Friday, May 28, 2010

Perspective

 

Nuclear Nonproliferation Conference Might Collapse on Final Day

Friday, May 28, 2010
By Elaine M. Grossman
Global Security Newswire
http://gsn.nti.org/gsn/nw_20100528_1080.php

UNITED NATIONS -- A major international assembly on nonproliferation here could end in failure today, over the appearance or omission of a single word in the text of its proposed final document: “Israel” (see http://gsn.nti.org/gsn/ts_20100527_5847.php, May 27).

The U.S. delegation signaled that it could not accept an overt reference to the unconfirmed but widely recognized nuclear arsenal of its closest ally in the Middle East, according to conference delegates and observers. However, by Friday morning Washington reportedly had been persuaded to change its stance (see update, below).

At stake is whether the document can be adopted by consensus. Without such unanimity, the five-year gathering could end in stalemate and recriminations.

Ambassador Libran Cabactulan of the Philippines, president of the 2010 Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty review conference, yesterday afternoon released the latest draft of text hammered out over the past four weeks of daily sessions attended by representatives of the accord’s 189 member nations.

The pending 28-page statement incorporates the work of three conference committees that addressed nonproliferation, disarmament and atomic energy issues, and is intended to strengthen the treaty regime. It includes 15 paragraphs on how NPT member nations plan to work toward designating the Middle East a region free of unconventional weapons and materials.

Read the rest of the article at the Global Security Newswire site (ibid.).

The reality

http://drybonesblog.blogspot.com/2010/05/no-nukes.html

Comments, in ENGLISH OR HEBREW ONLY, are welcome.

Yohanon Glenn
Yohanon.Glenn at gmail dot com

Monday, May 24, 2010

Arizona and Illegals

 

I don't get it.

Arizona - and California and Florida and a number of other states - are inundated with ILLEGAL immigrants.

But, funny enough, when Arizona wants to do something to stop the flow of ILLEGAL immigrants, it seems most of the "civilized" world gets up in arms and chastises Arizona. It's been a field day for editorial cartoonists.

It's not proper for police to ask someone to prove they are a US citizen or legal visitor. Mind, it's the law that police can stop people and ask for proof. It seems that the ILLEGAL alien has more rights than the legal citizen or visitor.

The ILLEGAL alien comes into the US and gets welfare, medical care, education for their kids, free lunches, and - if they are lucky enough to be pregnant and deliver here, a life-time pass to stay in the US of A, all on the taxpayer dollar.

Let's say that the ILLEGAL immigrant finds a job. Let's for the benefit of the ILLEGAL, say he takes a job that most legals wouldn't want.

Since he's ILLEGAL, he's paid under the table. No income tax. No state tax, and no city tax . Also no Social Security or Medicare payments. His pay is his pay; no sharing with anyone else.

Since he has undeclared income, his wife and kids are eligible for food stamps and Aid for Dependent families. Health care - paid for by the county. No insurance costs. The kids get a nearly free education; the ILLEGAL does pay property taxes to a landlord, although probably only a pittance. The school lunches are free.

So while the ILLEGAL doesn't make as much as a citizen, his expenses are WAY down, making his "real" pay at least as much, if not more, than Joe Citizen.

To be fair. if Joe Citizen didn't hire the ILLEGALs, they would be less likely to come to the country. Who wants to go some place and stay in the same rut?

And, to be fair, ILLEGALS come from all over; Latinos make up a good portion, but the Middle East is sending us far too many ILLEGALs. Orientals and Indians can be counted in the ILLEGAL category, especially pregnant ones. Indians tend to come in on a valid visa - do we really need to invite Indian programmers when we have an abundance of out-of-work citizen programmers ? - and just stay beyond the visa's expiration date.

Haiti; goes without saying.

I lived overseas - legally - and carried ID with me at all times. National ID at that.

No big deal. Everyone carries national ID.

The cops over there were - are - very big on profiling. But the borders are not a porous as they are around the 48 contiguous States. (On the other hand, when one country "over there" wanted to put up a fence to try to keep out suicide murderers, Americans told the fence builders they were bad people . . . at the same time the US was putting up a wall and beefing up Border Patrol along the US-Mexican line to keep out people who just want a richer life.)

