In New York No Shirt, No Shoes, No Service

 

Guy walks into a fancy NY restaurant. He’s wearing a grungy t-shirt, cut offs, and brogans sans socks.

He has shirt and shoes; trousers – albeit short ones – too.

But, the maître d’ says the guy can’t come in dressed “that way.”

The guy objects , a scene evolves, and the cops are called.

The cops arrive and tell the guy to move on else he’ll be eating jail chow.

Girl walks into a store wearing a tube top, Daisy Dukes, and $600 platform sandals.

Like the guy above, she has a shirt, albeit “brief,” a bikini bottom, and shoes.

The proprietor tells the girl she can’t stay.

The girl objects , a scene evolves, and the cops are called.

The cops arrive and tell the proprietor to serve the girl else the proprietor may be eating jail chow.

What’s the difference?

The obvious suspicion: One place is a classy joint whose owners likely are contributors to Hiz Honor’s campaign fund. The other place is a store in a haredi neighborhood that caters to haredim who have modesty issues. The store most likely does not contribute to Hiz Honors campaign fund.

For what it’s worth, the incumbent cannot run again. Maybe things will get better for the haredim under a new administration.

I am hardly a haredi. I’ve got a short beard not because I’m “datee,” but to hide a multitude of chins.

I am shomer Shabat and shomer kashrut and shomer many mitzvot, but I don’t wear a black suit or a Hasidic stremmel, nor do I have peyot to my waist. I would not – and I know this for a fact – be welcome in the haredi neighborhood. Been there.

I once visited a city and went to a local synagogue. It was summer. It was hot. I left suit coat and tie in my room and hiked for about 45 minutes to get to “shul.” It turned out to be a Reform or Liberal congregation; uncomfortable for me, but it has a Torah after all.

An usher, an older gentleman, approached and in a soft voice told me that if I had a coat and tie he could arrange an aliyah for me. The synagogue would even loan me a coat and tie.

The congregation was in Florida and this was circa 1978. Had it been NYC today, I could have asked the ACLU to file suit for me claiming I was denied my civil right to an aliyah because I refused to wear a coat and tie to services. I didn’t get an aliyah that Shabat.

Why is it that I must dress to a standard to avoid offending fellow diners, but I can violate community mores in dress and demand service in a retail outlet – or an aliyah for that matter?

I know New Yorkers have a reputation as lacking basic courtesies. “It’s all about ME.”

I also know that baksheesh is a way of life for almost everyone in business – any business. Been there.

But I cannot understand why refusing service in once place is legal and refusing service in another is illegal.

Blame the victims

The U.S. is to blame for the Boston Marathon Murders

 

Tom Brokaw says so (http://tinyurl.com/cqnnqmb

Justin Trudeau, Canada’s Liberal Party leader ,says so.

Geraldo Rivera says so.

If such prominent citizens say “Blame the victims, don’t blame the perpetrators,” why it must be so.

It could be worse, someone could blame the Jews and Gypsies – Roma – for the shoah.

Oops, someone already IS claiming the Jews and Roma.

In an article from the notoriously one sided Jewish Press, we read

“Former NBC News anchor Tom Brokaw strongly suggested that America is partly to blame for the Boston bombings because the young Muslim men involved may have felt “alienated” and angry over U.S. drone strikes on “innocent civilians” in Muslim countries abroad.” (See URL above for full story.)

“New Canadian Liberal Party leader Justin Trudeau said, “there is no question that this happened because of someone who feels completely excluded, someone who feels completely at war with innocence, at war with society.”

“Geraldo Rivera tweeted, ‘regrets to my Muslim brothers/sisters. We know how Boston will aggravate life’s friction—Now’s the time for patience pride & understanding’.”

It’s interesting that that “journalist” Rivera calls the perpetrators his “brothers/sisters.” Unless he converted to Islam, if he goes to – say – Saudia, he’ll soon find out how he is treated by his “brothers/sisters.”

AND IN CANADA, where Muslims also are being victimized. According to the Jewish Press http://tinyurl.com/cq9xmzo , “Canada’s Royal Canadian Mounted Police [RCMP] have thwarted a terrorism plot – one that enlisted the help of al Qaeda in Iran — to derail a VIA Rail passenger train. A combined effort between the RCMP, Toronto and Montreal Police and the FBI led to the arrest of two men on terrorism charges: 35 year old Raed Jaser of Toronto and 30 year old Chiheb Esseghaier of Montreal.”

ELSEWHERE

• Libyan born Mujahid Enderi, who goes by the name of Ryan, is being investigated by authorities, along with three Londoners – Aaron Yoon, Ali Medlej and Xristos Katsiroubas are being investigated for an attack on an Algerian gas plant
• Somali and Canadian security forces are now probing whether or not a former York University student was part of a team of suicide bombers last Sunday who stormed a courthouse in Somalia’s capital, Mogadishu, killing and injuring dozens

You can almost - almost - understand the Muslims’ feeling of mistreatment. They can’t handle the freedoms afforded by the U.S., Canada, Australia and, to a lesser extent, the EU countries. What I cannot fathom are the Timothy James "Tim" McVeigh s, U.S. born and raised terrorists.

