Opuscula Is civil New Year A Jewish holiday?

 

WE DON'T CELEBRATE the civil New Years' Day for several reasons.

We already have four Jewish New Year celebrations.

1. First of Nisan is the New Year for (Jewish) kings and for the religious calendar (for festivals)

2. First of Elul is the New Year for the tithing of cattle (but see 3., the first of Tishri)

3. First of Tishri is the New Year for the civil calendar (including the counting of the reigns of foreign kings)

4. First of Shevat is the New Year for trees, according to Bet Shammai, but Bet Hillel fixed the date as the 15th of Shevat

The sources for the holidays are given in the Jewish Virtual Library.

But the followers of Jesus are, perhaps unwittingly, celebrating a Jewish occasion.

Check the math.

Assuming Jesus was born on December 25 - which most historians reject - then January 1 is eight - count'em, eight - days later.

Almost every Jewish boy knows what happened on his eight day (if he was healthy). Two words: BRIT MELAH, circumcision, hopefully performed by a specialist - a mohel. (Until recently, all English royal sons were circumcised by the Royal Mohel. This had nothing to do with religion; the parents wanted the most experienced person to perform the operation and the Royal Mohel was that person.)

So, January 1 of the accepted international solar calendar is, as some Catholics and maybe a few others know, the "Feast of the Circumcision."

I suppose we - Jews - could celebrate a Jewish occasion, but why would we want to celebrate the brit melah of a boy whose followers have caused us so much grief: pogroms, inquisitions, dispositions with foregone conclusions, book burnings, the European holocaust. (That is NOT to suggest that we - Jews - had it much better in Muslim-dominated lands; we did not.)

Jesus, if he really lived, would have been thankful he was born of a Jewish mother rather than Muslim parents; some Muslims, at least in Morocco, still circumcise their sons at age 13 - that's got to be painful at the time and in the boy's memory throughout life.

Now, about "Sylvester"

In Israel many heloni - non-religious Jews - celebrate "Sylvester," an "a/k/a" for New Years' Eve on the philosophy that
כל סיבה למסיבה
or, roughly translated, "any excuse for a party."

The problem with "Sylvester" is that Sylvester was an anti-Semite or, more specifically, anti-Jewish. (Arabs also are Semites.)

According to the English-language Jerusalem Post, Israeli New Years, most commonly known as Sylvester, is named after an anti-Semitic pope.

It's origins, the paper continues, come from Pope Sylvester I, whose saint's day falls on December 31 (the day he died in 335 CE). Pope Sylvester" convinced Constantine to prohibit Jews from living in Jerusalem, and during the Council of Nicea he arranged for the passing of various anti-Semitic legislation.

The holiday "Sylvester, the Post speculates, came to Israel as part of the baggage of European immigrants; Sylvester was celebrated in a number of European, mostly Catholic-dominated, countries.

Meanwhile, ignoring the fact that most Israelis who celebrate "Sylvester" don't know it's origin or who this "Sylvester" was, the rabbis in Jerusalem have banned celebrations on the civil new year's eve.

According to Israel Today, The Chief Rabbinate of Israel has declared that there can be no New Year’s celebration in the Land of Israel. The Rabbinate’s requirements state explicitly that "placing references to Gentile holidays at the end of the secular year is not allowed.” That means no New Year’s Eve for many Israelis.

That ruling, of course, normally would have no impact on the non-religious Jews in Israel who pretty much ignore the rabbis anyway.

The rabbis, in their wisdom - and wanting to punish helonim that plan to celebrate at local hotels and restaurants - ruled that "Any hotel or restaurant offering a New Years Eve celebration will have their Kosher certificate revoked.” Similar warnings were issued to establishments not to display Christmas trees or put up New Year’s decorations.

Israel Today notes that December 31 is a, perhaps "junior" Tisha b'Av.

On January 1 in 1577, Pope Gregory XIII decreed that all Roman Jews, under pain of death, must listen to the compulsory Catholic conversion sermon given in Rome’s synagogues after Friday night services.. The following year (1578), the same pope signed into law a tax forcing Jews to pay for the support of a “House of Conversion” to convert Jews to Christianity and in 1581, Gregory ordered his troops to confiscate all sacred literature from the Roman Jewish community. Thousands of Jews were murdered in the campaign.

The civil calendar the world uses today is known as the "Gregorian" calendar since Gregory XIII revised the earlier Juliann calendar to suit himself. See Does the Pope have the authority to change times and laws?.

For more on "Sylvester" - the pope not the cat - read Do you know what Sylvester is?

Opuscula Are we Hypocrites?

 

OK, I KNOW MANY Jews can SAY the Hebrew words of the daily and Shabat prayers, but I also know that most Jews don't know what they are reading; they don't know the meaning of the words.

I confess that even as a "graduate" of an Israeli ulpan (intensive Hebrew language course) I hardly can be compared to Eliezer Ben-Yehuda or Abba Eban, but I am able to comprehend most of the daily and Shabat prayers.

Because I no longer can make the 1/2-mile trek to make minyan on Shabat I "do" Shabat at the house. It's not the same as being part of the minyan and while I have a humash - several in fact - I miss hearing the Sefer Torah. (I hear a bit of it Mondays and Thursdays so I still manage an aliyah once in 40 days.)

On weekdays, when we rush through our prayers so the youngsters can get to work - being a geezer has its benefits - I sometimes take a paragraph here or there from the prayers to read them slowly enough to understand the words' meaning.

The weekday and Shabat
עמידה/שמונע אשרי (a/k/a amedah/18 or "standing prayer") for the weekday morning prayer contains a paragraph (Hebrew language images from the Hebrew/Hebrew sedur Avotanu)

that translates (according to the Kol Yaakob Hebrew/English sedur as:

Sound the great shofar for our liberty, and raise a banner to gather our exiles, and quickly gather us together from the four corners of the earth into our land.

During the Shabat and Rosh Hodesh musaf service - the one after the Torah is returned to the ark/aron - we read, in part:

that is translated by the Orot Sephardic Shabat Siddur as :

May it be your will, Adonai, our G-d and G-d of our fathers, that you bring us up to our land with joy and establish us within our territory…

OK.

So seven days a week we - Jews - pray to pack our bags and make aliyah. Most people reading this are reading this חו''ל - "hutz l'aretz" or anyplace other than within Israel, this scrivener included.

Keep in mind that the עמידה/שמונע אשרי is the CORE prayer, the central prayer, so much so that it is known as "The Prayer." The prayer was formalized, according to Jewish Liturgy: A Guide to Research: 5.3, sometime after 70 CE (the second Temple's destruction). The Shema also was formalized during the same period, and although it's origins are in the Torah - vs. the Amidah's being primarily rabbinic - in the grand scheme of things, the Shema is the Shema, but the Amidah is "The Prayer."

I count a number of rabbis as acquaintances. Without exception they all reside in the U.S.

I know they can read and comprehend Hebrew - even the Reform and Conservative rabbis - and I wonder how they can justify their continued presence in the States.

I suppose it is because someone has to provide Jewish leadership, but I can't recall any rabbi waving the flag for aliyah. Perhaps that could be perceived as "un-American." (Given the dependence on American Jews' funding of Israeli organizations, it might be counter-productive for Israel if all of us suddenly packed up and moved to Israel.)

I lived in Israel but came back when I realized there was no opportunity for me to influence anything there. A prime minister - Peres - famously told an American woman who challenged his opinion on something to "go back to America"- if she didn't like how he was running things. (Truth in blogging: As a Beganite I am not fan of Shimon Peres or the Labor party.)

I don't want to go to Israel to take up space needed by younger, productive people, although being "closer-than-Skype" to my three grandchildren in Yavne would be nice.

Still, each time I read the weekday and Shabat musaf amidah I wonder if I'm not - just a little bit - hypocritical. I don' want animal sacrifices brought back when the Temple is restored; I think we - Jews - have matured and can replace sacrifice with prayer - not a new idea,

According to an oft-told story, R. Yohanan ben Zakkai once was walking with his disciple R. Joshua near Jerusalem after the destruction of the Temple.
R. Joshua looked at the Temple ruins and said: "Alas for us! The place which atoned for the sins of the people Israel through the ritual of animal sacrifice lies in ruins!"
Then R. Ben Zakkai spoke to him these words of comfort: "Be not grieved, my son. There is another way of gaining atonement even though the Temple is destroyed. We must now gain atonement through deeds of loving kindness." For it is written, "Loving kindness I desire, not sacrifice" (Hosea 6:6)

 

Both bilingual sidurim (siddurs) follow the Syrian (Aleppo) tradition.

