Dresden and Gaza

 

During World War Two the nazis attacked English cities with rockets and fire bombs.

Civilians died.

After suffering the attacks on civilians for far too long, the British and the U.S. responded.

Flight after flight of bombers flew over the nazi city of Dresden and dropped not just bombs, but incendiary bombs; Dresden was fire bombed into rubble and thousands died.

According to a Wikipedia entry at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bombing_of_Dresden_in_World_War_II, the US and Britain also fire bombed other nazi cities.

What the Wikipedia entry fails to mention is WHY the nazi cities were fire bombed.

In August of 1945, U.S. B-29 bombers dropped two atomic bombs on two Japanese cities: Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

According to the Wikipedia entry at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atomic_bombings_of_Hiroshima_and_Nagasaki, for six months before the atomic bombings, the United States intensely fire-bombed 67 Japanese cities. Aside from the note that the Allies demanded Japan's surrender prior to the bombings and Japan rejected the demand, no reason is given for the bombings. The fact that the Japanese sent incendiary-laden balloons to the U.S. and Canadian west coasts in hopes of setting cities and forests ablaze is not mentioned.

In both cases, the nazis and the Japanese, the bombings played a large part in bringing an end to the war in each theater. The enemy learned that the allies would and could deal with the enemy on the enemies' terms.

Today, both Germany and Japan - rebuilt with American dollars under the Marshall Plan - are strong "democracies" that are less-or-more allies of the nations that defeated them in war.

Did I make my point?

The "point" is that when your enemy attacks you, you respond in kind, but harder. A bit like convincing the neighborhood bully to abandon his - or her - ways.

The problem for the nazis and Japanese was the leadership. Ask an average nazi if he or she knew about the camps and the answer always is the same: "I didn't know." Ask a Japanese or nazi if they did anything to topple the regimes and the answer will be "There was nothing I could do."

The news out of Egypt, Tunisia, Algeria (ask the French), belies that.

The now-old news out of Poland and Hungary and even Georgia belies that.

The Vietnamese proved a grass roots effort could defeat mightier forces; the French may have learned the lesson and the U.S., thinking it could do what the French could not, also was taught (but perhaps did not learn) the lesson.

They did (seem to) overthrow the governments then in power.

Now, Gaza

Gaza's masters - Hamas or the jihadists-du-jour, any differnces are strictly "internal" - continue to attack Israeli civilians. No attempt at military targets.

The jihadists sent 40 rockets to land on southern Israeli cities - Ashdod and Ashkelon. Fortunately, only one Israeli civilian was murdered in the attack.

This, incidentally following the release of more than 1,000 terrorists by the Israeli government; terrorists who vow to return to their pre-incarceration ways (perhaps to be captured again to complete their PhDs on the Israelis' shekel).

Israel retaliated by striking a known jihadist missile launching site, killing 9.

As long as Israel strikes only at known jihadist sites, there is no impetus for the residents of Gaza to try to overthrow Hamas and the jihadist-du-jour terrorists controlling the area.

Israel needs to take a leaf from the war journals of Britain and the U.S. and strike Gaza as Gaza's masters are striking Israel - strike at the civilians who allow the terrorists to rule.

The bleeding hearts will scream - they always do whenever Israel retaliates but they never mention WHY Israel took action - but after awhile the Israeli bashers will lose their audience.

Level Gaza city? Yes.

Gaza City is home to the elite.

Gaza City is home to the fancy shops with imported luxury items.

Hit the Arabs in the UN camps?

Not initially, but it should not be ruled out.

The camps are themselves an interesting thing. The residents are kept there, in poverty, by their cousins in the surrounding Moslem countries, countries that for the most part won't allow them in and prevent the few that do manage to enter the opportunity to own anything or gain citizenship. Jordan was the exception; one Arab state ouot of how many ?

The ONLY way to end the attacks on Israeli civilians is for every jihadist missile that lands in Israel, 10 missiles are sent in return into Gaza's populated areas.

Israeli must fight this war - and it is, in all respects a war - on the enemies' terms.

