

Passover 2011 Magazine by Rabbi Eidlitz.

Vaad Hakashrus of Denver Pesach Newsletter

Vaad Hoeir of St. Louis Passover Guide

COR Passover Page

MK Passover Guide

London Beit Din Passover Page

South African Union of Orthodox Synagogues Passover Page

All of the above are linked from Kashruth.Com - (http://www.kashrut.com), Arlene J. Mathes-Scharf's super kosher information site, strictly alef-alef. (Everyone should sign up for her Kosher Alerts email.)

 

For Sefardim

 

The nod goes to the Seattle (WA) Vaad (http://www.seattlevaad.org/). The SeattleVaad list comes out before the other major Sefardi list in the U.S. and, while lacking some admonishments found on the East Coast list (below), its list of items is fairly inclusive - from air fresheners (all are permitted) to yogurt (requires K4P certification).

The SeattleVaad list is the only list I know about that presents, in separate columns, both Sefardi and non-Sefardi (Ashkenazi) Kosher-for-Passover items. Seattle has large communities of both Sefardim and Ashkenazim.

The other Sefardi list, it's probably been around longer than the SeattleVaad list but comes out too close to the holiday to meet the shopping needs of many, is the Jersey Shore Orthodox Rabbinate (JSOR) list http://www.jsor.org/PDF/passover2011bulletinformat.pdf.

The JSOR list every year includes 7 admonishments that deserve everyone's attention. The headings are below; go to the JSOR page (ibid.) to read the details.

א Thou shalt know what is Hames

ב. Thou shalt read Product labels Carefully

ג. Thou shalt beware of Look Alikes

ד. Thou shalt not buy any product simply since it is in the “Passover Aisle”

ה. Thou shalt know thine personal Kashrut level

ו. Thou shalt look before you cook!

ז. Thou shalt not assume – Ask!

Both lists remind the reader that the list is for the current year. Due to changes in manufacturing processes, what was K4P last year may not be K4P this year and, fortunately, what lacked K4P approval last year may be K4P this year.

One more Sefardi list: http://www.kashrut.org. Unlike the two preceding lists, this one expects a donation and suggests a "minimum of $5" via Paypal. Don't have a Paypal account? Donationa also may be made using a major credit card. According to the person recommending this list, "it is the most comprehensive, and includes Sephardic KP."

In the super

Jewish Humor Central, which is not always humorous, had a link to a Cincinnati supermarket that claims the largest kosher section in the city. The video can be watched at either http://tinyurl.com/4geqdjw or http://tinyurl.com/45lk5hk.

Fortunately, some aspirin, Motrin and Tylenol are K4P (check the lists) so if the pre-Pesach cleaning aches and pains continue into the holiday, there are remedies (but don't mix with alcohol).

Hag samach!

Yemen in U.S.' cross-hairs?

 

From a National Journal article by Sara Sochher as disseminated by the Global Security Newswire

WASHINGTON -- As the United States spearheads the attack against Libyan leader Muammar Qadhafi's military assets, key former officials said an even bigger threat to U.S. national security comes from Yemen, a country that hosts many militants and is now enmeshed in a civil uprising that is threatening to unseat U.S.-backed President Ali Abdullah Saleh (see GSN, Feb. 10).

According to former Homeland Security head Michael Chertoff, “From a security standpoint, our interest in what happens in Yemen is much more significant than our interest in Libya, In Libya it's a humanitarian issue -- there's some security issue, but really, Yemen is a critical issue.”

It will seem politically two-faced, at least from where this scrivener sits, if the occupant of the White House elects to bomb the insurgents in Yemen after bombing the government in Libya.

Of course the difference is, Libya's Gaddafi is not in Obama's pocket and Yemen's Ali Abdullah Saleh is paid by Washington.