Opuscula Kuwaiti journalist Has different view

 

IN AN ISRAEL HAYOM article headed Only Palestinians are 'martyrs', Kuwaiti journalist Abdullah al-Hadlaq writes that I am baffled by the international community's silence in the face of the crimes committed by Palestinian terrorists against the Israeli people. I am equally baffled by the international community's outcry against Israel's legal right to defend itself and its soldiers and against Israel's legitimate right to live and stand strong.

Al-Hadlaq adds Hundreds of thousands of Muslims are killed worldwide every day in wars and internal conflicts -- in Iraq, Syria, Egypt, Yemen, India, Pakistan, Myanmar, the Philippines, China, and Nepal -- but the defective Arab media does not refer to any one of the casualties by name or the title "shahid." Only when a Palestinian is killed, be it in battle or in a car accident or in a fight or when celebratory gunshots are fired at a wedding, does the Arab media applaud him and give him, falsely and deceptively, the name "shahid."

Al-Hadlaq chastises Arab media by asking Why, when Palestinian terrorists and murderers holding knives and rocks are killed by Israeli soldiers, who are forced to open fire in cases of legitimate self-defense, do these debased Arab media outlets twist the truth and call the Palestinian terrorists "shahids"?

The Kuwaiti writer's points are well made, but his focus is far too narrow.

It is not just the Arab or Muslim-controlled media - newspapers, tv, Web-based - that ignore the plight of Arabs and Muslims in, as Al-Hadid writes, Iraq, Syria, Egypt, Yemen, India, Pakistan, Myanmar, the Philippines, China, and Nepal. Syria the world knows about because it has the attention of the Big Powers (U.S. and Russia) and some lesser lights (U.K.) and because Iran is a major player with money, weapons, and personnel. Whenever Israel makes an incursion into Syrian airspace, that too makes news, brings additional condemnation on Israel - how dare it destroy munitions intended to be used against it!

Most Americans would be hard-pressed to know what is going on today in Yemen or Burma or even the Philippines. Admittedly, Americans, living in a huge country with its own problems, most of which emanate from 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, tend to be less knowledgeable of "foreign affairs" than citizens of smaller states and minor islands. Provincial without a doubt.

But when it comes to "Palestine," the artificial state, U.S. media bows to its PR releases and writes headlines starting Israel blamed … in attack on, for killing Palestinian, for; frankly, for failing to die at the hands of a "Palestinian" terrorist with a gun, a knife, or a vehicle.

Admittedly, murders are all too common in the U.S. Black-on-black murders get only fleeting attention - and none of the black superstars (Jackson, Sharpton, et al) make an appearance; likewise latino-on-latino killings fail to make news for more than a day or two. The superstars only come out when a white kills a black or latino. A white cop kills a white person - there are far too many cop killings of all races - where are, who are, the superstars?.

No, Mr. Al-Hadlaq, its not just the Arab media that sees only "Palestinians" worthy of headlines and more than a column inch or two, hardly a filler.

On the other hand, it may be that, like black-on-black and latino-on-latino murders in the U.S., perhaps Muslim-on-Muslim killings in Iraq, Syria, Egypt, Yemen, India, Pakistan, Myanmar, the Philippines, China, and Nepal are too distant and too common the make headlines or to be worth 10 seconds of tv air time…In other world news….

'Course, the "Arab media" Al-Hadlaq criticizes could be picking up their information from the Israeli leftist media who, like their Arab cousins, delight in bashing the only country that gives them any freedom to challenge the government.

 

A Internet search for "journalist Abdullah al-Hadlaq" turns up other Israel-friendly and Arab media-critical articles.

Opuscula Seaport for Gaza On Israel's Budget?

 

UNDER THE HEADLINE Uri Ariel calls to build a seaport in Gaza we read that Agriculture Minister Uri Ariel (Jewish Home) supports allowing Hamas more economic freedom in Gaza, he stated Monday, opining that it is Israel's responsibility in order to ensure stability in the region.

"We want to build a seaport in Gaza, so that they can import and export goods," Ariel stated in an interview with the Knesset Channel. "As of today, they don't have any real products.".

Ariel believes that "Israel must control Gaza, but only militarily. We are responsible for the region and we must permit them to do as we do."

Gaza COULD have had a seaport if:

1. It not repeatedly attacked Israel

2. Its leaders stopped pocketing money donated by nations around the world

Gaza also could have repaired its airport had it met the same conditions just cited.

THERE ARE SEVERAL PROBLEMS with MK Ariel's proposal.

Most critical, how will Israel be able to control what goes into Gaza?

What departs Gaza is less of a concern, but what it imports, based on its past history, often means problems for Israelis.

Even when Israel controls what crosses the Israel-Gaza border Hamas, which controls Gaza, redirects materials intended for post-retaliation reconstruction to its own military use.

In order for Israel to control what goes into Gaza via Ariel's Gaza sea port, Israel would have to either interdict every approaching ship, board it, and inspect its cargo. Alternatively, Israel would have to secure the port under its military and inspect off-loaded cargo at the port before allowing it to exit the port's secure (Israeli-controlled) area. In that case, Israel would have to build rocket-proof houses for its troops and provide some means to safely rotate them in and out of the port.

Beside the fact that Hamas cannot be trusted - it like the PA - has sworn to wipe Israel off the map (but it cannot since it would lose access to medical care, electricity, and a foe to point to when Gaza residents complain). Even if Hamas and the PA were to cancel their vows to destroy Israel and its citizens - Christian, Jew, and Muslim - Israel would be foolish to accept their change of heart at face value, based solely on past history.

ABOUT THE AIRPORT

Rather than a seaport I would prefer that Gaza be allowed - NOT FINANCED BY ISRAEL - to repair its airport to allow smaller commercial jets - e.g. regional jets such as the Embraer 145, the Antonov An-148, or the Tupolev Tu-334, all capable of carrying passengers throughout the region but lacking the capacity to deliver military-weigh loads and not requiring particularly long or thick runways.

In the past, Gaza-based flights primarily went to Cairo, Amman, and - believe it - "Tel Aviv" (Lod) with additional flights to Mecca and other regional destinations.

Had Hamas not destroyed the agricultural infrastructure left by the Israelis when Ariel Sharon forced them out, Gaza could be exporting fruits, vegetables, and flowers to Europe rather than exporting missiles to Israel.

AN ASIDE: According to Ahmed Hayman on the Web site Gaza Internatinal Airport, a/k/a Yasser Arafat International, The war (that closed the airport) was between 2008 and 2009 and the Palestinians destroyed the Asphalt in 2010 to get the stones .

ASKING ISRAEL TO FUND THE PROJECTS

Given all the money Hamas and the PA received and continue to receive from donors around the world - both Muslim and non-Muslim - the masters of Gaza should have sufficient funds to finance a port on their own. The problem for Hamas is two-fold.

One: Many of the donations went to fund weapons to strike Israel.

Two: Much of the funds went - following the grand tradition initiated by the late PLO boss Yasser Arafat - to line Hamas leaders' overseas bank accounts.

Asking Israel to fund a seaport for Gaza would be like sharpening the sword that will be used to behead you. "Foolish" and "stupid" are understatements.

Moreover, Israel has its own economic problems as a semi-welfare state, where, as it happens, non-Jewish citizens enjoy the same benefits as Jewish citizens (of late, sometimes more than Jewish citizens).

Gaza's import/export problems are NOT of Israel's doing. Had the rulers of Gaza - Hamas and the PLO before it - had peaceful relations with Israel - and Egypt - it could have a decent airport and it could have built a decent seaport.

Only a J Streeter or person of a similar anti-Israel mentality would expect Israel to fund a port it could not control what comes ashore.

If Hamas wants a port, let Hamas turn to Egypt; perhaps their fellow Muslims will be willing to pony up some cash; Iran seems to be ready and Turkey apparently wants to be first in line to use the port when it's a reality.

Asking Israel to fund a facility that can - will - be used to being in weapons to kill Israelis is beyond ludicrous. For a member of Israel's knesset to suggest such folly is beyond the realm of belief.

Opuscula Schnorers

 

I DON'T MIND SUPPORTING my congregation. I don't mind supporting the local Jewish food bank. But there is a limit.

