Opuscula nazis taunt Jews on Rosh HaShana In German city

A DRY BONES CARTOON (below) sent me scouring the WWW for confirmation that national socialism is alive and well in parts of Germany.

On Rosh HaShana, neo-nazis marched through the German city of Dortmund, waving flags of the nazi Third Reich, chanting "Palestine help us, Israel still exists" and "Israel no more" (Dry Bones for 10/3/2019 @ http://tinyurl.com/y4hw8x7y )

An aside I cannot bring myself to capitalize the “n” in nazi. These people and their hate-laden philosophy are beneath contempt.

UNFORTUNATELY, the Dry Bones cartoon was politically accurate.
I surfed the web and found at least five articles on the presence of nazis in Germany.

   German Neo-nazi Party Demands Addresses of All Jews in Dortmund (http://tinyurl.com/y5utsycs)
   Neo-nazi protestors in Germany call for Palestinian help against Israel (http://tinyurl.com/y3ed75yq)

   Neo-nazis wave Palestinian flags in protest against Israel (http://tinyurl.com/y33cqugb)

   Hundreds of neo-nazis chant anti-Semitic slogans in Dortmund, Germany (http://tinyurl.com/yyo8d9kq)

   A Neo-nazi’s Political Rise Exposes a German City’s Ethnic Tensions (http://tinyurl.com/y2r637ae)

Most of the publications failed to make the Rosh HaShana connection.

Sadly, a resurgence of national socialism is not limited to Germany.

In other countries, notably France, anti-Semitism is coupled with xenophobia brought about by the Muslim “refugee” influx and sharia law trumping French law.

On a less physically threatening level, xenophobia — the fear of anything “different” — is behind the recent spate of anti-shechitah laws (that also generally apply to observant Muslim slaughter practices).¹

The Dortmund Germany exhibition of stupidity and hate is the first time this scrivener has heard about a call for “help from the ‘Palestinians’.” The so-called “Palestinians” cannot even help each other (PLO-controlled areas vs. Hamas/Islamic Brotherhood in Gaza), not can it pay it’s bills despite massive and continuing cash input from fellow-Muslim states and the UN.

Dortmund is hardly the only place where nazis apparently run free.

The World Socialist Web Site (http://tinyurl.com/yyo8d9kq) reported On Friday evening, several hundred neo-nazis marched through a residential area in the working-class German city of Dortmund.
That same day, radical right-wingers once again marched through the city in Chemnitz. According to media reports, followers of the “Pro Chemnitz” alliance attacked the offices of the Left Party,
On Saturday, in the Bavarian city of Bamberg, a so-called “anchor centre” for refugees was burnt down.
At the end of August, a dozen neo-nazis had attacked the Jewish restaurant “Shalom” in Chemnitz.

Yes, Virginia, there IS a difference between a “real” socialist and a “national socialist” (a/k/a nazi).

The World Socialists contend that the German government is the cause of the current unrest. 85 years after the seizure of power by the nazis and the subsequent fascist terror in Europe, which cost the lives of 6 million Jews—nazi gangs are again marching through the streets and chanting anti-Semitic slogans under the eyes of the police is the product of the policy of the German government. The grand coalition of the Christian Democrats (CDU/CSU) and Social Democrats (SPD) is responsible for the return of the nazi hordes. The nazis managed to murder hundreds of socialists along with anyone else who opposed/might oppose their philosophy or who was physically or mentally unable to become cannon fodder for the reich.

According to the RIAS Berlin Commission, a federal organization that documents antisemitism in Germany, the police officers who escorted the neo-nazis (in Dortmund) didn’t see fit to dismantle the rally (http://tinyurl.com/y3ed75yq).

That may have been the best option and was similar to the police inaction when American nazis marched in Skokie IL with the blessing of the U.S. and Illinois supreme courts.² Violence was avoided, although citizens, Jewish and non-Jewish alike, were offended.

Sources

1, http://tinyurl.com/y2cfqdxy

2. http://tinyurl.com/n575qhd

עינים להם ולא יראו * אזנים להם ולא יאזנו

PLAGIARISM is the act of appropriating the literary composition of another, or parts or passages of his writings, or the ideas or language of the same, and passing them off as the product of one’s own mind.

Truth is an absolute defense to defamation. Defamation is a false statement of fact. If the statement was accurate, then by definition it wasn’t defamatory.

Comment on nazis

Keeping it under my “hat” Ban the kippa? What's the big deal?

Israel National News, a/k/a Arutz 7, reports that a French presidential candidate, Marie LePen, suggested that since Muslim garb was to be banned in France, perhaps kippot — a/k/a “yarmulkas” — also ought to be banned in France.

