KiwiJewPundit

The Dissolution of Judaism?

2006-05-24T09:03:00.000+12:00

Firstly, I shall apologise for our non-existance over the past half year. Hopefully the blog will flower from now on with more posts. Yay! Now, onto bigger and better things.

It has recently been reported that the Israeli Rabbinate is ceasing to recognise orthodox conversions and gets given outside Israel. The exceptions to this are conversions and gets issued by diaspora Rabbis that have passed the Israeli Rabbinate exams, and those issued by 50 Rabbis that appear on an exemption list. The rationale behind this move is apparantly "to protect Israeli citizens and prevent them from turning to unqualified rabbis."

But I fear that the ramifications of such a move are far greater, and more negative, than what the Rabbinate is aiming to do. The move to not recognise orthodox conversions and gets from the diaspora completely pulls apart the fabric that is Orthodox Judaism. It essentially ignores the centuries old tradition of Rabbinic ordination (that is traditionally passed from teacher to pupil) and assumes that the Israeli Rabbinate exams are far superior to any other Rabbinic ordination anywhere else in the world.

What the Israeli Rabbinate is failing to recognise is that not only will this cause tension between Israeli and Diaspora communities, but it has the power to completely dissolve any relationship that may exist between them and create an irrepairable rift.

This, it would seem, is another symptom of the Israeli trend to extreme conservatism (with small "c"). If something is not done about this travesty now, we may witness, within our own lifetimes, the creation of two incompatible Judaisms: Israeli Judaism and Diaspora Judaism. I think this may be too much for even the staunchest Orthodox Zionists to bear.

The original news article can be found here.

The UN is an impartial arbitrator, and has moral legitimacy

2005-12-10T08:00:00.000+13:00

November 29, as you might be aware, is the UN-declared "International Day of Solidarity with the Palestinian People". No other people, not the Tibetans, not the Kurds, not the Hutu, not the Basques -- no-one else -- has an annual "day of solidarity".

Here is a photo, from UN headquarters in New York, of the UN flag and the Palestinian flanking a map of the land in question. Hmmm... which flag is missing?

Here is a close-up of the map of Palestine that appeared between the two flags, above. I could've sworn there was another state there, one that even belonged to the UN. No?

Didn't Kofi recently castigate someone for saying that a certain state should be wiped off the map? Why is the UN doing it then?

To describe the picture below, I quote Eye on the UN:

In a moment which has been crafted to include the commemoration of suicide-bombers (from left to right) Nasser Al-Kidwa, Foreign Minister of the Palestinian Authority, President of the UN Security Council Andrey Denisov, President of the UN General Assembly Jan Eliasson, Chairman of the Committee on the Exercise of the Inalienable Rights of the Palestinian People Paul Badji, UN Secretary General Kofi Annan, (and two others) rise at the outset of the November 29th UN meeting with these words from the Chair. "I invite everyone present to rise and observe a minute of silence in memory of all those who have gven their lives for the cause of the Palestinian people and the return of peace between Israel and Palestine."

Of course, the Palestinians are the only group that have a "committee on the exercise of [their] inalienable rights"; it is one of about 20 UN groups devoted to them (read this). Worse, it also appears that the UN is commemorating such "martyrs" as the one who murdered five people in Netanya earlier this week.

I don't really think any further evidence is necessary to decide what the UN's stance on the Israeli-Palestinian issue is.

(Much thanks to Eye on the UN a joint project of the Hudson Institute and the Touro Law Center).

The Hostages and their interesting friends

2005-12-10T06:45:00.000+13:00

Evan of Black and Tan Eyes has an excellent post on the story of the four Christian Peacemaker [sic] Teams hostages in Iraq (link here).

Evan puts it better, but my perspective is that when the al Aqsa Martyrs Brigade is speaking in your favour, and referring to you as a fellow struggler, then your status as a pacifist or peace-supporter is doubtful, to say the least.

Nonetheless, I profoundly hope that the CPT 4 make it home safely (though chastened and with some of their preconceptions challenged).

Yeshivish Idol

2005-12-10T06:11:00.000+13:00

With my reference yesterday to Google Video, it is only correct to note the first clip I saw using this service, one that was making the rounds in the Jewish blogosphere about a month ago.

It is the first yeshiva bochur boy-band video, made by some English and American bochrim from a black-hat yeshiva in Israel during ben ha-z'manim (between terms). Link here.

A rather interesting sociological phenomonon. Also, surpisingly good production values.

(thanks, Nicky, for reminding me).

Another day, another crazed theocrat denying the holocaust and threatening to kill the Jews

2005-12-10T04:18:00.000+13:00

More sweet nothings whispered by Iran's President (link here):

European countries insist on saying that Hitler killed millions of innocent Jews
in furnaces, and they insist on it to the extent that if anyone proves
something contrary to that, they condemn that person and throw them in jail.
Although we don't accept this claim, if we suppose it is true, our question
for the Europeans is: Is the killing of innocent Jewish people by Hitler the
reason for their support to the occupiers of Jerusalem?

Let's summarise. We have the head of state of a UN member:
- Threatening the existence of another state (UN Charter ch 1 Art 2)
- Flouting a UN General Assembly Resolution (GA Res 60/7)
- And as anyone with brain-function should be aware, is leading an effort to develop nuclear weapons.
- Oh, and the head of state in question believes he is on a Divine mission, and surrounded by a mystical light when he gives a speech that relieves him from the need to blink (link here). So there goes mutual deterrance.

Isn't it funny that advocates for the Palestinian cause endlessly parrot ridiculous and offensive resolutions passed using the Muslim/"Non-Aligned Movement" automatic majority in the General Assembly, but ignore UN rules when they are not convenient (especially the more basic ones like not threatening to destroy other countries)?

Anyway, UN resolutions or not, it seems that when you have the leadership of one country denying the right of another to exist, wanting its eradication, funding terrorism against it, and simultaneously developing nuclear weapons -- you have a potentially explosive situation.

So I wonder if the UN's members and the august body itself will do anything, other than complain about their hurt feelings?

I'm guessing no.

Video

2005-12-09T08:10:00.000+13:00

Google video is yet another devilishly clever piece of engineering.

A number of Jewish blogs have linked to this movie (link here), shot at the time of the wedding of the daughter of the Munkaczer Rebbe in Hungary in 1933. It is an amazing depiction of a lost world: vibrant and diverse; from the rebbe, exhortating Jews in America to keep the the shabbat to the pictures of Zionist youth dancing in a mixed circle.

It is sobering to note that barely 10 years after that film, that entire community would be destroyed, and most of the people the film murdered by the Nazis (may their names and memory be erased).

On a lighter note, here is a brilliant Family Guy clip featuring Cookie Monster (my favourite Sesame Street). Cookie seems to have an addictive personality, and I feel that his inability to control his cookie intake would lead to problems.

Dilbert's Blog

2005-12-06T08:44:00.000+13:00

Scott Adams, brilliant creator of cartoon cubicle-slave Dilbert, has a blog (link here). Look at this gem he wrote after the third-ranking al Qaeda operative was blown up by a remote-controled drone:

I know that war is Hell and all that, but I have to think that the guy who fired the rocket by remote control loves his job. I have an image of him sitting in an air conditioned headquarters someplace, feet up on the desk, a bag of Cheetohs on one side, a Budweiser on the other, staring at his computer screen. It’s about 1 am and everyone else is asleep. The order comes through on e-mail saying something like “Blow up mud hut #4,7855.” So he takes a break from playing Doom and plugs that number into the GPS system and soon his drone is hovering over said mud hut, missiles ready to go.

Maybe it’s just a “guy thing” but the idea of blowing up a mud hut by remote controlled drone sounds like the most fun thing I can think of. And if the number 3 al-Qaida leader happens to be inside, that’s a bonus. It certainly makes your story sound less nerdy afterwards.

Genius. To the blogroll you go, Dilbert.

Ushpizin

2005-12-05T13:36:00.000+13:00

I saw Ushpizin last night (official website; see the trailer). A lot has been said about this film: the first film made by Israeli Haredim to gain critical acclaim, both internationally (and more surprisingly) in Israel.

There have been many films depicting Haredi life over recent years (from the engaging to the ridiculous); Israeli depictions have at times been less honest depictions than defamatory screeds (I think it is interesting that Modern Orthodox people, typically, are defensive of Haredim when secular Jews or non Jews deride them, yet we so often criticise and mock them. It's as if we feel we have exclusive rights to do so. Interesting).

This movie does not intend to be objective: the lead actors are themselves Haredim (and husband and wife in real life); and not just any Haredim, but formerly secular members of the cultural elite who became Breslov Hasidim.

The movie was a sweet, but nonetheless if one probes beyond the surface, carried a serious message. The message is not one that people like myself, the modernist Orthodox with their rational worldview and belief in living in the outside world and taking responsibility for our own futures. It is a message that simple faith, and a little help from mystical figures, works miracles. Moshe could be derided as passive and lazy, not taking action to support his wife, and letting others walk all over him. A Maimonidean would feel distinctly uneasy with investing a mitzvah object, such as the etrog, with magical powers. But the incredible diversity of philosophy -- while still adhering to the same Halacha -- is part of the strength of Orthodox Judaism.

The central couple, Moshe and Mali (Shuli and Michal Rand) evinced absolute authenticity, as one might expect, in playing secular Israelis turned Breslov Hasidim. In particular, Moshe, in his portrayal of a violent criminal turned pentitent, was outstanding. Moshe's old partner-in-crime, Eliyahu Scorpio (Shaul Mizrahi, who played Zohar Argov in an incredible biopic of Israel's greatest singer) and his goofy offsider Yosef (Ilan Gannani) cleverly combined farce and menace.

All in all, a beautiful story, which I can thoroughly recommend.

What a charming slogan

2005-12-02T02:35:00.000+13:00

Of course they are only seeking peaceful development of nuclear power. And Ahmadinejad's comments should be interpreted... allegorically. Yes, that's it.

The most pressing question of our time

2005-12-01T11:26:00.000+13:00

Which country has the best national anthem? Here are my candidates:

La Marseillaise. This will take a lot of beating. Uplifting and bloodcurdling. It makes you want to torch a car. How do you keep losing wars with such a cool anthem (listen to the Mireille Mathieu version here).
The Soviet Union anthem. Admittedly, this was not enough to win them the Cold War, but it is mightily stirring. I could imagine this warming the hearts of many a good comrade waiting in a bread line (Red Army chorus version here).
Advance Australia Fair. A confident and optimistic anthem for a confident and optimistic country, who beat us at sport just too damn often (except for this year!). No mention of penal colony origins or treating Aborigines badly (MP3 version here).
Il Canto degli Italiani (Italy). Trust them to have an athem that sounds like it was written by Verdi; repetition of how ready Italians are to die and that they don't like Austria very much (link here).
Britain. Although I am a royalist, God Save the Queen is about as stirring as a tepid cup of tea. Therefore, I deem Britain's entry to be Land of Hope and Glory (this is the best MP3 version I could find on the web).
The Star Spangled Banner. Where would baseball be with out it? (Link here).
God Defend New Zealand. I'm only really putting this in because I'm such a patriot. Anyway, the Maori version is better than the insipid English one. Actually, the best one was the one they used to play in the morning when TV awoke from its slumber (remember when tv started broadcasting at 9am, and there were only two channels?). (Link here. Note to Jewish readers: the second word in the Maori version is the tetragrammaton; so you should say Ikowa...)

So, those are my nominations. Votes and suggestions for other candidates are welcome in comments.

Christian Peacemaker Teams' Stockholm syndrome

2005-12-01T06:55:00.000+13:00

It turns out that one of the peace activists who is being held hostage by a Sunni group in Iraq, Harmeet Singh Sooden, while a Canadian citizen, has been resident in New Zealand for over two years and a student at Auckland University (link here).

I hope that the hostages are healthy, and will be returned unharmed, soon.

The group to which the hostages belong, "Christian Peacemaker Teams" has released a statement expressing there anger at... the US and UK governments (did you think I would say the terrorists?) (link here):

We are angry because what has happened to our teammates is the result of the
actions of the US and UK governments due to the illegal attack on Iraq and the continuing occupation and oppression of its people.

This is astonishingly bone-headed, even by the standards of peace activists. Even if the coalition is responsible for the anarchic situation in Iraq (which is highly debatable), treating the terrorists as automatons who have no choice in their decision to abduct and murder their compatriots and foreigners who have come to help (or at least with the intention of helping), is racism of the most crude form.

I am also sick of the "occupation and oppression" trope. This is ridiculous. Coalition forces removed a dictator who was responsible for over a million deaths. They are trying to bring order in the face of murderous ideologues who couldn't care less (nay, are happy) over murdering innocents.

What is it with lefties sympathising with the same people who point guns to their heads and beat them up?

Is there anything he can't be blamed for?

2005-11-30T05:47:00.000+13:00

Paul Hellyer, who used to be Canada's Minister of Defence and Deputy Prime Minister is hard at work trying to prevent war. Not a war between the west and Iran, or a war in the Middle East. Rather, a war of the worlds (link here):

On September 25, 2005, in a startling speech at the University of Toronto that caught the attention of mainstream newspapers and magazines, Paul Hellyer, Canada’s Defence Minister from 1963-67 under Nobel Peace Prize Laureate Prime Minister Lester Pearson, publicly stated: "UFOs, are as real as the airplanes that fly over your head."
...
Mr. Hellyer went on to say, "I'm so concerned about what the consequences might be of starting an intergalactic war, that I just think I had to say something."

No prizes for guessing who Mr Hellyer thinks is leading the world down the path of a Martian melee:

Hellyer warned, "The United States military are preparing weapons which could be used against the aliens, and they could get us into an intergalactic war without us ever having any warning. He stated, "The Bush administration has finally agreed to let the military build a forward base on the moon, which will put them in a better position to keep track of the goings and comings of the visitors from space, and to shoot at them, if they so decide."

Of course; that Texan Fascist/genius/chimp/dolt is going to start a war with ET. Luckily, the Reality Based Community is on Bush's case.

Below is an artist's (ie me) impression of what such an intergalactic war may look like, based on data provided by the French intelligence agencies:

It's a sad sign of the times...

2005-11-29T05:11:00.000+13:00

when kids get this as a present.

The New Zealand version of the Playmobil set features a baddy trying to sneak fruit into the country...

The Cult of Exercise and Diet: Today's asceticism?

2005-11-29T04:48:00.000+13:00

Prof Haym Soloveitchik (son of R' Yosef Dov Soloveitchik) is one of the Jewish world's greatest scholars. His primary field is medieval Jewish sociology and economics, but he has produced some of the most incisive commentaries on modern Jewish societies.

A little over 10 years ago, Prof Soloveitchik produced an essay called Rupture and Reconstruction: the Transformation of Contemporary Orthodoxy. It is the best study yet of Modern Orthodoxy in America.

In the course of tracing how Modern Orthodoxy has shed many of the ascetic tendencies and practices that used to be part of the religious Jewish life, and moved toward consumerism and gratification bounded only by the letter of Halachic law itself, Prof Soloveitchik makes a beautiful observation about the place of denial in the wider modern society (it applies to other post-industrial as well as the US):

Not that the ascetic impulse has now wholly disappeared from the surrounding society. There seems to be a fixed quantity of pain that people, in all periods, wish to inflict upon themselves for the sake of some distant, possibly unattainable, summum bonum. The rigors of monastic asceticism, or that of the flagellants, find their equivalent in our ceaseless exercise and unremitting self-starvation undertaken for the sake of Beauty or in the name of something called Fitness. Now, as then, it is those free from the immediate burdens of subsistence who most hear the call of that higher good and voluntarily undertake to wear the hairshirt. This impulse is often linked to an attempt to move backward in time. We strive, no less than medieval men, to move backwards in time, we to Youth, they to Eden. To them the body was born with the taint of original concupiscence; to us it acquires too swiftly the odor of Age. They mortified the flesh to enable the soul to escape the confines of the body, we to enable the body to escape the ravages of Time. Each of the two equally impossible, by all rules of common sense, yet each pursued with equal vigor. To be sure the overwhelming majority of people eschewed the rigors of asceticism, but probably never denied the rightness of the enterprise. Many, perhaps, even made some half-hearted attempts to engage in it themselves, much as exercise-bikes and running shoes gathering dust in countless homes stand as witnesses to an aspiration rather than to any actual endeavor. (My remarks refer to American society generally, rather than to the religious Jewish community, who participate tepidly, at best, in this form of asceticism. In this regard, at least, contemporary Orthodoxy is still unacculturated. Nevertheless, as this community is the subject of this essay, I felt it more appropriate to use "original concupiscence" rather than "Original Sin." The latter is alien to Jewish thought, the former is not. On man's fall and his diminished, concupiscent state, see, for example, Bezalel Safran, "Rabbi Azriel and Nahmanides: Two Views of the Fall of Man," in Isadore Twersky, (ed.). Rabbi Moses Nahmanidies: Explorations in his Religious Virtuosity [Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Mass: 1983], pp. 75-106.)

Absolutely brilliant.

Have you noticed how often language of morality or sanctity is used in contexts of diet and exercise? Chocolate is "sinful"; the body is a "temple". Many people, in casting off religious morality and self-denial are acting similarly in worship of the self.