Recenty we had two schnorers at the morning minyan.

One, a local gentleman, shows up at our place once-a-week. The other 5 schnoring days he makes the rounds of the other synagogues in the area.

The fellow, most assuredly of Social Security and Medicare age, always comes with his own envelop with his reason du jour written on the outside.

We're not a rich congregation - we only have one doctor and no lawyers. Used car dealers we have. Tee shirt sellers we have. Mechanics we have. But on a regular basis, no people with a lot of "discretionary" funds.

The local guy collects between $20 and $30 on each visit. Multiply that small amount times the number of congregations having daily minyans in the area - by my quick count there are at least 6 within walking distance. (To the best of my knowledge, the gentleman gets around on "shank's mare" - his two feet.)

Today he sought help for his medical condition.

OK, even with Medicare and a decent "no extra charge" Medicare Advantage plan he could get stuck with bills for medications. On the other hand, if he has Medicaid, then the medications should be covered.

At least this fellow is local.

The other schnorer we had came all the way from Israel to New York. From New York he traveled to northern New Jersey, then on the Florida.

Being the winter season, the Israeli could get relatively inexpensive tickets. According to Kayak, it's possible to fly from TLV to JFK, spend more than a month in the U.S., then back to TLV via Paris on Air France for only US$543 (plus taxes). Why anyone would want to travel via Paris is beyond me, but perhaps that's why the flight is "cheap." A KLM/Delta flight via Amsterdam and Boston priced in at US$570.

The NY - south Florida ticket also is inexpensive. The round-trip ticket JFK-MIA via Delta and American is listed for US$127. Cheaper than driving.

So why did the Israeli show up at our minyan?

His story, approved by the local rabbinical board, is that he has to come up with a dowry for his daughter, the great grand-daughter of a rabbi famous in his shtetl. It occurred to me that if his grandfather was such a "gadol," the potential groom would be delighted to have the schnorer's daughter as his wife and never mind the dowry. The groom's new father-in-law could squeeze one more chair at the table for the couple's first year of married life - also traditional for haridim who only have time to study and no time at all to earn a living.

The Israeli also claims to have an autistic child, but Israel has organizations, both government and non-government, to care for such children, so why was he begging here.

The congregation has a procedure to deal with schnorers. The rabbi - if present - or another congregant reads the document provided by the rabbinical board and places an envelop on the bima (ahmud). People put whatever they wish into the envelop. (Remember, the local guy brings his own envelope.) Schnorers are not allowed to buttonhole - stick their hands in a congregant's face to bully a person into giving - congregants.

Because the rabbi was AWOL, the Israeli - in what might be considered typical Israeli fashion - went from congregant to congregant putting out his hand for his due. He ignored the envelop.

I know tzdeka is a mitzvah - the word actually means "justice" - but I can't bring myself to contribute to the dowry of a schnorer's daughter - particularly when the money he spent on airfare could have been the basis for a nice dowry.

Call it "sour grapes." When my daughter was married, we shared the costs of the henna and the wedding in Israel with the groom's family. As far as dowry - the boy got my daughter; that should be enough! Maybe the groom's father and I should have schnorered Bnai Brak or Mea Sharim. Fair is fair.

Opuscula Israel dangerous For U.S. travelers

Under a headline that reads: US government issues updated travel warning on Israel", we learn that (The U.S.) State Department warns citizens of heightened security tensions, clashes in Jerusalem, urges Americans to avoid travel to West Bank and Gaza • Nevertheless, Americans can safely visit Israel for study, work, or tourism purposes, warning assures.

Is the U.S. as safe? Safer? Less safe?

Consider . . .

The ThinkProgress web site provides A Timeline Of Mass Shootings In The US Since Columbine beginning with

April 20, 1999. In the deadliest high school shooting in US history, teenagers Eric Harris and Dylan Kiebold shot up Columbine High School in Littleton, CO. They killed 13 people and wounded 21 others. They killed themselves after the massacre.

And ending with

August 2015. Vester Lee Flanagan II aka Bryce Williams shoots dead two former colleagues from the WDBJ7 news team.

Somehow the liberal site missed the shooting at the LA Jewish Community Center on August 10. 1999.

Since it occurred after the list was published, it also lacks

December 2, 2015. San Bernardino shooting (Syed Rizwan Farook and Tashfeen Malik)

The last year statics are available for Dade County FL (Miami) is 2013, when, according to City-Data.com the county had
* 71 murders
* 96 reported rapes
* 2.326 reported robberies (theft from people)
* 2,562 reported assaults
* 3,993 reported burglaries (theft from properties).

At the time (2013) the county has a population of only 2.617 million.

Forbes. claims the 10 most dangerous places to live in the U.S. are, in descending order:

Detroit
St. Louis
Oakland
Memphis
Birmingham
Atlanta
Baltimore
Stockton
Cleveland
and coming in at number 10, Buffalo.

According to NeighborhoodScout’s Most Dangerous Cities - 2015 list, the most dangerous city, based on crime per population, is Camden NJ, followed by
Chester PA
Detroit MI
Saginaw MI
Oakland CA
Bessemer, AL
Flint, MI
Atlantic City, NJ
Wilmington, DE
and Memphis, TN rounding out the Top Ten, a dubious honor.

Boston, Chicago, Los Angeles and New York failed to make the list. Washing DC comes in at 29. Miami at 46, Philadelphia is 54th, and Houston makes the list an #68.

Perhaps the U.S. State Department should issue a warning to potential visitors to the U.S. Statistically, it appears that a traveler is safer anywhere in Israel that in the U.S.

Opuscula Treat terrorists Before the victims?

 

THE QUESTION IN ISRAEL TODAY IS:

Should triage for injured terrorists and victims be the same for both?

All on-line English-language news sites are reporting that A decision by the ethics office of the Israeli Medical Association (IMA) raised a furor on Wednesday morning, after the body called to first treat the most wounded person at the scene of a terror attack - even if that person is the Arab terrorist who committed the attack.

The point of triage is to get personnel back to duty as quickly as possible. This was proven in North Africa during WW2 when penicillin, in short supply, preference was given in its administration to allied soldiers who contracted VD in local brothels over soldiers with combat injuries; purpose: the soldiers with VD could be rated suitable for duty faster than solders injured in combat.

It seems fair that no one wants to get the enemy "back to duty" as soon as possible. Moreover, specifically in Israel, a terrorist is wounded in an attack on Israeli civilians, receives excellent treatment at an Israeli hospital, is sent to an Israeli prison where education is free and the terrorist gets a salary from the "Palestinian" government (from donations by anti-Jews) and then is released early in a lop-sided prisoner swap.

Against that, the post-war Geneva Convention of 1949 ruled than Only urgent medical reasons will authorize priority in the order of treatment. In 1977 this was expanded to included injured enemy combatants. However, in 1988, the U.S. Defense Department - followed by NATO member countries - ordered medics to follow the utilitarian approach where preference is given for the maximum number of "salvagable" soldiers. See Triage & Equality Baker & Strosberg, 1992

The American Medical Association (AMA), in an article titled Maintaining Medical Neutrality in Conflict Zones cites a case of a medical organization working in rural Uganda that (apparently) refuses to treat "violent enemies" of the community it serves.

"We've worked for years to establish trust among the local people here-trust that's enabled us to dramatically improve the health in these communities. It would be a grave insult if we offered care to their violent enemies, and that would surely result in a huge setback for all our hard work. We should shut down the clinic before the rebels arrive because they're not welcome here." (Bold face emphasis mine.)

In a reddit AskHistorians entry titled How did Napoleon treat wounded enemy soldiers?, Donald F Draper comments that during Napoleon's wars, French surgeons would do whatever they could for anyone, interested in saving lives. This would extend to enemy soldiers if possible. (Underscore emphasis mine.)

The question remains: Does the Geneva Convention require medics to treat terrorists before treating their victims?

According to Military Medical Ethics: Is there a conflict?, slide 29/60 clearly states

Note the slide above does NOT require a medic to give preference to the enemy (terrorist) before giving aid to the terrorist's victims, even when it calls for the medic to "treat fallen combatants as one's own wounded."

The question: Do the laws of war and Geneva Conventions not apply to insurgents or other illegitimate combatants? is answered as follows:

If combatants violate the rules of war or are not wearing proper uniforms or insignia to show the enemy they're legitimate targets while operating behind enemy lines, they don't qualify as prisoners of war under the Geneva Conventions.