For all that Yemen is supposed to be in Washington's pocket, the National Journal article continues that "Before the recent unrest, two mail bombs crafted by a notorious al-Qaeda bombmaker in Yemen were intercepted in October before reaching Jewish synagogues in Chicago, and eight months earlier, airline passengers succeeded in stopping a Nigerian man trained by al-Qaeda in Yemen from blowing up a Detroit-bound plane (see GSN, Nov. 3, 2010). Yemeni-American cleric Anwar al-Awlaki -- currently on a U.S. capture-or-kill list -- is thought to be hiding in Yemen’s restive south. Awlaki was recently charged in Yemen for trying to kill foreigners in connection with the case against Army Maj. Nidal Hasan, who went on a shooting spree in 2009 at a military base in Fort Hood, Texas."

Perhaps Obama thinks he is getting the taxpayers' moneys worth from the Yemen puppet, but it would seem, if the foregoing is accurate, that the taxpayer is being short-changed.

It's time Obama left the middle east alone. For the U.S., getting involved in domestic warfare is a lose-lose situation. When will he ever learn?

Bomb Syria, too?

 

It's all over the Internet, Mr. President.

Bashar al-Assad, Syria's despotic ruler has sent the army to quell dissent.

Just like Gaddafi.

Maybe President Obama, undeserved Peace Prize in hand, will order Assad's palace bombed as he did Gaddafi's home.

After all, Syria has even less strategic value to the U.S. and its European hangers-on than Libya.

This, Mr. President, is the Syria you push Israel to return strategic heights, heights from which your Syrian friends will once again shell Israel.

This is the Syria that raped Lebanon.

This is the Syria that hid Saddam's weapons of mass destruction that disappeared from Iraq while your predecessor Bush II diddled and fiddled trying to get a "free world" consensus.

But, for all that, Syria is NOT, repeat NOT a U.S. problem.

Maybe France, which once claimed to control it, might take action.

The U.S. is not popular with Syrians, neither pro-government or anti-government.

For the U.S. to interfere in Syria's civil strife would be foolish; a lose-lose situation - JUST LIKE LIBYA.

Take a lesson from Israel - stay out of Arab nations' domestic problems.

We understand you are a Moslem disguised as a Christian, but that does NOT give you carte blanc to send Americans into harms way.

Yes, you have the authority to send in troops sans Congressional approval, but you were billed as an intelligent leader - neither trait, intelligence nor leadership has been shown since you moved into 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue. You don't have Congressional support; you don't have popular support.

If you MUST attack Syria as you foolishly attack Libya, may I suggest you send in only Muslim troops, assuming you can field even a Company of Muslims in all of the U.S. services.

Libya is not a U.S. concern.

Syria is not a U.S. concern; it has even less political and strategic value than Libya.

The U.S., because it lacks people on the ground to understand the locals and who understand both the language and the mentality, has no clue who it should support - assuming it needs to support one side over the other.

Promises vs. political foolishness

 

Obama's adventure in Libya

   vs. Medicare coverage.

Bush's misadventure in Iraq

   vs. Social Security benefits.

Presidential peccadillo in Afghanistan

   vs. education and other social needs.

OK, my ox is being gored. I admit it.

Surely, go after Osama bin Mohammed bin Awad bin Laden and his cohorts, but do we need to send in thousands of military personnel on the ground and more thousands to support attacks from the air?

In a word: No.

The Iraq war has been over for some time; Bush II declared it over, remember? Unlike Japan and Germany after the second of the world wars of the 20th century, the locals are more intent on killing each other than they are in rebuilding their county, to which I add: Let the US remove itself from their country so that can get on with killing one another.

As for Libya, what is the US' interest there? Libya contributes only 2 percent of our inflated oil needs. Countries go to war for a purpose, the US' attacks on Libya are based on pure altruism - we have no business involving ourselves in Libya's civil strife. Unlike Egypt - where we managed to avoid military interference - the (Libyan) army has proven to be on the dictator's side; that has to say something to even the greatest Gaddafi hater.

Despite our growing deficit - the US is owned by China, which may account for the US governments continuing to allow dangerous goods from that country to find sales here - the political powers-that-be of both parties continue to make the US the world's policeman.

In the meantime, seniors and others receiving "entitlement" (remember that word, "entitlement") benefits from the US treasury are being squeezed from both ends.

Social Security Cost-of-Living (COL) increases will be smaller and smaller and the eligibility age will climb to - what?