The IDF Conversion Programme

2005-11-24T09:08:00.000+13:00

One of the most divisive, and problematic political and demographic issues facing Israel in recent years has been nothing to do with Arabs -- rather, non-Jewish Russians. Approximately 1 million people from the Former Soviet Union (FSU) have immigrated to Israel since 1990, under the Law of Return; a controversial 1970 amendment to this law allows non-Jews who are spouses of Jews, or who have a Jewish grandparent, to become Israeli citizens. Although official statistics have not been kept, it is estimated that approximately a quarter of immigrants from the former Soviet Union are not Jewish according to Halacha (religious law). This proportion has risen, as most of the "more Jewish" population immigrated; in recent years, it has been estimated that 70% of FSU immigrants have been non-Jews.

Many of these non-Halachially-Jewish immigrants have contributed greatly to Israeli society in academia, sports and the army -- where more than a few have died defending the country (and have been denied burial in military cemetaries). But, nonetheless, there has also been great resentment at the arrival of thousands of non-Jews in the Jewish state, and a potentially dangerous situation -- fears of "two Israels" who are not able to intermarry, and lack even the most basic of common denominators, have run rampant.

Very few of these non-Jewish immigrants had any inclination to convert to Judaism, as the Orthodox conversion process is long, and requires the convert to make a commitment to a fully observant lifestyle that they are unlilely to keep up, and is at odds with much of secular Israeli society.

I remember reading, a few years ago, about a radical programme designed by the then-new head of the IDF's manpower division, Brig-Gen Elazar Stern. He proposed to create a conversion programme, that would use the facilities and societal position that the army had to allow those Russians who wanted to do so the option of converting. Warned of doubts that some rabbinical authorities would cast on army conversions, Stern challenged any rabbi to doubt the sincerity of a graduate of the conversion programme who had joined the IDF to defend the nation.

It is nice to read, in Haaretz of all places (link here) about the successes of the programme, and the number of immigrants who have chosen to utilise the opportunity to become a full member of the Jewish nation.

Locating a conversion programme in the IDF carries with it great advantages: the convert is freed from issues of making a living; issues of kashrut and Shabbat observance are taken care of; the all-encompassing nature of army service enables intensive courses to be undertaken in a much shorter timeframe than would otherwise be possible.

Controversially, it seems that the Bet Din (rabbinical court) used by the army to conduct the conversions is aware that many of the converts will not continue with an observant lifestyle after the army. Although the Shulhan Aruch grants a wide discretion to Batei Din when it comes to conversions, rabbis are generally cautious on this point. But in my opinion, it is on balance a wonderful thing to be able to welcome people into full participation in Jewish life -- and a most fitting reward for the efforts and risks they have taken to serve the people in the army.

Opinions, dear readers?

Ladies and Gentlemen, Israel's next Prime Minister

2005-11-22T10:41:00.000+13:00

Oh Dear.

Well, it's not like an ability to communicate to the outside world is important, or anything.

(Thanks to Silent Running).

N’oubliez pas nos frères

2005-11-22T05:45:00.000+13:00

With all the media coverage about the recent riots in French cities, it is well to remember the vicious levels of fear that French Jews have been living under in recent years.

The majority of Jews in France are Sefardim from the same North African countries as the rioters. Despite the economic and cultural success of a large number of them, there remains a large portion of the Jewish population in the same poor, crime-ridden neighbourhoods which have seen so much violence.

It was noted in the media that two synagogues were attacked in the riots (read here). However, what is most telling is that this does not represent a variation from the norm:

Jacki Brami, Garges’s rabbi, and his sons have been, "as usual", insulted, according to the anti-Semitism vigilance bureau.

“It’s business as usual,” Samy Ghozlan, head of the anti-Semitism vigilance bureau told EJP. “These communities are used to these daily assaults. It’s worrisome, but we fear the worst is still to come.”

What is most upsetting is the limp attitude of the authorities:

French authorities advised Jewish security officials not to publicize their fears, as such declarations could encourage rioters to attack Jews and Jewish community buildings.

In an article on French Jews emigrating to Quebec (link here), a day-school principal explains why he is leaving:

Mr. Barthel is the father of two young children. Last year, his children's school bus, belonging to a Jewish school in Epinay-sur-seine, a northern suburb of Paris, was set on fire. "The bus was empty when it was attacked, but still, nobody did anything about it, not the police, not the government."

It would seem that Jacques and Dominique would much rather the Jews continue to suffer in silence.
Anyone who has been to synagogues in Europe recently is familiar with the security measures that have been put in place; passports are often required (even in cities without `eruvin). Tragically, Jewish children are being forced to hide their identities for fears of vicious anti-semitic bullying, in an atmosphere redolent of another age:

Mr. Barthel explains the buddy system instituted at the Benvenuti school for children both arriving and leaving the premises. The students must travel in a pack and are not allowed to wear visible skullcaps or Stars of David anywhere but inside the school. They are also discouraged from dressing in a manner that Mr. Barthel calls "Shalala," meaning that they asked to refrain from dressing in a style which in North American parlance might be termed "Jappy."

This should not be acceptable. The French government should not be trying to buy quiet by casting the Jews to the wolves.

The Marshmallow of Terror

2005-11-21T08:36:00.000+13:00

IDF forces, monitoring the Karni crossing from Gaza, made a shocking discovery today.
a truck laden with a new kind of terrorist ordnance: krembos with forged kashrut symbols (reported in Haaretz, link here).

For those who aren't familiar with these devilish little things, they are composed of chemical-laden marshmallow encased in chocolate. Here is a picture:

This depraved attempt reveals the true face of the enemy: not content to try and murder us physically, they are attempting to annihilate us spiritually by making us eat tref sweets. They will not succeed. Luckily, the Chief Rabbinate has marshalled the forces of the state to combat this dastardly plan. Score one for the mix of religion and state...

Nostra Aetate and Interfaith Dialogue

2005-11-17T11:40:00.000+13:00

Forty years ago, the Second Vatican Council produced the Nostra Aetate declaration (which you can read here) renouncing the Catholic doctrine that God had rejected the Jews; further, it declared anti-semitism to be a sin.

I recently read an excellent comment marking the anniversary by Yitzchok Adlerstein. R' Adlerstein argues that Nostra Aetate was a watershed in Jewish history, halting two millennia of official attitudes of hate on the part of the Catholic Church's towards Jews and Judaism. Attitudes of hate that, in many instances, resulted in death and suffering.

This is obviously to be celebrated. However, the issue of whether interfaith dialogue is a goal that should be pursued is a more complicated one. R' Adlerstein states it well:

We in the Orthodox community are univocally opposed to the old kind of ecumenical dialogue, aimed at a cross-fertilization and interpenetration of religious ideas. That is out of the question to us, and has been rejected by all Torah authorities, including Rabbi Yosef Dov Soloveitchik zt”l, who was perhaps the most explicit and verbose about his opposition. We should, however, be able to recognize that some kinds of discussion have nothing to do with prodding each other to understand or respect (or dilute) religious teachings. There are areas in which our moral and ethical values coincide, especially in the Kulturkampf against the hedonistic, material and secular alternatives of our shared host culture. Few Jews realize that it is not only they who feel like an embattled minority – that committed Catholics, too, despite their greater numbers, feel mocked, disparaged and marginalized by the image-makers of general culture. We ought to be able to cooperate in waging common battle to convince (by persuasion, not religious coercion) fellow Americans to hold on to our shared treasured notions (even as we disagree about details of their application) about the specialness of human life, and about the importance of G-d in human affairs and decision-making.

The relationship between traditional Judaism and Christianity is a complex one; perspectives range from condemning Christianity as idolatry (Maimonides) to seeing it as a legitimate form of worship for non-Jews (R' Menahem haMeiri). But in recent times, Orthodox Jewish figures have stayed out of the ecumenical sphere.

A key reason for that, at least in America, was this article by R' Joseph Soloveitchik, the leader of modernist American Orthodoxy in the 20th Century. It is necessary to read this philosophically-sophisticated essay, product of a uniquely brilliant mind, in depth. While shying from a definitive pesaq halacha (legal ruling) banning interfaith dialogue on religious matters, R' Soloveitchik evinced a cautious approach, with four main points. I will briefly summarise them (at risk of over-simplifying and doing violence to the author):
1. That Judaism is a separate faith community; we are not "brethren" of other faiths, even though, from a historical-social perspective, we share.
2. The religious experience and religious belief is not susceptible to standardisation -- it is inherently private, personal, and cannot be readily communicated outside of the faith community; however, it is important to communicate between faiths on matters of importance in the wider world.
3. It is crucial that Jews, ever the minority, do not expect or suggest that the larger community will change its beliefs and principles to be more congenial to us. This would lead to reciprocal demands which the Jewish tradition cannot meet.
4. We must not adopt a servile attitude; we have not the authority to speak for our ancestors, and those who died in sanctification of the Divine Name to trade in beliefs, attitudes and practices that are part of our Tradition.

This cautious approach had much to recommend it. However, it had a chilling effect; and to large degree, at least in the US, Modern/Centrist Orthodox religious leaders are no more involved in interfaith dialogue than their ultra-Orthodox counterparts. The issue of how to deal with R' Soloveitchik's approach, and its relevance to today, is the subject of an ongoing discussion with some of the world's greatest Jewish thinkers (link here). I particularly recommend the contributions of Marc Shapiro, R' David Rosen and Chief Rabbi Sacks.

Thedore Dalrymple on les banlieux dangereuses

2005-11-17T06:42:00.000+13:00

Theodore Dalrymple is a wonderful columnist: lucid, educated, and loaded with wordly experience. He works as a psychiatrist, largely in the British public health system and in prisons. As a sample, and an exposition of some of his views (rather depressing ones) on the fate of British society, read this. He believes that due to a confluence of factors, British inner cities are dens of abandonment of personal responsibility, cruelty, and yes, evil.

But his most prescient work (at least, so far), is this column from 2002 about the festering sores on the body of France that are known in French as "les cités": endless rows of featureless blocks in which the poor and the different are segregated. Dalrymple documents the total breakdown of law and order in the cités, which far predates (and is a major cause of) the recent violence.

(Incidentally, Dalrymple is not simply another Francophobe; in fact, he is retiring to France).

Officious bureaucracy, a latent (and sometimes overt) bigotry in French society, an economy stultified and inflexible labour laws that create diastrous unemployment, and the separation of these South African-style townships from the French cities has sown the seeds. Militant Islam is turning what would have simply been social problems into the fuel of deadly violence. Read this excerpt:

A profoundly alienated population is thus armed with serious firepower; and in conditions of violent social upheaval, such as France is in the habit of experiencing every few decades, it could prove difficult to control. The French state is caught in a dilemma between honoring its commitments to the more privileged section of the population, many of whom earn their livelihoods from administering the dirigiste economy, and freeing the labor market sufficiently to give the hope of a normal life to the inhabitants of the cités. Most likely, the state will solve the dilemma by attempts to buy off the disaffected with more benefits and rights, at the cost of higher taxes that will further stifle the job creation that would most help the cité dwellers. If that fails, as in the long run it will, harsh repression will follow.

But among the third of the population of the cités that is of North African Muslim descent, there is an option that the French, and not only the French, fear. For imagine yourself a youth in Les Tarterets or Les Musiciens, intellectually alert but not well educated, believing yourself to be despised because of your origins by the larger society that you were born into, permanently condemned to unemployment by the system that contemptuously feeds and clothes you, and surrounded by a contemptible nihilistic culture of despair, violence, and crime. Is it not possible that you would seek a doctrine that would simultaneously explain your predicament, justify your wrath, point the way toward your revenge, and guarantee your salvation, especially if you were imprisoned? Would you not seek a “worthwhile” direction for the energy, hatred, and violence seething within you, a direction that would enable you to do evil in the name of ultimate good? It would require only a relatively few of like mind to cause havoc. Islamist proselytism flourishes in the prisons of France (where 60 percent of the inmates are of immigrant origin), as it does in British prisons; and it takes only a handful of Zacharias Moussaouis to start a conflagration.

The French, after decades of ignoring, patronising, throwing money at problems instead of addressing them, are seeing the consequences of their failures; France will not be immune.

Read the entire column.

Bowing, prostrating, and R' Avraham ben haRambam

2005-11-16T05:48:00.000+13:00

After the destruction of the Temple, the practice of kneeling and prostrating oneself ceased to be a part of the Jewish prayer ritual. One major exception still exists, during the `alenu prayer on Rosh Hashana, and at certain points of the Yom Kippur service, in memory of the Temple ritual.

As someone with an (ironic, at times) admiration of the aesthetics of Islam, I always thought bowing was a cool part of worship. It seems that I am not alone. Prof RP Scheindlin, of JTS, writes (in Merchants, Intellectuals, Rabbis and Poets: Judeo-Arabic Culture in the Golden Age of Islam) about the strong Sufi influence on the philosophical book Hovot haLevavot of R' Bahya ibn Pakuda. He then talks about Islamic influences on prayer, noting that Maimonides codifies a requirement to wash the feet as well as the hands (see MT Hil. Tefillah 4:3; Ra'avad is stumped), that has no Talmudic basis and must have come from Islamic ritual. This is congruent with Rambam's admiration for the decorum and seriousness with which Muslims take the mosque.

Maimonides son, R' Avraham, goes further. Scheindlin notes that the Karaites had already adopted many Muslim mannerisms (eg sitting on the ankles, palms turned upward), R' Avraham tried to introduce many such rituals into rabbinic Judaism, as part of his effort to remodel Jewish thinking (in large part) along pietistic Sufi lines:

Many of these customs were adopted by Maimuni in his massive religious work, The Complete Guide for the Servants of God. Had Maimuni's recommendations been fully carried out, the morning prayer service would have included no fewer than 40 prostrations. He also ordained that, when the congregation rises to recite those prayers that must be said in a standing position, they are to stand in straight rows, a clear imitation of the discipline of the mosque so admired by his father.

But, as now, innovations that were seen as being from outside the tradition, especially those seen as emanating from other religions, were treated with suspicion, or worse. Thus

Anticipating objections on the grounds that his measures were innovations in religious practice and openly imitative of Islamic ways, he asserted that these practices actually originated in the Bible but had been forgotten because of the tribulations of Israel's history, and now had to be relearned from non-Jews (an argument that was used to justify many innovations in the Middle Ages, including the writing of poetry and the study of philosophy).

Fascinating stuff.

BBC viewers commemorate Arafat

2005-11-12T07:45:00.000+13:00

The BBC has followed my lead and commemorated Arafat. In the BBC website's "have your say" section, reader comments are sought on Arafat's death, one year on (link here). Here are some of the choicest ones:

Yasser Arafat - a true, inspirational, dynamic and forthright leader of the times.

You'll always be remembered as the man who took a stand against Israeli tyranny

KEVIN ROONEY, Downpatrick

It's true. Because no other Arab leader had ever, y'know, tried to fight the Jews before...

In 500 years, when the history of this conflict is written, The sucessive US presidents and European Governments will be shown to have poor and immoral leaderships on this conflict. Yasser Arafat will remain a symbol of Freedom akin to Nelson Mandela. Controversial perhaps, but a symbol of man's ability to fight incredible odds and strive for somethign greater than himself. His place in history is assured of that I have no doubt.

Akram, London

Yes, just like Mandela. If Mandela had encouraged black South African children to blow themselves up in the middle of Cape Town and Johannesburg. And lied, pocketed at least $300 million while his people went hungry, and actually refused to come to terms with his opponents.

But this is the champion

I suggest that his name be posthumously changed to 'Yesser' Arafat as he was truly a man who welcomed peace in all its forms.

David Norton

I am speechless. Yes, I'm sure, if Clinton and Barak remember one thing about Arafat, it'll be that he's the man who just can't say no.

Truly, there are a lot of numbskulls out there. Interestingly, as BBC viewers and readers, they would tend to perceive themselves as some kind of intellectual elite.

NZ politics are more like the US than I thought...

2005-11-10T03:50:00.000+13:00

Below is a map showing the party votes by electorate in the general election held in NZ last month. (US readers should note that, as opposed to the convention Red=Republican, here the blue denotes the conservative National Party, and red the left-liberal Labour Party).

A sea of blue, with a little sprinkling of red splotches. It just so happens that the red splotches include NZ's 5 largest cities, and Labour has ended up being able to put a government together. It seems that although the issues are different from those in American politics, the urban-rural split is as real as in the US:

(thanks: Rational Number)

The fall of the last taboo

2005-11-09T09:16:00.000+13:00

In his 1959 book This is My God, novelist and playwright Herman Wouk wrote an apologia for his Orthodox Judaism, defending it against the rampant proliferation of both secularism and non-Orthodox Jewish movements.

There was an episode in the book where Wouk contrasted the ultra-Orthodox Jew, with his old-world appearance and lack of savoir faire, with the modernised, Jewish American. The latter held the former in contempt, and was ashamed of him. At most, one could be a Jew in the home, but in the street, the moderniser resolved to be merely citizen. The intricate laws of the Sabbath and kashrut, the holidays and ther rituals -- were outmoded. However, even the frei Hebrew had his limits. In particular, if one were to suggest that pork had ever passed his lips, he would feel the need to satisfy his honour -- by physical means if necessary.

This meshes with history. Even though eating pork (at least in private) is not a yehareg ve'al ya`avor prohibition (one that someone must die rather than commit), Jews have historically submitted to death rather than eat pork, at least in public (see eg 2 Maccabees ch 7). And very often, a refusal to eat pork has been one of the last vestiges of commitment to Judaism to disappear, long after everything else has gone. Even those who may have eaten pork would do so in private, and not announce it to the world.

But things are changing. While some cling strongly to tradition (sometimes a little zealously, as I have noted...), the secular masses of the Jewish people are vanishing before our eyes. Both demographically, and in their connection to any form of Jewish practice, belief, or identity.