McVeigh was mad at America because of the Waco Siege.

Theodore John "Ted" Kaczynski was a PhD in Mathematics who started his bombing career as “necessary to attract attention to the erosion of human freedom necessitated by modern technologies requiring large-scale organization.” ( http://tinyurl.com/mnlts )

The difference between McVeigh and friends and Kaczynski is – at least as I recall – Tom Brokaw and his fellow liberals-to-the-nth degree failed to cry over their incarceration and, in McVeigh’s case, execution. But then neither was a Muslim and neither aimed his attacks at Jews which seems to be permissible.

Kosher & China??

 

Two adjacent headlines from Kosher.com, THE Website for kashrut information ( http://www.kashrut.com/News/.

Increase of kosher food production in China

Information on pesticides and aduteration in foods from China

 

Chinese kosher: According to an article in Arutz 7 ( http://tinyurl.com/acf62nb), “The China Ministry of industry reported that more kosher products are being produced in China for domestic use and export. According to the report, the amount of kosher production rose 60% in 2012, compared to the year before.

“Much of the food being produced is exported to markets around the world, including Israel, which is a big customer of fish, canned vegetables, and other grocery items "made in China". But some of that kosher production is also being used domestically for the Chinese themselves.”

 

Dangerous foods: “Pesticides and aduteration in foods from China. Food Sentry had analyzed nearly 1,000 reported food violation incidents in 73 countries. They found that China had the most violations of any single country. Produce was most likely to be contaminated with pesticides while seafood was most likely to be contaminated with antibiotics. "32 distinct pesticides found in Chinese foods, mostly in produce, fruit and spices. In one instance, a cumin sample had six different pesticides (acetamiprid, carbendazim, profenofos, cypermethrin, hexaconazole and Ethion) detected at violative concentrations in laboratory testing." Some of the issues found are the following:

• "Antibiotics were a particular problem with seafood from China. We found multiple instances of leuco-malachite green (a metabolite of malachite green), enrofloxacin and ciprofloxacin (fluoroquinolone drugs), and sulfamethoxazole (a sulfonamide drug) contamination." "Leuco-malachite green/malachite green have been banned in aquaculture by the FDA since 1983 due to serious toxicity, so their continued use in Chinese aquaculture is cause for concern. It is actually a dye used in the clothing industry, but it has anti-bacterial properties that are effective for use in fish farming. In this case we found it reported as a contaminant in tilapia, grouper, mackerel, carp and crabs." The FDA inspects only 2 percent of all food imports and tests much less than 1 percent, there’s a good chance that some contaminated tilapia is getting through.

• Escherichia coli, Clostridium botulinum and unspecified coliform bacteria being reported multiple times.

• “Mycotoxins from poisonous molds were present, mainly in seeds, oils, dairy and rice. Economically Motivated Adulteration (EMA) continues to be an issue in China.

• “Seafood has water added to increase its weight. The fish is soaked in sodium tripolyphosphate (STPP), which at high concentrations can be toxic. Israeli Video showing water addition in a the Chinese fish processing plant.

“Food Sentry ( http://tinyurl.com/b5f26og) has found that very little of the total import amount is actually inspected and tested, and the results from foreign laboratories that do test demonstrate some persistent level of contamination across a range of products.”

No fines or jail for draft dodgers Stop stipends, services

 

What’s the fuss about haredim and the draft or national service?

If the so-called “ultra-orthodox” refuse to serve in the military OR perform national service, that’s fine.

But don’t support any haredi institution or haredi men who reject taking part in the reality of Israel.

The education ministry has the right idea.

If haredi schools refuse to teach basic subjects, they lose state financial support. The haredi youngsters already are losers due to a lack of preparation for the real world, that is, the world outside the yeshiva where people work for their bread.

Granted, the state can afford to subsidize a few full-time talmedai hakham, but not the thousands currently draining the state’s limited resources (not all are on the dole, but many are; even those NOT receiving stipends use state resources without recompense to the state).

Don’t put the shirkers in jail. The state will still have to feed and clothe them and support their families.

Don’t fine the shirkers. They have no money. (What they have is through the generosity of others, primarily from outside Israel.)

Cut off stipends and cut off services to areas where the majority of residents refuse to participate in the reality of Israel. (Those areas of Mea Sharim that refuse to recognize the state should be offered to Jordan or as part of a “palestinian” state.)

Make it simple for the haredim: Participate or forego state resources.

Don’t participate in Israeli life? Fine. Forego police and fire protection, give up access to publically-funded hospitals. If a water main breaks, tough. If the streets need repair, fix them yourself. Lose all state aid for schools. No more subsidies for the children. No welfare.

The choice should be simple: Integrate or separate.

Boston Marathon murders

Blame it on Israel – of course

According to Rick Falk’s blog ( http://richardfalk.wordpress.com/ ), the Boston Marathon murders and mayhem are the direct result of “Tel Aviv (having) the compliant ear of the American political establishment.”