International law states that only properly uniformed combatants who violates the rules of war (for example by fighting under a white flag or committing atrocities against civilians or enemy prisoners of war or enemy prisoners of war committing against their own buddies or officers of belligerents in POW camps held by belligerents or civilians or waging destruction on property inside the belligerent territory while escaping back to their own lines) and combatants who are not wearing proper uniforms or insignia to show the enemy they're legitimate targets while operating behind enemy lines don't qualify as prisoners of war.

In other words, the "Palestinian" terrorists, being sans uniform, don't have Geneva Convention protection.

Ted Lapkin asks in the Middle East Forum: Does Human Rights Law Apply to Terrorists?

No terrorist group is a party to the Geneva Conventions. They have not signed, much less ratified, those treaties. Moreover, it is evident that Hamas, Hezbollah, and members of the global Al-Qaeda network spurn both the spirit and the letter of international treaties designed to ameliorate the cruelty of war. Bloody attacks in New York, Jerusalem, Bali, Madrid, and Beslan are testament to the fact that these groups seek to kill civilians rather than to take captives. And when Islamist terrorists do seize hostages, brutality rather than protection appears to be the rule.

Terrorists groups all fail the four-part (Geneva Convention) test. Hijacking civilian airliners and flying them into office buildings is not "in accordance with the laws and customs of war," nor is using human bombs to blow up buses, nor is lining up and executing school teachers.

Michael L. Gross writes in Chapter 4 of The Limits of Impartial Medical Treatment during Armed Conflict

But what happens when some of the soldiers are enemy wounded? May their interests be shunted aside in the name of military necessity? During WWII the US government thought so when it allocated 85 per cent of available penicillin stocks to the US military, 15 per cent to civilian hospitals and 0 per cent to treat POWs.

The claim of enemy wounded to receive medical care is similar to the claim of any moral agent who requires aid from those who can provide it. This claim is not absolute nor does it entail that a rescuer offer aid to others that is equal to what he needs for himself. When rescuing agents are states, a similar condition holds: while states may be called upon to aid those in need, no state may be required to relinquish resources at the expense of its wellbeing.

As a corpsman (medic) in the U.S. military circa 1960 I do not recall anyone suggesting that enemy combatants, and certainly not enemies lacking combatant status (i.e., combatants in civilian apparel) deserved the priority attention over less injured American personnel.

That did not mean uniformed enemies were ignored, only that our priorities were for U.S. and allied wounded.

Consider all the facts. Is it humane to treat a badly wounded terrorists before a wounded victim, knowing the terrorist will be a recidivist? If Israel had the death penalty, would the terrorist face it? Given Israel's budget squeeze, is the cost of a terrorist's incarceration worth it?

I'm not living in Israel so it's not my decision, but I think the Israeli Medical Association (IMA) may have gotten it wrong.

Opuscula "Xmas not for Jews" Said to be hate crime

 

COOPER CITY FL, is a small community west of U.S. 441/SR 7 in Broward County that grew out of agricultural land. For the most part, it - as most of the county - is a tolerant place; live and let live.

Now, in mid-December 2015, two "hate crimes" are being investigated by the local sheriff's department. In one case, there's no question that the crime was prompted by hate. The other? From my perspective, there's no crime at all.

THE HATE CRIME was when some jerk spray painted "F*** Muslims" on the local K-12 Ishmaelite school.

The attack was stupid on many levels.

First, I suspect most residents of the county didn't even know the school existed. Now they do.

Attacking the school might mean local Muslims, with help from outsiders, will retaliate against local churches, synagogues, and schools. Broward County does not need a war of, or against, religions.

XMAS IS NOT FOR JEWS

One Cooper City family, Chabadniks, got a note from an ignoramus who neither knew what a hanukia is nor had more than a kindergarten education (if that).Had the jerk politely knocked on the door and asked, the residents would have been happy to explain that thing on the roof. Whether or not the note writer's holiday is "better" is open to debate. (1 day vs. 8; sufganiyot and latkes vs. artery clogging egg nog and Aunt Tillie's fruit cake; easy choice.)

Several other Jews living in the same Cooper City development found notes stuck in their mailboxes that stated "Xmas is not for the Jews"

Of course "Xmas" it is not for Jews. Hanukah is for the Jews,

In this case, the crimes are a violation of FEDERAL law and the Post Office inspectors and Fibbies (FBI) should be investigating; it's a crime to open a mailbox that is not yours.

There apparently are a few anti-Semites in the neighborhood - someone objected to a Chabad-sized hanukia (Hanukah menorah) on a private residence. One of the people receiving the mail box admonition had a blow-up teddy bear with a dreidel on the front lawn of the family home, making it obvious that the family was Jewish. Equally obvious is that both families - the one with the large hanukia and the one with the bear - are Jewish. Neither residence had anything remotely "Christmas" to encourage the "Xmas is not for Jews" note.

There ARE Jews who put up Christmas trees - "Hanukah bushes" - and other holiday decorations. These are ignorant people who pretend that the holiday is an "American holiday; everybody celebrates it." Granted, the holiday is celebrated - commercially if not religiously - by the majority of Americans who claim Jesus as their god, but it is not an "American" holiday. July 4th is an American holiday. Thanksgiving is an American holiday, as are Veterans' Day and Memorial Day. Christmas, New Years, and Halloween are Christian cum pagan holidays.

The note writer(s) is correct: "Xmas is NOT a Jewish holiday.

Opuscula One more reason Israel isn’t my home

 

THE HEADLINE IN THE TIMES OF ISRAEL reads:
Court denies legal counsel for Jewish suspects in case under gag order

Muslim terrorists from Occupied Israel get representation - and early releases.

Muslim terrorists from Occupied Israel somehow manage to acquire weapons used to maim and murder Israelis, usually civilians and often the very old or the very young. Until recently, the only Israeli civilians allowed to possess firearms after active duty service were IDF officers. The restriction has been very slightly reduced in light of attacks by Muslims from Occupied Israel and, in some cases, Israeli Muslims.

By contrast, an American Jew may own long guns and side arms without restriction (assuming the Jew is not a felon); in most states the American Jew can be licensed to carry a side arm for self defense.

The Israeli rabbinute has a strangle hold on everything that even indirectly touches it - kashrut, birth, marriage, divorce, burial. Even Jews who are heloni (non-observant) are under the oft-times heavy thumb of the rabbinute.

MANY AMERICAN JEWS stay "home" because the Israeli life style can be difficult. It takes some adjusting to go from a spacious home to a postage stamp apartment. (On the other hand, it's possible to buy nice, albeit large, furniture abandoned by new immigrants from North America - the furniture simply can't be squeezed into to an Israeli apartment.)

Israeli politics boggle the mind of anyone accustomed to a two party system with a three-division government in which, at least in theory, all three branches are equal. In Israel, there are more than THIRTY (30) different political parties.

In the U.S., candidates are elected as individuals (most "Party Levers" have disappeared from voting machines.). In Israel people vote by party and don't know until Knesset seats are assigned who will fill them. In theory, the person at the top of a party's "list" may be bumped to the bottom of the list between the time ballots are cast and the final votes tallied. At best, Israel has a pseudo-democracy. (Still, it's better than any of its regional neighbors.)

Want to buy a car in Israel? Jerusalem Institute of Market Studies (JIMS) researcher Keren Harel-Hariri says, "Israel's purchase tax is one of the highest in the world - 83% plus VAT (now 17%). The tax on spare parts is effectively over 100%." She adds that the discounts given to leasing companies and car fleets, compared with ordinary citizens, further distorts pricing, because the Ministry of Finance favors companies with big car fleets.

If you want to DRIVE that vehicle, Bloomberg reports that With Israel's average price for gas at $8.28 per gallon ($2.12/liter), it constitutes 8% of the average Israeli's daily income to buy a gallon of fuel. It could be worse; Israel's prices are LOWER than 10 other countries. (Norway is #1at $9.79/gallon.)

No car? There are taxis for local trips and sherutes (jitneys) for inter-city trips. Inter-city buses are comfortable and trains are great, but just before and just after Shabat, they often are SRO - Standing Room Only.