Until it does that, its population is threatened 24 * 7.

As long as that is the situation, the Israeli government is NOT doing its job.

Israel needs another Orde Wingate. A Began only succeeds when there is a Sadat on the other side.

Cuba

 

Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen [R-FL18], a Cuban-born American, is one of the many south Florida Cubans and Cuban-Americans who want to continue the war with the Castro government.

Thankfully it's a mostly a war of inconvenience for both sides.

But I wonder: Is this continuation of a conflict with a neighbor really necessary?

Republican Richard Nixon managed to open diplomatic doors with China.

China remains Communist.

China supports North Korea, like Iran a threat to world safety.

China still is one of the world's greatest human rights violators.

BUT, Americans may travel to China and do business with China (despite many Chinese materials being inferior or unsafe).

Republican Ronald Reagan famously told Mikhail Gorbachev to "Tear down this wall!" when the U.S. president visited Berlin on June 12, 1987.

The Berlin wall came down, Germany reunited, and eventually a pseudo-democracy replaced Communism in the fractured former Soviet Union.

Democracy as known in the U.S. has, at best, a tenuous hold on the land.

Russia is close to Iran, a fanatical regime that wants to destroy Israel and the U.S.

Human rights are questionable in the former USSR states.

BUT, American may travel to the states of the former Soviet Union and do business with them.

The two biggest Communist threats to the U.S. are now the country's economic "friends." Indeed, China in large measure "owns" the U.S.

Cuba, on the other hand, is a small country hardly capable of attacking the U.S. or even the Conch Republic (Key West, 90 miles from Cuba). The Soviets tried to put missiles on the island, but were prevented by the then Democratic president. Basically, Cuba is a non-threat to the U.S. and its territories (in this case, Puerto Rico).

Cuba's biggest threat is exporting its band of Communism, which it has done successfully to Latin America, long dominated by Rome.

However, despite being only a political thorn in the side of the State Department, the Cubans and Cuban-Americans of South Florida demand that the U.S. continue to treat our neighbor as a pariah.

My repeated reference to Cubans and Cuban-Americans is to distinguish between those Cubans who came to the U.S. and who, although taking full advantage of U.S. benefits, can't seem to integrate into American society; who can't adopt the language or even pretend to learn it (doing business in Miami is doing business in Cuban Spanish, English is a "foreign language" in Dade County). These Cubans-in-Florida are "temporary residents" who promise to "go back to Cuba" as soon as the U.S. overthrows the Castro government.

Cuban-Americans on the other hand, are like any other hyphenated Americans; they adopted the country and adapted to its language and ways. I personally know both.

The U.S. has, on several occasions, helped Cubans establish "democracy" on the island.

On each occasion, the Cubans have quickly returned to a dictatorship. U.S.-style democracy does not grow on that island.

So the U.S. government shuns Cuba; it largely pretends it isn't there.

But it IS there.

Not a U.S.-style democracy?

SO WHAT!

Neither is China nor Russia nor Afghanistan. Pakistan, Saudia, Egypt, Morocco, or, for that matter, England, France, and Israel.

Yet the U.S. does business with them all; it gives money to them all in one form or another..

But not Cuba, our neighbor.

In the pre-Castro days Americans used to visit Cuba regularly; Havana was known to be "wide open" to vices prohibited - but desired - in Florida and most other states in the U.S.

Sugar was Cuba's main export; in fact, it was just about it's only export.

Unless the U.S. is afraid - unlike Canada and most other nations of the world - that citizens visiting the island will become firebrands for its version of Communism - as some are dong with the "legal in America" Moslem jihadists - why does the U.S. maintain the water wall with a neighbor?

Why can't Americans freely visit Cuba? Why can't we again import sugar from Cuba. Florida's sugar cane farmers survived nicely when Cuban sugar was part of the U.S. economy; surely they will continue to survive.

Maybe the Cubans-in-America will go back and, if they want democracy so much, agitate for it on the island. If the Women In White can march down Havana's streets to protest, why not Cubans who want political change?