The interesting thing about Falk is that he is the U.N.'s Human Rights Council special rapporteur for the Palestinians. He also is, according to a Wikipedia entry ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_A._Falk), “an American professor emeritus of international law at Princeton University, the author or co-author of 20 books and the editor or co-editor of another 20 books, speaker, and activist on world affairs.”

The “Iraq War is a war of aggression, and as such, that it amounts to a Crime against Peace of the sort for which surviving German leaders were indicted, prosecuted and punished at the Nuremberg trials conducted shortly after the Second World War.” (Wikipedia, ibid.)

In a book-length paragraph on his blog (ibid.), Falk seems to blame “Tel Aviv” (he apparently ignores the fact that Jerusalem is Israel’s seat of government, in itself telling) for all the world’s conflict potential. “The war drums are beating at this moment in relation to both North Korea and Iran, and as long as Tel Aviv has the compliant ear of the American political establishment those who wish for peace and justice in the world should not rest easy.”

Falk’s ravings have been censured by the UN’s incumbent Secretary-General on Jan. 24, 2010. According to UN Watch, a non-governmental organization based in Geneva whose mandate is to monitor the performance of the United Nations by the yardstick of its own Charter. “On the eve of a U.S. Congressional hearing into the U.N. Human Rights Council, the controversial body’s Palestine expert, Richard Falk, was “condemned” today by Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon for his “preposterous” comments questioning whether the 9/11 terrorist attacks were orchestrated by the U.S. government. Mr. Ban said Falk’s remarks were “an affront to the memory of the more than 3,000 people who died in the attack.” ( http://tinyurl.com/4blduyw)

The U.S. government, still the UN’s chief money source, has several times called for Falk’s dismissal for his outrageous one-sided and anti-Israel comments. He has taken his role of “rapporteur” – defined by Merriam-Webster as “a person who gives reports (as at a meeting of a learned society)” – and made it a bully pulpit for his Palestinian masters.

So what else is new?

In the air in Israel

 

El Al & the Histadrut

El Al, IsrAir, and Arkia – Israel-flagged airlines, are on strike.

Israel’s all-powerful union, the Histadrut, is striking at Lod but not Israeli’s other domestic and international airports.

The reason for the work stoppages is a Knesset decision to make flights to and from Israel more price competitive.

The airlines, led by El Al, complain that Israeli airlines have high security costs and, according to an Israel HaYom op-ed piece by Dan Margalit, are prevented from making code share partnerships with any carrier that flies into Arab countries.

El Al has code share agreements with American Airlines, which in turn has agreements with Royal Jordanian and Etihad Airways (flights to Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates (UAE), with connecting flights to Kuwait and Pakistan) and Gulf Air (flights to Abu Dhabi, U.A.E.; Bahrain; Doha, Qatar; Kuwait, and Muscat, Oman). Note: According to the American Airlines Web site, “Due to a regulatory change by the U.S. Federal Aviation Administration, American Airlines has suspended its code share on flights operated by Gulf Air until further notice.
“This regulatory change does not affect Gulf Air's code share on flights operated by American Airlines, which continues uninterrupted.”

If I read that correctly. It still is possible to board an AA flight to an Arab country.

El Al also has code share agreements with Iberia (flights to Morocco, Algeria, Mauritania, and Egypt); SwissAir (flights to Bahrain, Iran *, Kuwait*, Lebanon*, Oman, Saudi Arabia*, Qatar, Doha*, United Arab Emirates; * indicates code share with Swiss Air); and Czech Airlines (flights to Kuwait, Bahrain*, Dubai*, Abu Dabi, Oman*; ; * indicates code share with Czech Airlines), so the restriction obviously is a false one.

El Al also has – or had – a code share agreement with Delta that, like AA, flies into a Arab state (Saudia).

According to HaAretz, “A set number of weekly flights to certain destinations will be added every year. At the end of the five-year period there will be full competition on all routes between Israel and the EU, and every airline from the EU or Israel will be allowed to fly to any destination within the region as many times as it wants. The agreement differentiate between flights that terminate in Israel or the EU and that continue on to a final destination.”

The HaArtez article notes that “There are now direct flights from Israel to 16 EU nations; 57% of all Israeli international passenger flights going to the EU. ( http://tinyurl.com/c4cfh8b )

A Jewish Journal article dated April 26, 2010, briefly described the U.S.-Israel Open Skies agreement that Ray LaHood, then U.S. secretary of transportation, said in a statement last Friday, after the agreement was signed. “Consumers, airlines and economies of both the United States and Israel will enjoy the benefits of competitive pricing and more convenient service.” ( http://tinyurl.com/cwcv45f )
 

V-22 Osprey – Gift (??) from USA

According to Shlomo Cohen's Daily Cartoon 22.04.2013 in Israel HaYom, US SecDef Chuck Hagel is “gifting” Israel with a so far unannounced number of the V-22 Osprey hybrid aircraft. ( http://www.israelhayom.com/site/newsletter_car.php?id=625)

The per unit cost of the V-22 is somewhat above US$100k.