There ARE some companies in Israel that have a 5-day work week, but schools, government, and many businesses have a 5 1/2 day work week: Sunday through Friday afternoon. In the U.S., if a barber wants to cut hair 7 days a week, the barber is free to do so; the barber's competition might not like it, but it's the barber's choice. Likewise grocers. Most Israeli communities force barbers and grocers to close on Shabat; but they ALSO force closure mid-week. Sell a tomato on Wednesday afternoon in Haifa and face a stiff fine.

Need a Social Security card or passport. Make an appointment with the consulate in the capital; the embassy in Tel Aviv might not accommodate your requirement. It's easier to make an appointment at an Israeli consulate in the U.S.

If you are of military age you will need a permit from the IDF to travel outside the country. It's usually granted, but it's more paperwork for the traveler. Your children will need their own Israeli passports to exit the country. Contrary to popular opinion, going through Lod (a/k/a Ben Gurion) International Airport is no different than any other international airport through which I've passed, both in the U.S. and Europe.

How do I know all this?

I lived, studied, and worked in Israel for four years; my daughter and grandchildren live there now.

Given the way the Israeli government operates - denying Jews their rights under the law, limiting a citizen's right of self defense - I think I'm better off politically and legally in the U.S.; at least here I can defend my rights.

America's not perfect, but it suits me better,

Opuscula Black Muslims in US Don't know history

 

THERE IS, or at least was, a video titled Islamberg, NY – Quiet Hamlet or Terror Training Camp? that purports to show Muslim women learning (para-)military tasks.

All of the women appearing in the video are black.

They sound like Americans or perhaps Canadians.

Don't they know their own history?

The slave trade that brought blacks to America in the 17th and 18th centuries worked like this:

Blacks captured blacks from other tribes.

The captured blacks were sold to Arab Muslims; Muslims who, to this day, consider dark skin the mark of an inferior person.

The Muslims sold the blacks to, primarily, Europeans who put the blacks in inhumane conditions on board ships bound for Europe and the New World.

The blacks arriving in North America were sold to whites. In the American South, their primary work was in the fields. Despite the Simon Legree slave master image*, logic shows that most slaves were not ill treated; they were, after all, valuable property. Some slaves who were mistreated were victims of their black bosses wanting to exercise their power over weaker people - that, unfortunately, is human nature.

That is NOT to claim that all slaves were treated like family or that no Jews were involved in slave trading or slave ownership, just as it would e a lie to state that all Jews follow Torah.

Visit North Africa today and witness how blacks are treated by Arabs.

Count how many blacks are Muslims in Europe compared to Arabs.

Certainly there ARE Muslims who are black, consider Wilāyat Gharb Ifrīqīyyah (a/k/a Boko Haram) in Nigeria, Chad, Niger, and northern Cameroon and Ḥarakat ash-Shabāb al-Mujāhidīn (a/k/a Al-Shabaab) controls large parts of central and southern Somalia and operates in Uganda.

What entices a black in North America to join Islamic terrorists deserves a study. What ideology draws blacks to it while at the same time degrading blacks? A video at http://dailyrollcall.com/2015/05/21/two-of-many-islamberg-in-hancock-ny-and-islamville-in-dover-tn-why-do-we-allow-them-to-exist/ suggests many black Muslims in the U.S. - male and female - are graduates of the penal system, and that many find their way to one of the 36 Islamist communities in the U.S .

עינים להם ולא יראו

 

* Abolitionist Harriet Elisabeth Beecher Stowe authored a work of fiction titled Uncle Tom's Cabin; or, Life Among the Lowly that had as a lead character Simon Legree, a fictional sadistic slave owner who tormented his slaves with assistance from other slaves.

There is no evidence that Ms. Stowe ever saw slaves in the American south.

Opuscula Attack on Paris Fault of the Jews

 

WHEN SOMETHING BAD HAPPENS, BLAME THE JEWS.

The so-called "Palestinians" blame Israel and the Jews for all their woes, and would be willing to make nice if only Israel would disappear.

Even the Swedes who once helped save Jews from the Germans blame everything on the Jews and Israel.

The latest event for which Jews and Israel is to blame is the Paris massacre of November 2015. Even the attacks on Charlie Hebdo and it's mostly Jewish staff, and the kosher market in January 2015 happened because Israel is mistreating the Palestinians who come into Israel to murder by bomb, knife, gun, and car any convenient Jew, Israeli or not.

The Jewish-Palestinian issue is similar to the White-Black issue in the U.S.

It a black guy shoots another black guy, maybe it rates a one or two sentence sound bite on the local tv news. If a black guy shoots a white guy, the talking heads may give it three or four sentences. But if a white guy - especially a white cop - shoots a black guy, everyone gets involved from the president to the professional agitators such as Jessie Jackson and Al Sharpton. The talking heads talk and talk and talk about the issue, and the white guy ALWAYS is 100% at fault. - Even some blacks admit the discrepancy.

http://www.gocomics.com/candorville/2015/11/16

(Read the LA Times article Why the police killing of this unarmed white man has not led to national outcry for a background on the cartoon.)

According to one report, the Israeli Mossad was behind the attacks.

Anka mayor Melih Gokcek said Israeli intelligence planned the attacks in retaliation for France recently expressing support for Palestinian statehood, according to Today’s Zaman, an English-language Turkish publication, citing the Andalou news agency.

At a political event Sunday, Gokcek said it “is certain that Mossad is behind these kinds of incidents. Mossad enflames Islamophobia by causing such incidents.”

Opuscula Not the American way

 

IT'S FRUSTATING reading the news day after day after day.

• Palestinian attacks Israeli Jew.
• Palestinian stabs Jew.
• Palestinian shoots Jews.
• Palestinian drives car into crowd of Jews.

Israeli Jews, for the most part, have no defense.

The police don't arrive in time - Israel's police force is undermanned.

The army and border police don’t arrive on time.

When a Jew defends himself and his family, the government arrests the Jew.

In the U.S., a person attacked has the right to fight back - except, of course, in New York City where only the criminals have guns.

Admittedly, there are far too many cases of a white cop killing a black suspect, but often the suspect fights back with deadly force or black agitators hit the streets and burn the neighborhood - never mind that its their OWN neighborhood.

More and more states have concealed carry laws. Some states now have or are considered open carry laws. The carry laws according to pro-gun organizations substantially cut down on attacks.

While the death penalty may not be a deterrent to capital crimes, an armed citizenry is a proven deterrent. Would you attack a person next to you if you thought that person could defend himself - and maim or kill you?

I am NOT suggesting a return to the "wild west" and revisiting the OK Corral, and I certainly am opposed to fully-automatic weapons of any type or caliber, but I do believe people have the right to defend themselves and the governments - in particular the U.S. and Israel, should support that right.

In Israel, the only people allowed to own a handgun are former IDF officers - enlisted personnel apparently can't be trusted to have a weapon once they complete their time in the IDF. A far cry from the yeshuv era when settlers, mostly in kibbutzim, were armed and defended their homes.

Israel inherited it's "only the terrorists have weapons" mentality from the Brits. In England a person might - might - be allowed to own a long gun, a smooth bore shotgun. Until recently cops had to have special permission to carry a firearm. With the Islamist take-over of the island, things will - just - change or the English will - like the Israelis - pay the price of severe gun control. That's a situation even the war with the Irish couldn't change.

Granted, there ARE people who should NOT have a firearm - long gun or handgun -but for the most part people who are trained to use firearms in self defense should be allowed to own firearms - at least one per adult family member.

Again, this scrivener sees NO reason for any gun to have a 15-round magazine (clip) and certainly no weapons should be "full auto." I understand that unless a person is highly proficient with their weapon, it is unlikely to instantly stop an attack; there are only a few locations on the body that can "instantly" kill an attacker, and for that reason a number of bullets are needed. Most wheel guns (revolvers) hold between 5 and 7 rounds (bullets). In a self defense situation it seems to me that would be sufficient. (I'm depending on it.)

Israelis must be allowed weapons for self defense. Knowing the citizenry is armed and prepared to defend itself will reduce attacks (with the exception of Islamists determined to go to the 70 virgins).

Call me "Mister" Trading on Spouse's title

 

AN INTERESTING THING occurred to me today.

In some circles, a rabbi's wife is given the honorific of "rebbitzin."

So what do you call

• A doctor's wife? Doctorette?
• A lawyer's wife? Lawyerette?
• A realtor's wife? Realette?

Yes, I KNOW "realtor" is supposed to be initial cap - Realtor - but then why not every other occupation?