I may be wrong, but it seems to me that this article is symptomatic of a decline. The New York Times Style Magazine, an arbiter of what's cool for sophisticated urbanites around the world, has decided that pork is hip again. The article featured the opinions of top chefs extolling the hipness of swine-meat, and a discussion of a new book called Pig Perfect: Encounters with Remarkable Swine and Some Great Ways to Cook Them.

What did the author of the article, the author of the featured book on porcine cullinary and one of the quoted chefs have in common? They all have distinctly Jewish names.

In this day and age, nothing can be assumed from possession of a Jewish name. But either way, does it not state something significant that people who appear to be Jewish are publicly extolling the virtues of pig flesh. This is also not limited to America; Britain's most famous Jewish chef is also a propagator of pork.

It is understandable that the Jews who suffered under the Soviet Union, repressed and deprived of their religion, traditions and nationhood, became accustomed to pork -- and it is possible to sympathise with them in the problems this has caused in their move to Israel.

But in free countries where Jews have been successful and Judaism respected -- how can things have fallen so far?

Yasser Arafat -- memories

2005-11-07T11:22:00.000+13:00

It's hard to believe he has been gone for a year already.

So, to mark a year to the passing of Abu Amar, the Raїs, I present my dear readers with one of the most disturbing scenes I have ever seen. This is enough to give you nightmares.

Can someone identify for me the clergyman for whom Yasser was so fond? I have a feeling it may be Patriarch Ireneos I, but I am not sure.

New link

2005-11-06T16:00:00.000+13:00

I have added the Dry Bones blog link to my blogroll (thanks in part to a surprise viist by the creator of Dry Bones, Mr Kirshcen, himself). He manages to sum up in a sketch the humour and sadness of being a Jew and an Israeli in a rather unfriendly world.

Shabbat Shalom

2005-11-05T09:07:00.000+13:00

Sabbatical greetings to all --
and a happy (and safe!) Guy Fawkes Night!

(to non-British/Kiwi/Commonwealth readers: Guy Fawkes Night , November 5th, commemorates the victory of intolerance, and the failure of the Papist gunpowder plot to blow up Parliament. We celebrate by letting off fireworks and burning an effigy of the chief conspirator).

A thought on Parshat Noah

2005-11-04T14:56:00.000+13:00

This week's Torah reading is Noah, the second portion of the Torah.

Something I noticed reading through the parsha, is in the wording, where God commands Noah how he is to save the animal species. First, read Bereshit (Genesis)7:2 --

מִכֹּל הַבְּהֵמָה הַטְּהוֹרָה, תִּקַּח-לְךָ שִׁבְעָה שִׁבְעָה--אִישׁ וְאִשְׁתּוֹ; וּמִן-הַבְּהֵמָה אֲשֶׁר לֹא טְהֹרָה הִוא, שְׁנַיִם--אִישׁ וְאִשְׁתּוֹ.
Of every clean beast, take seven of each -- man and his wife; from the beasts that are not clean, take two -- man and his wife;

and compare it with the next verse (7:3) --

גַּם מֵעוֹף הַשָּׁמַיִם שִׁבְעָה שִׁבְעָה, זָכָר וּנְקֵבָה, לְחַיּוֹת זֶרַע, עַל-פְּנֵי כָל-הָאָרֶץ.
Also of the fowl of the air, seven of each, male and female; to keep seed alive upon the face of all the earth.

A noticeable difference between the two descriptions is the usage of the human-like description "אִישׁ וְאִשְׁתּוֹ/man and his wife" rather than the "זָכָר וּנְקֵבָה/male and female" that one might expect (Onkelos doesn't read much into this, and translates here דכר ונוקבא as he does elsewhere).

Why is the Torah referring to animals using human terminology? "Ish" and "ishto" are human terms!

Bereshit 6:12 --

וַיַּרְא אֱלֹהִים אֶת-הָאָרֶץ, וְהִנֵּה נִשְׁחָתָה: כִּי-הִשְׁחִית כָּל-בָּשָׂר אֶת-דַּרְכּוֹ, עַל-הָאָרֶץ.
And God saw the earth, and, behold, it was corrupt; for all flesh had corrupted their way upon the earth.

Rashi, in a famous commentary, explains the reference "all flesh" as including animals in the sinfulness as well (although Ramban points out that this is against the normal meaning of the word "בָּשָׂר"). Talmud Bavli (Sanhedrin 108a)explains the nature of the depravity and sexual perversion that was occurring. The animal kingdom were playing a full part in this, and deserved punishment alongside humanity.

So, what does this have to say about the wording "אִישׁ וְאִשְׁתּוֹ/man and his wife"? I have a couple of thoughts on this point.

Perhaps, by referring to animals using human terminology, the Torah is telling us how low humans had sunk -- there was no longer any moral difference between them and animals, as they were reduced to their base instinctual nature. Or, that because of the prevalent perversion, humans saw animals as "men" and "women" (this meshes with the position of R' Yohanan in Sanhedrin).

But I also thought there might be a contrary message. Maybe the Torah is saying that the assumption that "humanity" is higher, and evil is somehow "animalistic" is not correct. We call a greedy person "a pig", a dishonourable person "a dog" etc. But animals are innocent of the yetzer hara` (evil inclination). Real, intentional, sin -- cruelty, perversion, wantonness -- are inherently human traits. This reminds me of a poignant passage from "Yosl Rakover Talks to God":

It is not true that there is something of the animal in Hitler. He is - I am utterly convinced of it - a typical child of modern man. Mankind has borne him and raised him and he is the direct, unfeigned expression of mankind's innermost, deepest-hidden urges.

By calling the antediluvean animals who had sinned "man and wife", the Torah is emphasising that violence and cruelty, חָמָס (hamas), is distinctly human.

New links

2005-11-03T18:11:00.000+13:00

If you are eagle-eyed, you may notice two new links to your left.

Mar Gavriel's Sabbath Activities and Diqduq [diqduq: grammar (Hebrew)] is maintained by the eponymous (and psuedonymous?) Mar Gavriel. Mar Gavriel is a purveyor of random passages in Aramaic, as well as treatments of various scriptural, rabbinic, and other texts. As an additional bonus, we are treated to Gavriel's sabbath activities.

Steg (dos iz nit der šteg), in addition to being a proponent of "God is a Trickster" theory, provides a unique take on Biblical passages. He has also been appointed Geek Orthodox Patriarch.

Calling all scholars of Mormonism

2005-11-03T10:54:00.000+13:00

I am aware that despite a declaration from the elders of the Mormon church, there is a sub-sect of the Mormon (LDS) Church that practises polygamy.

Although I am not at all familiar with the Book of Mormon, or the articles of faith of the LDS church, I am aware that they also respect the Bible.

This is why this is so confusing. It is not just the fact that a judge of all people has flouted the law of the state, but that it is a violation of express Biblical prohibition (Leviticus 18:18):

וְאִשָּׁה אֶל-אֲחֹתָהּ, לֹא תִקָּח: לִצְרֹר, לְגַלּוֹת עֶרְוָתָהּ עָלֶיהָ--בְּחַיֶּיהָ
And thou shalt not take a woman to her sister, to be a rival to her, to uncover her nakedness, beside the other in her lifetime.

Perhaps the reasoning is that the Patriarch Jacob did so, when he married Rahel and Leah. This conflicts with the general belief of the Sages that the Patriarchs kept the entire Torah (a good discussion of the problem can be found here).

Reliance on the actions of the forefathers notwithstanding, the rule of the Torah is now in force.

Why would someone would fashion their life around the principle of polygamy because their religious principles allow it, but do so in a fashion that violates Scripture?

If anyone is a scholar of LDS, and can explain this to me, that would be good.

You don't exist but we'll kill you anyway

2005-11-02T16:06:00.000+13:00

Brilliance, from DryBones.

Trust a country where this is "justice" with nukes?

2005-11-02T06:23:00.000+13:00

As a post-script to President Ahmadinejad's comments, here is an example of the Iranian regime's justice system in action.

(Warning: pictures of mullahcratic barbarity may shock.)

I wonder if Helen and Winston would also find this "unhelpful"?

But of course the moral equivalence crowd say that they're to be trusted with nuclear weapons at least as much as the US and Israel

HRH the Prince of Dhimmitude

2005-10-30T16:03:00.000+13:00

As a royalist Kiwi and a strong supporter of the Monarchy it pains me to do this, but I am afraid that the Heir Apparent needs a stern talking to. If only his grandparents were alive. They knew how to react to a totalitarian enemy that started a worldwide war and attacked Britain at home.

Constitutional monarchy, in my opinion, is the system which has best protected individual rights and freedoms, societal stability, and the rule of law in the modern world. But I think that that is a topic that deserves a separate post. One of the core conventions that has kept constitutional monarchy so effective is the judgment royals have exercised in remaining aloof and non-partisan when it comes to the major political issues of the day. I believe that this judgment should apply not only to the Monarch, but to her consort and probable successor.

That is why I am so appalled by this. The article discusses HRH's perceptions of "Islamophobia":

The Prince, who leaves on Tuesday for an eight-day tour of the US, has voiced private concerns over America's "confrontational" approach to Muslim countries and its failure to appreciate Islam's strengths.

The Prince raised his concerns when he met senior Muslims in London in November 2001. The gathering took place just two months after the attacks on New York and Washington. "I find the language and rhetoric coming from America too confrontational," the Prince said, according to one leader at the meeting.

To say that Americans have have been insufficiently respectful of Islam is a gross inversion of the truth. Who declared jihad on whom? The US government has bent over backwards to befriend Muslim leaders (whether genuinely friendly or not), President Bush has attended Ramadan iftar meals and visited mosques, praised Islam and distinguished between the jihad cult and mainstream Islam (whether correctly or not) more times than can be listed. There has been, despite the bleatings of the terrorist-apologists of CAIR, no verified backlash against Muslims in the US. This is absurd and insulting.

Prince Charles has a history of being an apologist for Islam and sharia law that stretches long before 9/11.

Makes one start to consider all sorts of rumours...

Maybe he should openly convert to Islam -- at least it would disqualify him from succeeding to the throne:

The Sovereign must, in addition, be in communion with the Church of England and must swear to preserve the established Church of England and the established Church of Scotland. The Sovereign must also promise to uphold the Protestant succession.

Of broiler hens and Jewish morality

2005-10-27T15:58:00.000+13:00

Some years ago, I worked on a kibbutz in Israel. One of my duties there was to assist in the chicken sheds, where over 100,000 broiler chickens were raised at a time. My duties involved cleaning the sheds, pulling out the dead chickens each morning, weed-killing.

The people who ran the lul were educated, intelligent, decent `olim (immigrants) from England. As this was a religious kibbutz, they were also sensitive to Judaic imperatives.

Still, it was some time after my stint working in those sheds before I could eat chicken again.

Now, I read in Haaretz a report about the standard of chicken-raising in Israel.

Fifty years ago, a broiler chicken reached its maximum weight in 80 days. Today, through genetic selection, its life cycle has been reduced to 42 days. The reason is economic: All broilers born in hatcheries in Israel belong to one of two varieties, developed through genetic selective breeding, to achieve the most profitable result - a chicken that will swell to the largest possible proportions in the shortest space of time. However, a consumer searching for chicken breasts at the supermarket has no way of knowing who bred the plastic-wrapped chicken, where, or under what conditions - unlike many other food products for which information is available.

Chickens raised for meat, called broilers, have become an industrial product, in an industry that produces some 170 million broilers per year. When they are one or two days old, the chicks are sent to the shed for fattening. Results of the genetic selection are apparent early in life: All the broilers develop exceptionally large breasts - bred this way intentionally because chicken breast receives the highest market price.

A report published in 2000 by the Scientific Veterinary Committee of the European Commission stated that the broilers' legs can hardly bear the excess weight of their bodies. The chickens may suffer from painful lameness, because of abnormal skeletal development or diseased bones.

I am talking from personal experience when I say that the way chickens are raised for slaughter in Israel has become an industrial parade of death. The laws of kashrut do not affect the horrendous practices involved in raising the chickens.

I am not a vegetarian, and Judaism condones eating meat. In Judaism, the needs of animals must be subjugated to the needs of humans (see Sefer haHinuch 545, Moreh Nevuchim 3:48 and Nahmanides, all on the commandment to send the mother bird away before taking the young, Deuteronoy 22:6). But the value of preventing tza`ar ba`alei hayyim (cruelty to animals) -- has always been present in Jewish thinking. R' Yehezkel Landau (Yoreh De`ah 2:10), in his responsum to a question on the possibility of hunting for sport replied that although he could not see a basis for banning sport hunting (ie killing animals for fun rather than for any human need) is something that cannot be reconciled with the Jewish ethos, that we are "rahmanim b'nei rahmanim".

I realise that meat has to be an industry: it is crucial that kosher meat can be sold to the people of Israel at a price that does not make life any harder for the many who struggle to make ends meet than it is already.

But is there not a kinder way? A way that preserves our humanity and at least minimises the animals' suffering? I cannot believe that God, whose "mercies are upon all of His creatures" wants us to sit with equanimity while those creatures are treated with such callousness and denial of the life that is within them.

I am reminded of a story from the Talmud (Baba Metzi`a 85a). A calf, running from the slaughterman, ran to Rabbi Yehuda haNassi (redactor of the Mishna and huge figure in Judaism), and burrowed itself, crying, in the folds of Rabbi Yehuda's robe. Rabbi Yehuda said to the calf: "zil, ki le'kach notzarta" -- "go, because for this (ie to be slaughtered for meat) were you created". For his lack of compassion, Rabbi Yehuda was struck with terrible suffering.

What a surprise

2005-10-27T15:42:00.000+13:00

President Ahmadinejad has done us all a favour by dropping the mask and the pretense and stating that the Iranian government wishes to see Israel wiped off the map.

The true significance is that the double game that the mullah-crats have played until this point is no longer tenable -- they can no longer talk peace and non-agression through a cuddly figurehead like Khatami while behind the scenes funding Hizbullah and genocidal TV programmes.

Haaretz reports. Canada's Foreign Minister: "The comments are all the more troubling given Iran's nuclear ambitions and its refusal to cooperate fully with International Atomic Energy inspectors. This refusal underlines the need for all countries to stand together to ensure that Iran is prevented from developing nuclear weaponry." But of course, this is the same Canada and the same France that are so opposed to any real action to prevent this happening. Better to aim a few words at the mullahs to look like you oppose genocidal antisemitism than do anything about it. It reminds me of a quote from Team America:

Kim Jong Il: Hans Brix? Oh no! Oh, herro. Great to see you again, Hans!
Hans Blix: Mr. Il, I was supposed to be allowed to inspect your palace today, but your guards won't let me enter certain areas.
Kim Jong Il: Hans, Hans, Hans! We've been frew this a dozen times. I don't have any weapons of mass destwuction, OK Hans?
Hans Blix: Then let me look around, so I can ease the UN's collective mind. I'm sorry, but the UN must be firm with you. Let me in, or else.
Kim Jong Il: Or else what?
Hans Blix: Or else we will be very angry with you... and we will write you a letter, telling you how angry we are.

The Nobel Prize in Economics goes to...

2005-10-11T05:53:00.000+13:00

No, not a rabbi. Not the Nobel Prize in gemara. The Nobel Prize in economics goes to Robert (Yisrael) Aumann.

That's a big qidush Hashem. As someone with an academic background in economics and who likes game theory(but without even a Nobel Prize nomination to my name), I think that it's doubly cool.

Here is a fascinating interview of Professor Aumann by his colleague Sergiu Hart. It covers the origin of his love of maths (cultivated in the R' Jacob Joseph day school on the Lower East Side), to the application of game theory to international relations. There is a great discussion of his view on issues of science and religion from pages 20 to 30.

According to the BBC, Aumann's work in game theory centred on the effect of repeated interactions on the choices a player would make.

He is also one of the founders of the Hebrew University's interdisciplinary Center for the Study of Rationality (maybe he's a Rambamist...).

Unless I'm wrong (please correct me, dear readers), Aumann becomes the second kipa-wearing Nobel laureate (after Shai Agnon, of course).

Shana Tova

2005-10-04T05:29:00.000+13:00

A happy New Year to all readers!

Shana tova tekatevu ve'tehatemu.

Following the precedent of the Jewish appropriation of Chinese food, I feel it is justified to pilfer another element of their culture: their cool Zodiac calendar.

I hereby declare 5766 to be: YEAR OF THE GEFILTE FISH

People born in the Year of the Gefilte Fish have a sweet and agreeable nature. But beware: they can have a bit of pepper.

Elul, Correct Pronunciation and Inappropriate Giggling

2005-10-04T04:55:00.000+13:00

I have the custom of joining a minyan for Sefardi selihot whenever possible.

Sefardim tend to place much more emphasis than Ashkenazim on Hebrew grammar, and correct pronunciation and orthography. The greatest scholars and grammarians of the Hebrew and Aramaic languages were Sefaradim, and for them, correct pronunciation is extremely important.

The other night, in selihot, I was using the book prepared by R' Ovadiah Yosef. In the responsive section "anenu" (which means answer us), the book helpfully tells the reciter not to stress the first "nun", which would, Heaven forbid, make it sound like an-nenu (with a dagesh in the nun), which would mean punish us. As important as it is to pronounce the words of the prayers correctly and treat the Holy tongue seriously, I wonder why R' Ovadia chooses to warn us of this? Does he fear that God will mistakenly think we are seeking punishment, and plague us?

