For a bad time...

Read WorldNetDaily.

There's quite a variety of stupid on the menu today, and I may not get to them all.

First, Joseph Farah and his lackeys reporters are claiming that a new law which supposedly "tosses out sexual moral conduct codes" both persecutes Christians, as well as forces them to "sacrifice their children on the altar" of the pagan queer agenda. Um... what?

We get to hear great arguments like, "Equating sexual preference with the immutable characteristics of age, national origin or race will result in other variable behaviors being added to the list of invariable classes rightfully protected," and "This bill is yet another attempt to prevent citizens with moral and religious principles from expressing their beliefs and educating their children according to those beliefs," and "Today's disastrous action by Schwarzenegger means Christian and other faith-based colleges in California will be forced to promote transsexuality, bisexuality, and homosexuality if they accept students with Cal Grants,"!!

Damn Arnie, all that from one signature? Talk about productive.

These accusations, of course, skirt the issue- a private institution is entitled to teach whatever doctrine it wants, however it is NOT entitled to recieve public funding in order to help it perpetuate an admittedly exclusionary or discriminatory agenda. You don't have to LIKE that, but you don't get to cry religious persecution over it, either. The state does not have the right to legislate sexual morality codes in the first place- if something is criminal, it's criminal. If it's not, it's not. If your private college wants to ban something, go right ahead, but it doesn't mean the government- or the taxpayers- are required to support it with their money. These people are crying foul TWICE- first that they're being called on their homophobic teachings, and second that they're being "penalized" (aka, no longer being subsidized) monetarily. Tough luck. That's the trade-off you get for being a private institution. Suck it up like the Boy Scouts.

Joseph Farah, of course, displaying his usual logic, is all-but advocating seceeding from the Union over this:

The only alternative left for Christians and Jews and people of other faiths in California is quite literally to drop out. That means homeschooling. It means creating new institutions that won't touch any public funding – even when it is as tenuous as one student accepting a state grant. When you submit yourself or your institution to government regulation in California now, you tacitly accept the official state religion of paganism.

...By going to virtually any educational institution in California today you are swearing allegiance to the idea that homosexuality, bisexuality, transsexuality and a growing list of other sexual sins and pathologies are just as good, just as normal, just as acceptable, just as healthy as heterosexuality.

Again, this is bull. First, not denouncing something is not the same as swearing allegiance to it. Second, if you really want to preach against homosexuality, you should do it in church, not in a school. If you ARE teaching religion in school, then it shouldn't be funded by the government in the first place. This is not so hard.

Even worse, you are converting to this religious view. You are rejecting your old religious code – if you had one. You are accepting what might be called "the mark of the Terminator."

Hey Joe, John called. He's suing you for plagiarism.

These are the same people who consider the Boy Scouts of America one of the most subversive organizations in America because of their commitment to the simple non-sectarian principle of monotheism. If you believe in one true God who rules the universe and has established a standard of behavior for all men, these zealots are coming after you.

The war is not over until everyone bows before Baal.

Horse-crap. It's about saying that there are certain standards for recieving government money. Either you work to meet those requirements, or you ACCEPT the consequences, stop bitching about it, and raise some money for your private school. Furthermore, I would think someone as vehemently opposed to government hand-outs as you would welcome this opportunity to keep good and decent Christian institutions from suckling off the government teat.

The issue with the Boy Scouts has nothing to do with subversiveness, and everything to do with discrimination. The Boy Scouts argue that they have the right to exclude people, as they are a private institution. If they want to say they are, that's fine- but they also have to accep the result of that definition. You don't get to have it both ways, and you certainly don't get to cry discrimination over the state telling you it doesn't feel like subsidizing your discrimination.

Hey, what do you know, I was right, we're out of time. More BS with Dennis "list of Muslim criminals" Prager and Burt "hang 'em all and let God sort 'em out"Prelutsky later.

In which Great-Uncle Milt owes me five bucks

Hey, Milt. Remember this, from a few weeks ago? You thought it was oh-so-crucial that I read this stupid rant by some supposed Middle-East expert about how Iran was going to "answer" the US on Aug 22, presumably by blowing the shit out of something?