Medicare benefits will be more and more difficult to receive, taking life and death decisions farther from the patient's and doctor's hands and making life-or-death a politico-financial decision.

As an aside, how is it that my Medicare payment that is given over to AvMed, a Medicare Supplement provider, buys me so much more than it would if I let Medicare keep the money? And why are medicines so much less expensive in Canada than in the US? Or how can Target and Wal-Mart and some others charge $10 for a prescription that until those companies' plans came into effect cost much, much more for people on Medicare?

If, as some insist, countries go to war for gain, what did the US gain from its incursion into Iraq?

What has it gained by its adventure in Afghanistan? What benefit will Americans gain from taking sides in Libya's civil war?

Is Gaddafi another Saddam Hussein who tortured his opponents and gassed non-Sunnis by the hundreds? Another Hafiz al-Assad of Hama fame, or his son Bashar al-Assad who carries on his father's "traditions." Perhaps Sudan's Omar al-Bashir of Darfur fame, whom the UN blames for “murdering, exterminating, raping, torturing, and forcibly transferring large numbers of civilians, and pillaging their property.” Bashir’s military campaign has been accused of driving 2.7 million people from their homes since 2003." Or on the other side of the word, is Gaddafi another Kim Jong Il or his despot-in-training son, Kim Jong Un. Never mind comparing Gaddafi with the ayatollahs.

For a list of Parade magazine's pick of the "Worlds Worst Dictators" (of which Gaddafi is at the bottom of the Top 10), see http://www.parade.com/dictators/.

At the beginning of this tirade I asked "do we need to send in thousands of military personnel on the ground and more thousands to support attacks from the air" to eliminate Bin Laden?

No, no, and no again.

What the US should have done - and perhaps should be doing - is sending in a relative few well-trained people to assassinate Bin Laden and his top associates. Navy Seals perhaps? Problem is, finding an American who can infiltrate Bin Laden's inner circle is more than a little difficult; perhaps "renting" an assassin is in order.

Apparently someone in Washington had the same idea; in the May 2nd blog entry, Bin Laden is reportedly killed by a team of Navy SEALs; see http://tinyurl.com/3tsyhmd.

I cannot see the US getting involved in internal conflicts such as Egypt or Libya or Iraq or the Balkans. Iran, because it threatens the world, yes. North Korea the same answer for the same reason. But Saudia or Syria?

It does nothing for the US and after things settle down, the US is hated no matter which side prevails.

And my ox lies bleeding, dying for presidential misadventures.

Why Gadaffi?

 

The U.S. and the tired old ladies of Europe are supporting the overthrow of Libya's government.

In fact, they actively are supporting the rebels.

If Communism was still America's bug-a-boo and if someone would suggest the rebels were Communists or Communist tools, the Red, White, and Blue would be solidly behind Gadaffi.

No one will argue that Gadaffi is unbalanced or that he once, if not now, supported terrorists and terrorism - Pan Am 103's explosion over Lockerbie Scotland on December 21, 1988 has been laid at is door (see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pan_Am_Flight_103) - but of late, he's behaved in an apparently acceptable manner.

If the United States is to war on Gadaffi and the Libyans who support him - an undeclared war at that - why not attack other regimes that pose a greater threat to world peace and human rights?

Shall we start with Iran that is - no question - a threat to all its neighbors, a place that supports terrorists worldwide, and a place where human rights are trampled?

Of course not.

What's the difference between Iran and Libya? Oil.

What about Syria? It's despot's daddy wiped out a whole village because it failed to support Hafez al-Assad. completely (see http://www.newsmax.com/deBorchgrave/Assad-Syria-Facebook-protests/2011/03/09/id/388872).

The current despot, Bashar al-Assad, has so far refrained from killing his own people, but supports Hezbollah in Lebanon, a small country that, before Hezbollah, was a cultural center that thrived on Christian-Moslem tolerance.

Syria is the place that Iraq sent its weapons of mass destruction (WMDs) while the world waited for an agreement to remove Saddam Hussein from power, WMDs that suddenly never existed if Washington is to believed.