Another example. Today I prayed together with a minyan using the Orot Syrian siddur. After the prayers, I was looking through the siddur. In the reading of the shema , the authors kindly warn us to emphasise the "ayin" of the word "nishba" (which means swore, as in
"that God swore to give..."), so that it does not sound like it has the letter "heh" at the end, which would mean that we are saying that God "was captured". This actually made me chuckle, and I had to undertake mighty efforts to suppress my mirth from audibility. For a start, it is wholly inappropriate to laugh at a siddur, and it can be seen as a dishonour to laugh at the comments of our teachers on the prayers. I was also scared that my Mediterranean co-religionists would take me out back and give me a good beating if they thought I was laughing at their nusah.

But really -- it is inconceivable in our theology (inter alia, principles 1 and 3 of Maimonides' 13 Principles) that God could be captured. I agree that it is of the utmost importance to enunciate the shema (which it is a separate commandment to recite) correctly, but why should we worry in particular about confusing the meaning of this word, when we must guard against manglings that could change the meaning of any word?

My theory: the Sefardi rabbis want to ensure that their communities retain their identity in all ways, including pronunciation of Hebrew. They want to prevent Sefardim from following the Ashkenazi and dominant Israeli practice of not pronouncing the guttural "ayin" differently from "alef", which is a mere glottal stop, and not pronounced. Emphasising where there is a halachic nafka mina (consequence) is a good way of doing this.

Habib's DVD review: Monsoon Wedding

2005-09-29T14:52:00.000+12:00

(Caution: spoilers).

These days, Habib finds himself without a TV set. I can't in all honesty say that my lack of a television set is motivated by religious ideology, but more a combination of space, the economics of pay television, and time (ie tv would waste an unacceptable portion of it. Especially if I had the history channel).

Anyway... what I do have is a computer, that can play DVDs, and I've had the chance to see a few movies anyway. Last week I saw the French film "Dieu est grand et je suis toute petite", about a non-Jewish girl who flits from one spiritual fad to another, but meets a Jewish man and decides to convert, even though he is assimilated and not so interested. A shame, because I so often like French movies. French comedies, especially, seem to be able to combine involve without losing their humour, and low brow without becoming crass and stupid. Some of my favourites have included Apres Vous, the Dinner Game, Ridicule, and the fantastic La Verite si je mens.

I have been struggling to find a copy of the sequel . I tried a new video shop this time, but was again disappointed. While in the foregin aisle, I saw Monsoon Wedding. I have long had a weakness for Bollywood music, so I decided to give it a try.

You may think that writing a review of a four year old movie is pointless. On the other hand, I'm sure there are many of you out in the blogosphere who have not seen it, and may be interested in the opinion of this particular semite (I may be wrong, of course, on that count).

My impressions are that the real star of the film is India; the juxtaposition of poverty amid the booming high-tech economy is poignant but in a sense hopeful. This country is becoming a superpower, and a force to be reckoned with in the economic sphere. Expect that to be followed in the cultural sphere.

(*Spoiler alert*). I was impressed with the courage of the scriptwriter to portray a message that is so contrary to the Hollywood ethos: in this film, the traditional structures -- here, arranged marriage -- were seen as correct, and successful. In the end, western romantic love did not conquer all.

The music and dancing scenes were, of course, delightful. There really is something in that Punjabi music, an amazing energy. I think the sub-plot of the romance between shifty event planner Dubey and demure servant-girl Alice was beautifully played. The portrait of troubled family head Lalit was also a skilfully painted one.

However, there were some serious weaknesses in the script. The agon, of how Lalit was to deal with benevolent and generous, but child-molesting, Uncle Tej, was perhaps signalled with too little subtlety from the beginning. Also, the not-quite-over love affair between bride-to-be Aditi and her former boyfriend Vikram is superficially left behind, without any real resolution.

But all in all, a wonderful story, with colour and style.

More from the Jewish National and University Library

2005-09-28T15:50:00.000+12:00

If there were to be a Jewish Bollywood film made any time soon, this would definitely be on the soundtrack. A Sukkot song from the Baghdadi community of Bombay. Very cool.

It's coming up to Rosh Hashana, so...

2005-09-28T15:13:00.000+12:00

I am going to talk about Pesah. Not so much about the festival, but some obscure music connected with it. When I was looking for an MP3 recording of "Ben Adam" before, I found a sample on the website of the Jewish National and University Library.

There are some other wonderful things there. Sadly, with the upheavels of the last century, assimilation, the collection of Jews into larger communities, and the relentless (and unfortunate) process of homogenisation of Jewry (Chabad and Artscroll for Ashkenazim, R' Ovadiah and the Yeha-ve Da'at siddur for Mizrahiim), many of the idiosyncratic and unique customs, traditions, foods and prayers of the multitude of communities that used to make up the Jewish world are vanishing.

Song and music are vital components of these diverse communities. Therefore, it is vital to record these songs while people who grew up in these communities, and were shaped by the special conditions and values that were contained there, are still alive.

Anyway, on to Pesah. The library has an MP3 collection of various versions of the popular song "Ehad mi yodea" (who knows one?). Versions from Hungary, the Netherlands, Persia, Corfu, among others. The best, in my opinion, is this one from Tetouan, in Morocco. Most of the words are in Haketia, a form of Ladino (Judeo-Spanish) spoken in northern Morocco. The most interesting part is at the end of each verse. After saying "One is God in Heaven and the Earth", it finishes "la illa ill'Allah".

Interesting. Similar to a phrase I have heard others say.

But remember, Musa is the Rasool.

The Days of Awe approach

2005-09-27T14:16:00.000+12:00

Rosh Hashana is coming: just over a week away. The year 5766 is about to be upon us. Traditionally, this is a time of reflection. Last Saturday night, many of us commenced saying selihot, the penitential prayers. However, our Sefardi brethren have been arising early (or staying up late) to say their selihot since the beginning of the month.

The Sefardi selihot tend to be less dour than their Ashkenazi counterparts, and are full of rousing melodies. While perhaps enjoying the penitential prayers too much defeats the purpose of reciting them, there is much scope to appreciate the meaning of the beautiful prayers. One of my favourite parts is the opening piyut (religious poem) with which the Sefardi selihot begin (my free translation). My favourite tune for this is the Moroccan one: at once serious and dignified, and haunting (listen to it on MP3 here). A fitting way to enter the penitential state of mind.

Unfortunately, I am not skilled enough to carry the rhyme and rhythm through the translation:

Ben Adam (son of man), why do you slumber?
Arise and call out in supplication.
Pour out speech, seek forgiveness;
from the Lord of Lords.

Run, and be purified, do not wait;
before your days run out.
And quickly, run for help;
from before He who dwells in Heaven.

And from sin, and wickedness;
flee and fear as from catastrophes.
Please hear those who know your Name;
the faithful of Israel.

For Yours, Lord, is justice.
And ours is to be shame-faced.

Stand up as a man, and overcome yourself;
that you may confess your sins.
Lord God seek, in dignified manner;
that he may forgive your transgressions.

For never is any secret hidden from You;
and everything that is said is heard before You.

The Merciful One, may he have mercy;
as a father has mercy on his children.

For Yours, Lord, is justice.
And ours is to be shame-faced.

Excerpts of the selihot in RealAudio format are available here (you can even buy the full CD!)

Ice Age Skeletons

2005-09-26T10:38:00.000+12:00

A fascinating discovery, on the banks of the Danube, in Austria -- the pefectly preserved corpses of two children that appear to be 27,000 years old.

As awful as it is to see the remains of children dying at such a young age, the findings could open a window on the lives and material culture of long-disappeared human groups.

The discovery of "Oetzi" in the Tyrolean Alps some years back was a landmark in our understanding of neolithic culture in Europe. Suggestions that Oetzi was murdered increased the popular dissemination of his finding.

But the new finding is approximately five times as old, and could help further scientific study (and, importantly, popular understanding for us lay-people) of paleolithic life in the same area of Europe.

A couple of points to ponder:
1. I hope that the archeological community, while utilising the findings to further knwoledge treat the remains with due respect; after all, they are dealing with human remains.
2. I am interested to see how hard-core Biblical literalists, such as those who attacked R' Natan Slifkin for his kefirah (heresy) in suggesting, inter alia, that the world is more than 5765 years old, would deal with the discovery of actual human remains that can be proved to be far older.

Our Shame, redux

2005-09-23T16:08:00.000+12:00

I posted recently about an inchoate, but still worrying, rise in Jewish violence against innocent Arabs and Muslims. I said then that the "privatisation of violence" was an incredibly dangerous thing.

Today's news reveals another instance in which we must hang our heads for what a fellow Jew has tried to do in our name. Earl Krugel was sentenced to 20 years imprisonment for a plot to detonate an expolosion at a mosque in California, and another at the office of Congressman Representative Darrell Issa (of Lebanese Christian extraction). Krugel's co-conspirator, Jewish Defence League leader Irv Rubin, committed suicide before trial.

What on Earth were these men thinking? The King Fahd mosque in Culver City was a Saudi-funded institution peddling Wahhabi Islam, including its odious political ideology. But any jihadi activity going on there should have been dealt with by the authorities. In what universe would blowing the mosque up have been justified?

With regard to Rep. Issa, what were they thinking? Yes, he was no friend of Israel, has spoken rather too kindly of Hezbollah, and has had dealings with shady characters. But an attempt to do violence with this democratically-elected official (a Republican, no less), is utterly beyond the pale.

What are Americans in general to think of Jews who plan attacks against places of worship and members of Congress?

If this represents the thinking of the JDL, then it is a terrorist organisation, and needs to be dealt with as such.

Good old clean, geeky fun

2005-09-23T09:18:00.000+12:00

Added a cool little thing to the sidebar -- a "Clustrmap", which tells me, and you, O Honoured visitor, from which countries traffic on this blog comes from.

The technology is brilliant, if a little scary.

Sanctity of Human Life and the New Barbarism, Part II

2005-09-19T16:34:00.000+12:00

I have blogged recently on the threat to that core value of civilisation, the sanctity of human life, posed by "ethicists" such as Peter Singer and his ilk.

An item in the New Zealand Herald struck me today. There has been an increased incidence of Down Syndrome in New Zealand. Some individuals in the health and fertility fields are blaming the lack of a cohesive screening programme.

My question is: who else sees this for what it is, and what it could lead to?

How long will it take for a "screening programme" (a euphemism for state-induced abortion of "imperfect" fetuses) to metamorphose into infanticide of born children (no doubt under some euphemism?

Humanity is imperfect. It always has been. People with Downs have a harder life, true. But they can grow into decent, achieving human beings; capable of giving and receiving love, and developing their talents and minds.

This is eugenics. It is an attempt to eliminate "imperfection" from inhumanity, and vet our reproduction to that end.

The belief that their genetic condition must be eradicated root and branch, and that fetuses diagnosed with Downs must be done away with is no less than a new barbarism.

But in secular, PC New Zealand -- where is the outcry?

Come on Don!

2005-09-15T09:41:00.000+12:00

(thanks to Gordon at NZPundit).

Politicised "war crimes" warrants -- a blot on British justice

2005-09-13T12:54:00.000+12:00

Major-General (ret.) Doron Almog was in charge of the IDF's southern command between 2000 and 2003. In that time, he earnt an impressive record in preventing breaches of the Gaza security fence by terrorists; he actually achieved ISO-9001 accreditation for the IDF's management of the sector (an achievement many businesses would find enviable).

Since retiring, he has headed a residential centre in the Negev for adults with severe physical and mental disabilities, a cause he became involved with as the father of a child who suffers from brain damage. He was to come to the UK to speak to an audience at a synagogue about his work.

But he could not do this. Major-General Almog had to cancel his trip, and return on the plane he came in on, because Metropolitan Police were waiting for him at Heathrow with an arrest warrant, issued by the Bow Street Magistrates' Court (incidentally, the same court that issued the warrant for Pinochet's arrest).

The charge? War crimes. Lawyers representing Gazan Palestinians claimed that General Almog ordered the destruction of 59 Palestinian homes.

Yet the reason these houses need to be demolished (and it is tragic that such actions need to be taken) is to save lives. Sourthen Command, without doubt, saved dozens, or hundreds of lives, by maintaining the security of the Gaza perimeter. Yes, it is a horrible thing, destroying a house. But it is property. It does not count as much as life and limb.

Let us think about what this means: a British court has taken it upon itself to hear charges against the army of a sovereign country for taking (non-lethal) actions to protect itself against a terrorist onslaught. If this is a precedent, then Israeli officers will need to think twice before taking any action to prevent terrorist murders, or else forfeit the ability to travel anywhere outside Israel.

If this is a precedent, the ability of sovereign nations to fight against threats to their civilian populations is greatly diminished. If it is not to be a precedent, and is a rule only for Israel, then it is evidence of the ludicrous singling out of the sole Jewish state for opprobrium that is sweeping the world.

This is an outrage, and rank hypocrisy (I'm not going to hold my breath to see the trial of the Metropolitan Police Commissioner for the brutal shooting of an unarmed Brazilian plumber).

Yes, war criminals should be tracked down and brought to justice, regardless of borders. But there is a world of difference between using poison gas on Halabja or using rape as a weapon of war in Srebrenica, and what General Almog is accused of.

This arrest warrant represents the politicisation of international law and judicial processes at its worst.

Katrina, Theodicy and Yosl Rakover

2005-09-08T14:55:00.000+12:00

The scale of the natural disaster visited on Louisiana and the surrounding states is terrible; both in the lives it has taken, and the communities it has destroyed.

When such events happen, people always ask how a God who we are taught is both kind and omnipotent can allow such things to happen. I realise that the pain of those who have been caught up in the tragedy must be unbearable and unknowable to those of us sitting in safety, but it is human nature to try and make sense out of such suffering.

Some blame God. Others refuse to believe him. And others still talk of punishment for sins. But what sins did the innocent of New Orleans commit? And is such a simple view of reward and punishment possible?

Embedded deeply in Jewish thought is the concept of hester panim -- God figuratively hides His face from humanity, and leaves His people to the cold forces of nature and human instinct. Hester panim is referred to by the Prophets as the reason for our exile and the reason for the ascendancy of evil in the world.

In the aftermath of the Shoah, Zvi Kolitz wrote a short story, Yosl Rakover Talks to God, an incredibly moving allegorical account of a Jew, in the last hours of the Warsaw Ghetto uprising, confronting God, for his abandonment of the Jewish people to the demonic Germans. In the tradition of the forefathers, Yosl confronts God, and demands an answer:

Perhaps You are saying that it is not a question of sin and punishment now, but that it is always so when You veil Your face and leave mankind to its inner drives? But then, God, I wish to ask You, and this question burns in me like a consuming fire: What more, O tell us, what more must happen before You reveal Your face to the world again?

I wish to speak to You clearly and frankly, to say that now, more than at any previous stage on our endless road of suffering - we, the tormented, the reviled, the suffocated, the buried alive and burned alive, we, the humiliated, the mocked, the ridiculed, the slaughtered in our millions - now more than ever do we have the right to know: Where are the limits of Your patience?

And I wish to say something more to You: You should not pull the rope too tight, because it might, heaven forbid, yet snap. The temptation into which You have led us is so grievous, so unbearably grievous, that You should, You must, forgive those of Your people who in their misery and anger have turned away from You.

But in the end, Yosl announces that in spite of the cruelty of hester panim, he will not give up on God, or the Torah and mitzvot that form the core of the Jew's life:

I believe in the God of Israel, even when He has done everything to make me cease to believe in Him. I believe in His laws even when I cannot justify His deeds. My relationship to Him is no longer that of a servant to his master, but of a student to his rabbi. I bow my head before His greatness, but I will not kiss the rod with which He chastises me. I love Him. But I love His Torah more. Even if I were disappointed in Him, I would still cherish His Torah. God commands religion, but His Torah commands a way of life - and the more we die for this way of life, the more immortal it is!

Yosl Rakover confronts the suffering that God allows to be visited -- and refuses to concede.

It is my prayer that the people of New Orleans -- strong in faith as I'm sure they are -- refuse to kiss the rod with which they have been so unjustly smitten, and that we all help them restore their lives and comfort them in their loss.

Peter Singer: Destroyer of Civilisation

2005-09-02T15:52:00.000+12:00

Peter Singer is Professor of Ethics at Princeton (in the US) and the University of Melbourne in Australia. Over the years, he has become a leading figure in the medical ethics movement.

Professor Singer subscribes to utilitarian philosophy, the heritage of J.S. Mill. Singer created waves a few years ago when the media relayed statements he made to the effect that an animal had more right to life than a disabled child (Singer is a militant vegan and a founder of the animal liberation movement), and advocating the euthanasia of severly disabled children.

The latest edition of Foreign Policy magazine carries a series of articles under the title "Here Today, Gone Tomorrow" about institutions and paradigms that are likely to disappear in the near future (such as the Euro and remaining monarchies). Singer writes that the principle of the sanctity of human life, which most take for granted as the core value of any civilisation, is on its way out. Singer states:

During the next 35 years, the traditional view of the sanctity of human life will collapse under pressure from scientific, technological, and demographic developments. By 2040, it may be that only a rump of hard-core, know-nothing religious fundamentalists will defend the view that every human life, from conception to death, is sacrosanct.

In retrospect, 2005 may be seen as the year in which that position became untenable....