Both Republicans and Democrats are patsies to the liberals. The GOP granted citizenship as a reward for ILLEGAL immigration. It pays to sneak in and lie low for awhile.

There are ways for people looking for a better income to come into the US. Work permits are the primary way.

I think Arizona is doing the right thing.

I understand many organizations hope to punish Arizona by taking their conferences elsewhere. For my part, if I take an in-country vacation, I'll make it a point to visit Arizona.

Maybe if the Federal government did its job at the border, maybe if the Federal government paid for the ILLEGAL's costs to the state, maybe Arizona would have less to complain about.

On the other hand, guess who pays for the Federal government - no, it's not the ILLEGALs; it's you and me.

ILLEGALS should have no - zero, nada - legal rights in this country. No citizenship, no visa = no rights.

Wander into North Korea and go to jail.

Stray into Iran and go to jail.

Take a wrong turn in Afghanistan and lose your head.

Sneak into Aza and you're likely to be shot. Sneak OUT of Aza into Egypt and the likelihood of being shot also is pretty good.

But sneak into the US and you're granted citizenship.

Something is wrong with this picture.

I am NOT suggesting we shoot ILLEGALs in the US; I am suggesting that the country needs to remove the ILLEGALs and secure its borders.

Yohanon Glenn
Yohanaon.Glenn at gmail dot com

Friday, May 21, 2010

Hag of many names

 

This week we celebrated Shavuot.

The holiday celebrating the giving of the Torah (matan Torah).

The holiday celebrating a convert.

The holiday of cholesterol.

It's the holiday of the convert that interests me, particularly in light of Israel's political rabbinate and its current "push people away" philosophy.

Who was the first convert? Ruth? Hardly. Try Abraham, nee' Abram.

Still, Abraham's conversion and Ruth's were similar; both were based on the convert's declaration of accepting G-d as G-d. Abraham's conversion was a bit more painful. (Interestingly, in neither case is a mikveh or other pool mentioned. ) The Torah (biktav) is silent about Sara - did she accept haShem as haShem or did she just "go along" with her husband. Abraham's sons and male slaves were circumcised, but I failed to read tht they said, as we did under Har Sinai, we will do and listen (learn).

Were these valid conversions or, excluding Abraham, were they forced conversions, a situation we have suffered too often in our peoplehood?

Now we come to Ruth.

"Where you will go I will go; your god will be my god." That sounds, to my suspicious mind, as if Ruth is accepting Naomi's god in order to stay with her mother-in-law.

Despite the fact that Torah (biktav) clearly states that Jews will have no association with Moabites - yes, I know the rabbis conveniently ignore Hebrew grammar and exclude Moabiote, female Moabites - Naomi's two sons married Moabite women (and did that contribute to their death at a relatively young age?). To be fair, the two women were related to Abraham having descended from Lot and one of his daughters.

Torah (ba'al pei, a/k/a Talmud) and Ram"bam tell us that if a person comes and says "I want to be a Jew, to be one of you" the person is to be discouraged three times.

If the person proves hardheaded enough and still insists on joining the people Israel, then that person is to be taught some of the major and some of the minor laws and then be welcomed - via brit and mikveh - "into the fold."

No one until relatively recently in Jewish history ever suggested that a prospective convert had to know ALL the mitzvot and certainly no one ever expected a prospective convert to perform all the mitzvoth - that is an impossibility; even the kohen gadol was unable to accomplish that feat.

But the haridim - religious extremists - have control of the Israeli rabbinute and they are insisting that prospective converts be just like them. "Modern" orthodoxy is too liberal. Never mind the prospective convert's willingness to go forth and learn; never mind Torah (ba'al pei), never mind Ram"bam; it's "our way or the highway."

Torah (biktav) tells us that once a person has converted - the words "according to halakah" are not mentioned in connection with this act -the person is considered as if born a Jew. We are forbidden to broach the subject with the person for fear of embarrassing the convert.