It's time to lift all embargos on the island.

If the U.S. can have diplomatic agreements with states such as China, Albania, Saudia, Vietnam, Russia, Iraq and others where democracy is unknown, then why not Cuba - a small, non-threatening island 90 miles off Florida's coast.

הריני מקבל עלי מצוה עשה של ואהבת לרעך כמוך, והריני אוהב כל אחד מבני ישראל כנפשי ומאודי

I had it wrong again

 

For years I was under the impression that until after the flood man was vegetarian.

That HaShem grudgingly allowed us to slaughter and eat living things after Noah and family disembarked from the boat.

Last Shabat - Shabat Bereshith - as I listened to the Torah portion I discovered otherwise.

After Adam and Havah (a/k/a Eve) were banished from Gan Eden and after the couple's two sons grew to manhood, the Torah tells us (Chapter 4, beginning with Verse 2) - in the Soncino Press translation -

2) "And Abel was a keeper of sheep but Cain was a tiller of the ground.

3) And in the process of time, it came to pass, that Cain brought of the fruit of the ground an offering to the Lord.

4) And Abel, he also brought of the firstlings of the flock and of the fat thereof. And the Lord had respect unto Able and to his offering.

5) But unto Cain and to his offering He had not respect.

I'm going to make a number of "assumptions," always a dangerous thing to do.

Assumption Number 1 is that Abel slaughtered the sheep, ergo the appended words "and of the fat thereof." It suggests that Able killed the animal rather than send it off to Azazal as we later did with the sacrificial goat.

Assumption Number 2 is that HaShem's approval of Abel's (apparent) sacrifice indicates permission to slaughter and devour living creatures.

The Torah never states that anyone ATE the sacrificed animal, although I posit that this is a "reasonable" assumption.

If my "assumptions" are valid, then ben adam did, indeed, have permission from HaShem to eat anything he could catch - fish, fowl, and hoofed. At this time Adam and family lacked the Torah to instruct them on how to kill, cook, and eat anything.

Bereshith leaves me with another question, a "legal" one.

HaShem tells Adam (Chapter 2, Verse 17)

"But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it; for in that day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die."

Later on, we know that Havah - who according to Chapter 3, Verses 2 and 3 KNEW the fruit of this particular tree was forbidden - caved to the snake's charms and ate some of the tree's fruit, later giving some to a weak-willed Adam (Chapter 3, Verse 6).

MY problem is that HaShem threatens Adam with death - "for in that day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die."

Problem One: Adam, being in Gan Eden, had no conception of "death." No one had died in the Garden during Adam's tenure there, nor had anyone been born for that matter. There is no indication that HaShem explained the concept of death to Adam - or that Adam understood it. To this point, there had been no (recorded) punishments.

Problem Two: The Author of the Torah tells us that in order to punish a sinner, several things must occur. First, the sinner must be warned; Adam and Halvah were warned well in advance of the transgression. I think - but can't cite a source - that there needs to be two witnesses and at least one must do everything within his or her power to prevent the offense.

Since a person cannot testify against himself, neither Adam nor Halvah are valid witnesses. The snake was there, but it was the instigator (and therefore not a valid witness as being "an accessory before the fact" ).

That leaves HaShem as the lone witness to a capital offense. Even if the accuser can be a witness, as we recite daily, "The Lord is One"; we're still short a witness. Besides, apparently HaShem failed to make every effort to prevent the sin.

Granted, HaShem did not end Adam's and Halvah's lives on the spot - on "first bite" as it were - although He did put their trials and tribulations and eventual demise into motion.

On to Noah, "righteous" for his era.

Every year it's the same ol' thing. From Bereshith to Zachor.

But as one very smart person noted: turn it and turn it, there's always something new.

הריני מקבל עלי מצוה עשה של ואהבת לרעך כמוך, והריני אוהב כל אחד מבני ישראל כנפשי ומאודי

Terrible price

 

I know it sounds cruel, but Israel will pay a terrible price for the return of one person.

Israel "swapped" more than 1000 Arabs, most of them terrorists, several of whom murdered multiple people, for one person, Gilad Shalit.