When the traditional ethic of the sanctity of human life is proven indefensible at both the beginning and end of life, a new ethic will replace it. It will recognize that the concept of a person is distinct from that of a member of the species Homo sapiens, and that it is personhood, not species membership, that is most significant in determining when it is wrong to end a life. We will understand that even if the life of a human organism begins at conception, the life of a person—that is, at a minimum, a being with some level of self-awareness—does not begin so early. And we will respect the right of autonomous, competent people to choose when to live and when to die.

Why is it "untenable" to hold that human life is inherently valuable and worthy of protection? Singer cites some South Korean research that stem cells can be cloned by combining an unfertilised egg with an ordinary cell. Regardless of how the embryo is created, how does this affect the inherent worth or dignity of the resulting human being, even if he or she is the result of cloning rather than sexual reproduction?

(Incidentally, I am not arguing that the inviolability of human life begins at conception. I am not an anti-abortion absolutist, and the topic deserves wider discussion in another post).

As for demographic trends, Singer cites the greying populations of first world countries. The prospect of an young generation "euthanising" their parents to avoid the burden of supporting them and to inherent more quickly, is both morally terrifying and imminent.

It must be clear to all who have a modicum of perceptiveness that right-to-die cases are the thin end of the wedge. There will be an inevitable ratchet effect. Singer uses as his test the ability to suffer.

Let us put aside for the moment the practical concern of whether one can ever be sure, even in cases of apparent insensibility and comas, that the person is not suffering.

When doctors are permitted to kill severly disabled children, the boundaries will inevitably be pushed. There will be pressure to be rid of any humans who are considered a drain on others or insufficiently sentient. Note how vague Singer is about the distinction between a "person" and a mere member of species Homo Sapiens; self awareness is a "minimum"; therefore, human infants are not "people". Once this "utilitarian" logic is set in train, it won't be easily stopped. Remember who the first victims of the Nazis were.

The loss of our respect for the sanctity of human life is the loss of our humanity; it is the renunciation of civilisation, and its replacement with a vicious barbaric "utility". What has become of our society when a leading philosopher and "ethicist" would forbid the killing of a fish for food but assent to killing a human baby?

If Singer deems me a "know-nothing religious fundamentalist", then so be it. Those of us who believe in the dignity of the human and that we are all created in the image of God must fight Singer and his barbarism without cease.

Our shame

2005-08-18T12:57:00.000+12:00

Recently, I have often contrasted the restrained behaviour of Israeli Jews despite facing an unremitting terror campaign, with the mob violence and hysteria of Arab and Muslim societies. I derided constant reference in the media to the acts of Baruch Goldstein and the failed Bat Ayin bombing attempt were specks of sand inthe desert: irrelevant next to the vast wave of jihadi violence.

But the exceptions are coming a little thick and fast right now.

When fighting an Islamofascist enemy that shuns rationality, seeks death and ever greater "harvests" of innocent victims, it's not hard to be the better camp. But it's not enough just to maintain moral superiority -- but as inidividuals, we have to live up to the Jewish values of rahmanut and tolerance. Innocent people in Shiloh (and all the more so Shfaram) must never be targets -- otherwise we have entered the logic of jihad. And the "privatisation of violence" must be prevented.

Disengagement Prayer

2005-08-17T15:57:00.000+12:00

For those that are interested, here is the tfillah that was authored by Rabbi Jonathan Sacks and Rabbi Dr. Warren Goldstein (Chief Rabbi of South Africa).

Prayer at a Time of Disengagement

Avinu shebaShamayim, Our Father in Heaven,

At this testing time for our beloved State of Israel and the Jewish people throughout the world, we humbly pray for Your help and blessing.

We pray that You will bring Your consolation to our brothers and sisters who are about to leave their homes and sources of livelihood, their shuls and schools, and the land they love, for which they have sacrificed so much.

We pray, too, that You may help us preserve the unity of Your people, in Israel and elsewhere, who today face so many threats and dangers. Save us from the risks of our own dissension. Help us to help one another, remembering that we are all children of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, offspring of those You freed from Egypt, heirs to those with whom You made a covenant at Mount Sinai, descendants of those You led to Eretz Yisrael in ancient times, and joined to those who live there now in a covenant of fate and faith.

Heavenly Father, teach us to recognize that our destiny is in Your hands, and lead us back to You through teshuvah, tefillah and tzedakah, so that we may merit Your redemption, speedily in our days, and let us say: Amen.

Tisha B'Av musings

2005-08-15T03:03:00.000+12:00

Forgive my blogging absence recently -- major life changes have been in store for Habib. But I will be better now.

The focus of the minds of the Jewish people right now, whether in Israel or the rest of the world, has been on the disengagement that is about to occur from Gaza, bringing in its wake the forced removal of about 8000 Jewish residents of the territory. Comrade has already posted well on this topic.

Although my mind is a little befuddled by the effects of the fast, I thought I would share my thoughts.

I heard, recently, comments from a Torah educator, comparing the Israeli leaders who are coordinating withdrawal from Gaza to the 10 spies who reported that the Canaanites were too powerful for the Israelites to defeat and conquer the land; and comparing the Israelis who support withdrawal to those Israelites who believed their report, ignoring Caleb and Joshua (the connection with Tisha B'Av is that this occurred on the 9th of Av; God decreed that because the Israelites wailed for no good reason this time, he would make it a time of wailing and mourning through the generations). The implication is that those who deem withdrawal necessary are "seeing themselves as grasshoppers and afraid".

With respect, I think this is mistaken on more than one level.

First, it is not correct for us, who sit in comfort in the Diaspora, to pass judgment on the decisions taken by those who are responsible for the Jewish state; people like Sharon, who have dedicated their entire lives to the security of Israel (and been heroes of numerous wars) cannot be dismissed as appeasers or weak.

Second, parallels to Scripture can work both ways. For example, one of the kinnot (moruning dirges) we read on Tisha B'Av is worded as a eulogy to King Josiah by the prophet Jeremiah. The Egyptian Pharoah wanted to pass through Israel on its way to fight the Assyrians. Josiah, a righteous monarch, fueled on pride and Biblical prophecy that foreign swords won't be raised in Israel, refuses to let Egypt through. Jeremiah warns him against this course of action -- that fighting the Egyptians is pragmatically useless, and morally unnecessary. Josiah ignores this, is defeated, and killed.

We need, in addition to religious zeal and commitment to our nation, wisdom, and the ability to have a wide enough moral view to encompass those outside our nation, while maintaining peace and mutual respect within it.

The most important thing to remember is that our bonds, as fellow Jews, are far greater than what divides us. When we lose sight of that, disaster follows. For an example, see the parallels between the murder of Gedalia ben Ahikam, and that of Yitzhak Rabin, for an abject lesson in allowing internal disputes to fall into internecine violence.

May this Tisha B'Av serve the Jewish nation by making us aware of the diversity of views that come within our tradition, and unity must be foremost.

9 Av, Disengagement and random thought

2005-08-12T14:30:00.000+12:00

Good afternoon all.
Firstly, let me apologise for not updating this blog for the last two weeks or so. My bad. Let me also apologise on behalf of Habib - he has been particularly lame in this respect over the last while. He has been busy, but still lame.

Let me make a plea first of all. Saturday night/Sunday is 9 Av, the day when we commemorate the destruction of the first and second temples. Let us not forget in this testing time that the second temple was destroyed because of sinat chinam (unbased hatred) between Jews. No matter what your political view is, and whether or not you agree with the disengagement, the fact is that it will happen and that we need to make sure that we don't let a war of brothers ensue. The Chief Rabbinate of the Commonwealth has published a prayer to be said this Shabbat and on Tisha B'Av reinforcing this. It is a very important message. Thousands of people will be losing their homes and livelihood, and I don't think any of us can really begin to imagine how terrible this must be for those people. Hopefully, their sacrifice will bring about a new era and the possibility of peace. I know it's a long shot, but we really have to be positive.

Secondly, I thought I would bring a lovely message from this weeks parasha. This week we will be reading parashat Devarim, the first parasha of the book of Devarim. At one point, the torah states that Moses "be'er et ha'Torah" - literally, explained or expounded the Torah. Rashi explains this by stating "b'shivim lashon" - Moses explained the Torah in 70 languages. This only makes sense when we put it into context. According to Jewish tradition, there are 70 nations in the world, each with their own language. So Moshe was really explaining the Torah to the entire world. I think this statement has a lot of power. The Torah does not belong exclusively to the Jews. The Torah's ideas are universal. I think this message is particularly poignant at the moment, and relates back to what I was saying earlier about not being antagonistic towards one another. Just a thought. Perhaps you can come up with your own understanding of the significance of Rashi's statment. I'd be glad to hear suggestions.

Shabbat Shalom.

Protection Is Bigger Than The Both Of Us?

2005-07-26T12:14:00.000+12:00

A few days ago, English police shot dead a Brazilian tourist in a London underground station. Apparantly it was because they suspected him of being a terrorist and he ran away when they chased him. But can you blame him for running away? They weren't even dressed as policemen! Ask yourself this: if you were in a London underground station and a bunch of random people started running after you, would you stop, or would you run for your life?

Recently a lot of people (including us bloggers at kiwijewpundit) have been quick to defend such actions. "He might have been a terrorist!" But I think that this excuse for such actions has been taken way too far. Can we really excuse such acts? Killing (and verifying the death of!) an innocent man for the sake of the "greater good?" I would have liked to think that the world left such Hegelian utilitarianism a long time ago. It's precisely this kind of utilitarianism that can so often lead to morally repugnant acts. Communism has largely been left behind by the West because it understands the problems inherent in placing the universal over and above the individual.

Terrorism is a hard cookie to crack. However, I don't think the answer is the complete disregard of the individual for the sake of the universal. In doing so, we become as bad as the ideologoies we are fighting.

I hope this terrible incident is a wake up call for the West. We need to fight terrorism, but when our fighting leads to a state of light-headedness and a disregard for what is moral and right, then we have taken a wrong turn somewhere.

Ever noticed the similarities?

2005-07-22T12:55:00.000+12:00

The Toddler's Creed

If I want it, it's mine.

If I can take it away from you, it's mine.

If I had it a little while ago, it's mine.

If it looks like mine, it's mine.

If I give it to you and change my mind later, it's mine.

If we are building something together, all the pieces are mine.

If it's mine, it will never belong to anyone else. No matter what.

Waaaah! My toys! Mine! Give me! Waaaaah...

The Jihadi Creed

If I want it, it's Dar ul-Islam.

If I can take it away from you, it's Dar ul-Islam.

If I had it a little while ago, it's Dar ul-Islam.

If it looks like Dar ul-Islam, it's Dar ul-Islam.

If I give it to you and change my mind later, it's Dar ul-Islam.

If we are building something together, all the pieces are Dar ul-Islam.

If it's Dar ul-Islam, it will never belong to anyone else. No matter what.

Waaah, my land! Chechnya mine, Palestine mine, Andalus mine, give me!! Waaaah...

Reality check

2005-07-14T20:53:00.000+12:00

What was responsible for this?

Or this?

Or this?

Or this?

Please, let us jettison the euphemisms and the pieties. They may serve a purpose for world leaders who must soothe and unify, but they block the truth.

Islam did this.

It did all of this. Imam Blair and Mullah Bush and Sheikh Clark cannot dictate what is real Islam ("the religion of peace"™) and what is a "perversion". The fact is that real schools of Islam are providing the ideological basis, the justification, and the fuel, for the most unbelievable barbarities.

Yes, I believe that the vandalism of mosques in Auckland was shameful and awful. But Muslims must renounce jihadi violence -- unreservedly, without "buts", without "you must understand the root causes", without ridiculous evasions blaming the incredibly depraved state of much of the Muslim world on the presence of a few Jews in the Middle East.

Otherwise, unfortunately, a war of civilisations is simply inevitable.

This is not the time for a Pinhas

2005-07-04T19:32:00.000+12:00

In the Book of Numbers (Bemidbar) (Hebrew text here, English here), the People of Israel camped at Shittim in the desert. Some of the men began illicit relationships with Moabite women. A noble of the tribe of Shimon, Zimri ben Salu and a Midianite princess, Kozbi bat Tsur, brazenly paraded their liaison.

Pinhas ben Elazar took a spear, and killed the two of them. He received a Divine reward: the Covenant of Peace. The Talmud (Sanhedrin 81b) said that he acted correctly: that the law was "kinain pogi'in bo" (a zealous one may kill them).

However, in the post-Biblical world, acts of such zealotry in Judaism are hard to find. But rabbinical Judaism did not generally condone the taking of law into one's hands; it even used law of evidence to effectively abolish the death penalty (see Talmud Makkot 7a). Judaism does not enforce itself through violence.

That is why it is particularly sad when an individual sullies the name of the Torah by trying to enforce it through violence. An Orthodox Jew stabbed three people at a Gay Pride parade in Jerusalem.

It is a legitimate opinion to be opposed to such displays of sexuality, especially in a Holy City (and clergy of the three monotheistic religions that revere Jerusalem were opposed to it). As much as our tendency is toward inclusiveness and tolerance, normative rabbinic Judaism does not and cannot endorse a lifestyle that involves sexual expression that is forbidden by the Torah. But in a democratic and civil society, disputes must be settled by the law; all must be treated with equality and compassion by the law. This is not the age of Pinhas: it is an age of dialogue and mutual respect.

This individual has disgraced Judaism -- a true Hillul Hashem.

Parasites on Poverty: subliminal anti-semitism?

2005-06-28T20:23:00.000+12:00

"Parasites on Poverty" is a campaign that has been initiated by a group called Global Peace and Justice -- who are normally involved in the usual anti-American / anti-Israel cause du jour. This time, however, the target are the pokie machines and loan sharks that many believe are bleeding New Zealand's poorest communities dry. The motives are commendable (one might argue about the efficacy of targeting these people rather than the behaviours that lead them to make money). But, what is distressing is the imagery that is being used to market the movement.

Here is an example of a Parasites on Poverty poster:

It depicts Jesus throwing the moneylenders out of the Temple. That Jews pervert worship for commercial ends is an age-old anti-semitic calumny. The painting here plays on this: an ahistorically non-Jewish looking Jesus casting rather semitic-looking traders out of the Temple.

This is despite the fact that they were really money-changers, not money-lenders).

These associations are galling enough; but we know that there has been a history of associating Jews with usurous moneylenders and a suspicious reverence for money (this picture from a certain amoeba who met his rightful end):

GPJA leader John Minto (who has much dedicated himself to anti-racism) should think twice before launching such imagery in New Zealand.

Want to see a REAL gulag?

2005-06-23T17:12:00.000+12:00

I have already commented on Amnesty International's deranged comparison of the Guantanamo Bay detention centre to the Soviet gulag system. The Guardian expose on the subject can be read here. Now, proof that Amnesty truly has lost all sense of proportion. Patrick Devenney, in FrontPage magazine compares Amnesty's reports on the USA and North Korea. 200,000 North Koreans are held in what Amnesty demurely refers to as "detention centres":

...[i]n other camps, it is estimated that 20 to 25 percent of the total prison population dies every year, leading to a staggering amount of death. These prisoners are often arrested by authorities with no explanation or formal procedure. In some instances, three generations are jailed together, with children being imprisoned for the imagined crimes of their grandparents. In other smaller prison camps, run by the North Korean security apparatus, prisoners are routinely tortured and politically "re-educated." These camps are not hidden, one can easily view satellite photos of them, along with descriptions from the many North Koreans who have escaped. Amnesty, apparently, has not found such evidence compelling enough to include this in their report.

When President Bush referred to North Korean concentration camps, he wasn't wrong, and wasn't exaggerating. I am sure he weighed his words deliberately.
Amnesty's annual report on North Korea was a meagre 1351 words: barely half those used to excoriate Israel for sins infinitesimal in comparison, and a third of those needed to tear into the US.
Again: it is becoming clear that Amnesty retains precious little moral credibility, and has deteriorated into a tendentious political popinjay. I call on anyone who has a habit of giving money to Amnesty to withhold, and let the organisation know, in writing, why you are doing so.
When NGOs learn that there is a price to degrading their missions and becoming effective lackeys of tyrants, maybe they will mend their ways a little.

Kia Kaha

2005-06-20T19:01:00.000+12:00

(for those who don't know, kind of like yeshar koach in Maori) was the headline (for a very fleeting moment) on the ESPN website, the world's dominant sports broadcaster.

For those who don't like sports/watch TV/read newspapers, Michael Campbell, a New Zealander (and a Maori guy from Titahi Bay to boot), has just won the US Open -- one of Golf's Majors. Along with perhaps the 4 tennis grand slams, world heavyweight boxingchamp, and a handful of Olympic events), it is one of the biggest individual sporting prizes in the world.

This is quite something. The world's fairways and driving ranges are full of people trying to be the next Nicholson, or Faldo, or Woods. But this guy from the end of the world (and, with all due respect, Titahi Bay is, even more than the rest of NZ -- it's over an hour from Wellington!) has done it. Absolutely brilliant.

In fact, in my personal (and wildly unpopular) opinion, this is cooller than most of the Oscars we've won recently.

Amnesty has destroyed itself

2005-06-08T17:10:00.000+12:00

Sadly, what was the world's leading group for protecting the rights of the imprisoned and oppressed, and preventing the free world from forgetting about political prisoners, has fallen victim to the political madness of our times, and become a far-left pressure group, abandoning its mission.

It has now put up a web-page entitled "USA: Betraying Human Rights". It includes, among other features, video of comments from Noam Chomsky on conditions at Guantanamo Bay. Chomsky, as I'm sure many of you will know, is the doyen of hard-left academics.