French Jews and Jews elsewhere are up in arms over the possibility of such a ban. LePen allegedly said “Since I believe all French citizens should receive equFkippa historyal treatment, I support the ban on wearing a kippa (yarmulka, skullcap) in public areas. Honestly, I think the situation is dangerous enough that those Jews who wear a kippa in public are the minority. They're scared. But mostly, I think that the fight against radical Islam needs to be a joint battle, and we need to be able to say that we're sacrificing something.

"Maybe they'll just wear hats, but at least it will be a step in eradicating extremist Islam in France,"

(I have to wonder if this “ban religious garb” will apply to Catholic clergy and, if so, how will the Vatican react. So far Rome has been silent on actions against non Christian garb. Would the pope, visiting France, have to leave his kippa (zucchetto) in the Vatican before entering France?)

A little kippa history

According to the Jewish Virtual Library, Wearing of a head covering (yarmulka, skullcaps, kippah [pl. kippot]) for men was only instituted in Talmudic times (approximately the second century CE). The first mention of it is in Tractate Shabbat, which discusses respect and fear of G-d. Some sources likened it to the High Priest who wore a hat (Mitznefet) to remind him something was always between him and G-d. Thus, wearing a kippah makes us all like the high priest and turns us into a "holy nation." The head covering is also a sign of humility for men, acknowledging what's "above" us (G-­d).

Many Ashkenazi rabbis acknowledge that wearing a head covering at all times was once considered an optional midat chasidut (pious act), but, today, full­time head covering is the norm except under extenuating circumstances. Sephardic communities generally did not have the custom of wearing a kippah all the time.

The Mosaic Law Congregation, cites, Rabbi Shay Piron (http://www.kipa.co.il) website answers): The source of wearing Kippah or any other head-cover is found in the Gemara in Masechet Kidushin. There it is written that wearing Kipa is a virtue of piety. That way, a person expresses that “G-d (Shekhina) dwells above my head”.

The Chabad web site offers that Jewish law requires men to cover their heads as a sign of respect and reverence for G‑d when praying, studying Torah, saying a blessing or entering a synagogue.

This practice has its roots in biblical times, when the priests in the Temple were instructed to cover their heads.

Although it is not explicitly required by law, the practice is noted in the Talmud, and through the ages, this became an accepted Jewish custom to the point that according to the majority of halachic authorities, it is mandatory. One should, therefore, not walk or even sit, bareheaded. Small children should also be taught to cover their heads.

The singular point of agreement is that the kippa is, within the Jewish time frame, a relatively new addition to the wardrobe, dating back “only” to Talmudic times, c 200 CE. Tallit and tefillin are Biblical commandments.

There was a time when Jewish men were encouraged to wear tefillin all day, and there are stories of rabbis who kept tefillin on until their bodies obliged them to answer nature’s call. There even are stories of teamsters working on their wagons while wearing tefillin.

The Forward interestingly notes that Moses and the Israelites proudly left Egypt bareheaded, according to one Exodus explanation. Later, according to the Babylonian Talmud, head covering was a pious practice exclusively for learned married men, possibly because it connoted humility. What the Forward article fails to include are the multi-layered (kippa on top of kippa) favored by some kippa extremists.

My Jewish Learning notes that In Europe, it was the universal custom among Orthodox Jews, except for some in Germany, to do so indoors and out. The most orthodox even did it while sleeping. In the Near East there was greater latitude in the matter, and many religious Jews only covered their heads for sacred activities. Keeping the head covered at all times has a kabbalistic [mystical] significance, leading some to cover their heads twice — a hat over a kippah (skullcap), or a tallit (prayer shawl over a kippah–while praying.

I have seen advertised — but failed to find the ad — 2 and 3-layer kippot; kippa on top of kippa on top of kippa. These serves the same purpose as a hat on a kippa. The third layer . . . THAT is the question.

Only in America ??

I worked for two Israeli companies in America: Tadiran and Zim. In both jobs my kippa segurah was not welcome. Unlike Tadiran in Israel, where I worked before returning to the States, Tadiran — and Zim — worked very hard at being what U.S. management considered being an “American company.” Translation: Christmas, New Years, and Easter were official holidays; Yomai Noraim and the Shalosh Ragelim were not — an observant Jew paid for time off for those days with vacation time. Working for a Japanese company (Oki Electronics) and a number of other “really” American companies and local governments (I was a risk management consultant) was far more comfortable.

Variation in spellings within quoted sections of articles are the way the words appeared in the articles.

Opuscula Burkinis: What’s the Big deal?

RECENTLY, MOSTLY IN FRANCE, there has been a big brouhaha about the “burkini.”

According to the French authorities, the burkini is “religious apparel” and therefore, in the land of Liberty, Equality, and Fraternity, forbidden.