What is the significance of Aug. 22? This year, Aug. 22 corresponds, in the Islamic calendar, to the 27th day of the month of Rajab of the year 1427. This, by tradition, is the night when many Muslims commemorate the night flight of the prophet Muhammad on the winged horse Buraq, first to "the farthest mosque," usually identified with Jerusalem, and then to heaven and back (c.f., Koran XVII.1). This might well be deemed an appropriate date for the apocalyptic ending of Israel and if necessary of the world. It is far from certain that Mr. Ahmadinejad plans any such cataclysmic events precisely for Aug. 22. But it would be wise to bear the possibility in mind.

Yeah, well, I think you owe me an apology.

What was the Great Anti-Satan's ACTUAL response? "No". No explosions, no dead Americans... a frigging press converence. Oh, the humanity!

So... Milt... when can I expect that apology for wasting my time and hurting my brain? Better yet, when will we see apologies from the Wall Street Journal, FrontPageMag and the other net and print- scandal rags that beat Americans over the head with "Aug 22= doomsday" for the past month?

Been in a bad accident? Burned a bus full of nuns? Caught punching a baby? Don't worry...

Call Lapin & Associates. We defend the indefensible!

Yes, whether it's his homie Jack Abramoff or the rantings of Mel Gibson, Rabbi Daniel Lapin puts the Jew in "Jew-likeDevil's Advocate". His latest downtrodden martyr? D. James Kennedy, head of Coral Ridge Ministries, which has produced a new film that's sure to be fun for the whole family. What's that? What's the title? Oh, you'll love it, it's quite catchy- "Darwin's Deadly Legacy". It tells you all the important stuff about Darwin that those people don't want you to know. That's right, we all know who "they" are.

Its premise is that Darwin's thinking changed the world's perception of people, so instead of considering them made in God's image, they became just another organism. Bloggers Internet-wide as well as the Anti-Defamation League launched their criticism in pointed phrases when the airing was announced.

Seems fair. But wait, Rabbi Lapin to the rescue!

"Some American Jews may believe that Christian conservatives pose the biggest threat to Judaism. Therefore Jews should insult and attack Christians and suppress dissent by constantly evoking the Holocaust while darkly implying anti-Semitism," he wrote in a column addressing the dispute. "God help Jews if America ever becomes a post-Christian society. Just think of Europe."

This, of course, is ridiculous. The issue is not Christian conservatives, per se, but rather any religious group that seeks to turn America into a theocracy, or dictate their religious morality to others via American laws. A Christian Republican who does not share, say, Pat Robertson's conviction that non-Jews or Christians should not serve on juries, is not a threat to either myself personally, or to the American democracy I believe in. Just as the Jewish liberal is more nuanced than merely Holocaust-baiting anti-Semite accusers, so too are there quite a few shades of gray among American Christians, conservative and otherwise.

WND continues:

Kennedy, the Coral Ridge founder, acts as host for the program, and suggests, "No Darwin, no Hitler." The program goes even further, linking the two men with the concept of eugenics, formulated after Darwin wrote his theories and before Hitler came to power, with the contemporary abortion industry which does not recognize the value of all unborn human life.

First of all, it is generally a rather futile exercise to play the "historical what-if" game- not only do you get into the messy issue of proving a negative hypothetical, but there's also the problem of gross oversimplification that such discussions tend to involve. Darwin may have played some sort of role in forming Hitler's world-view, but Hitler's decisions were based on much more than merely seeing man as (possibly) the result of an evolutionary process. You might as well say something like, "no bratwurst, no Hitler", or "no crappy hair pomade, no Hitler". (Though I admit, one of the better ones of these I've heard has been, "had Hitler been accepted to art school, he might have been different.)

That aside, let's call a spade a spade. This isn't being done in a spirit of "open inquiry", this is a politically-motivated attempt to delegitimize Darwin, abortion and anything else Kennedy and Coral Ridge don't like by linking them to Hitler. It may not trivialize the Holocaust, as Abraham Foxman has argued, but it's certainly exploiting it, and being pretty damn obvious about it, too. Incidentally, for those keeping score, yes, this qualifies under the oft-implied Godwin's Law.

Rabbi Lapin's column can be accessed in full here:

Examining which issues raise its organizational blood-pressure, it is easy to see that the ADL chiefly represents two categories of Jews.

One: Jews for whom the doctrines of secular fundamentalism and of the Democratic Party have replaced the authentic principles of Judaism.

Two: Jews who consider Christian conservatives to be a far greater peril than Islamic extremism.