Of the murders set free in exchange for Shalit, a number have sworn to return to Israel to kill again.

Not simply not to renounce terror and murder of innocent men, women, and children, but to come back into Israel and kill again.

I'm certain the parents of Shalit are happy he is home, but I also know that the parents of the people slaughtered by the Arabs must be in agony as the murderers are welcomed as heroes in the streets of Occupied Israel (Gaza).

I also know that there will be more children, parents, and grandparents murdered by the same people who crossed into Gaza today.

Being sentenced to several life terms in Israel is a joke .  . . if you happen to be a terrorist. (If you happen to be a Jew DEFENDING your life, your family, or your land, you can expect a stiff sentence without any hope of reprieve; such is life in Israel today.)

I believe in the "rule of law," but when politics make it a mockery then I also believe the "rule of law" needs revision. Instead of capturing, trying, and incarcerating until the next "swap," let the people be armed and allowed to defend themselves, let them kill the people who come to murder them.

Judaism tells us to kill a person who threatens to kill us.

The Israeli governments - plural - prevent Jews from defending themselves; when they do, they are arrested, often by the army that is supposed to - but often fails to - protect them.

I'm glad Shalit is back, but I think the price was, and will be, too high.

Vietnam all over again? Obama sends "advisors" into Africa

 

According to a Wall Street Journal MarketWatch video (http://tinyurl.com/6yrjttx). the U.S. has about 100 "advisors" on the ground in Chad, Uganda, Democratic Republic of Congo, and South Sudan.

The "advisors" - in 12-person units - are to provide training and advice to armies in the host countries.

According to the WSJ's MarketWatch, the U.S. troops are to help the locals counter the Lord's Resistance Army.

The Lord's Resistance Army, LRA, is endorsed by Rush Limbaugh as a Christian army (http://tinyurl.com/3ksrclw).

“They are fighting the Muslims in Sudan. And Obama has sent troops, United States troops, to remove them from the battlefield, which means kill them. So that’s a new war, a hundred troops to wipe out Christians in Sudan, Uganda,” Limbaugh insists.

Reports from the area, however, suggest that these "Christian" soldiers are no more than terrorists.

According to the GlobalSecurity.org (http://tinyurl.com/8bvop), "The Lord's Resistance Army (LRA), led committed numerous abuses and atrocities, including the abduction, rape, maiming, and killing of civilians, including children. In addition to destabilizing northern Uganda from bases in Sudan, the LRA congregated in the Bunia area in eastern Congo. They linked up with the Army for the Liberation of Rwanda (ALIR) and other rebel groups that were battling with forces from the Rally for Congolese Democracy (RCD).

"The LRA sought to overthrow the Ugandan Government and inflicted brutal violence on the population in northern Uganda. LRA forces also targeted local government officials and employees. The LRA also targeted international humanitarian convoys and local NGO workers.

"The LRA abducted large numbers of civilians for training as guerrillas. Most victims were children and young adults. The LRA abducted young girls as sex and labor slaves. Other children, mainly girls, were reported to have been sold, traded, or given as gifts by the LRA to arms dealers in Sudan. While some later escaped or were rescued, the whereabouts of many children remain unknown."

The U.S. debacle in Vietnam, following on the heels of the French embarrassment, started off with Military Advisory Groups (MAGs) - U.S. military personnel assigned to advise the Vietnamese on how to combat the Communist effort to overthrow the U.S. backed government.

The questions that should be asked are

• "Why U.S. troops? Why not send in troops from the African Union?"
• Does anyone remember something called the Monroe Doctrine?

The African Union (AU) consists of 52 countries (list at end of entry). Even with the so-called "Arab spring," at least some of the member states could contribute troops and equipment to combat terrorist organizations regardless of their religious association.

To be fair, the question has to be asked: "Will a Moslem army treat non-Moslems civilly, humanely?"

If the U.S. must send in "advisors" let it send "advisors" into stable countries to train and advise those countries' troops. We cannot afford - in lives and in costs - to engage in another war.

