Paul Krugman of the New York Times publishes the usual garbage about them (i.e., "the Muslim world") hating us (Americans and Jews) because of the policies of George Bush. I hate to have to defend Bush, but just as I'll say that Bill Clinton was unfairly attacked for political gain, anybody who says that Muslim countries hate us because of George Bush is an idiot. Think back to the OPEC Oil Embargo, the Iranian Hostage Crisis and the Beirut barracks bombing and I think you've got a pretty good legacy of acts of war against this country (unanswered mind you) while George Bush was still deciding what he wanted to do when he grew up.

Personally, if there are people who feel they need to use hate to advance their political agendas, my goal in life would not be to appease them or understand their motives, but to hate them back and kill them if they ever came near by wife and children. There is no room in this world for prime ministers of countries of tens of millions of people saying things such as "Jews run the world" and must be defeated. No excuses. For crying out loud, the guy is retiring soon - there is absolutely no need to have made those remarks. Krugman thinks Mahathir's just a shrewd politician. Hitler was playing to his constituents also because they had a crappy economy.

You know what, now that I understand why Hitler used anti-Semitism the way he did, I don't hate him anymore. He was just being reasonable after all! What else could he be expected to do with a country to run and all those evil Jews running the world ?!?

I want to throw up.

Update: I am glad to see there are others as outraged as I am: Once again, the hard work is done by Little Green Footballs.

I can't believe that a second year has gone by and I didn't get a chance to go to the Texas State Fair which is a month long event. Last year it was because we had just moved and this year it was because we just had a baby. I'm looking forward to 2004!

Why the big fuss? Where else can you find such local delicacies as fried Snickers on a stick?

You've probably seen reports like this one, about how Germany's Jewish population is on the rise. What is more interesting to me is why these people are going to Germany, although in Jerry Seinfeld's words - "not that there's anything wrong with that".

The article says that many are fleeing from the Ukraine, Russia, etc. and going to Germany because it's close. If that were indeed the case, what makes these immigrants so different from those of 100 years ago like my great-grandparents who took an enormously more difficult trip to the U.S.? I'm assuming that it's because German immigration policies are much more open than our own nowadays. Based on recent reports, it seems that we here could use an influx of immigrants to bolster the American Jewish community.

It is also a sad commentary on the situation in Israel that having decided to leave their home country, many Jews prefer the colder climate of Europe to the balmy Mediterranean. I would like to think that if I ever felt that I had to leave the United States that Israel would be my principal option. Then again, the U.S. isn't the Ukraine where I'm sure almost anywhere else would make for a better life.

Then again, maybe there is hope for the Ukraine. I just read that a Holocaust Museum and Jewish Education Center is to be built there.

In any case, good luck to them all.

Apologies to those who've noticed a slowdown in postings. We just had a baby a month ago and now that grandma has gone back home, we're still trying to figure out what to do with the little one and her big sister. I'll be going on several trips soon which will actually give me more time to think and post. Please stay tuned.

By the way, if you don't go to shul regularly and were thinking about starting, now's a good a time as any...we read the very first parsha of the Torah this Shabbos - Breishit. You know, "In the beginning...., etc."

We're going to be in Arkansas this weekend doing some leaf peeping. Maybe we'll see if we can't find some MOTs (Members of the Tribe) for a little Shabbat action, even if it's Chabad in Little Rock.

Great post at a website called Jessica's Well. Look at the entry for October 16 which links to Life Magazine articles from six months after WWII saying things like - "We have swept away Hitlerism, but a great many Europeans feel that the cure has been worse than the disease." Sounds like criticism of our war in Iraq today, doesn't it? I'm now even more confident that things will work out just fine in the long run.

OK - think of the most bizarre thing that could possibly happen to you.

Now read about the Jewish couple in Minnesota that had the artist formerly known as Prince knock on their door to try to convert them....on Kol Nidre night!