Digging around the internet turns up too many entries of V-22 failures, from design on. The bird, at least in one point in its development, lacked weaponry for any ground support function, specifically a front-mounted machine gun.

Pod-mounted weapons on the aircraft’s wings are of questionable use when the plane is in VTOL (helicopter) more. The size of the propellers may preclude any standard wing-mounted weaponry.

American taxpayers probably will pay for Hagel’s “gift,” but as with most weapons “gifts” from the U.S., Israelis are expected to combat test them for the Americans.

The Osprey has developed, over the years, a nasty reputation for failing to meet its mission.

But perhaps, as Israel has done on other U.S. “gifted” weapons, it will “tweak” the bird to male it into a mission-capable weapon even if not a particularly safe flying machine.

Not enough causalities?

 

Obama to Hagel: Send 1st Armor to Jordan

 

According to Global Security Newswire, the U.S.(is) to Deploy More Forces Near Syria ( http://www.nti.rsvp1.com/gsn/article/us-deploy-more-forces-near-syria/?mgh=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.nti.org&mgf=1)

The GSN article reported that “The 1st Armored Division outpost could make ready for a broader U.S. military deployment that might exceed 20,000 personnel if President Obama deems forcible involvement in Syria to be necessary, Hagel told the Senate Armed Services Committee. He added, though, that ‘military intervention ... should be an option of last resort’.”

The 1st Armored Division troops would be used, we are told, “for a possible intervention aimed at locking down chemical warfare stocks in war-torn Syria.” (Emphasis mine.)

Aside from my old whine “Anyone remember the Monroe Doctrine?” I wonder why Obungler deems it necessary to

* Endanger U.S. troops in another nation’s civil war

* Why the Arab League doesn’t send Muslim soldiers to do something on either side; Syria is a member of the League

To the best of my knowledge, the troops we sent to Iraq still are being attacked by Iraqis who welcomed the defeat of their despot by gifting U.S. troops with IEDs.

To the best of my knowledge, the troops we sent to Afghanistan are still being murdered by Afghans both for our interference in their politics and our insistence that girls be educated (imagine that).

While Obungler did NOT get us involved in either Iraq or Afghanistan – we can thank the Bushes for that, the current POTUS seems determined to make a name for himself as the fool who interferes in yet another Muslim war, a war that the U.S. is bound to lose – another Vietnam.

Let’s be cynical.

What’s in it for the U.S.? What does Syria have that the U.S. wants?

Natural resources are, at best, minimal.

As it stands now, if – when – the insurgents/rebels, call them what you wish, take over the country, Israel will once again have an active northern border; probably more so than its border with Aza and the Sinai. Unlike the Aza/Sinai borders, there won’t be a powerful neighbor to help keep a lid on the terrorists. For all its anti-Israel rhetoric, Egypt HAS attempted to keep Hamas in check and HAS stepped up activities to reduce missile attacks from the Sinai. Is there an “Egypt” bordering Syria? Look at the map.

Iran certainly is not going to play a restraining role; it’s maniacal ayatollahs have their puppet, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, constantly calling for Israel’s demise.

Lebanon is controlled by Hezbollah that, like Iran, want to drive the Jews – and may some non-Jews, too – into the sea.

Jordon is afraid to interfere with Syria’s threat to Israel; it’s monarchy is in danger of falling even now as the “Palestinians” among its citizens agitate against the government; this, of course is nothing new.

Turkey, apologies and air kisses not withstanding, is on the far side of Syria and of no help for Israel, unless Syria’s rulers decide to attack it for providing sanctuary to escaping civilians.

The U.N. is a farce. If anyone says “Boo!,” the blue berets run, tails between their legs. U.N. “peacekeepers” are not worth a prutah.

Which means that Obungler will follow the disastrous actions of his predecessors and send in U.S. troops who will be despised by the locals and victims of snipers and IEDs, just like in Iraq and Afghanistan. Yet another Vietnam.

(Join me in a chorus of Pete Seeger's “Where Have All the Flowers Gone?”)

I’m ashamed

 

Gun laws

I have been a registered Republican my entire voting life.

I confess to voting split tickets and have no objection to loudly supporting better qualified candidate of a different party.

But today I am embarrassed and ashamed of the Republicans in Congress.

They aren’t “real” Republicans; they are National Rifle Association (NRA) flunkies.

I’ve owned guns for years. I fired a .22 rifle at age 6 and since have fired a number of other rifles, revolvers, pistols, and Derringers. I have never shot anyone even when legally allowed. I did my time, voluntarily, in the U.S. armed forces.

While I prefer to hunt with a camera, I understand hunters armed with rifles and bows.

What I FAIL to understand is the need for a hunter to have a fully automatic rifle with a 30-round clip or a person in need of self-defense with a fully automatic pistol with a high-capacity clip.

Nor do I understand the need for armor-piercing shells.

Caveat: My Number 1 Son is a cop, and while his enlightened department issues and insists that all its officers wear “bullet resistant” vests, the vests won’t stop an AK-47’s bullet nor an armor-piercing bullet.

The Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution – all 27 words of it – states simply that “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”

That would suggest that a person who was a member of “a well regulated Militia” had the right to “keep and bear arms.”

Given our love of guns for hunting and, unfortunately the need for self defense (there simply are too few cops and they take too long to get where they are needed), U.S. citizens have enjoyed the right to own firearms.

Since the U.S. does have a standing military and reserves (both with a capital “R” and as each state’s National Guard), it seems in my mind that the average citizen has no justifiable need for a fully automatic weapon with a high-capacity clip; in other words, Joe (and Jane) Citizen isn’t going to be defending the nation from invading armies.

If we – American citizens – fear a take-over by invading hordes or a megalomaniacal Commander in Chief, a/k/a President of the United States (POTUS) sending troops to take away (more of) our Constitutional and States rights, then using semi-automatic – or even single-shot – weapons with standard clips of 8-to-10 rounds could provide the citizens with sufficient fire power to overcome enough of the “enemy” to acquire the enemies’ (fully automatic) weapons. Heck, this can be achieved with a decent hunting bow and suitable arrows.

I am NOT in favor of banning firearms a la New York City where only the villains have guns; we see that this encourages crime rather than reduces it.

I am not necessarily in favor of registering allowable (semi-automatic and single-shot) firearms and clips.

I most assuredly AM in favor of national background checks of potential weapons purchasers and I AM in favor of a ban on fully automatic weapons and a ban on large-capacity clips.

No one seems to object to a limit on the number of shells a shotgun can hold, and - for the most part - a shotgun is either (a) a hunting gun or (b) a defensive weapon and no one seems to be pushing for a full automatic 12-gauge shotgun.

Further, there seems no loud complaint that functional machine guns, mortars, Howitzers, and similar weapons are restricted to military ownership and use even though the NRA defends the rights – apparently of anyone, citizen or not – to own assault weapons with high-capacity clips.

By the way, what, pray, is the difference between a true machine gun and a fully automatic rifle other than bullet capacity?

To be fair, none of the recent disasters – see Senior Legislative Attorney Janet L. Kaminski Leduc’s report to the Connecticut General Assembly at http://www.cga.ct.gov/2013/rpt/2013-R-0057.htm - have been caused by fully automatic weapons. The report did not specify if high-capacity clips were used with semi-automatic rifles and pistols.

In an article titled Twelve facts about guns and mass shootings in the United States at http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2012/12/14/nine-facts-about-guns-and-mass-shootings-in-the-united-states/ , author Ezra Klein

• Cites a study by Richard Florida that concludes that “Deaths are significantly lower in states with stricter gun control legislation. Though the sample sizes are small, we find substantial negative correlations between firearm deaths and states that ban assault weapons (-.45), require trigger locks (-.42), and mandate safe storage requirements for guns (-.48).”

• Includes, as a graphic, results an August CNN/ORC poll that asked respondents whether they favor or oppose a number of specific policies to restrict gun ownership. Unfortunately, as with most poll results, no demographics are provided and the phrasing of the questions was omitted, making the results suspect and arguable regardless of an individual's position on gun control.

The poll, keeping the above caveat in mind, indicated that the gun control measure most favored was a requirement for background checks. Closely behind this was a prohibition of gun sales to the mentally ill and felons (with neither “mentally ill” nor “felon” defined). Other popular measures were gun registration, a ban on high-capacity clips, a ban on semi-automatic weapons, and a limit on the number of guns per individual.

I suppose the NRA’s position on any gun control is that once “the camel gets its nose in the tent” the rest (of the camel) will quickly follow; in other words, if any gun control laws are passed, more restrictive laws will follow.

That may not necessarily be true.

IN Florida the main concerns are protecting children, preferably by keeping a weapon out of sight and out of reach or, failing that, storing the weapon in a gun safe or, minimally, using a trigger lock to prevent the weapon from firing. In a vehicle, a gun owner may carry the weapon inside a private vehicle as long as it remains secured in the trunk, inside a gun case, inside a closed box, or inside a closed glove compartment.

Against that, Florida concealed carry permits are relatively easy to acquire, albeit for a fee. The state does not require a permit to purchase a weapon or gun registration, nor does it ban assault weapons (e.g. AK-47) according to a Wikipedia entry at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_Laws_in_Florida .

My personal “bottom line” is that we DO need some gun control laws. The most important is having a national background check. It’s simply too easy and too common for a person in State A to relocate to State B to buy a weapon there that the person could not buy in State A due to a criminal or mental health issue. At the same time, both criminal and mental health issues need to be clearly defined. A case of obsessive-compulsive disorder is hardly the same as paranoid schizophrenia; likewise shoplifting is far different from battery or any crime with a weapon of any type.

If the Janet L. Kaminski Leduc report, ibid., is accurate, a ban on assault rifles is a waste of time. Most of the shootings were done with semi-automatics.

The idea of limiting the number of guns owned by an individual is worth consideration. But that means gun registration that both the NRA and this scrivener oppose.