Chomsky, incidentally, has endorsed such human rights luminaries as Mao Tse Tung, Fidel Castro and the Khmer Rouge. He has also defended holocaust deniers, and claimed that America had no right to be aggireved after September 11. For an excellent analysis of this man's mendacity and hyppocrisy, read this article by Keith Windschuttle.

In any event, we all agree that, in its prosecution of the war in terror and its wars to remove the Taliban and Saddam Hussein, the US has employed some tactics that can be questioned. But to say that they amount to "betraying human rights" is to ignore orders of magnitude so immense that the statement becomes farcical.

By comparison, have a look at the Guardian's report on the conditions suffered by innocents people in concentration camps (I do not use that term lightly) in North Korea: gas chambers, murder by medical experiment, forced starvation.

When Amnesty devotes so much energy to excoriating America for possibly violating the rights of terror suspects, but ignores state murder and terrorism on a vast scale in so many places, it has ceased to speak for human rights, and is merely a mouthpiece for a warped ideology.

Who's the chimp?

2005-06-08T16:49:00.000+12:00

How interesting. After years of liberal elites around the world scoffing at the supposed lack of intelligence of the US President, and comparing him unfavourable to his "nuanced" challenger last year, guess who did better at university?

CNN can tell you.

There's no weaseling out of this by saying that the comparison is inapt, either: they were at the same school at (basically - Kerry was one year ahead) the same time.

Just goes to show how stubborn a media-borne calumny can be, and how it can distort the truth. My guess is that the "Bush is stupid" meme will be resistant to these revelations, as it is so embedded in the DNA of our cultural arbiters.

But even before these results were released, I asked those who parroted the received wisdom one question: if GWB is unintelligent, how come he keeps winning?

No-one has been able to answer this without resorting to a Byzantine, and somewhat crazy-sounding, conspiracy theory.

Yom Yerushalayim

2005-06-07T18:12:00.000+12:00

Monday June 6 was Yom Yerushlayim -- the 28th of Iyar in the Hebrew calendar. It is the day on which we commemorate the liberation of the Old City of Jerusalem during the Six Day War in 1967 from Jordanian control.

It was the first time since the Bar Kochba rebellion (131-135 CE) in which our holy sites were in Jewish hands. And more than that, the return of Jewish sovereignty to the site of our Temple signified the hope that our redemption, our geulah, is imminent.

The Zionist project has been fantastically successful: it has brought an oppressed and ravaged people back to its land, revived its language, rescued Jews in danger. But sadly the vision of the Jewish people settling the whole land in Israel has had to be weighed against the reality of another people also living in the land. There have been, and are to be, saddening compromises.

But nonetheless, the enormity of the liberation of our holy city remains, and we should celebrate it. I feel that this is true whether we see the State of Israel as the fulfilment of the eschatological dream, or as merely a haven and human achievement, while not bringing with it the real geulah.

A transcript of a Voice of Israel broadcast made at the time is available here . It brings to life (especially for those of us who were not born then) the miraculous nature of that event. It's hard to keep dry eyes.

(Thanks to R' Gil Student of Hirhurim).

Awesome Aznar

2005-06-07T17:54:00.000+12:00

Former Spanish PM Jose Maria Aznar tells the Jerusalem Post that Europe's opposition to Israel and obscene double standards in Middle Eastern politics (merrilly funding Palestinian terror etc) are part of a silly adolescent desire to distance themselves from the US, and that Israel should ignore them.
"Europe likes appeasement very much; this is one of the most important differences between us and the States," Aznar said in an interview on the Bar-Ilan University campus. "Europeans don't like any problems. They prefer appeasement."
Unfortunately, his electorate bore this assessment out, responding to that horrendous Islamofascist outrage in the worst conceivable way, and replaced him with an appeaser of the worst kind. Shame.

What's French for schadenfreude?

2005-05-31T18:55:00.000+12:00

I would comment on my pleasure at seeing the statist, anti-American, appeasement-pacifist, anti-Israel, unelected, unaccountable, sovereignty-usurping monster known as the European Union defeated in a referendum. But I won't bother, because Mark Steyn has already done so beautifully.

Funny Vodka

2005-05-31T18:50:00.000+12:00

One of the most interesting recent phenomona of the growth of email has been viral advertising: companies using internet movie formats such as Flash to create advertisements. Two New Zealand beverage manufacturers have done this beautifully: 42 Below vodka have done some beauties. Realising there is a limit to what they can get away with on television, they have made some beautifully subversive ads that have added massively to their profile: The first is "The Story of 42 Below". They followed it up with beautiful takes on Britain and Australia, where they played on the (actually untrue) stereotype of New Zealanders living on Australian welfare hand-outs while they laze on Bondi beach. The other company is L&P (for non-Kiwis: L&P is a lemon-flavoured soft drink), relying on Kiwi memories of the atrocious offence to elegance that were Stubbies shorts. To know what NZ looked like in the early 80s, see this ad.

Apologies

2005-05-31T18:37:00.000+12:00

Hi all. Yet again, I have to apologise for not posting. I have been busy, but that's no excuse. Thankfully, Comrade has kept people informed and thinking.

There is much blogging to come.

To iPod, or not to iPod

2005-05-24T13:43:00.000+12:00

The Apple iPod is a fantastic invention. It is ridiculously popular, and even people like myself that tend to distance themselves somewhat from popular culture have one in their pocket. But there are problems with the iPod, and I'm not referring to technological ones.

The problem is not with the iPod per se, but with the phenomenon it represents in our society. It is the problem of instant gratification. It's the monster that wants strawberries all year round, the beast that demands television movies to start NOW. And now it has a new guise - the one that wants access to all the music it owns, at all times.

There is something remarkable and beautiful about seasons, about anticipation. Only through anticipation without instant gratification can we truly appreciate what we are recieving when we recieve it. There is something wonderful about not having the one CD you want to listen to with you, and listening to it when you return home instead.

Even now, for example, in Israel, winter is the season of the pomella. It is a beautiful and delicious fruit, but you know it is only around for a short time. Every juicy bite becomes heaven. Every morcel is savioured. And everyone is more grateful for that morsel than they would have been had been available all the time.

I'm not suggesting that we dispose of imported or greenhouse fruits, or that everyone burns their iPods, or that we shutdown the internet. These are all things that have their place. But we should definately be aware of the deep problems these concepts present. We need to be aware of how far they have taken us from our natural human nature - the nature that is rooted with the land and the seasons. Only if we are truly aware of these phenomena can we be truly grateful for what we have.

Jeff da Maori

2005-05-20T00:23:00.000+12:00

I saw a programme on television (shock! horror!) the other day called "New Zild: The Story of New Zealand English". Great stuff. I love the idea of bringing historical linguistics to the masses!
This programme caused me to contemplate the "bro" or "fresh" accent heard in a lot of Maori and Pacific Island English in New Zealand, and I was wondering if it is remnants of the Pacific languages on English (just like French was originally Gaulish Latin). A lot of the sounds are similar. Any comments people? I know it's not as exciting as my last blog, but this really fascinates me.

Late Night Philosophy - The Jewish Imperative

2005-05-17T00:19:00.000+12:00

No, this isn't about the Jewish imperative to do late night philosophising. Rather, it is a blog about the "Jewish Imperative" and is written late at night, hence it is in itself late night philosophy. Anyway, let's get to work. This is just a thought I had while walking to shule on Shabbat a couple of weeks ago.

People (especially Jews) have complained in recent years of the so called "moral double standard" that the world seems to hold Israel to. They complain that the world holds Israel accountable for things that would go unnoticed in other countries. I think this is a real problem - not that people hold these "double standards", but rather that people protest against them. Every human has a moral obligation to the other. It is the face of the other that demands this obligation. However, it would seem that there is indeed something more than this to Judaism.

In many places in the Torah, we read about the requirement to be kind to the stranger "for you were strangers in the land of Egypt". It is this sentence that holds the key here. We were strangers in the land of Egypt. We know what it feels like to be strangers in a land. Indeed, we have known it not only from Egypt, but from all periods through history. But it is because of that, that we must be held accountable for what happens to strangers in our own land.

It is the Jews that have had this experience, and as such they have what I will call an experiential imperative. Jews are human. They already have the moral obligation to their fellow by that fact alone. It is as if the text is telling us "You know what it is like to be a stranger! Al achat kama v'chama (even more so) do you need to be kind to the stranger! You - because you have experienced the suffering to be a people in a strange land - you must take the extra imperative! It is not enough for you to merely be human!" It is not anti-semites or anti-Zionists that hold Israel to a higher set of morals - it is the Torah itself!

Not only is the idea of a "double moral standard" a very Jewish concept, but it is the essence of what makes us Jews. We know what it is like. We have experienced suffering. We must not let others suffer. Even if it is beyond our obligations as moral people, it is not beyond our obligations as Jews. This is our Jewish experience. Those that deny the double standard, deny their Jewishness. We must live up to our obligations.

Apologies and General Funniness

2005-05-05T12:54:00.000+12:00

Hello all!
First I must apologise for my several long inactive months. I have been a bad blogger. But enough of that... onwards and upwards as they say.

Let me relate to you a short anecdote from my wanderings of the vicinity of the University of Auckland yesterday. I'm not usually one to support the defacing of property, but this time it was some good graffiti that made me laugh. Someone had stuck a poster for May Day on a lamp post with something to the effect of "Want to Sack your Boss?" written on the top. To which another being, with their pen in their hand, had commented: "Want anarchy? Go to Angola you dumb fucks!".
Sometimes swear words say it best don't they...

Habib is wrong! Millions left disillusioned and confused!

2005-04-13T19:29:00.000+12:00

Yes, my Monday posting was proven wrong by the events. Tamihere, who I dubbed a "moron", "a fool" and "ignorant" is back. He brazenly ignored instructions to take time off, and went staight back to caucus.

Labour, being the bunch of hopeless PC nancies that they are, have accepted him with barely even a slap on the wrist: they've resorted to inventing stories about "volcanic" rages on the part of Comrade Helen to maintain some dignity. Pathetic.

(tip: Antarctic Lemur at Sir Humphreys)

RIP John Tamihere's political career

2005-04-11T18:45:00.002+12:00

Well, it looks like he's finally done it now. No, I don't think he's an anti-semite. But I think he is:
1. A moron for thinking explosive comments like that would "stay off the record".
2. A fool for thinking there is any comparison between any Maori grievances and the Shoah.
3. Ignorant for ignoring the Simon Wiesenthal Centre's efforts to track down actual Nazis who committed actual murders.
4. Insensitive in his expression.

Many of us who privately chuckled at John's rants about the "wimmin's division" that runs the Labour Party and the country are feeling a bit silly now, and I must say it does bring a somewhat inappropriate comparison to mind:

First he came for the "queer tossers", and I did not speak out, because I am not a queer tosser.

Then he came for "butch wimmin", and I did not speak out, because I am not a "butch wimmin".

Then he came for "overpaid union officials", and I did not speak out, because I am not an overpaid union official.

In any event, he's finished, he's over, and he's a putz.

See ya later, Johnnie.

Ayaan Hirsi Ali

2005-04-05T19:29:00.000+12:00

I blogged earlier on the film "Submission" that got filmmaker Theo van Gogh killed. The letter pinned to his chest contained a threat to Ayaan Hirsi Ali: the bravest woman in Europe.

Pope John Paul II

2005-04-05T19:19:00.000+12:00

As I am sure you will all know, unless you have been hiding under a rock or heavily under the influence of Nandor-weed, the head of the Catholic Church, Pope John Paul II (ne Karol Wojtyla) has died. Much has been said about him already, and all can acknowledge that he has been one of the pivotal figures of the last 30 years, as well as a moral human.

During the final stages of the Pope's illness, Edah, the Modern Orthodox organisation, published a prayer.

There is much silly, wrongheaded ecumenicism and inter-faith activity in the world now, but it is incumbent on all of us to recognise the stature and moral efforts of this great figure. I reproduce the prayer, as well as the accompanying anecdote, in full:

In 1942, a Jewish couple in the Krakow ghetto entrusted their son to a
childless Polish Catholic couple, in order to save him from the Germans. When the war was over the boy's adoptive parents brought him to a young priest to be baptized. When the young priest learned that the orphan's parents had asked that he be returned to the Jewish people, the priest refused to baptize the boy. That priest, then known as Karol Wojtyla, became Pope John Paul II. We remember him as one who forever remained a friend of the Jewish people.

On March 26, 2000, Pope John Paul II came to Jerusalem, to the heart of Israel, to that city to which all Jewish hearts have turned for 2000 years. He came to the Western Wall, adjacent to the Temple Mount. He placed a prayer in the Western Wall. It read:

God of our fathers,
You chose Abraham and his descendants
To bring Your name to the nations;
We are deeply saddened
By the behavior of those
Who in the course of history
Have caused these children of Yours to suffer
And asking Your forgiveness We wish to commit ourselves To genuine brotherhood With the people of the Covenant.

Pope John Paul II will always be remembered by the Jewish people as the man who wrote this prayer and lived its words. These simple short lines express the ideas by which he transformed the relationship of the Roman Catholic Church towards Judaism and the Jewish people. With these words, he became the first Pope in 2000 years to recognize that the Jewish people remain the people of the Covenant.

At this moment the Pope lies gravely ill. We have adapted the following tefilla, which was originally issued by the Rabbinical Council of Connecticut, in consultation with Rav Joseph B. Soloveitchik ZTZ"L, for recitation during the illness of the Governor of Connecticut, Ella Grasso.

Edah urges all of our congregations to consider reciting this tefilla in
shul this Shabbat:

Mi Shebarach for the Speedy Recovery of Pope John Paul II

"Mi sheberach kol b'nai adam, shene'emar (Breishit 20:17) "Vayitpalel Avraham el haElokim vayirpa Elokim et Avimelech v'et ishto v'amhotav.." Hu Yivarech vayirapeh et hecholeh, Pope John Paul II, Karol Wojtyla, Ba'avur sh'anachnu mitpalelim ba'avuro. Hakadosh Baruch Hu yimaleh rachamim alav l'hachlimo u'l'rapoto l'hachziko u'l'hachioto, vayishlach lo m'hera refuah shlemah, l'chol evarav u'l'chol gidav shabat hi milizok u'refuah krovah lavo, hashta ba'agala uvizman kariv, v'nomar, amen"

"May He who blessed all humanity, as it is said (Genesis 21:17) "And Abraham prayed to God, and God healed Avimelech and his wife and his maids." May He bless and heal Pope John Paul II, Karol Wojtyla, who is ill, since the congregation prays on his behalf. May the Holy One, Blessed be He, have mercy and speedily restore him to perfect health, in all his organs and sinews. We restrain our pleading on the Shabbat, but may his suffering cease and healing come speedily, and let us say, Amen."

When the hate speech law comes, this site is SO banned

2005-03-22T21:40:00.000+12:00

For those of you who aren't aware, the Labour Government's chief PC commissar, Diane Yates, is leading a Parliamentary Select Committee to investigate the possibility of enacting "hate speech laws".

Renewing my faith in the sensibility of the New Zealand people (to be distinguished from their PC overlords), the public response was quick and certain. A pat on the back to all those making submissions, from left and right, religious and secular, of all ethnicities, for putting the kibosh on this horrendous attack on free speech and democracy.

New Zealand already has a law against inciting racial disharmony -- section 61 of the Human Rights Act. The committee wanted to extend the protection to religion and sexual orientation, among other criteria. Now, I am a religious person, but religions are fundamentally ideologies and belief system. They should be protected no more than other belief systems. In any event, our jhadi friends are keen to use such laws to protect criticism of their little global take-over project. I have blogged about this already. The right to free speech is not a luxury, but often a necessity of survival.

Anyway, I have decided to celebrate this, with... HATE SPEECH! Designated victim: the Labour government. Visit Prime Minister Helen Clark's own blog "Popular and Competent". A recent item about Islam is a doozy...

Bolton at the UN, Wolfowitz at the World Bank: am I dreaming?

2005-03-21T19:10:00.000+12:00

Big news recently has been made of two major appointments to international bodies made by US President George W Bush.

First, Bolton, a longtime diplomate who is following in the footsteps of Daniel Patrick Moynihan, in eschewing diplomatic politesse for straight truths. He famously said that if the 38-floor UN building in Manhattan lost 10 floors, noone would notice. Regarding Iran, he said:

The European arguments against the Iran-Libya Sanctions Act demonstrate that "some Europeans have never lost faith in appeasement as a way of life. It is clear that Iran is cynically manipulating gullible (or equally cynical) Europeans to advance its development of weapons of mass destruction.

Remember: this guy is a diplomat. It is almost too good to be true.
Mark Steyn writes a beautiful column on Bush's boldness:

The New York Times wondered what Mr Bush’s next appointment would be: "Donald Rumsfeld to negotiate a new set of Geneva conventions? Martha Stewart to run the Securities and Exchange Commission?"
Okay, I get the hang of this game. Sending John Bolton to be UN ambassador is like ...putting Sudan and Zimbabwe on the Human Rights Commission. Or letting Saddam’s Iraq chair the UN conference on disarmament. Or sending a bunch of child-sex fiends to man UN operations in the Congo. And the Central African Republic. And Sierra Leone, and Burundi, Liberia, Haiti, Kosovo, and pretty much everywhere else. All of which happened without the UN fetishists running around shrieking hysterically. Why should America be the only country not to enjoy an uproarious joke at the UN’s expense?

Again, Steyn has the lines. Take that, Kofi.

And Wolfowitz, "Darth Vader", the Holy Grail of the Neocon-conspiracy-theory types, the guy with a Jewish sounding name who unashamedly suggested invading Iraq even before 9-11, is heading the leading development agency for the 3rd World.