How many "orthodox" Jews do you know - I know very many - who fail to follow all the mitzvot they COULD follow; positive and negative commandments. How many "orthodox" Jews do you know who are guilty of l'shon ha'ra or rehelut (gossip)?

Incidentally, how is an "orthodox Jew" defined? By the synagogue he or she attends? By the congregation to which he or she pays membership (not always the same thing as attendance). I don't know of ANY "orthodox" congregation where at least some of the members drive to "shul" on Shabat.

If the Israeli political rabbinute can strip a convert of her Jewishness - and that of her children as well - because she found she was unable to keep all the mitzvoth, why doesn't it strip all the "orthodox" Jews who violate Shabat or talk about their neighbors of their Jewishness. Why, because it (the rabbinute) cannot; these people were born Jewish - an "accident of birth" if you will . Yet a convert - like a naturalized citizen - remains at risk of being deported - deJudenized, cast out. This despite the Torah's admonition that a Jew is a Jew is a Jew REGARDLESS of how the Jewish status was acquired.

The haridim, following the lead of R. Moses Schreiber (Moshe Sofer, a/k/a Chatam Sofer), believe that "anything new (after his time) is forbidden by the Torah." He was railing against the nascent Reform movement

If that is the case, then today's political rabbi's need to revisit the Torah and become true Torah Jews - Jews who follow the Torah's lessons.

This tirade is limited to traditional, sometimes called "orthodox", conversions and the rabbis and lay people who perform them and the rabbis in Israel who disapprove any conversion on terms other than their own, regardless of Torah and luminaries such as Ram"bam.

The political rabbinute sadly is not limited to the Ashkenazim. Sefardi and Mizrahi leadership also has been infected by the desire for power and control.

It seems to me, given the state of Judaism - we are losing the population battle through smaller families and assimilation - that prospective converts would be welcomed in the tradition of the Torah. If non-traditional Judaism is so repulsive to these men, Jewish ayatollahs, then they should make every effort to wean potential converts from those "wrong" paths and bring them to the correct path.

Rather than push away Jews who are less than "orthodox" in practice, they should, like Chabad and many Sefardi rabbis, encourage people to keep striving to add a mitzvah.

For the record, Syrian communities outside of Israel (and maybe inside as well) do NOT accept people for conversion or converts. Even to marry outside the Syrian community (outside of Israel) is strongly discouraged.

But what do I know? I'm not a rabbi and I don't play one on t.v.

Yohanon Glenn
Yohanon.Glenn at gmail dot com

 

Promoting no experience

 

Florida, where I live, has at least two candidates running for state-wide office that advertise themselves as political outsiders.

One is running for governor, the other for the US senate.

Both claim successful business backgrounds and both promise to make changes in government.

Trouble is, neither can accomplish what they promise.

The only way an outsider can force changes in government is if many other like-minded outsiders are elected at the same time.

One person, be that person a governor or a senator, might influence others, but that person alone can't bring about change.

Florida has had some good governors in the past - it's also had its share of "less good" chief executives. But no matter what the governor wants, the state's house and senate still can override the governor's desires. True, a governor can veto a house/senate bill, but the same house and senate can override the veto.

There are, at last count, 100 members of the US senate. Try and get 51 senators to agree on any one bit of legislative action - without adding unrelated "amendments" to a bill.

The last US president who had great success with congress was LBJ. Lyndon Baines Johnson was for many years in the US senate; he knew "where the bodies were buried"; he knew his peers' secrets and he knew how to "play politics."

Outsiders, political innocents, may be very skilled at running a business, and certainly we need such people in office to reign in the professional politicians, but there is a big difference between running a business and running a government.

It's one thing to be an 800 pound gorilla in a private business. It's another entirely to be 1/100th of a political body - that gorilla quickly shrinks to an ant of less than a gram. (OK, truth in blogging; I've never weighed gorillas or ants.)

As much as I would like to see government run as a business, I think I'll have to stay with the insider and hope that I, and others of similar convictions, can influence that person to work toward government-as-business.