What is going on in Africa is a disaster, but it is a disaster than should be ended by Africans, not Americans. If the U.S. must get involved, let it provide food and medical aid via a third party (and realize that a goodly portion of the U.S. aid will be diverted and more relabeled).

Food, yes.

Medicine, yes.

American presence, NO.

If European countries want to get militarily involved let them; after all, most of Africa was subject to European control at one time - Dutch, English, French, and German all had a presence - and the Europeans may bear some responsibility for the chaos in the continent.

Arab League members

Arab Republic of Egypt
Burkina Faso
Central African Republic
Democratic Republic of sao Tome and Principe
Democratic Republic of the Congo
Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia
Federal Republic of Nigeria
Gabonese Republic
Great Socialist People`s Libyan Arab Jamahiriya
Kingdom of Lesotho
Kingdom of Swaziland
People`s Democratic Republic of Algeria
Republic Arab Saharawi Democratic
Republic of Angola
Republic of Benin
Republic of Botswana
Republic of Burundi
Republic of Cameroon
Republic of Cape Verde
Republic of Cote d'Ivoire
Republic of Djibouti
Republic of Equatorial Guinea
Republic of Ghana
Republic of Guinea-Bissau
Republic of Kenya
Republic of Liberia
Republic of Madagascar
Republic of Malawi
Republic of Mali
Republic of Mauritania
Republic of Mauritius
Republic of Mozambique
Republic of Namibia
Republic of Niger
Republic of Rwanda
Republic of Senegal
Republic of Seychelles
Republic of Sierra Leone
Republic of South Africa
Republic of the Congo
Republic of the Gambia
Republic of The Sudan
Republic of Uganda
Republic of Zambia
Republic of Zimbabwe
Somali Republic
State of Eritrea
The Republic of Chad,
Togolese Republic
Tunisian Republic
Union of the Comoros
United Republic of Tanzania

Face front

 

It is, in the grand scheme of things, a very minor point, but it bothers me.

Cohanim who attend Sephardim and Mizrachim congregations for morning prayers go up to the hakel (ark) for birkat haCohanim, the blessing HaShem ordered the cohanim to recite over Am Israel. (Sephardim and Mizrachim assume that means every day and twice -a-day if there is a musaf service; not just Yom Kippor or just haggim, but every day - Shabat and yom hol, haggim and hol hamoed.

I confess I sometimes look around when I ought not be looking around. The Moroccan tradition is that we cast our eyes downward while the cohanim face us.

As I looked around I saw several people either turning their back to the cohanim or turning their side to the cohamin.

I learned that as the cohanim recite the bless we are to face the cohanim. Turning to the side or turning our back to them negates the blessing.

Today, hol hamoed Sukot, I started looking for a source to either support my tradition or to enlighten me otherwise.

I am blessed with a small library and I checked the Moroccan sources first.

Nothing.

I checked a couple of sidurim.

Ditto.

Finally I found a source in a sedur called Tefelat Yasharim - published by Yakov Mansour in Jerusalem.

In very small print I found

והיו פני העם כנגד הכהנים ולא יביטו עליהם, והעמדים אחריה כהנים או בצדדים כל שאין עומדים באויר אשר מכנגד הכהנים ואילך אינם בכלל הברכה

In other words, if you are standing behind the cohanim (or otherwise have your back to them) or if you have your side toward the cohanim, you don't get the blessing.

This has nothing to do with covering your head with a tallit as many men do, or putting a sidur in front of your eyes as some women do; it only addresses how we stand during the Torah-required blessing.

Many Sephardim, mostly Moroccans, do not cover their heads; many Mizrachim and some Sephardim do cover their heads, and all cover their children's heads, even when their children are adults and the father has - as I must - stand "one row higher" to reach their heads.

As apropos of nothing, while in search of the answer to my "face the cohen" query, I discovered that in some parts of Morocco - Marrakesh - people do not answer "Bruk hu ..." when HaShem's name is mentioned in the cohanic blessing, while in other places in Morocco - Casablanca - they do answer "Bruk hu..."