WHAT IF THE WIFE IS the doctor, lawyer, realtor? What do you call the male spouse of a lawyer? Lawboy?

Is there a name for a preacher's spouse? I can't recall ever hearing anything unique.

Now, with non-traditional Jewish organizations, a woman can be a rabbi and her husband - or, I suppose same sex "significant other" - is called ?

It seems to me the most sensible thing is to drop the whole "rebbitzin" and just call the spouse by the surname preceded by Mister or Misses.

As a matter of propriety, a woman married to Yankel Cohen should be addressed as "Mrs. Yankel Cohen" not as "Mrs. Sadie Cohen"; the latter indicates the lady is a widow. ("Ms." is an option, of course.)

For my money, let's stop trying to even suggest the spouse has the same credentials as the rabbi, doctor, lawyer, preacher, or whatever.

My spouse is an educator and was a realtor. I most assuredly am NOT an educator nor was I ever a realtor. Should someone refer to me as "Ed" or "Real?"

Just because a man or woman is married to a doctor, does that mean the spouse automatically has medical knowledge (assuming the spouse is not also a doctor):

Same with a lawyer; anyone wish to be defended before the bar by a non-lawyer spouse of a lawyer?

If I have a question revolving around why Rabbi Yehudah is credited with "Happy is the person whose work is the Torah" rather than Rabbi Yohanon - who is credited in the tractate Blessings - I'll ask a rabbi or a talmud hakham. True, there are a few rabbis' wives (and children as well) who might be able to provide an answer, but they hardly would be in a majority.

I am a geezer and I have been known to express displeasure when someone with whom I have no acquaintenance, and sans invitation, calls me by my given name. Admittedly I am a curmudgeon - and proud of it. I grew up in slightly "more civilized" times (if you can consider post-WW II era "civilized" at all.

Opuscula Europe to label Israeli products

 

EUROPEAN GOVERNMENTS WANT TO LABEL all products from Israel. (Maybe they'd like to label Israeli products with a yellow star.)

That could turn out to be good for Israel.

Back in 1947, when it was the soon-to-be Nation of Israel vs. The Hordes of Arabs waiting to invade the nascent nation once the English evacuated, the world (mostly) stood by Israel as the underdog David to the Arab's Goliath.

Having successfully fended oft repeated attacks by its neighbors, and in the process regaining land promised Israel by the English and UN, the world started to view the adversaries in a reverse light - millions of Arabs now were the David to a few thousand Jewish Goliaths.

Now, Israel once again is David, but this time the Goliath is the European Union.

IF THE PRO-ARAB SYMPATHIZERS want to label all products from Israel with a design that even the most illiterate consumer can recognize as Made in Israel then I think Israel should aid and abet in this effort.

All products from Israel should carry an image of the Israeli flag someplace on the product or product's container.

Fruits and vegetables from Israel should carry - as do products imported into the U.S. from Honduras, Mexico, Guatemala, and other "South of the Border" suppliers - a sticker showing the country of origin.

Most packaged products list the country of origin on the packaging - box or bottle. Sometimes it is very small print, but the nation of origin is supposed to be on the product.

Even clothing identifies the country of origin.

For most Americans, electing to buy one nation's products over another comes down not to politics but to quality and price.

That's not to suggest that for some consumers politics is not absent in their purchase choice; there are those who simply won't purchase a Blue and White product because they accept as fact the fallacies proclaimed by the BDSers. Never having BEEN to Israel and never being willing to listen to anyone other than the BDSers, they won't buy any Israeli product even, as was Soda Stream, it was largely manufactured by "Palestinians."

For these people, many of whom are Jews, Israel can do no right.

ON THE OTHER HAND, there are people who will, given the opportunity and a competitive price and quality, buy Israeli products as quickly as they would buy a product from almost anyplace else.

While I personally prefer to Buy American, if the American product is inferior or substantially (>10%) more expensive than an import, I'll buy the import. If there is no American product, e.g., Minhag Morocco sidurim and machzorim, I'll buy from whatever country makes what I want; in this case, that country is Israel (although to be fair, Israeli bookbinding is terrible).

As a Jew I occasionally go out of my way to "Buy Blue and White," but usually if I (a) need/want the product and (b) if the product is well made.

The world is a place of many different languages. To avoid trying to have "Product of Israel" labels created in 70 languages, Israeli products should bear a universal symbol of the Jewish state - a small flag stuck on, imprinted on, or sown on to every product exported from Israel.

Let EVERYONE know the product is Israeli - and at the same time, make certain Israel's quality assurance/quality control is A Number 1; no shoddy products to denigrate Israel's name. The "Made in Israel" identifier also must be an identifier of quality.

Opuscula Airline ranker Partner with BDS?

 

ISRAEL HAS 15 air carriers. Most are domestic, in-country air carriers, and a few others are cargo carriers or specialized - e.g., crop dusting or helicopter tour companies.

There are at least 3 scheduled international airlines, alphabetically

* Arkia Israel Airlines

* El Al

* Israir

NONE of the Israeli international carriers is listed on the UK-based Skytrax list of "Top 100 Airlines."

North Korea's Air Koryo is ranked last (#150) in the rating company's survey - it, like Arkia, El Al, and Israir, failed to make even the "Top 100" list.

ON THE OTHER HAND, many Arab airlines made the list. There probably will be no argument that at least two of the list leaders

* Qatar Airways (1)
* Turkish Airlines (4)
* Emirates (5)
* Etihad Airways (6)

treat their passengers as passengers once expected to be treated.

Still, there ARE some Arab airlines that, like their Israeli counterparts failed to make the "Top 100" list. Missing are EgyptAir, Royal Air Maroc, and Royal Jordanian Airlines.

According to the The Star article about North Korea's airline, the "SkyTrax ratings are focused on service and not safety."

I have flown on several of the "Top 100" airlines as well as El Al. While I might not rank El Al as my favorite carrier - it's over priced and it no longer offers convenient flights from South Florida - it most assuredly would make my personal Top 20 list. (British Midland, thankfully no longer a scheduled carrier, would compete with North Korea's Air Koryo for the "World's Worst" carrier. I'm ready to explain why my Midland's flights were so bad.)

My #2 son who frequently travels to the far corners of the world, likes Lufthansa (#12 on Skytrax' list) and the Spouse favors Iberia (#56). Iberia is OK for me, but the jaunt from the arrival gate to the departure gate in Madrid always is impossibly long. (My best U.S.-Israel flight was on KLM (#28) via Amsterdam's Schiphol airport.) Because of France's De Gaulle airport I try to avoid Air France (#15) and any flights that require a change of planes at that airport. Air France service is, in my opinion, nothing to write home about.

I'm hardly a frequent flyer, but I have been flying commercial for a number of years; from tail draggers (e.g., DC-3) with real "box" lunches to Lockheed Super Constellations and L-1011s, now Boeing and Airbus jumbos. I'm not sure "bigger is better."

I have flown on the no-longer-in-the-air Eastern, National, Pan American, and TWA, as well as several others that were "absorbed" by still-flying airlines (Northwest (Orient) merged with Delta and US Airways merged with American). I've had bad experiences with several of Skytrax' "Top 100": Alitalia (74), American (79), Delta (45), and United (60). El Al compares favorably with all of the "Top 100" on which I have hours in the air - and waiting on the ground. I have flown multiple times on each of the currently flying airlines.

Although I realize some major mid-east carriers, particularly those of Israel's neighbors Egypt and Jordan, are absent from Skytrax' "Top 100", I still find it hard to accept that El Al and Arkia failed to make the list. No one ever has spilled coffee on me on El Al (it happened to another passenger on a KLM flight), no one gave my meal - with my name clearly marked on the box - to another passenger (British Midland). El Al never lost my luggage, unlike Delta and US Air regularly did when I was a consultant. El Al never left me stranded short of my destination and sent me on my way in an over-crowded jitney as United did.

Lod, El Al's home base - much improved since my first El Al flight in 1975 - is an easy to navigate airport - with free WiFi; I think better than Madrid, Rome, London, and far, far better than Paris .

From this passenger's limited in-flight experience, I think El Al should have made the "Top 100" list; that it didn't suggests something is rotten - not in Denmark but at Skytrax' UK headquarters.