Yohanon Glenn
Yohanon.Glenn at gmail dot com

Sunday, May 9, 2010

The problem with pets (Good bye, Frankie)

 

I had until the day after Pesach 5770, a small rabbit.

I was told he was an "American Polish Dwarf" - Oryctolagus cuniculus.

Franklyn, also known as Frankie, Frank, and You Rotten Rabbit depending on what mischief he'd managed, came into the household when he was just two weeks old.

My #2 son, Dodi, complained that his siblings had had pets, but he didn't.

What do you want, his mother asked, adding "no dogs or cats." She was thinking in terms of gerbils (#1 son's pet) or fish or finches (both belonging to our daughter).

"I want a rabbit," he told her. Where can we get a rabbit? "Our neighbors have a bunny they want to sell," said #2, being prepared. Turns out the neighbors bought two rabbits thinking they both were females. Opps. Suddenly they had a litter of rabbits.

Frankie was the runt of the litter and was the only remaining kitten when #2 discovered the opportunity.

Reluctantly, the mother caved and agreed to #2's appeal. The three kids and I piled into the flivver and drove over to the neighbors to collect the rabbit.

I handed the unintended breeder his fee - $10 - and he tried to hand the kitten to #2. Problem was, #2 was afraid he'd hurt the bunny. Not so his younger sister who took him and cuddled him; instant bonding.

A few days in a box and acquaintance with a rapidly growing Great Dane puppy dropped by with the puppy's cage - a 3'L by 2'W by 3'H cage that would be home for Frankie almost all the days of his life. Not that he stayed much in it. The puppy came by about a week after Frankie took possession . . . the pup put its nose near the cage and Frank gave a loud smack with his hind foot; the pup backed off.

Franklyn was almost always a gentle animal. He did "threaten" my daughter's mother - twice. She and daughter were horsing around on a couch they were sharing with the rabbit. Mother pushes daughter and rabbit lunges at the mother . . . not touching her, but showing displeasure. Neither could believe what they saw, so the "push" was repeated, and Franklyn once again charged the person he feared would hurt "his" mommy.

We moved from Florida to Virginia, the daughter, the mother, and me. The boys, both young adults, stayed in Florida. The rabbit stayed with the boys. Trouble was, Frankie had so bonded with the daughter - and vice versa - the daughter couldn't part company with him. The boys packed him and his home and drove him to Virginia.

Most of his years with us he shared space with me in a home office.

When I went to northern Virginia, he came with me.

When The Spouse and I relocated back to southeast Florida, Frankie came along, happy in a box on the back seat. (He was a good traveler; being in a moving vehicle had no impact on his appetite.)

We settled into the new house and all was great; he had a place in the kitchen nook where he was assured a cookie every morning and motzie at every Shabat meal. He wasn't in the office with me, but we still had plenty of "quality time."

But just before Pesach 5770 he started slowing down.

As Pesach neared its final days, he was unable to get up from lying on his side. Once propped up, he was mobile. But soon he was unable to manage even that. He had to be held to eat and drink, which was no problem, except that he couldn't move away from his waste. Eventually he lacked either energy or appetite to eat even his favorite veggies.

The day after Pesach I called several vet's offices until I found one who cared about rabbits. The vet took one look at Frankie and said "it's time."

How do you memorialize a rabbit? Just an animal. But an animal who gave - and received - unconditional love. A gibor bunny afraid of nothing; like Don Quixote ready to joust with windmills, that rotten rabbit held his ground against the noisiest vacuums. He tolerated young people who were not always as gentle as he liked and he never knew a stranger.

Frank's gone; all that's left is a photo . . . and this urge to take a piece of motze over to where a bunny once lived.

See http://yohanon.blogspot.com/2008/05/big-personality-in-small-body.html for an earlier, happier, entry about Franklyn.

Yohanon
Yohanon.Glenn at gmail dot com

Friday, May 7, 2010

English or Hebrew - only

Comments to this blog are accepted in English and in Hebrew ONLY.

Comments in any other language will be rejected.

ALL comments must include the poster's identification (name and email address).

How early can Shabbath be started?