Unfortunately, the people we sent to Washington seem to prefer extremist obstinacy to working for the welfare of the country; perhaps they just are working for their self-defined owners at the expense of their constituents.

I’m curious

 

Imams vs. rabbis

What is the difference between an extremist imam and an extremist rabbi?

People such as the #1 ayatollah in Iran and the #1 and #2 haredi rabbis in Israel.

Islamists want sharia law.

Haredim want talmudic law (on which, by the way, much of sharia law is based).

Islamists want to force women – not men, just women – to dress “modestly.”

Haredim want to force women – not men, just women – to dress “modestly.”

Islamists want to control the government and to protect their positions.

Haredim want to control the government and to protect their positions.

Islamists insist that no Muslim sell land to a Jew.

Haredim insist that no Jew sell land to a Muslim.

So what’s the difference?

None. Nada. Effis. Klum. Shum davar.

Those Jews who rail against the Islamists also should rail against the haredim of Mea Sharim, Bnei Brak, Deal, and Boro Park.

I am not suggesting that non-haredi Jews invade haredi neighborhoods dressed in provocative apparel or that they should drive through playing Madonna or some other female vocalist at high volume just to offend the denizens of those neighborhoods.

What I am stating is that we – Jews – have our own extremists. Unfortunately, we have them at BOTH ends of the spectrum – the haredim and the far left anti-everything-Jewish accident-of-birth Jews. I suspect there probably are Muslims who feel the same way about their extremists as I do about ours.

Too bad we can’t send all the extremists of all varieties to a small island.

Alcatraz might be available. Or Devil’s Island off French Guiana.

Israel’s problem?

 

Gaza farmers burn 3 tons of herbs after Israel closes border crossing ( http://www.israelhayom.com/site/newsletter_article.php?id=8599)

 

It’s ALWAYS Israel’s fault.

Never mind that Aza (Gaza) has

• An airport ( http://www.gazaairport.com/index.html) with scheduled airline service to Cairo and Amman, among other destinations ( http://www.palairlines.com/Fleet.aspx) By the way, check out the history of the airport and the airline; most interesting ( http://www.gazaairport.com/history.html)

• An open gateway to Egypt and its sea ports (( http://geography.about.com/library/cia/blcgaza.htm).

Also ignore the fact that when Sharon forced Jews out of Aza the Jews left behind hot houses and synagogues which the Muslims immediately destroyed, the former in violation of their Koran and the latter in simple stupidity and hatred of anything Jewish – never mind that many of the Jewish settlers probably were helonim (non observant).

It is interesting to note that when Egypt closes its border with Aza, the liberals of the world are strangely silent.

And in Occupied Israel (a/k/a “the West Bank”>

The instant “Palestinians” have access to the international marketplace via Jordan http://mideastweb.org/mpalestine.htm) as well as via Israeli gateways.

The fact that border crossings are burdensome might have something to do with the fact that terrorists use these access points to murder Israeli men, women, and babes in arms (literally).

SO WHY BLAME ISRAEL?

Because it is so easy. Duh!

Israel is expected to keep its borders open to people whose over-riding goal and purpose in life is to eliminate Israel and all the Jews within it – and if a few non-Jews are “eliminated” as well … ah well, collateral damage, the price of war.

Never mind that the U.S. has a fence – just like Israel – to keep Mexican’s in Mexico.

These Mexicans, for the most part, only want to take jobs Americans won’t do (due to the difficulty, perceived lack of prestige, or pay). Granted a few of the Mexicans are in the business of killing Americans, mostly with drugs, sometimes with guns and knives. But I cannot recall any time in recent history when the Mexican government fired missiles into the U.S. or encouraged suicide murderers to cross the border – unlike the governments and good people of Aza and Occupied Israel (i.e., the Palestinian “state”).

Israel provides electricity to the so-called Palestinian “state” yet the Palestinian “state” can’t or won’t pay its bill. That’s OK.

But when Israel withheld money collected for the PA to pay the electric company, the world howled – “Israel cannot do that; unfair, unkind.” Never mind that Israelis will have to pay more to their electricity to make up the deficit caused by the Palestinian “state”’s unwillingness or inability to pay.

The “state” is whining that its Arab benefactors are failing to pay what they promised; does anyone hear the world chastising the Muslims – either for (a) failing to make promised payments to the PA or (b) for the PA’s poor financial management.

It’s easier to blame Israel.

The time has come

Back in 1972, then-president Richard Nixon went to China. His trip set the groundwork for normalization of relations with China, a country that since has devoured the US economically and sends us shoddy and dangerous goods.

But at least it is not a belligerent a la North Korea or Iran, and indeed now tries to keep North Korea in check.

On June 12, 1987, then president Ronald Reagan challenged then USSR premier Mikhail Gorbachev to tear down the Berlin Wall. The wall eventually came down on November 9, 1989.

In 1995, then-president Wm. Clinton normalized relations with Vietnam, a country with which the US had been at war for a number of years during which 58, 209 Americans lost their lives (Wikipedia, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_military_casualties_of_war)

We’ve established a relative peace with most of our former foes, certainly the ones that had – some still have – the capability of harming US citizens at home and around the globe.