You know, it's really sad that there is so much blatant, published anti-semitism in the world that I have to post a link to someone who's taken the time out to do a summary of recent anti-semitic events and comments made by public officials. Hat tip to www.jewschool.com.

As the author states at the end - "How can any self-repsecting Jew honestly be anti-Zionist? Really?"

At the Organization of the Islamic Conference taking place in Malaysia, the prime minister of that country told the attendees that "The Europeans killed 6 million Jews out of 12 million, but today the Jews rule the world by proxy," Mahathir said, opening the meeting of Islamic leaders from 57 nations. "They get others to fight and die for them."

He further urged the Islamic World to "unite, using nonviolent means for a "final victory." Sounds like Final Solution - doesn't it? Maybe it's OK to just try to starve all the Jews to death instead of buring them in ovens?

Our good friend Hamid Karzai, the leader of Afghanistan hand-picked by the US had this to say - "It is great to hear Prime Minister Mahathir speak so eloquently on the problems of the ummah (Muslim world) and ways to remedy them," Karzai said. "His speech was an eye-opener to a lot of us and that is what the Islamic world should do."

See the whole article from USA Today here.

With friends like Ann Coulter, who needs enemies? I really do despise most of what this woman writes, and to prove it I am including a link to an anti-Coulter site.

That being said, I have been a fan of Rush Limbaugh because I do believe that regardless of how egotistical he comes across in his show, he can be critical and funny without too much name calling - as opposed to Ann Coulter.

However, I do want to comment on some quotes pulled from the Coulter piece:

"Inasmuch as liberals have no morals, they can sit back and criticize other people for failing to meet the standards that liberals simply renounce." OK, I don't agree with the first part - that's the kind of thing that makes me dislike Ann so much. The second part though is important - we don't hear now how if we only ended the War on Drugs and decriminalized "recreational" use Rush and other innocents wouldn't be in this unnecessary predicament. No! It's "shame on him - he's as bad as a heroin addict driving a bus full of children!" Send him away!

Here's another interesting quote:

'Liberals can lie under oath in legal proceedings and it's a "personal matter." Conservatives must scream their every failing from the rooftops or they are "liars".' You know who she's talking about...and I'm sure this is too broad a generalization,..or is it?

No more Jews in Baghdad. Would you believe that 100 years ago a quarter of Baghdad was Jewish? Hmmm, now why would they all leave like that? We know that Islam is the Religion of Peace and Love....or is it, kufr?

TRAGIC. How do people go to work in this city, not knowing whether they'll come home alive or not? I think I'll start posting every time someone in NY meets a random, untimely death. Here's one from this weekend.

What is the price that people are willing to pay to live around here? How many millions put their lives in the hands of others every day? Who remembers the Brooklyn subway crash that lead to 100 deaths? How about any of these (which has not been updated and may not be complete)?

I swear that I love NY even though I left - but in a place where only the sky is the limit for people's dreams, the tragedies are all that more profound.

We're thinking of going to Arkansas next week to see what kind of autumn action they get over there in the Ouachitas. I know it's not Vermont but it's a heck of a lot closer.

Is it any wonder that innocent Palestinian children die when they do something so sensless as to provide background cover for their comrades with guns? It's been 3 years and countless dead and they still think it's a fun idea to hang around during a firefight? Hat Tip to Little Green Footballs.

I would never claim that individual Palestinians don't suffer due to Israel's hunt to destroy terrorists and their operations. However, it's hard to react to those claims when the reporting of their extent vary so wildly and in many cases fallaciously.

One report in the left leaning Ha'Aretz claims that 2,000 Palestinians were left homeless by this past week's actions by the Israeli army to destroy tunnels used for smuggling arms, people, etc, from Egypt into Gaza.
Today a report by the Associated Press with a headline of "almost 1,500" homeless actually uses a figure of 1,240 in the body of the article. If 1,240 is almost 1,500, then 200 is almost 500.