Moving to the east of Iran, we have North Korea, The only differences between Iran and North Korea are (a) Iran has oil and (b) North Korea has the bomb.

In neither location is dissent tolerated.

But we don't attack or even seriously threaten either Iran or North Korea.

And then there is China.

China has the bomb; it has severe human rights violations and does not countenance dissent; it conquered Tibet and suppresses its culture. It also has designs on Taiwan, a small Chinese island where the U.S. set up another despot, Chiang Kai-shek to counter Communist Mao, reportedly the Chinese people's choice.

Why doesn't the U.S. and the old biddies of Europe remove China's leadership and institute "democracy" (but whose democracy - Europe or the U.S.).

Actually, if repression and general human rights violations are legitimate causes for war, then most of the Islamic regimes and many African states - the worst offenders seem to be Moslem dominated - should be again taken over by the more humane and democratic countries. Surely no one has forgotten French, British, Dutch, Spanish, and Portuguese rule and how these advanced nations treated their foreign subjects.

A quick aside: The U.S. allegedly is in Afghanistan (and Pakistan and ...) chasing Osama bin Mohammed bin Awad bin Laden. For that the U.S. does not need armies of thousands; it needs a few highly trained assassins who can infiltrate bin Laden's court and behead the snake. But the U.S. is reluctant to target individual terrorists (although it does that), preferring to send in thousands and collateral causalities be damned. Someone in Washington seems to think bin Laden and Company are soldiers and deserve Geneva Convention rules. They are not and they do not.

Let Gadaffi alone.

What is going on in Libya is a Libyan affair.

There is little likelihood it will spread to "the world," even the Arab world where open displeasure with governments probably will be a short-lived thing.

Unless the U.S. and the European pantywaists are prepared to put down every despotic government in the Moslem world, the U.S. lacks the moral high ground to interfere in any way with what is transpiring in Libya.

Eliminating incentive

 

An acquaintenance of mine owns a pizza joint.

The place has (I think) really good dairy dishes - pizza, calzones, etc.

I used to go there every so often.

But no more.

The last time I was there I noticed that the bill included an 18 percent surcharge as a wait staff gratuity.

I have no objection to leaving a tip for reasonable service or a large tip for exceptional service, but I resent having a tip automatically appended to the bill.

I know this is a common practice in many so called "better" establishments, but it is counter-productive. It eliminates any incentive the wait staff may have to provide even a "decent" level of service.

In the land of capitalism, this is socialism or, perhaps, communism with a lower case "c."

Tips are, I thought, supposed to be for good service, above and beyond the minimum acceptable standard.

I know, because I have "been there and done that," that wait staff, along with "pearl divers" (dishwashers), cooks, and soda jerks (I know I'm showing my age with that job category) are on the low end of the pay scale, sometimes not even making minimum wage.

I know tips often can mean paying the rent and the phone bill or letting one of the bills slide.

If truth be told, I think everyone ought to work in a "tip intensive" job for a while. My daughter "slung hash" for awhile and at 25 has a healthy respect for waiters and waitresses and tips accordingly.

But when service is sub-par, she, like her Dear Ol' Dad, pays the bill and no more. No gratuity for a job poorly done.

I'll still patronize my acquaintance's establishment, but now only on a take-out basis.

If I want to dine in, I will go to one of several other nearby dairy places.

Political correctness gone amuck

 

Due to threat of copyright suits, refer to the New Haven Register at http://www.nhregister.com/articles/2011/03/10/news/aa3_nedanburysettle030911.txt or to the link on AdvisenFPN at http://tinyurl.com/69k9dc7for complete article.

A New Haven Register copyrighted article with a headline reading Danbury, ICE to pay in civil rights case reports that profiling is costing the town of Danbury and Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) $650,000 because Danbury police arrested 8 illegal immigrants and turned them over to ICE.

The 8 are to be deported.

Why the windfall for breaking the law?

According to the New Haven Register article, because (a) the men were profiled and (b) because the Danbury PD failed to charge the 8 with a violation of municipal law . . . the police apparently are not allowed to charge criminals with violation of federal law.