The Internet is a wonderful thing, but until it has every book converted to bits and bytes, I'll treasure the paper in my small library.

הריני מקבל עלי מצוה עשה של ואהבת לרעך כמוך, והריני אוהב כל אחד מבני ישראל כנפשי ומאודי

Quick rules for Sukot North African minhagim

 

The following are from ילקוט שמ"ש by Hakham Shalom Messas a"h.

The blessing to sit in the sukkah normally is said sitting down.

However, on erev Shabat hol hamoed and erev yom tov (when kiddush is said), the all the blessings are said standing. Ramba"m instructs that we should stand for the kiddush, sit for "yoshev b'sukkah" and then shekianu. Maran (Yosef Caro) believes the stand/sit/stand would cause an interruption. Tradition follows Maran.

On yomay hol, when there is no kiddush, the order is motze then immediately yoshev b'sukah.

Wave the lulav as follows

1. Face south and wave (we do not shake) the lulav

2. Turn to right until facing north and wave the lulav

3. Turn to right until facing east and wave the lulav

4. While facing east, wave the lulav upward

5. While facing east, wave the lulav downward

6. Turn to right until facing west and wave the lulav

This north-south-east-up-down-west follows HaAri. According to Hakham Yosef Messas a"h in his book הוד יוסף חי, Maran's order is east-north-west-south.

At every morning service (s'hareet) during Sukot, a sefer Torah is placed on the bemah and the congregants make one hakafah (walking with the arba minim) around the bema.

On Hosheanah Rabah, seven hakafot are made around the bema.

It is traditional to recite hosheanote after musaf.

Maran and those who follow the ancient minhag of Casablanca allow even men who do not have a lulav may join in the hakafot. Ramba"m rules that only those who have a lulav can make the hakafot.

On Shabat, hosheanote are recited but there are no hakafot (since the lulav is not waved on Shabat).

According to הוד יוסף חי, in order to say the "yoshev b'sukah" blessing a person must eat bread; rice and couscous without bread is not considered a meal. (Most North Africans require bread for every repast if it is to be called a "meal.")

The following are from דברי שלום ואמת. This work is in response to many rulings by former Hakham Bakshe Ovadia Yosef that disagree with North African - and often other - minhagim. It might be of interest to note that many North African minhagim are identical or nearly identical to those of the Ashkenazim.

When the maftir recites the blessing over the haftarah, he adds "m'kdash Israel v'hazmanim."

חג סכות שמח

Importing arba minim

 

The following is from Augdath Israel (Compliments of R. Sender Haber)

 

Over the years, Agudath Israel of America's Washington Office has worked closely with the U.S. Department of Homeland Security's Customs and Border Protection (CBP) agency to help alleviate potential problems facing Jewish travelers to the U.S. carrying sets of arba minim. This year, CBP has again issued pre-Sukkos guidance on the agricultural issues and procedures involved in the entry of esrogim, lulavim, hadasim and aravos from foreign countries -- and we present it below, with several explanatory comments that we have added as an introduction. We hope this will clarify some of the questions that have arisen in the past and help travelers carrying arba minim plan accordingly.

INTRODUCTION

   1. Country of Origin -- The guidance below applies only to arba minim that were grown in certain countries.

The guidance for esrogim applies to those grown in several countries, including Greece, Israel, Italy and Morocco -- the main sources of foreign esrogim for yom tov.

LI>The guidance for lulavim applies to those grown in several countries, including Egypt, Israel and Spain -- the main sources of foreign lulavim for yom tov.)
• The guidance for aravos applies to those grown in several countries, including Canada, Europe, and Israel -- the main sources of foreign aravos for yom tov.

• The The guidance for hadasim applies to those grown in all foreign countries.