WOOHOO!

Victor Davis Hanson on "Bushitler"

2005-03-21T19:04:00.000+12:00

I have already blogged a number of times on the fatuous and simply ignorant comparisons between the US President and Hitler (may his name and memory be obliterated). Military historian Victor Davis Hanson articulates it very well:

In fact, what do Linda Ronstadt, Harold Pinter, Scott Ritter, Ted Rall, and George Soros all have in common? The same thing that unites Fidel Castro, the European street, the Iranians, and North Koreans: an evocation of some aspects of Adolf Hitler’s Nazi Germany to deprecate President Bush in connection with the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Read it.

Who is a bigger pacifist wussy: Kofi Annan or Miguel Moratinos?

2005-03-10T22:31:00.000+13:00

It's a toughie, I must ask.

Kofi, UN Secretary General (scion of a proud heritage that included Nazi war criminal Kurt Waldheim) has decided that the US must "recognise Hezbollah", whatever that means. No reciprocal need for Hezbollah to recognise America, of course. Funny that Americans don't like Hezbollah. I mean, all they did was murder 241 American peacekeepers... not to mention murder more than 200 innocent Jews in Buenos Aires, and who knows how many in Israel. But Hezbollah has a political wing, and a cable TV channel, so they must be OK.

But, Kofi has a challenger for pathetic weeny of the year: Miguel Moratinos. The Spanish Foreign Minister, fresh from ensuring that Hezbollah won't make the EU terror list, wants Hamas taken off the list. Why? Have Hamas finally made the decision to accept a Jewish state and a negotiated solution? Well, not quite. Actually, they still want to push the Jews into the sea (read their lovely charter here). But, if they promise Uncle Miguel to lay off the suicide bombing for a while, at least inside the Green Line, then Europe will stop pretending that they disapprove of them.

Miguel, you are a taint on the honour on the land of El Cid and paella.

Kofi, we already knew what you were like.

So: readers -- who would you rather kick sand in the face of?

Lebanese: Why I am not an Arab

2005-03-07T19:31:00.000+13:00

Louis-Noel Bar-Levhannon is a Lebanese academic residing in America. Erudite, and compelling, here he makes the case for a Lebanese identity, separate from the Arab world.

He also articulates why it is not really write to lump everybody from Casablanca to Karbala under the same nomer:

But who are the “Arabs”, and what is the “Arab World”?
This is a thorny question to which there isn’t one clearly defined or satisfying answer. I can understand that the labels “Arab World” or “Arab” can be soothing to some who believe that Arab nationalism or Arabness are valid identity markers; but the terms themselves are loaded, misleading, ambiguous, abstract, and false, not to mention grotesque oversimplifications of a political ethnic and cultural realm that is anything but uniform and homogeneous, let alone exclusively Arab (to merit a comprehensive “Arab” label)..
The labels “Arab” and “Arab World” presuppose an Arabic cultural, ethnic, and national monolith, and assign it to a geographic area that is anything but monocultural. Those labels also (smugly) presume that the Arab/Muslim expansion (7th century) happened in a vacuum, or that the cultures that it overwhelmed were somehow expunged and replaced. That is why, although infinitely flattered (not) when referred to as an “Arab”, I as a Lebanese, see myself in completely different terms that often disclaim and reject any forms of putative Arabness (or Frenchness for that matter, given that French is as much a “native” language for me, as are “Arabic” and the Lebanese “vernacular”.) I happen to believe that the Arabic language is NOT the sole property of the “Arabs”, just as the French language is not the property of the French.

He also explains why Ba'athism (and its feudin' cousin, Nasserite pan-Arab nationalism) cannot be divorced from Islam, quoting Professor Landis of Oklahoma:

The whole notion of a “secular” Ba`th [the main political exponent of Arabism and Arab nationalism. L-N,] needs correcting. Ba`thism is often referred to as a secular movement and non-religious version of Arab nationalism, but this just isn’t true... Ba`thism [...] is a transcendent faith [i.e. a secular form of Islam, L-N]. Both the founders of Ba`thist thought, Michel `Aflaq (Greek Orthodox Syrian) and Zaki al-Arsuzi (Alawite Muslim), discovered early in their careers that their party would never appeal to the broad masses of the Sunni heartland without making it perfectly clear that Ba`thism was not secular or based on earthly truths. They both insisted that Ba`thism was part and parcel of the Islamic worldview embraced by most Syrians. `Aflaq was so adamant about placating Muslim and religious sensibilities that he became known among his friends as Muhammad `Aflaq (and indeed he converted to Islam before his death). His genius lay in his ability to align Ba`thism with Islam.

As a Christian, and an exponent of western country, can he accept an Arab identity that crushes all before it?

An interesting question. Lebanon has a chance to choose its Levantine, Phoenecian heritage -- live at peace and liberty, pursue trade, and again become the "Paris of the Middle East". Let's hope they make the choice, and succeed.

Kicking out Ba'thist Assad is a great first step.

A symptom of the sickness

2005-02-27T23:34:00.000+13:00

In last week's (20 February) Sunday Star-Times (New Zealand's leading Sunday newspaper), published a piece featuring the Bush-Hitler comparisons that have become so common recently among the unthinking "intellectuals" of the left. As I have noted before, it is legitimate to disagree with Bush, his policies, and think he is a flawed individual, and not the best candidate for the US Presidency. But -- comparing him to the genocidal maniac who wiped out a third of the Jewish people, established the most vicious police state the world has ever known, and started a war that killed 80 million people with W is beyond crazy.

But a sorry individual by the name of Nicholas Woods, from Auckland,has decided to go a step further: he thinks the comparison is unfair... to Hitler.

What could be more depressing than this?

The Sunday Star-Times honoured it as letter of the week, and Mr Woods won a Parker pen for his troubles.

In his criticism of George W Bush, Steve Meikle made the hackneyed and tiresome comparison of the American president with Adolf Hitler. A brief examination of the personalities and careers of the two leaders exposes how ridiculous such a comparison is.

One was a self-made man who came from relatively humble origins to become the most powerful man of his era. The other was born into a famous political dynasty which included millionaire businessmen, a senator, and of course a president.

As a young man, one fought for his country, and in the process won the Iron Cross, and received a citation that spoke of his conspicuous bravery. The other provided only token service, thousands of kilometres away from combat. Even then, he appears to have been AWOL for much of the time.

One had a brilliant command of his native language, the other appears to have considerable difficulty composing a sentence in his own language. One was a voracious reader, the other prides himself on the fact that he doesn't even read newspapers.

Clearly a comparison of the two men is palpably unfair, but unfair to whom?

Mr Woods is a sick puppy. But who can be surprised when the media coddle these types?

A new political lexicon

2005-02-27T21:08:00.000+13:00

Sorry, again, for being too busy to care about the people who have made me what I am: the blog-reading public.

More serious posts are on their way (and I will endeavour to get my even lazier blog partners to awake from their slumber).

Anyway, for now, a cute email that has been doing the rounds --

1. Capitalist:
A. Someone who owns capital, and thus would include almost all American workers, who own capital through their pension funds.
B. Someone who understands that capitalism is the only system on earth that can produce wealth or reduce poverty.

2. Liberal:
Before 1960, someone who believes in individual freedom, economic freedom, and opposes discrimination. Since 1970, someone who opposes individual freedom, opposes economic freedom, and supports discrimination.

3. Marxist:
A. An extremely rare form of psychosis and personality disorder.
B. Something someone claims to be to make their Mommy mad.

4. Fidelista: a terminal case of #3.

5. Socialist:
A. Someone who refuses to study economics.
B. Someone practicing recreational compassion.

6. Conservative: see "liberal" for before 1960.

7. Jew - someone born to a Jewish mother or who converted to Judaism.

8. Self-hating Jew: A Jew who supports Arab terrorism and wants Israel destroyed

9. Christian: someone following the teachings of Christ.

10. Zionist: A Jew who is not a self-hating Jew.

11. Anti-Zionist: an Anti-Semite

12. Deconstructionist: a twit with nothing of value to say about anything

13. Progressive: shallow politically-correct liberals and leftists

14. Post-modernist: a Deconstructionist without all that depth in understanding

15. Multiculturalist: someone pretending to be interested in other cultures, as long as no one asks him or her to study a foreign language

16. Humanist: a human speciesist

17. Reconstructionist: see "Deconstructionist"

18. Empowered: a meaningless word PC leftists use to make themselves feel deep.

19. Feminist:
A. Before 1970, someone who wants equality of opportunity for the
sexes.
B. After 1970, someone who opposes equality of opportunity for the
sexes.

20. Palestinian self-determination: the destruction of Israel and its
depopulation

21. Democrat: see "liberal".

22. Moderate Republican: see "Democrat".

23. Caring: what liberals claim to be to make themselves feel good.

24. Egalitarian: someone who opposes equality of opportunity.

25 White: an American person with light complexion generally possessing a
mix of Caucasian, American Indian, and other racial ancestors.

26. Black: an American person with dark complexion generally possessing
a mix of black, Caucasian, American Indian, and other racial ancestors.

27. Hispanic:
A. Anyone speaking Spanish except someone from Spain.
B. Anyone the racist bureaucrats in Washington decide arbitrarily is Hispanic.

28. Asian: someone whose ancestors do not come from Asia west of the Himalaya mountains.

29. Afrocentric: someone who hates white people.

30. Eurocentric: a meaningless adjective attached by PC leftists to everything they do not like.

31. Freedom of speech: something PC leftists want promoted through censorship and speech codes.

32. The media: an Old Boys Club for liberals.

33. Affirmative action: a form of apartheid.

A modern day auto da fe: Zootorah vs the Haredi establishment

2005-02-06T01:44:00.000+13:00

Rabbi Natan Slifkin is an English educator and zoologist. He is the author of a series of books fusing science, Torah (ie the entire corpus of biblical and rabbinic texts), and the animal kingdom. He is done some fascinating work identifying different species with the traditions as to whether they are kosher or not, and has set up an educational program (read about it at the website www.zootorah.org).

Recently, however, his books received some negative publicity. In his books, R' Slifkin makes reference to different theories for accommodating scientific accounts of biology and evolution with traditional Jewish beliefs of creation; he also notes that the sages of the Talmud did not have perfect scientific knowledge, and made some mistakes in their categorisation of animals (for instance, the opinion that lice are not born from eggs, but generate spontaneously from sweat). He based himself on strong foundations: Maimonides, Nahmandies, R' Hai Gaon, R' Shimshon Rafael Hirsh among others. Yet now, it seems, ultra-Orthodox Judaism will not accept any explanations that are not in line with the most simpistic biblical literalism, and dogmatic faith in the infallibility of the sages.

A large group of "gedolim" (leading sages) have condemned his books in the strongest terms, accusing this pious, learned Jew of the utmost heresy. Indirectly, they condemn as heretics all those who, following the lead of many learned rabbis, accept the insights of empirical science, while staying faithful and true to Torah.

Yet it wasn't like this: a thousand years ago, Maimonides could speculate on the Aristotelean concept of a permanently existing world; Nahmanides could talk of days of creation that weren't 24 hours; sages conceived of hominids existing before Adam. Yet the process of enlightenment seems to have gone backwards!

Opinions that were well within normative Judaism in those days would be condemned as heresy today.

This is a departure from the questioning nature of the Jewish heritage. This is what might be expected from fundamentalist Islam -- it is deeply saddening that this is happening in the Orthodox Jewish world.

(for a good discussion of this topic, go to the wonderful Hirhurim weblog, in the links section to your left).

Borat's scariness exceeds his funniness

2005-02-06T01:21:00.000+13:00

Again, apologies for going the best part of a month without blogging: I intend to make up for it. I have a lot of material...

Anyway, our controversial Kazakh friend Borat went to the "Serengeti ranch" to see what hunting is like in America. The proprietor proceeded to reminisce about how it used to be possible to hunt black people in Africa, and how he'd like to do the same to Jews. Scary. View here.

But, I wonder: if there is so much anti-semitism in heartland America, why it has not manifested itself in a serious anti-Israel movement, like it has in Europe.

Tsunami

2005-01-12T21:38:00.000+13:00

I'm back from a summer hiatus -- unfortunately, what I have to write about is neither light nor fun.

Much has been written about the human tragedy. It is my hope and prayer that the survivors are tended to quickly and adequately, the sick and injured recover, and that the mourners are able to try and rebuild their lives as best the can.

Although it feels churlish to talk about politics after such a tragedy, a few lessons are evident.

The death toll luridly exhbits the terrible vulnerability of the world's poor. Had such a disaster hit the first world, where people live in solid homes, with access to reliable transport and communications, good medical care and safe water, the number of dead would have been far lower. Tsunamis will always happen, but to prevent them from causing such catastrophic loss of life, living standards in these countries must be raised. Aid is important, but history shows that it is not the main ingredient in reducing poverty and misery. Free trade is necessary now. I strongly agree with the leftists on one point: the hypocritical trade barriers of the rich world must go.

In the immediate wake of the tragedy, many of the world's bien pensants rushed to do that which they like best: blame America (and its mini-me, Israel) for all the world's ills. The fact that the US provided almost all the air and sea transport for the aid, as well as marines to distribute is, as well as a tremendous amount of food aid, was lost in criticism of the federal government's slowness to open its wallet.

For others, the aftermath of the tsunami was an example of why the UN is morally bankrupt. David Frum wrote a wonderful piece in the Telegraph, which I must quote at length:

The UN's authority is instead one of those ineffable mystical mysteries. The authority's existence cannot be perceived by the senses and exerts no influence on the events of this world. Even the authority's most devout hierophants retain the right to disavow that authority at whim, as Ms Short herself disavowed its resolutions on Iraq. And yet at other times those same hierophants praise this same imperceptible, inconsequential, and intermittently binding authority as the best hope for a just and peaceful world. An early church father is supposed to have said of the story of the resurrection: "I believe it because it is absurd." The same could much more justly be said of the doctrine of the UN's moral authority.

Whence exactly does this moral authority emanate? How did the UN get it? Did it earn it by championing liberty, justice, and other high ideals? That seems a strange thing to say about a body that voted in 2003 to award the chair of its commission on human rights to Mummar Gaddafi's Libya.

Did it earn it by the efficacy of its aid work? On the contrary, the UN's efforts in Iraq have led to the largest financial scandal in the organisation's history: as much as $20 billion unaccounted for in oil-for-food funds. UN aid efforts in the Congo have been besmirched by allegations of sexual abuse of children; in the Balkans, by charges of sex trafficking.

Is the UN a defender of the weak against aggression by the powerful? Not exactly. Two of this planet's most intractable conflicts pit small democracies against vastly more populous neighbouring states. In both cases, the UN treats the democracies – Israel, Taiwan – like pariahs.

This record may explain why the UN is regarded by so many Americans as neither moral nor authoritative – and why American leaders of both political parties reject UN attempts to control American actions.

But there are positives in the humanitarian response. Indonesia set aside its hate of Israel, letting an El Al plane laden with aid land.

Special credit must go to the world's cricketers, for rushing in to action and staging a "World XI vs Asian XI" match, and raising $14 million -- a staggering effort (Kiwi hero Chris Cairns raised $100,000 in just two mighty blows, as Toyota had pledged to give $50,000 for each six).

National Religous Punished Again

2005-01-12T06:03:00.000+13:00

An uncle of mine once said to me that the national religous (dati leumi) constituency in Israel was an unfortunate one because they love everyone else, but everyone else hates them. They are willing to work with secular Jews and secular culture for important nationalist goals, and they are highly focussed on the spiritual issues that drive the Ultra-Orthodox (charedi) world. However, the charedi world looks down on them for their secular and nationalist involvements, and the secular world rejects them for their religiosity.

In recent years, we have seen the consequences of this played out time and again. Two examples from the last few weeks bear out this point well.

1) The new educational reforms as modified through coalition with UTJ (the leading charedi party). Reforms cutting funding, firing teachers, reducing the six-day week to five days (Fridays off) will be offset by higher salaries for the remainder and more training. However none of the cuts will be applied to charedi schools. On the contrary, funding will be increased to the independent charedi institutions. The public 'national religous' schools will be cut along with the rest of the public school system.

2) The major changes considered to the military in the wake of growing signs that large numbers of national religous soldiers will refuse to evict the Jewish residents of Gaza in the proposed disengagement plan. As secular Zionism and nationalism slowly recedes, the national religous have been playing an increasing role in the military, volunteering in increasing numbers for front line combat roles in accordance with their belief that it is a mitzvah (commandment) to protect the land of Israel and the Jewish people from attack. This has until now been very convenient for the military commanders and the government, but now the story has changed. Again, in accordance with their beliefs and the instructions of their Rabbis, the national religous have been putting huge pressure both inside and outside the military to prevent the disengagement form Gaza which must of necessity involve evicting Jewish residents. Many have talked explicitly about refusing orders, others have discussed an emotional incapability of carrying out such orders, while many have merely expressed their concern, yet maintained that they would still crry out the order were it issued. In response the government is openly discussing cuttting funds to the hesder yeshivot (national religous establishments that combine army service with Torah study).
The message is clear - 'We'll take your ideology when it suits us, but try and assert yourself, and we'll stab you in the back.'

I don't have the answer to all these problems, but one thing is certain - Israeli society has a lot of problems to work through, and no amount of referendums will solve them (although they might be a good start.)

CNN: New Zealand is a haven for terrorists

2004-12-23T01:31:00.000+13:00

Amazing that the local media have tried to bury this story, yet it comes up on CNN: the Director of the SIS has publicly announced that there are jihadis operating in New Zealand.