Purim thoughts from ATorahMinute

 

 

The following two items are from ATorah Minute http://www.atorahminute.com/

When to give the half Sheqel

by Rabbi Ya'aqob Menashe

The giving of the Mahasith Hasheqel (charity in memory of the half Sheqel), is done on the eve of Purim, before the Minha prayer, i.e. during Ta'anith (the fast of) Esther. When Purim falls on Mosei Shabbath (Saturday night) Ta'anith Esther is, of course, brought forward to Thursday since we are not permitted to fast on Shabbath.

Even when Purim falls on Mosei Shabbath and the fast is held on Thursday, the Mahasith Hasheqel is given on Thursday, before Minha, so that it can be connected with the fast. The reason is that giving charity when one is fasting is an atonement.

(See Rama 694:1. Kaf Hahayyim ibid, 25)

 

Giving priority to Mattanoth La-ebyonim

by Rabbi Ya'aqob Menashe

It is preferable for a person to increase the amount he gives as Mattanoth La-ebyonim (gifts for the poor) on Purim rather than to to increase the amount of Mishlowah Manoth he sends to his friends, or to add to his Se'uddath Purim (festive meal). The reason is that there is no greater or more glorious happiness than when one gladdens the hearts of the poor, orphans, widows and converts, because one who gladdens the hearts of the unfortunate is likened to the Shekhinah (G-d's holy presence).

This is because even though G-d dwells in high places He is also with the one who is of lowly spirit, as it says in Yeshayahu (57:15), "to revive the spirit of the humble and to revive the hearts of the oppressed".

(See Kaf Hahayyim 694:5)

To sign up for these daily Torah Minutes, click here.

To view other Torah Minute entries, go to http://www.atorahminute.com/

Religion and Superstition: Thoughts for Shabbat Vayikra

 

The following used with permission

By Rabbi Marc D. Angel

During the past week, I received an email from an organization in Israel seeking donations for which donors would merit success, happy marriage and good health. The organization offered to have a Torah scholar pray at the Kotel from the Fast of Esther through the 7th day of Passover. They assured donors that this is a "very powerful time for hidden blessings to be revealed."

Not long after getting this spam, I received in the mail a glitzy brochure from another organization seeking donations so that the "gedolei hador" will pray on our behalf at the Kotel. The brochure features photos of sages with long white beards, who assure us that by supporting this charity we will gain wonderful rewards.

These are recent examples of the ongoing process of cheapening Jewish prayer, and of undermining the spiritual foundations of the Jewish people. The above charities, and many others as well, prey on the gullibility and fears of the public. They claim to have direct access to God--through their "Torah scholars" and "gedolei hador"-- that the rest of us lack. They claim that these prayers at the Kotel will be effective, whereas our own prayers anywhere else will not be as effective. Charlatans abound who promise miracles, if only we will give them ample donations. They will write us amulets, bless red strings, send us holy water or food, pray for us at the Kotel.

There is, of course, a long history of charlatanism and shamanism in religion--including Judaism. There have always been those who claimed to have the keys to God's inner chambers, and that--for a price--they would intercede on behalf of those who turned to them.

Superstitious practices and beliefs, even if dressed in holy garb, are inimical to the purity of religion. They blur the line between religion and superstition, degrading and disgracing true religion.

As we approach the Purim holiday, we recall that Esther requested that the Jews fast during their hour of distress. Rabbinic tradition has understood this as a call to prayer and repentance. Esther did not ask Jews to send donations to holy people at the Kotel; or to pay for prayers by supposed saints and scholars. No, she called on each Jew to reach out to God from the depths of his/her heart. And the Jews were redeemed.

Let us each turn to the Almighty in sincere and pure prayer. This is the special privilege and responsibility that Judaism offers us: to stand before the Master of the Universe directly. The Torah of God is pure; we must not allow it to be defiled by misguided superstitious beliefs and practices.

The Angel for Shabbat column is presented as a service of the Institute for Jewish Ideas and Ideals. Please visit our website jewishideas.org for a wide array of articles of special interest to those who wish to foster an intellectually vibrant, compassionate and inclusive Orthodox Judaism.