By Rabbi Ya'aqob Menashe

In the summer months it is common for families to start Shabbath early. What is the earliest one may start?

The Shabbath candles may be lit from Pelagh Haminha (10.75 halachic hours into the day), 'Arbith may be prayed and the Friday night Shabbath meal may be eaten right away.

When praying early, one must be careful to read the Shema' again at the correct time, which is after the stars come out, even though one already read it as part of 'Arbith. The blessings of the Shema' are not repeated.

This rule holds true even on weekdays, whenever 'Arbith is prayed early, that the Shema' must be recited again after nightfall.

See (Shulhan 'Arukh 267: 2, and 235: 1)

From A Torah Minute http://www.atorahminute.com/

Sunday, May 2, 2010

Israel's PM welcomes progress toward peace talks

 

Israel's PM welcomes progress toward peace talks
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100502/ap_on_re_mi_ea/ml_israel_palestinians

 

JERUSALEM – Israel's prime minister on Sunday welcomed Arab nations' endorsement of indirect, U.S.-brokered peace talks with the Palestinians, saying he is ready to restart negotiations "at any time and at any place."

Israeli and Palestinian officials said they expect the talks to begin by early next week, and one Israeli official said the dialogue would go beyond formalities and include preliminary discussions on "core issues" in the decades-long conflict.

Details on the exact timing and scope of the talks were still being finalized Sunday, a day after the 22-member Arab League gave the Palestinians the green light for negotiations

 

Is it any wonder that peace eludes the middle east?

Israel is not negotiating with so-called "Palestinians," it is trying, and failing, to negotiate with "the 22-member Arab League" and, now, the 23rd member, Obama's White House.

The Moslems, there and at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue in Washington D.C., fail to take any responsibility for living up to Oslo, which Israel's government stupidly endorsed and acquiesced (it complied with the terms; the other side only made unfulfilled promises).

The Moslems, there and at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue in Washington D.C., rail at Israel for building a fence to keep out terrorists, yet the U.S. built a wall - albeit not a very effective one - to keep out mostly non-violent Mexicans coming to the U.S. for work and quick citizenship. (Presidents of both parties have granted amnesty and citizenship to illegal Latino aliens - I have not heard that this extends to other illegals.)

Israeli lives - Jewish, Moslem, and others - are cheap if you think trying to keep suicide murderers out is wrong. It puts me in mind of PETA, the animal lovers' group, that took umbrage when an Moslem loaded a donkey with explosives with intent to blow up the animal amidst a gathering of Jews. PETA was OK with killing Jews, but got upset that the donkey also would have died. (I've had a problem with PETA ever since.)

The Moslems, there and at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue in Washington D.C., are insisting that Israel allow hundreds of thousands of "Palestinians" into Israel, a land most left willingly. (True, some were chased out; there was no place to intern them, as the U.S. did to the Japanese - but not the Germans or Italians who looked the same as most Euro-Americans - during World War 2. The U.S. government was afraid the Japanese were "fifth columnist" (enemy sympathizers and spies); Joe Kennedy, who WAS a German sympathizer, was punished only by being recalled from his ambassadorship to Ireland.)

There is no - absolutely none - question that many of the "Palestinians" confined by the Arab League to refugee camps have been indoctrinated by their masters to hate Jews and to seek to kill as many as they can. If Israel, a small country, can absorb thousands of Jews from Moslem-dominated countries as well as more thousands from Europe (once the British blockade was lifted), you have to wonder why those 23 Arab League states were not willing to absorb the camps' residents? To be fair, Jordan has taken in some "Palestinians" and given them Jordanian citizenship - Jordan is, after all, the greater part of original British-established "Palestine" - but it also must be admitted that Jordan chased many out of the country (into Lebanon via Syria) when they tried to fascinate its king and overthrow the government during Black September.

It is my understanding that the head of the 23rd Arab league nation has put out the welcome mat for "Palestinians" their fellow Arabs won't accept. The lesson of Jordan's Black September must have gone un-noticed at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue

Yohanon Glenn
yohanon.glenn at gmail dot com