In February, 1962, then-president John Kennedy, with an executive order, placed an embargo on Fidel Castro’s Cuba. Kennedy imposed travel restrictions on February 8, 1963, and the Cuban Assets Control Regulations were issued on July 8, 1963. (Wikipedia, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_embargo_against_Cuba#Kennedy-era_embargo)

For an interesting aside, see the Wikipedia entry (ibid.) regarding Kennedy’s fondness for, and pre-embargo purchase of, Cuban cigars.

The US State Department considers, in 2013, that Cuba is a “state sponsor of terrorism” and based on that, prevents almost all travel by US citizens to Cuba.

Cuba, which made the list in 1982, is one of only four countries the US State considers to be a “state sponsor of terrorism,” the others being Syria (1979), Iran (1984), and Sudan (1993). Libya was on the list but it was removed. China, North Korea, and Saudia are absent from the list, although they are actively warring against the US either financially and industrially (China), providing funding and shelter for Muslim terrorists (Saudia and other Muslim-dominated countries), or blatantly threatening the US with missiles (North Korea).

The only threat to the US Cuba might possess is cancer caused by smoking Cuban cigars and cigarettes.

There seems NO valid reason to prevent average US citizens from visiting the island. Special permits have been granted to some American citizens and they have come back safely. That cannot be said for other countries, Mexico in particular, yet there is no prohibition on travel to Mexico.

So why is the embargo still in place?

Primarily because expatriate Cubans, despite claims to the contrary, don’t want to go home. They have “Cubanized” South Florida which explains why Cuban Spanish is the dominate language in South Florida for even the less-than-elderly population.

If relations between Cuba and the US were “normalized” and trade barriers torn down, the island’s economy would improve and with it its dependence on Russia. The South Florida Cubans who claim that they want to “go home” would no longer have an excuse to stay in the US. The island’s mix of communism and capitalism seems to have no negative effect on Canadians who are allowed to visit Cuba. I have heard no talk from Canada about returning visitors pressing for a communist (form of) government in Canada.

The only other people who stand to benefit from a continuing embargo on Cuba, besides cigar makers in Tampa FL, are sugar cane and beet growers who would have to compete with Cuban sugar cane.

Politically, aside from the Cubans in South Florida, there seems no reason to prevent social intercourse with the island nation.

It’s not going to go away.

Its government will never be a sustainable US-style democracy – the US has several times tried to force our understanding of democracy on Cuba and it always is quickly replaced by a dictatorship that seems better suited to the Cubans by the Cubans. It may surprise some Americans, but not every one wants to be American look-alikes.

It won’t make South Florida’s Cubans happy, but since he’s a lame duck anyway, perhaps President Obungler could issue an executive order to cancel another Democrat’s executive order and lead the way to normalization of relations with the US’ neighbor to the south.

Of course there is no guarantee the State Department will DO what a president instructs it – moving the US embassy to Jerusalem is a good – albeit sad – example of how State does what it wants despite congressional and presidential instructions.

Mourning in Nissan

Making a mountain out of a mole hill

One of the Israeli haredi political party Shas’ sub-leaders (all of whom report to R. Ovadia Yosef), claim that "Holocaust Remembrance Day does not apply to haredi [ultra-Orthodox] Jews.”

According to an article in the Israel HaYom ( http://www.israelhayom.com/site/newsletter_article.php?id=8537), Shas party Co-chairman Aryeh Deri said in an interview with haredi radio station Kol Barama set to air Thursday night said that “"Personally, I don't see any sanctity or distinctiveness in this day. Israel's Chief Rabbinate has designated the 10th of Tevet [the Hebrew month corresponding to December-January] as a general mourners' day, and that is they day when, religiously speaking, we remember the victims of the Holocaust.”

The month of Nissan, in which Passover falls, traditionally allows only limited mourning (death in immediate family excepted).

While Deri’s remarks, if accurately translated by Israel HaYom, are harsh, he does have a basis for his position.

Holocaust Remembrance Day 5773 (2013) was aligned with the beginning of the Warsaw (Poland) ghetto’s uprising. Deri challenged the date choice, noting there were other uprisings in other ghettos at different times.

According to the Israel HaYom article, Deri allegedly said "No one can come and tell us about the Holocaust. The Holocaust Remembrance Day that 'they' declared because of the Warsaw ghetto doesn't apply to us as haredi Jews," he said.

From my personal perspective, and while I might agree with Deri and the haredim regarding mourning during the month of Nissan, I contend that the holocaust indeed applies to Sefardim – a group Shas purports to represent - both directly and indirectly.

The nazis destroyed Sefardi communities throughout the Mediterranean region – Rhodes and Soloniki to name but two. According to a table at http://www.holocaustchronicle.org/holocaustappendices.html, 80 percent of all Greek Jews were murdered by the nazis; in Italy, “only” 20 percent of the Jewish population was murdered.