The Institute for Jewish Ideas and Ideals
8 West 70th Street
New York, NY 10023

Shooting himself in the footOr, why Israeli hasbarah fails

 

Israeli hasbarah - public relations - stinks.

Since 1948, the country's PR efforts have gone steadily down hill, which partly explains why Israel is losing support among "neutral" nations at the same time its enemies - and they are many - are gaining support.

It's not because Israel lacks PR flacks - its has them in large numbers.

It's not because Israel; lacks people who speak the target language as a native speaker.

It's just - as far as I can see - attitude.

"You'll believe what I tell you no matter how I say it."

Case in point:

There is as petition at http://www.ipetition.com/str-asp-PetitionID_9-end-SignPetition.htm that calls for readers to tell Jordan's King Abdullah II to make Jordan the "palestinian" country the heirs of the Arabs who abandoned Israel in 1948 are demanding.

The petition is good, except for one word. "disenfranchised."

According to Merriam-Webster Online. disenfranchise means: "to deprive of a franchise, of a legal right, or of some privilege or immunity; especially : to deprive of the right to vote."

Translation: the so-called palestinians would have had to stay within Israel's borders and Israel would have had to deny them privileges and the right to vote.

Obviously denying the right to vote to those Arabs who elected to remain in Israel is not the case. They vote. They have parties sitting in the government.

Are they denied privileges? Well, yes. The are denied the "privilege" of serving in the military (although the Druze serve), but by and large - for most Arabs in Israel - that is the most obvious denial of privilege. Vote, yes. Travel, yes. Education at all levels, yes. Medical care, yes.

So where is the "disenfranchisement?"

I agree that Abdullah should admit that Jordan is a "palestinian" state and I think Abdullah should take responsibility for the "palestinians" in Occupied Israel - Aza and the so-called West Bank. I would prefer that Abdullah take them into Jordan proper; Israel should pay the people relocating just as the Arab states paid the Jews forced out of their former homes in Moslem-dominated lands.

As much as I agree with MK Prof. Aryeh Eldad, M.D, and his petition, I cannot sign it for the one word.

To say the "palestinians" in Occupied Israel are "disenfranchised" is simply not true. These people can vote - when their masters let them - for whomever they are allowed. The are eligible for all the social services their "palestinian" governments provide. ISRAEL is not disenfranchising anyone in Occupied Israel of anything, except perhaps the ability to easily pass into Jewish Israel to kill and maim.

If MK Prof. Aryeh Eldad, M.D, will remove the offending word - "disenfranchised" - I gladly will sign the petition. But until that word is removed, I can't bring myself to add my name.

Farrakhan & I agree ?

  I never thought I would agree with Nation of Islam's chief anti-Semite, but he made a statement to his loyal followers that I must second.

According to an article in the Jereusalem Post (http://www.jpost.com/International/Article.aspx?id=210444).

“President Obama,” Farrakhan said, “if you allow the Zionists to push you, to mount a military offensive against Gaddafi and you go in and kill him and his sons, as you did with Saddam Hussein and his sons... I’m warning you this is a Libyan problem, let the Libyans solve their problem among themselves.”

Farrakhan, a modern Haman, and I agree that Libyans - and Saudis, and Yemanis, and Iranians, - yes, and Israelis, too - and pick-a-group, should settle their own internal problems; the United States, Russia, the EU and all the other busybody interferring nations should stay home.

Granted the crazies in Iran and North Korea - did we forget about North Korea because they are no DIRECT threat to either Israel or the United States? - need to be "removed" because they are a threat to other nations.

I seriously doubt I'll ever agree again with Farrakahn, may his name be blotted out, but just this time we are thinking along the same lines.

 

AND THEN THERE IS

Jewish groups oppose circumcision ban in US city

By JTA

03/06/2011 17:02

http://www.jpost.com/JewishWorld/JewishNews/Article.aspx?id=211000

Activist has been collecting signatures for a voter initiative that would criminalize infant circumcision in San Francisco

Self described "intactivist" Lloyd Schofield has been collecting signatures for a voter initiative that would criminalize infant circumcision in San Francisco and local Jewish groups are taking up the challenge.

Only in San Francisco (or Berkeley across the Bay).