   2. Airports and Border Crossing

• Esrogim brought into the U.S. on international flights will not be allowed entry at all airports and by ground transportation across all border crossings . They will only be allowed entry -- if inspected and released -- at Northern Atlantic and Northern Pacific airports and border crossings, which are located in: Alaska, Connecticut, Delaware, Idaho, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Michigan, Missouri (Kansas City), Montana, Nebraska, New Hampshire,, New Jersey, New York, North Dakota, Ohio, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Dakota, Vermont, Virginia (Dulles), Washington, West Virginia, Wisconsin, and Wyoming.

The Esrogim brought into the U.S. on international flights will NOT be granted entry at airports and border crossings in the following states: Alabama, Arizona, Arkansas, California, Colorado, Florida, Georgia, Hawaii, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri (St. Charles) Nevada, New Mexico, North Carolina, Oklahoma, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, Utah and Virginia (Norfolk and Richmond). Esrogim brought into these locations will be disposed of by CBP. Travelers should make arrangements to purchase esrogim locally.

   3. Direct/Indirect Entry -- Please note that the non-entry of esrogim to these locations applies only when directly brought in on international flights or across border crossings. If a esrog has entered through an approved location, it can then be transported on a domestic flight to any location. (i.e., if a traveler's esrog enters and is released in New York, he/she can then take it to Atlanta or Los Angeles without problem.)

   4. Declaration and Fines -- All arba minim carried by travelers to the U.S. must be declared to CBP, no matter the airport or border crossings at which entry into the U.S. is made. Failure to do so could result in a fine of US$300 and seizure of the arba minim.

    5. Inspection and Release -- Entry of the arba minim into an approved airport does not mean that they will be allowed into the U.S. All items are subject to inspection by CBP. If pests, stings or other problems (as outlined by the guidance) are found, the items will be seized. If not, they will be released.

CUSTOMS AND BORDER PROTECTION GUIDANCE

CBP information also can be found at http://www.cbp.gov and www.cbp.gov/xp/cgov/travel/alerts/

The travel period for the Jewish holiday of Sukkot is from September 26 through October 23, 2011. The holiday begins October 12 (at sundown) through October 19, 2011. U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) understands that observant Jewish travelers entering the United States during the Sukkot holiday might carry religious items (ethrogs, palm fronds, twigs of willow and myrtle) in their vehicles if arriving at land border ports of entry, or in their personal baggage if they are arriving by aircraft. These items are regulated to prevent the introduction of invasive pests and diseases; however, these items might be allowed into the United States after inspection by CBP agriculture specialists. Thus, the following guidance is provided for travelers:

Ethrogs

Personal shipments of ethrogs are allowed entry through North Atlantic and Northern Pacific ports of entry after inspection by agriculture specialists. North Atlantic ports are defined as Atlantic ports north of and including Baltimore; ports on the Great Lakes and St. Lawrence Seaway; Canadian Border ports east of and including North Dakota; and Washington D. C. (including Dulles) for air shipments. Northern Pacific ports are defined as Pacific ports north of California including Alaska, Canadian Border ports west of and including Montana, excluding Hawaii.

Travelers will be asked to open the container with the ethrog and unwrap it. The agriculture specialist will inspect the ethrog. If either insect stings or pests are found, the ethrog will be prohibited from entering the United States. If neither is found, the traveler will be allowed to rewrap and re-box the ethrog for entry into the United States.

Palm Fronds

Single palm fronds will be inspected by agriculture specialists and released if no pests or symptoms of disease are found.

Twigs of Willow

If the twigs of willow are from Europe, they will be prohibited from entering the United States. If they are from other than Europe, they will be inspected by agriculture specialists and released if no pests or symptoms of disease are found.

Also, if the twigs of willow are green in color, have soft tissue present, or have buds that sprouted, then they are capable of being grown and are prohibited from entering the United States.

Twigs of Myrtle

Twigs of myrtle will be inspected by agriculture specialists and released if no pests or symptoms of disease are found.

 

If travelers have any concerns resulting from the inspection of their religious items at a port of entry, a CBP supervisor is always available to answer questions and address their concerns. As always, CBP is committed to treating all travelers, including travelers who may be observing Sukkot, with respect and dignity at all U.S ports of entry.