This reminds me of Operation Defensive Shield in Jenin in 2002 when Palestinian cabinet member Nabil Shaath claimed hundreds of civilians killed in a massacre perpetrated by the Israel Defense Forces. A more sober accounting by the U.N. determined that almost as many Israeli soldiers died (23) as Palestinian civilians (maybe up to half of the 52 Palestinians killed in the fighting). This of course does not mention the 29 Israelis killed at a Passover Seder just before that.

Update: Now the Associate Press is reporting "hundreds" of homeless. So we've gone from 2,000 to "hundreds". Anybody willing to bet on a drop to "dozens" in the next 24 hours?

We're in for a lunar eclipse on November 8th.

Emma Thomson is one of my favorite actresses. Maybe it's the accent, or maybe it's just that she's one of the few actresses that seems to have a brain - again this may be an illusion based on the accent, but I don't think so. Anyway, that's why I'm so excited that she's agreed to take the role of Professor Trelawney in the upcoming movie version of "Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban".

This blog is starting to need a serious dose of silliness after so much discussion of serious topics. It's good to see that there are people who have so few cares in the world, and so much free time on their hands, that they spend the majority of their life grooming their cats.

The LA Times has printed a report claiming that Israel now has sea-based nuclear missiles. I guess Israel needs them to protect themselves from followers of people like NYU professor Tony Judt, published yesterday in the same newspaper who calls for an end to the Jewish state.

This is my latest e-mail to Ray Hanania. Here I am responding to a request of his to comment on a pro-Israel readers' irate and personal attack on him based on what he had written in his column, also posted below:

------------------------------------------------------------------------

Here are my thoughts as you have requested:

First of all, even if this person had a good point, there is no room in civilized discourse to say things like, "As any educated person would know..." and claiming that your words incited anti-semitic acts. That's just not right. Now, I'll try and get into the mind of this person and explain what made him so irate.

When I read your article and saw that you said "Zionism...declares that Israel must be exclusively Jewish" that got my dander up too. In fact, I would say it was that one line that sparked this whole conversation we're having. Let's say that I and the other writer disagree with your statement...why does it upset us so, instead of just making us shake our heads? Your statement brings to mind, unintentionally I'm sure, the litany of prejudices about Jews setting themselves apart from everyone else because they feel they're better than non-Jews. This is often a false impression that is given by religious Jews who refuse to eat other's food because it's not kosher, or promote marriage within the religion. (I can't claim that there aren't Jews who feel they are better than others, but what society, race or religion doesn't have such people?)

It hurts us (moderate to liberal Jews in particular) deeply to hear that people think that we're exclusivists when one of our principal laws teach us to "love thy neighbor". Our patriarch Abraham is famous for inviting strangers into his tent - and they sure weren't Jews because there weren't any others! The Jewish trend to want to live together in tight-knit communities is primarily due to the desire for a more comfortable life such as being close to kosher food sources and within walking distance of synagogues since travel is prohibited on the Sabbath and other holidays - not because we think of others as inferiors who we don't want to mix with. In Israel in particular, there is the additive desire to live together as a defensive stance in front of the outside world which I have described in prior e-mails. It is indeed this misunderstanding of Jew's desire to "hang together" that many of us believe allow people to begin down the slippery slope of hate - "those Jew bastards don't think we're good enough for them...we don't need 'em here" - therefore the harsh, angry reaction to your words.

(As an aside, remember that just as radical Muslim militants distort the world's views of the Muslim community at large, so the ultra-Orthodox Jewish community presents a false impression of the mainstream Jewish community, 90% of which are not Orthodox, but are Conservative, Reform or otherwise affiliated.) I am Conservative (not too religious, not too secular) myself although I did choose to live in an area that is more Jewish than most based on the general reasons cited above.

As to some of the reader's other comments, he seems to want you to apologize for everything that people claim is wrong in Palestinian society. I don't think you should have to do that every time you write a column criticizing a particular policy or action. I don't remember where I read it, but I did see an interesting comment somewhere that an Arab that condemns Arab actions must also include a condemnation of Israel somewhere in the article lest they be perceived of as an "Uncle Tom" of sorts. Similarly, any Jew who criticizes Israeli policy has to include a comment about those policies not justifying Palestinian militancy.