Map by worldatlas, copyright GraphicMaps.com

Indirectly, the nazis – with the enthusiastic help of the Muslims – managed to slaughter Jews in Iran, in Israel, and elsewhere in the Muslim world. While not round-ups a la Europe, the Muslims simply murdered Jews where they found them, similar to pogroms in Russia, the Ukraine, and elsewhere in that region.

My personal “bottom line”: While I would prefer the Holocaust Remembrance Day be linked to the Hebrew calendar, as is Israel Independence Day, and that the link be to a date in a month other than Nissan, Deri and his boss need to open their eyes to the fact that the holocaust was not “just” an Ashkenazi thing; indeed, it was not “just” a Jewish thing. See the table at http://www.hawaii.edu/powerkills/NAZIS.TAB1.1.GIF for a breakdown of the nazis’ victims and how they were “eliminated.”

It’s a shame that Deri and his fellow haredim can’t pick their fights a little more sanely. If the haredim are trying to recruit people to their side, to see their point of view, Deri’s remarks are counter-productive. The remarks can only serve to drive observant Jews farther from the haredi camp and to set fast the helonim in their opinion of the haredim.

This mountain, all things and timing considered, should have been left as a mole hill.

CHUTZPAH !

When I was young, just after The Flood, I was taught to not only respect my elders but to show them that respect.

Yes sir, no sir; yes mam, no mam.

Never, never presume to call an adult by their given name unless specifically invited to do so by the adult. Maybe Uncle Joe wanted to be called Uncle Joe, but unless the lady at the corner market asked to be called Carol, it was Miz Swartz.

In the pseudo-military of the U.S. Air Force, back when Wilber and Orville were taking to the air, peons – of which I was one – were obliged to salute shave tail second lieutenants who, as every sergeant knows, are lower than new recruits. We had to address them as sir or mam; in fact, everyone with more rank than E-1 – there was nothing lower – had to be shown respect; sir or mam.

We were told we didn’t have to like the person we were addressing; we had to show respect for the rank, and yes, Virginia, some of those people were pretty “rank.”

But, as Robert Allen Zimmerman told us, “Times they are a’changin.” (http://tinyurl.com/23xbawo). He should know; he and I are contemporaries if not contemporary.

I’m a grey beard; I look my age. Living this long certainly beats the alternative.

I take umbrage when some “whipper snapper” takes liberties and addresses me, a total stranger, by my given name. As I made an appointment for an eye exam the Sweet Young Thing at the desk, using my given name, told me my appointment was set. When she said my name I quietly corrected her: It’s Mister Glenn.

I don’t know the child – she looked to be in her 20s – and I don’t care if she wore a name tag with her given name on it – remember, I was scheduling an eye exam so maybe I just failed to see the name tag.

This buddy-buddy approach is fostered by management to make the customer – be the product spectacles or Cadillacs – think he or she is among friends. Nonsense! The customer is among people who are after the customer’s money.

Until I give someone leave to address me by my given name, don’t do it, unless, of course you either (a) are older than me or (b) wish me to address you in a similar manner. Rabbis, doctors, judges, and the like beware.

My “junior” surgeon is younger than me – my “senior” surgeon is my age; neither invites me to call them by their first names although I confess to taking liberties with the junior’s surname; it’s Hertz and I refer to him as “Painless” since I never needed even an aspirin following his work at the table.

I don’t normally call a rabbi by his given name, even if I am very much the youngster’s senior. (I often feel sorry for rabbis and doctors who lack “first name” friends. In some Latin countries, titles are prefixed to names of engineers, lawyers, and other professionals.)

I am a curmudgeon, no doubt about it. But I firmly believe this would be a better place if minimal courtesies were restored; start with addressing your elders by title, if only Mister, Miss, Misses, or even Miz; children should – gasp! – stand when a teacher enters the classroom. Let’s put hands over the heart during the U.S. National Anthem – ever watch the players at a sports event; maybe one in five or 10 doff their hats and place them over their heart. Heck, I’m not even sure our elected officials, from POTUS down, show respect to the flag and anthem. (Yes, I see their little flag lapel pins; it’s simply not the same.)

Who knows what a modicum of courtesy might generate. Perhaps less road rage? Less cutting in lines? Gentlemen holding the door for ladies – or have both gone the way of dinosaurs?

Go on, as Mr. Clint Eastwood famously said, “make my day” (http://tinyurl.com/cfm9mqd) and “call me mister” (http://tinyurl.com/cupa9q7 and http://tinyurl.com/3xbcc4u).

As I “researched” the origin of “Call me Mister,” the first URL I visited referred to a play of that name revolving around, according to Wikipedia, returning soldiers (from WW II) who expected to be addressed as civilians instead of by their military rank.

I recall how surprised I was when, as a just out of the Air Force civilian someone addressed me as “Mister Glenn.” I almost went into shock – that would have been OK since I was working at a hospital. That incident occurred (c 1963) before many readers of this rant were born.

To paraphrase the late Mr. James Francis Durante, “goodnight, Ms. Swartz, wherever you are.”