Dog barks, world cowers

 

'Millions for defense, but not one cent for tribute'

Funny enough, this phrase, uttered on June 18, 1798 by one Robert Goodloe Harper, a Federalist representative to the U.S. House and Chairman of the Committee on Ways and Means, was not about Islamist pirates off the Barbary Coast of Africa but against the French who were trying to extort a £50,000 bribe and force the U.S. to make a large loan to the French government for the French to cease attacks on U.S. vessels. (http://tinyurl.com/65wk55e)

According to Islam's War Against The West, the expression gained new popularity by 1800 when the attacks on U.S. vessels was carried out by Islamist terrorists of the era. (http://tinyurl.com/3guufl4)

Nothing new

The "Millions for defense..." phrase came to mind as I was reading an article titled Palestinians' Shoe-Throwing Extortion by Khaled Abu Toameh (http://tinyurl.com/64o9wko).

Both Toameh's article and Islam's War Against The West (ibid.) take note of the fact that in regard to Moslem mentality, nothing has changed - in centuries.

Islam's War Against The West takes Islam's history back to 640 CE, long before the current crop of Islamists took up the banner of jihad.

As Solomon allegedly said, אין שם חדש תחת השמש (there's nothing new under the sun).

Toameh wonders why governments allow their representatives to be abused by beggars.

The current crop of extortionists, the so called "Palestinian Authority" terrorist organizations, is, Toameh opines, telling the U.S. that "If you do not endorse our position and if you cut off financial aid, we will turn against you."

To the shores of Tripoli

Do I hear an echo of Solomon's words?

""Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it."

Jorge Agustín Nicolás Ruiz de Santayana y Borrás was right when he said that and he is correct today.

The United States, particularly under recent administrations, seems to think that it can "westernize" the Islamists they way it and its allies "westernized" - less or more - the Japanese.

The difference is, the Japanese after World War 2 were absolutely crushed, and when they did start to recover, they realized they were part of a commercial world that they could extort "within the rules." That is about China's position today; modifying a steel company's slogan by changing one letter to "Steal when you want it."

Some mentalities are hard to change.

The Moslem mentality is one. The German mentality - at least in the "homeland" - is another.

A correspondent wrote the other day regarding the increasing demands of Islamists in France (and the foolishness of that country's political leader) that the Muslims want their own courts, that they want Halal food in public schools or to have their own goveernment-funded schools, that they want their own domestic and criminal courts, and they want to live in their own communities.

I responded that we - Jews - want basically the same things.

The Moslems simply are aping Jewish desires. Even sharia - Islamic law - is based on Torah and rabbinic law, but with the vast difference that Jewish law has progressed from its ancient ways. Even in Israel, where Jews could implement laws of the Torah, stoning, beheadings, garroting, and 39 lashes are only matters of historical interest, not modern jurisprudence. Sharia drags primitive punishment into the 21st century.

My non-Jewish correspondent pointed out that while my presentation of (observant) Judaism is correct, the people who practice it are tolerant of those who do not (Jews and non-Jews alike) and we - Jews - have, less or more, integrated into the societies in which we live. Unlike the Islamists, we are not isolationists, certainly not by choice.

I fail to see any way to identify an "Islamist" from a "moderate Moslem" - are moderates the ones in the street protesting outrageous Islamist behavior? No, but only because there are no moderate Moslems in the street protesting.

The question remains

Why, given the lessons of history - a very long history at that - does the U.S. try to appease the Islamists.

Why does the country's chief executive bow to Saudi royalty? (Oil, of course, and maybe a dose of fear of a country to which the U.S. sends its soldiers to protect.)

Why does the country, despite threats, insist on supporting - financially if not completely politically - a non-entity that has as it's primary goal to wipe an ally - one of a very few trusted allies - off the map and drive its non-Moslem population into the sea ... that means Jews, of course, but also Christians and Buddhists and whomever else Israel has extended sanctuary?

Will the U.S.' leadership ever find the intestinal fortitude to stand up to extortionists and to make the phrase "Millions for defense, but not one cent for tribute" once again the watchword of a proud nation.