Opuscula Poor Europe Inundated By Refugees

 

SINCE WRITING the following entry. the Times of Israel published an article headlined Egypt billionaire offers to buy island for migrants. The ToI article announces a proposal by Egyptian Naguib Sawiris to buy an island from Greece of Italy to settle refugees from civil warfare. His plan calls for the refugees to - as did the Jews in Israel - build their own cities and infrastructure, starting with temporary housing. If Greece (badly in need of money) and Italy decline to sell an unpopulated island, perhaps Sawiris could convince Saudi Arabia to set aside some empty land for the project. (Egypt has enough problems with terrorists to preclude building in the Sinai.) Certainly worth the world's consideration.

THANKS TO OBAMA'S "ARAB SPRING" that destabilized Muslim-dominated countries across Africa and Asia, Europe has been invaded by thousands of Muslims trying to escape civil warfare in their countries.

Now Europeans don't know what to do with the refugees..

There is a simple answer to the refugee crisis.

SEND THE REFUGEES

To ANY of the TWENTY-TWO (22) Arab League member states

To ANY of the FOURTY-SEVEN (47) Muslim dominated countries (The number includes the 22 Arab countries).

Arabs are invading Europe from across Africa and parts of Asia; notably Libya and Syria, but other Muslim-dominated countries as well.

Prior to Obama's "Arab Spring," these countries were controlled by iron-fisted dictators: Gaddafi in Libya and al-Assad in Syria. (Meanwhile, Obama kowtows to Russia's Putin as he rapes the Ukraine.)

Many of the Arab counties are hardly populated. Saudi Arabia, for example, has a population density of 12.72 per square KILOMETER and is ranked Number 211 of 242 nations - there are only 31 nations with a LOWER population density according to Index Mundi. Turkey has 104.16 per square kilometer.

By comparison, the European countries most impacted by the influx of Arab refugees are

France (102.92)

Germany (226.87)

Italy (204.69)

i
United Kingdom (261.66)

Not only are the most-desired European nations already densely populated (in comparison with many Muslim-dominated countries), they are finding the refugees taking over their countries and demanding that their hosts conform to the refugees' demands, e.g., sharia (religious) law not only for their fellow refugees but the native population as well.

Even Arabs escaping their own countries murder non-Muslim refugees in transit, according to the BBC.

Admittedly not all refugees will try to take over their host countries, but given the Moslems' history of large families with multiple wives, they soon will be the majority population and, in gaining the demogrfaphic upper hand, will change the political nature of the country.

The U.S. experienced something similar with the Cuban invasion of South Florida. To survive in Dade County residents are almost forced to speak Spanish; many merchants in Miami have no staff with a command of English. There ARE Cubans who have "mainstreamed" into U.S. society, but a very large number established Cuba on America's shores..Where major stores once had signs declaring "Si Habla Espanol" (Spanish spoken here) now a few merchants advertise "We speak English.")

It will offend liberal sensibilities, but the best thing for BOTH Europe and the refugees is to send them to Muslim-dominated countries.

For the refugees, that would put them with their Muslim fellows so the cultures and mentality would be the same or similar while removing the threat to Europeans that their culture and mentality will be redefined to Islamic standards.

 

An additional web site for population density by country is https://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_population_density

Opuscula Conversion wars: Rabbis vs. Rabbis

 

Israel's Chief Rabbinute is taking up the challenge of Israel's Zionist Rabbinute - and to some extent, traditional rabbis outside of Israel.

The alleged bone of contention: conversions.

It's a big business and currently the only official game in town is the Chief Rabbinates'.

WHAT'S THE PROBLEM?

The Chief Rabbinute has distanced itself far away from the conversion processes that go back to the most notable converts: Abraham Avinu and Ruth.

The Chief Rabbinute is a long way from what Moses ben Maimon (Maimonides or Rambam) set forth. As far as the Rambam was concerned, the requirements a potential convert had to meet were simple:

Study and perform some "minor" mitzvot and agree to expand both study and performance of additional mitzvot. He never demanded that a convert know, and practice, all the mitzvot.

Pretty much what Shamai's counterpart told a potential convert eons before Rambam.

The Chief Rabbinute has made a business of conversions with year-long mills (for a fee) and a promise by the convert that he or she never will be a backslider, never will fail to perform all the relevant mitzvoth.

Because it can, the Chief Rabbinute will revoke a convert's conversion if it feels the convert is not living up to the Chief Rabbinuite's standards - never mind if the convert has married and given birth to children being raised as Jews.. (It is unfortunate, but this has happened in Israel.)

The Israeli Chief Rabbinute has usurped the authority of rabbis outside of Israel, anointing only a select few with the authority to convert people, subject to review by the Chief Rabbinute, of course. (One of the anointed ones recently was involved in a "peeking into the mikveh" as female converts immersed.)

The Chief Rabbinute, because it controls all religious life for Jews in Israel, has a vested interest in maintaining control of the conversion process. Any procedure lacking the Chief Rabbinute's seal of approval is not acceptable by the religious establishment. (Israel's Interior Ministry does not necessarily abide by the Chief Rabbinute's opinions.)

Conservative conversions are not acceptable - period.

Reform conversions certainly are not acceptable. (FromWikipedia, Reform Jewish Views: Reform Judaism rejects the concept that any rules or rituals should be considered necessary for conversion to Judaism. In the late 19th century, the Central Conference of American Rabbis, the official body of American Reform rabbis, formally resolved to permit the admission of converts "without any initiatory rite, ceremony, or observance whatsoever." (CCAR Yearbook 3 (1893), 73–95; American Reform Responsa (ARR), no. 68, at 236–237.)

Even "orthodox" conversions are not acceptable unless they are performed by an anointed rabbi as Rosh Bet Din (head of the three person conversion committee).

Enter the Religious Zionist Rabbinute.

I'm not certain how the Religious Zionist Rabbinute would change what the Chief Rabbinute does.

I understand the Religious Zionist Rabbinute wants to make things easier for a person who wants to convert, but nowhere on the WWW did I find what the Religious Zionist Rabbinute requires. I read that it, like the Chief Rabbinute, requires certain studies in its institutes - how long, emphasis, and cost never are mentioned.

There was a law proposed - but prevented from being presented to the full Knesset (Israeli parliament) - that would have put conversions into the hands of local rabbis. Admittedly this could have resulted in people "shopping" for a lenient rabbi, one who demanded only what Rambam demanded along with circumcision for males and the mikveh for all.

The Religious Zionist's concern, they claim, is to formally convert young people who have been educated in Israeli schools - some in Israeli religious schools - and who are in their daily lives in all respects Jews, albeit for some non-observant Jews, as are many "accident-of-birth" Jews in Israel.

The reasoning is that unless these non-Jewish "Jews" are converted, they will marry "real" Jews and no one will know if a child's mother is the daughter of a Jewish woman. The issue is raised due to immigration by "Russian" Jews and non-"orthodox" Jews from around the globe, primarily the U.S>, Canada, U.K., Australia, and Germany, the latter which gave us both Reform and Conservative movements.

Perhaps the answer is for the Chief Rabbinute to develop a CLEP-like test to determine how much a prospective convert already knows about Judaism before sentencing the prospect to undergo lessons about subjects in which he (or she) already is proficient.

Just a thought.

Opuscula Force feeding prisoners Violates human rights

 

HOW DARE THE ISRAELI OPPRESSORS force feed Palestinian prisoners illegally held in Israeli prisons for simply trying - and often succeeding - to kill Israeli men, women, and children.

The nerve!

Damned if they do and damned if they don't - as Solomon allegedly said, there is nothing new under the sun, and for the Israelis this truth marches on.

OK, I know that suicide is prohibited under JEWISH law, but the hunger strikers are not Jews.

I know we (Jews) are obliged to preserve life, but the people refusing to eat are in prison because they attacked Jews. The Talmud Bavil tells us if a person comes to kill you, kill him first (Berakoth 58a based on Shemot 22 1).

While these people came to kill Jews - along with the occasional non-Jew - since they are incarcerated - having been tried and convicted - Israel cannot, or at least should not - kill the prisoners.

ON THE OTHER HAND, Israel need not force feed the prisoners whose sole intent is to be released from gaol so they can prove recidivism reigns and they can again attack Israeli men, women, and children, all the while gaining honors and income from their masters in the PA (an organization that, while existing only on the charity of others, will not pay its debts but it can pay stipends to terrorists in Israeli jails and pensions to survivors of terrorists killed in the act).