Are kippot (yarmulkas) also forbidden, or a Sikh’s dastar? What about a sari, a sure sign of a Hindu woman? What about a galabiya or thawb?

Granted, wearing a kippa or dastar or sari CAN make the wearer a target for a bigot – or in the case of a burkini on a (not so) Nice beach by the cops.

Orthodox Jewish women, if they swim in mixed company, also “cover up.” Some Jewish sects that take rabbinical Judaism beyond the limits, have taken up the hajab. (Does that mean they still must wear a wig?)

Actually, according to Orthodoxy, toes should not be seen; not men’s feet nor women’s feet, so the burkini needs additional booties, a la Doctor Denton pjs for kids – and now, apparently, for adults.

One thing I find strange about the French – I find many things strange things about the French – is that unattractive people are allowed to display their “wares” on the beaches (and probably elsewhere) sans concern for the modesty of others. That’s permitted, but a woman who feels modest only when her body is 99% covered is forced to uncover . . . and is fined, too.

What next?

I can understand a Muslim’s anger at the French government – as I also can understand the non-Muslim’s anger at the immigrant Muslims’’ take-over of French communities and the imposition of Shiria law on the non-Muslim population.

For all that, I think the burkini flap simply is a façade hiding the real problems with which France must deal. Another dose of perfume won’t cover this stink.

Let the women dress as they wish.

Lines for war

According to a Global Security Newswire on-line article, Obama Adviser: Syrian Transitional Body ‘Only Sustainable’ Way to End Bloodshed, the president’s national security adviser insisted in a Monday speech that the creation of a post-Assad transitional authority in Syria would be the ‘only’ long-term means of ending bloodshed in the Middle Eastern nation’s ongoing civil war.”

Syria’s civil war – likewise the problems in Libya, Pakistan, India, Lebanon, and probably a great deal of Africa as well – can be laid at the door of fat-headed Europeans who knew better than the locals when it came to drawing borders.

Consider tribal loyalties – hardly.

Consider religious affiliations – never; the people are “heathens” anyway, so who cares.

Draw lines where it is convenient for the European conquerors.

Consider the Kurds.

1986 CIA World Factbook

The Encyclopedia of the Middle East notes that There are about 26-36 million Kurds in the world, with the largest concentration, 10-15 million, in Turkey. The map below shows the major areas of Kurdish concentration. The settlements in outlying districts away from the central area of Kurdistan, reflect in part attempts at resettlement and ethnic cleansing by various Turkish and Iranian Muslim rulers. Alone among the major peoples of the Middle East, the Kurds were denied self determination after the fall of the Ottoman Empire.

A glance at the map shows that the Kurds are a widely disbursed people, but there IS a concentration; the majority of Kurds live in an area that includes parts of Northern Iran, Iraq, Syria, and Turkey.

Kashmir is another example.

Rather than create an independent state populated by Kashmiri peoples in India, Pakistan, and China, the Brits drew lines of convenience – for them.. The British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC) map follows. The BBC map cuts off Kashmir from the rest of India and offered it to Pakistan and China.

BBC map

Obungler wants the Syrians to create a “Syrian Transitional Body” but who will populate this group?

Syria is divided along religion and tribal lines. Add to the indigenous population the imports from Lebanon, Iran, Iraq, and “Palestinians” who fled Israel to clear a path for the glorious Arab armies that would drive the Jews into the sea.

Map by Fragile States Resource Center

To see how lines could be drawn to reduce intra-religious conflict, the populations of the adjacent states (Lebanon, Jordan, Turkey, Iraq, and even Israel) need to be displayed together with the Syrian map. See the second Kurdish map as an example of cross-border populations.

Syria and Lebanon are both ancient nations, but their modern borders are the result of French and British map makers who ignored the reality on the ground.

Which begs the question: Who will be represented on Obungler’s “Syrian Transitional Body?” Will imports Al-Qaeda and Hezbollah be included? Will the Kurds, the Druze, the Jews still in Syria – and there are Jews in Syria. How about Christians?

If the so-called Palestinians cannot sit down with Israelis, why would Obungler think Shia, Sunni, and Alawi sit down to draw up an agreement – never mind including the other groups.

Who will be an “honest broker” among the parties? The Arab League? Hardly; it, too, is fragmented along religious lines. “Infidels” would be wasting their time as well as generating increased hostility toward the nations they represent.

Bottom line: Obungler should drop the whole Syria issue and hope the world will forget how his speech writers got him between a hammer and an anvil/rock and a hard spot.

The United States has no business interfering, in any way, in Syria’s civil war. For the U.S. and other non-Muslim countries, interference is a lose-lose situation. Besides, the French and Brits caused enough trouble in the area by drawing maps of their convenience.