Releasing Zaoui, and signing a ridiculous "non-aggression pact" with South East Asia were symbolic of what has happened to this country. Not only have we run down our armed forces to near uselessness, we seem to be unwilling to realise the threats facing the world: even our supposedly peaceful corner of it.

We feel safe to morally preen and sneer while the Aussies and Americans actually fight. We are seen as a soft touch: lacking the wherewithal, the will, and most importantly the moral clarity to see jihad for what it is, and to fight back.

Where is the opposition?

What Habib wants from Santa...

2004-12-22T20:31:00.000+13:00

Yes, I'm Jewish, and am incredibly scathing on those Jews who have Xmas trees and give Xmas presents, and even those Jews who elevate Hannukah presents to Xmas-like proportions; BUT, I am prepared to bend just this once if anyone would buy me this.

A close election? Nah...

2004-12-22T20:18:00.000+13:00

For all the commentary saying that America is a "deeply divided country", this is a pretty good answer.

On the other hand, once you account for relative population, things look a little different.

Squat or sit?

2004-12-20T20:37:00.000+13:00

The news in Aotearoa turned a little scatological today:

Nine of the Asian-style toilets will be installed in the main library as part of an overhaul of the facilities. The remaining 40-or-so toilets in the library on the corner of Princes and Alfred streets will be the usual sitting variety.

University spokesman Bill Williams said the squats were being trialled and, if successful, the university aimed to swap about 10 per cent of its 1400 toilets on the Auckland City campus.

The residents of talkback land were, of course, incensed: "when you come to ear country, yoi doi thungs ear wye", "ween un Roim, you doi ez the Roimans".

Despite a cultural inability to understand the working of these toilets, I don't really see problem with installing them per se. I don't believe in socially-engineered assimilation.

I am no fan of multiculturalism, partly because it involves more social engineering, and partly because western (especially Anglosphere) culture is so patently superior to other varieties on offer.

But I don't think the odd squat toilet damages this. The main focus should be on those who, by aggressive proselytisation, or violence, aim to effect change on western populations against their will. The Taiwanese and Filipinos who want to go to the toilet squatting are not putting this in danger.

What does is the university's current policy of recruiting students from the Wahhabi heartland of Saudia Arabia and the Gulf.

Religious tolerance leads to crazy PC intolerance

2004-12-13T22:31:00.000+13:00

Her Majesty's government is trying to push a new law through Parliament: it would create a ban on "incitement to religious hatred". This offence would replace the crime of blasphemous libel, which has essentially become a dead letter.

The bill has one real purpose: to protect Islam from verbal attack. The proposer of the law, Lord Avebury, says as much in his speech in the House of Lords. The thinking is that other minority groups, such as Jews and Sikhs (for whom religion and ethnicity are combined) have protection under existing racial vilification law, but Muslims (a mighty Ummah made up of Asians, Africans, Arabs and others) are not protected.

This thinking is, of course, feeble. It makes some sense to prohibit vilification on the grounds of factors that people have no control over, such as race, national heritage or disability. But to ban criticism of certain religions (or political ideologies) -- things over which the individual has choice and freedom -- is ridiculous.

I am a religious Jew -- but I would never dream of imposing a situation where Judaism would be above the law and protected by the coercive arms of the state. Such laws are reminiscent of medieval Europe: where an infallible and omnipotent church stifled the search for truth.

People must be free to criticise religions just as they are to criticise political movements, artistic tastes, or anything else they don't like.

This law is an encroachment on the ultimate freedom -- that of thought and expression.

Very few people in Britain have had the courage to stand up against this monstrous attack on liberty. One of them was Rowan Atkinson, of Mr Bean and Blackadder fame. He complains that some of his most famous comedy routines (remember his "I am Satan, but you can call me Toby" skit?) would potentially be illegal under the new law. Of course, don't expect to see any prosecutions for attacking Christianity.

Charles Moore, former editor of the Telegraph, puts it another way, in a wonderful article. The Quran records how Mohammed became betrothed to his favourite wife, Aïsha, when she was six -- and consummated the marriage when she was nine (she was plucked away from playing on a swing to fulfil her marital obligations with the Prophet - PBUH). This is a straight reading from the Quran and the most trustworthy of hadith, those of Bukhari (see here for more).

Moore says that he doesn't think it is appropriate to call Mohammed a paedophile, as this western concept doesn't fit when talking about 7th Century Arab culture. Nonetheless, one might do so, and be justified. This may soon be illegal in Britain.

He interprets Blunkett as saying that it would be illegal to say that Islam is a threat. Is this sane? Is it not patently obvious now that there is a threat to Western countries, Britain among them -- the Metropolitan police have just thwarted a "Madrid style attack". These attacks are not being carried out by vegans, Inuit, or croquet players. They are being carried out by Muslims, in the name of Islam, and supported by a huge number of Muslim clerics and leaders.

Making it illegal to call the threat by its name is not only a disgusting attack on liberty, but it represents reacting to a deadly threat by wishing it away and forbidding anyone to mention it.

America -- **** yeah!

2004-12-12T02:31:00.000+13:00

I have just returned from seeing the funniest film of 2004. Matt Stone and Trey Parker (of South Park fame) have created a Thunderbirds-style spoof of a Jerry Bruckheimer action movie.

"Team America: Global Police" are an American anti-terrorist force that track down and kill baddies, while blithely ignoring such things as international law and the sovereignty of other naitons.

There are many targets of satire, on both the left and the right: American paranoia about terrorism, and ignorance of foreign countries (every location in the film bears a title such as "Panama, Central America: 1500 miles south of the real America").

But the main target is that clique of Hollywood leftists who oppose America's fight against terrorism. The Film Actors' Guild (humorous acronym), led by Alec Baldwin, and with all the usual suspects (Tim Robbins, Susan Sarandon, Janeane Garofalo and a hilarious suicide-bombing Michael Moore) combine to try and stop Team America.

The film had me struggling to breathe with laughter. It is a triumph against cloying political correctness (Kim Jong-Il's musical solo will make your jaw drop); I love the way it pierces the moral preening of the entertainment elites -- their pretension to a deep wisdom on current affairs that is no more than fashionable received opinion, their assumption that the public care about their political views.
Most of all, it is a feat of free speech. I can't believe uber-PC New Zealand even allowed this film to be shown. Maybe that is a good sign.

Best line in the film: Sean Penn interviewed on TV about his opinion on Team America --

Last year I went to Iraq. Before Team America showed up it was a happy place. They had flowering meadows and rainbow skies and rivers made of chocolate, where the children danced and laughed and played with gumdrop smiles.

Brilliant.

UPDATE: The Sean Penn dialogue (among others) is available on the web! Go to the Team America website, click on "clips", and then "movie clips".

Zaoui and the left: an odd couple?

2004-12-08T23:30:00.000+13:00

There's a good article at venerable Commentary magazine by Joshua Kurlantzick detailing how many of the leftist elites are actively supporting Islamist groups that stand against everything the left ostensibly supports (gender equality, gay rights, reproductive choice, artistic freedom, free speech, I could go on and on...).

In New Zealand, we have the Zaoui gang. Last night, they crowded into a mosque in Ponsonby to celebrate his birthday. A couple of weeks back, they held a concert in a pub in his honour. The whole leftist establishment, from musicians like Dave Dobbyn to Finlay MacDonald of the Listener attend these things.

A pub of all places. The FIS (Islamic Salvation Front) that Zaoui represented are hardly enthusiastic about outlets that sell alcohol... The Said Qutb-influenced FIS would ban women from working outside the house -- fascinating that Deborah Manning, Zaoui's lawyer, doesn't seem to care about this.

David Farrar summarises the SIS case against Zaoui:

* attempted to destroy a false South African passport
* possible "casing" video included many places not obvious tourist sites
* visited mosque in Hanoi frequented by Algerian diplomats despite claiming to fear contact with Algerian regime
* doubts over veracity of an answer he gave
* twice declined refugee status in Belgium
* convicted in Belgium in 1996 of being a leader and instigator of a criminal association
* illegally left Belgium and illegally entered Switzerland in 1997
* undertook activities in Switzerland which the Swiss government saw as endangering Switzerland's domestic and external security
* expelled from Switzerland to Burkina Faso in 1998
* convicted in absentia in France in 2001 of participation in a criminal group with a view to preparing terrorist acts

The New Zealand Herald, in an uncharaceristically good piece of investigative journalism, revealed some hard-to-dispute terrorist links here. It is known that he acted as a link between the political FIS and the ghastly violent GIA. For a short summary of the GIA's oeuvre:

Frequent attacks against civilians and government workers. Since 1992, the GIA has conducted a terrorist campaign of civilian massacres, sometimes wiping out entire villages in its area of operation, although the group’s dwindling numbers have caused a decrease in the number of attacks. Since announcing its campaign against foreigners living in Algeria in 1993, the GIA has killed more than 100 expatriate men and women—mostly Europeans—in the country. The group uses assassinations and bombings, including car bombs, and it is known to favor kidnapping victims. The GIA highjacked an Air France flight to Algiers in December 1994. In 2002, a French court sentenced two GIA members to life in prison for conducting a series of bombings in France in 1995.

Do we want this guy in New Zealand? Does he deserve amnesty? Do we want to be seen as a haven for this kind of ideology? Funnily enough, those who should oppose it most are supporting it.

Cool stuff on MEMRI-TV

2004-12-02T23:33:00.000+13:00

MEMRI (Middle East Media Research Institute) Do invaluable work translating Arab and Muslim media. They now have some excellent high resolution, subtitled videos that will make your hair stand on end.

British MP George Galloway, on an Egyptian TV show, out-Arabing the Arabs (clip 372):

The people who invaded and destroyed Iraq and have murdered more than a million Iraqi people by sanctions and war will burn in Hell in the hell-fires, and their name in history will be branded as killers and war criminals for all time. Fallujah is a Guernica, Falluaja is a Stalingrad, and Iraq is in flames as a result of the actions of these criminals. Not the resistance, not anybody else but these criminals who invaded and fell like wolves upon the people of Iraq. And by the way, those Arab regimes which helped them to do it will burn in the same hell-fires.

The accent is Scottish, but the message is a mix of Osama, Robert Fisk and Mohammed al Sahaf. Methinks the Right Honourable member for Glasgow Kelvin is overdoing the multicultural thing just a touch with the hellfire and the Arafatisms "Falluja is a Stalingrad".

Next is a delightful clip from Iranian children's TV, celebrating "Jerusalem Day". At a large rally, a presenter talks to a child (clip 365):

Reporter: Why did you come here?

Child: I came to say that I love them [the Palestinian children] with all my heart.

Reporter: Oh Muslim Palestinian child, you are so courageous, you are so brave. the stone that is thrown from your hand toward the godless enemies, the angles in heaven will crash it like bombs and missile on the enemies' heads.

Reporter: Dear viewers, the Palestinian children say: "Even if they take us all to the slaughterhouse, the door of Jihad and Intifada will not be closed."

Why did you come to take part in the parade?

Child: I came to say, "Death to Israel" and "Death to America." And I also have a piece to recite

Lovely. The problem with children's TV in the west is that there just aren't enough psycho flag-burning rallies with people screaming death chants.

Don't you love New Zealand's new-found special relationship with Iran?

The chasm between Australia and New Zealand yawns ever wider...

2004-12-02T22:47:00.000+13:00

Leaders of Asia-Pacific countries congregated in Vientiane, capital of Laos (pronounced "louse"), to discuss trade and diplomatic relationships.

Australia and New Zealand were represented by their respective prime ministers. They were supposed to form a united block, as two English-speaking, OECD nations, negotiating for their mutual interest.

South East Asian countries wanted Australia and New Zealand to sign a "non aggression pact". This involves a pledge not to interefere in the affairs of another ASEAN state, and not to threaten or use force.

Of course, New Zealand signed. A combination of our PC commitment to appearing to support 3rd world and non-western nations, shocking ignorance of the threat posed by Islamic fanatics in our region, and a craven willingness to do anything to secure a free trade agreement -- all combined in our accession to the pact.

Australia, of course, see it differently. Although it is a cliche, Bali was their 9/11. It was the day when it became obvious to the vast majority of Aussies that Islamofascism was a threat to their very existence.

If the government of the Phillipines or Thailand is unable to deal with the rebel problem in their country, or more to the point, if Indonesia and Malaysia begin to support movements such as Jema'ah Islamia, and this threatens the safety of Australia and Australians, they will take action -- treaty, or "international legitimacy" be damned.

And if there is no such threat, then there is no need for a non-aggression treaty.

New Zealand needs to snap out of its slumber. We should try and build the best trade and diplomatic relations with South East Asia we can, and improve mutual understanding.

But: there are nearly a quarter of a billion Muslims on Australia's doorstep. Many are angry and violent; one need only know of the restiveness in Molucca; the desire of so many to form a "caliphate" in Indochina; horrendously violent Islamist separatists in Thailand and the Phillipines; the growing Islamocentric racism in Malaysia. The prospect of a radical government taking hold in coming decades is significant. Helen Clark calls our region a "benign strategic environment". Like the Tui beer slogan: "yeah right". We need to be prepared to deal with reality.

Disarming our Air Force and Navy, and reducing our Army to a "force" only suitable for peace-keeping, is not sensible. This needs to be fixed as a national priority (a $5 billion government budget surplus would go a ways to fixing that).

This needs to be combined with a knowledge of who our real allies are: even if they are our foes on the cricket and footy pitches.

Fame... but where is the fortune?

2004-11-29T21:54:00.000+13:00

The December edition of New Zealand's premier Internet magazine "Net Guide" features a story on the rise of blogging in New Zealand.

Guess who was mentioned on page 49?

My one quibble: they had the temerity to characterise KiwiJewPundit as being of the political right. I'm sure Comrade would differ.

But I guess, in order to change perceptions, he would have to post more, wouldn't he...

Dancing Cossacks

2004-11-29T21:31:00.000+13:00

The lead-up to the 1975 election was a vituperative one. The Kirk-Rowling Labour Government had mobilised the left-leaning Vietnam-generation youth, and middle New Zealand was ripe for a red-scare. The opposition saw an opportunity to portray the compulsory savings scheme as a commie takeover.

The National Party, led by Rob Muldoon, created the most famous television ad in New Zealand political history, the "Dancing Cossacks" ad. There can't have been many more stark political advertisements anywhere. It's available here, from the National Archives.

The irony is, that the Muldoon government (1975-1984) turned out to be the most socialist in the nation's history: wage and price freezes; marginal income tax rates of 66%; regulations on everything from trucks to tomatoes.

More ironically, it took the Labour government of Lange and Douglas after 1984 to free the economy and dismantle the socialist system.

(Courtesy of a guy who doesn't like socialism very much.)

From the National Front website...

2004-11-28T23:53:00.000+13:00

Back in August, I noted reports that National Front members were carrying "Free Palestine" banners at their counter-demonstration to the anti-racism meeting in Wellington.

The left wouldn't comment, of course. It damages their pat distinction between anti-Zionism and its honest cousin, anti-semitism.

Well, the National Front's website is unafraid of voicing their "support for the Palestinians". They called their protest an "anti zog rally" (ZOG stands for Zionist Occupation Government; it is a term used by fascist loony tunes for the US Government and anyone else they see as a marionette of the Jooooos).

Here is the National Front's report of the event:

Six of us were therefore left to spend the entirety of the two hours standing outside the hall, with placards reading
"Zionism is Racist" and "Free Palestine from Zionist Occupation", and talking amicably with a large police contingent. Leaflets exposing Zionism as Jewish supremacy and the manner by which it uses others to do its dirty work,
were handed out. The anti-racists attending couldn?t say much in criticism of the NF pickets.

Even these addled skinhead morons seem to realise that since when it comes to hating Jews, they'll ally themselves with anyone, they may end up with strange bedfellows:

Some of the Left seem to be aware of the common ground between them and the NF on certain issues and find the confrontations problematical.

I wanna see Keith Locke respond to that.

"The Apprentice 2: Ambassador" -- what a great reality TV concept!

2004-11-25T16:15:00.000+13:00

Israelis are sick of their terrible image overseas. There are many causes: a trendy identification of Palestinians as "udnerdogs", the pervasive influence of oil wealth, weariness of the influence of growing Muslim minorities.

But the fact is, a large part of Israel's PR problem is due to the low quality of many of its international representatives. Think of the Israelis we're used to seeing on CNN or BBC: combative, scary looking Raanan Gissin; Jabba-the-Hutt-impersonator Fuad Ben-Eliezer; and all the others with their stammering, their "eeeeh", their slow delivery. No wonder Hanan Ashrawi and Saeb Erekat tear them to pieces.

Now, Israeli TV is coming to the rescue:

"Hashagrir," or "The Ambassador," which debuts Wednesday, plays into a classic Israeli pet peeve: that the country's diplomats invariably fail to convince foreign audiences that Israel is in the right in its dispute with the Arabs....

The format of "Hashagrir" is similar to American reality TV programs like "The Apprentice," with an expert panel giving a designated loser his marching orders at the end of each episode.

The first assignment was a tough one:

The first program pit the seven male contestants against their seven female counterparts at the Cambridge University Union in England. Speaking before a skeptical audience, each side presented Israel's case in a short speech before answering questions from the floor.

Not all were successful:

"Unfortunately the Palestinian Authority has declined to every opportunity the Israeli government offered them," she said, butchering English grammar.

(thanks to Israel Insider).