I'm sure you won't mind if I comment that it seems that even you succumbed somewhat to this standard by stating that the government of Israel has murderous ways. Assuming that's a correct and fair statement, what does that have to do with the suicide bombings, unless you're saying that one leads to the other and is therefore understandable? If it's understandable, it's a natural reaction - and how can we possibly condemn Hamas' natural reaction to Israeli murders? Suicide bombing is either a good tactic or a bad one, a moral use of force or an immoral use of force, wholly independent of what caused that person to want to engage in that activity in the first place.

Here's what may be a bad analogy (which my friends know I have a tendency to dream up). If a vigilante kills someone to exact his revenge outside the court of law, it doesn't matter whether that revenge was for stealing a bottle of milk or for having had his wife raped and murdered. It's just wrong. What led the vigilante to murder another human being has no justification. End of story. I believe that's what you wanted to say about suicide bombings, but the criticism of Israel lessened the argument you were making, just as calling the robber or rapist a criminal above would have weakened the argument that what the vigilante did was 100% wrong.

Now it's time for me to go to bed! Forgive me if the late hour has made me slacken my attempts at impartiality.

Respectfully,
Howard

Ray Hanania and I have had a very heartfelt e-mail exchange on the plights of our two peoples. See below for the latest. Maybe we can figure this thing out eventually amongst ourselves.....
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Thanks Howard for your comments.

I appreciate them and recognize your sincerity to be fair, which is probably the only thing we can ask of each other. Rather than say you are right or wrong, or vice versus, Palestinians and Israelis need to engage in a constructive dialogue of understanding.

As a palestinian, here is how I view things (very summarized, of course).

I don't agree that they should have divided Palestine into two states that crisscrossed illogically. The Partition was flawed and made to fail. But, since Israel was established and because events have changed so much over the past 50 years, I don't believe that Palestinians should continue to argue about whether or not the creation of Israel was right or wrong. It's there. Deal with it. Most Palestinians agree with me.

Most Palestinians do accept the ability to create a state in the West Bank and gaza Strip with East Jerusalem as its capitol. If that were ever really offered, we would take it.

The problem, as I see it, is that while some Israeli officials say theys upport the concept of a Palestinian state, they don't offer a vision of what that state will be like. It's almost like they have a precondition: Palestinians accept Israel and its security, then we negotiate about the borders. Palestinians fear that Israel will whittle the "state" down to small strips of land, divided by Israeli roads and settlements. And, while they negotiate, they continue to build and expand new settlements.

It's makes it hard for even the most supportive of the State of Israel to feel comfortable that Israel willdeliver what it implies but does not really say.

I'm not saying that Israel is right or wrong. Just trying to help you understand what themajor problem is on our side.

Add to all this on both our sides, extremism. Settler extremism which results in violence and death. Hamas/Islamic Jihad extremism which results in violence and death. Israeli military excesses that result in the killing of innocent civilians. Palestinian police excesses that encourage Hamas and Islamic Jihad rather than undermining them.

You need to recognize that the real fight is between extremists and moderates. The moderates on both sides don't have to agree on every detail, just the hard core principles. And they need to work together, even when we find ourselves angry and emotional over events. There isn't one Palestinian or Israeli, Arab or Jew who hasn't said something they should regret. On both sides.

I'm not Muslim but I am discriminated against as if I were a Muslim. Arab buildings are vandalized. We had seven Arab newspapers in Chicago and six have been forced to close because of bigotry and no one is doing anything about it, except saying it's part of the Arab community "extremism" against Israel.

I fear for both of us, but again, I recognize your feelings, hear what you are saying and genuinely wish we could all arrive at a settlement that is fair to both sides. I think it is possible. I'm just not sure we have a situation where both sides are fairly positioned to achieve it or are being treated in a fair and balanced manner.

best regards
Ray Hanania