I truly am surprised that a hew and cry has not (yet) arisen from the ranks of the liberal, terrorist sympathizers of the world or from the ranks of the sponsors of terrorism, e.g., Iran, Saudia, complaining that the (once) Zionists are forcing food down the prisoners' throats or nutrition into their veins.

I hardly am a liberal, but here I agree: FORCE FEEDING PRISIONERS IS WRONG AND INHUMAN. If they want to die of hunger, let them. It is an almost painless way to commit suicide. Not as fast as a suicide/murder bomb favored by many Islamic terrorists, and only the striker dies by this method.

WHERE ARE THE LEFTISTS, THE LIBERALS, THE BLEEDING HEARTS? Why aren't they protesting the Israelis inhumane treatment of Palestinian terrorists who are being force fed, whose civil and human rights are being so blatantly violated by their Israeli jailers.

Let them die

It is their privilege and their right.

Opuscula Obama vs. victims Of Muslim terrorists

 

U.S. protects Iran, PA
Despite court decisions

 

Two seemingly unrelated articles caught my attention this morning.

The first, a link from the Dry Bones cartoon for Thursday, August 06, 2015, led me to an AP story titled U.S. Likely to Intervene in Palestinian Terror Case.

The second, initially seen on Israel HaYom, appears on the Business Insider web site under the heading Victims of Iran-backed attacks who won $1.5 billion in court are suing the US to keep sanctions in place.

The first item, linked from the Dry Bones editorial cartoon, tells readers that The U.S. government is moving closer to intervening in a high-stakes civil case over deadly Palestinian terror attacks as officials met Tuesday with victims' families to discuss concerns over a jury verdict worth hundreds of millions of dollars.. Pretty strong words for the AP; "deadly Palestinian terror attacks."

The AP copy continues: At issue is $218.5 million in damages awarded by a New York jury in February for attacks that killed 33 people and wounded hundreds more — a penalty that lawyers say would be automatically tripled under the U.S. Anti-Terrorism Act, but that the State Department fears could weaken the stability of the Palestinian government.

The victims, understanding that the PA only has ready cash to pay salaries to jailed terrorists, stipends to dead terrorists' survivors, and monuments honoring the terrorists' "heroism," are willing to take payments over time. (Based on the PA's payments for water and electricity provided by Israel, even token payments to the terrorists' victims seems unlikely.)

Like the first item, the second is a case of the federal government protecting a terror sponsor; this time, Iran.

The Reuters' story begins NEW YORK (Reuters) - Twenty U.S. citizens who won more than $1.5 billion in court judgments against Iran for its support of militant attacks sued the U.S. government on Wednesday to try and prevent it from lifting sanctions on Tehran under an international nuclear deal.

The lawsuit in federal court in New York said that unfreezing Iranian funds would rob the victims of the attacks in Israel and the Gaza Strip of “their last remaining opportunity to pressure Iran to satisfy their judgments."

It has been suggested that the victims of PA-sponsored attacks get their money from the funds the U.S. government provides the PA on a continuing basis (ignoring what the PA does with the money).

The same might be applied to Iran's frozen funds; take out the $1.5 billion awarded by the courts and distribute it to the victims of Iran-sponsored terrorism before lifting sanctions on Iran.

Will either suggestion win Obama's approval?

Does it snow in Key West?

Opuscula What an Opportunity

 

Jordan has filed a complaint with the UN's International Civil Aviation Organization.

Jordanian officials have said the operations at an expanded Timna airport will affect takeoffs and landings at Aqaba’s airport.

Currently,

Israel has an airport near Eilat.

Jordan has an airport near Aqaba.

There are only 4 air miles (6 km) between the two ports. The distance by sea between the Port of Eilat and the Port of Aqaba is 10 nautical miles (roughly 11.5 statute miles).

The two ports are so close together that most area maps put one almost on top of the other.

BY COMPARISON, the distance between

JFK and LaGuardia is about 12 miles (19 km); shuttle services connect the two airports

O'Hare and Midway is 31 miles (50 km); the two are connected by local rail

Fort Lauderdale/Hollywood and Miami is 27 miles (48km)

LAX and John Wayne is 40 miles (64 km); shuttle service connects the two airports

. Timna's airport is north of Eilat.

The King Hussein International Airport is north of Aqaba..

The Timna airport, in place but to be expanded to accommodate wide-body planes, is 6.22 miles (10 km) from Jordan's King Hussein International.

Jordan is understandably concerned but the Timna Ramon airport was in place for some time sans problems.

Israel is planning to spend NIS 1.95 billion, and even though that's Israeli shekels, that still is a lot of money, especially for a country that is having budget problems.

It would seem reasonable - and that may be the main problem - that whichever airport now serves wide-body aircraft should be the - dare I write it? - a REGIONAL airport for both Israel and Jordan (or Jordan and Israel).

Since both Timna and King Hussein are international airports - that is, they have customs, passport checks, etc. already in place - it would seem logical that instead of enhancing the existing Timna airport to build a light rail from airport to airport.

Timna still would serve domestic flights and "narrow-body" jets from Europe, but any wide-biddy aircraft would use King Hussein.

Israel and Jordan could split revenue based on passenger destination and origination. Israel and Jordon could jointly staff Customs and passport checks - incoming passenger would go to the left for Jordan and to the right for Israel (or vice versa).

The inter-airport shuttle (light rail) could originate and terminate in secure areas of the terminals, assuring that Israelis don't wander around Jordan with out the proper papers and Jordanians don't tour Israel sans authorizing documentation.

Even if Israel paid for the tracks between the two terminals, it still probably would cost less than the estimated cost for the Timna expansion.

An aside: There already is scheduled airline service between Lod (TLV) and Amman (AMM).

It seems this would be a win-win for both countries.

But it's the Middle East, so . . .

Opuscula Capital punishment as Answer to recidivism

 

THERE ARE THOSE WHO contend that the death penalty serves no purpose.

It doesn't prevent others from committing heinous crimes - murder, rape, mutilation - and there is some evidence to support this theory.

The death penalty, however, DOES effectively prevent recidivism.

Ahh, the anti-capital punishment people respond, most of murderers were one-time killers; they won't do it again.

They also will remind us that there have been far too many innocent people on death row, many thankfully found innocent before their execution. No argument there.

JEWISH LAW - BIBLICAL LAW - requires two witnesses to a capital crime and at least one of those witnesses must warn the person about to commit a murder of the consequences.

It's a good law and one that seems to very well protect against sending an innocent person to the executioner.

Unfortunately, we find that many of the people charged with murder, particularly terrorists, when released return to their pre-arrest ways; they are repeat offenders.

The U.S, learned the lesson - well, perhaps it failed to learn the lesson - when it released terrorists captured in Afghanistan and Iraq. Israel, which repeatedly caves to terrorist pressure to "trade" hundreds of jailed terrorists for one or two Israelis - frequently already dead Israelis - has too much experience with recidivistic killers.

In Israel, a Member of Knesset (parliament) tried to propose a bill that would make capital punishment part of Israeli law. (Israel is a democracy and is home to people of many different beliefs, not all based on the Bible.) In all its modern history there has only been one court-sanctioned execution, that of Adolf Eichmann.

The country's prime minister sent the proposal to committee to prevent the entire parliament from debating the bill and possibly failing to vote his way. (Meanwhile fanatics continue to murder civilians - infants to the elderly - knowing they will sit in an Israeli jail, getting their masters degrees before being traded back to do it all again.)

The only people who are guaranteed NOT to be recidivists are the suicide murders who succeed in their plans.

While I agree with the anti-capital punishment folks that

a) Some innocent people have been executed; thanks to DNA this potential execution of an innocent is greatly reduced.

b) That many murders were committed in the heat of passion (which usually precludes murder in the first degree for which the death penalty is an option) and, therefore, the murderer probably won't commit another murder in another "fit of passion.

The above does NOT apply to rapists who typically have a history of rape and sexual perversion on unwilling victims.

c) Execution is not a deterrent; if it was there would be no more murders and rapes.

HOWEVER, execution does prevent recidivism. Murderers will not murder others; rapists will never rape another woman or molest another child.

Limit the death penalty. It's less expensive to incarcerate a a person for life-and-a-day than it is to execute the person, given the cost of automatic appeals, etc. (I have no objection to automatic appeals.)

There is a place for the death penalty, and there is a reason for the death penalty.

Persons convicted of murder as a means to terrorize the population should be the prime candidates for the executioner.