Uh, no. See, I'm pretty sure God didn't tell Moses what party to vote for. B, as stated above, ANY kind of theocratic extremism is a KIND of danger to American democracy. This actually includes far-left secular fundamentalism, too- Stalinism, et al wouldn't be very good for America, either. I have no problem admitting this. I'm centrist like that.

It now turns out that the ADL represents yet a third category of Jews: those passionately dedicated to defending Darwin. Once again, like a friendly and frolicsome puppy with a large, bushy tail that constantly knocks down expensive vases, the ADL, though filled with good intent, is utterly, completely clueless. Not only is it misrepresenting Judaism, but it may well be cracking the priceless vase of Jewish survival.

This is complete crap. The ADL hasn't claimed to be speaking on behalf of Judaism. They've said Coral Ridge is offending Jews and is using the Holocaust to make a cheap point. And you know what? They're right. And cracking the vase of Jewish survival? Huh?

...This dazzling production shows how ideas always have consequences, often unintended, and how Darwinism has impacted American culture. It discusses how the philosophy of evolution can dehumanize people and how Adolf Hitler, on his own admission, was influenced by Darwinian thought.

Does it also mention how Darwinism has had POSITIVE effects? Does it discuss secular scientists that have helped revolutionize the way people have understood and looked at the world? Or is this mainly a hatchet job?

Serious people are asking these three questions:

Why is a movie that shows how Darwinian thought helped shape Hitler’s murderous mind, dangerous to Jews?

No, again, it is not DANGEROUS to Jews, it is INSULTING to Jews, and arguably, anyone with more than a few brain cells. It is "dangerous" only so far as it helps push an anti-secular, anti-Darwinian agenda. It's also intellectually dishonest by indirectly attacking Darwin by poisoning the well. It doesn't actually go after Darwin's ideas or arguments, it takes the coward's way out- "You know who also liked Darwin? Adolf. Just saying."

Why is it necessary to insult so harshly one of America’s most prominent Christian leaders? Or to put it more bluntly, how exactly does it help Jews when the ADL humiliates an Evangelical leader whom as many as forty million Americans revere? Especially since Christian conservatives are virtually alone in acting benevolently towards Jews and standing with Jews in support of Israel.

One of America's most prominent Christian leaders? Since when? I've never heard of this bozo. Let's see some statistics to back up those numbers. Then again, I hadn't heard of Lapin's pal Abramoff before his story broke, either. How does it help Jews when the ADL goes after someone? Well, arguably, it helps let these guys know that not everybody thinks their BS cowardly-exploit-the-Holocaust-argument is ok. And no, Dan, the argument that "these guys are willing to support Israel and like us (insofar as we play bit players in their end-times Passion play) doesn't wash with me. You don't let a guest shit on your floor just because he says he'll pay you back.

Finally, had some Protestant pastor said in 2000, “Vice presidential candidate Joe Lieberman is a leader among a distinct group of Jewish supremacists who seek to eradicate Christianity from America and turn the U.S. into a secular society based upon their strange notions of Jewish socialism,” would Mr. Foxman not have decried it as anti-Semitic? Intellectual honesty, if not a sense of decency, surely compels us to acknowledge that if anti-Semitism is an evil, so is anti-Christianism—bigotry is, after all, bigotry.

Fair enough, but first, that's factually inaccurate, as Leiberman is not a supremacist, a Christian hater, or a socialist. Neither is Foxman, arguably. And again, this "sense of decency" argument is pretty funny coming from a guy defending an anti-Darwin and abortion screed that says Darwin leads to the Holocaust by saying "Christians like other Christians, and besides, some of them like Jews". How "decent" is that?

I believe it appropriate for thoughtful Jews to support the Coral Ridge documentary and perhaps even for it to be shown in Jewish schools because there really are only two ways to account for human presence on our planet. One is that God created us in His image. The other is that by a lengthy and random process of totally unaided materialistic evolution, primitive protoplasm evolved into Bach, Brahms, and Beethoven. This approach, ruling out any role for God, is simply incompatible with Jewish values.

In other words, Lapin is willing to support any work that attacks Darwin or other components of a secular world-view, because he's already decided that such a view is not only incorrect, but also anti-Jewish. Hey, that's open-minded.

I would also be open to "thoughtful Jews" seeing this documentary, as well as countless others. Thoughtful Jews should, well, think. Darwin should be no different. But simply because you disagree, dislike, or even hate Darwin (or how he has been used to rationalize something by a specific group) does not mean that you should give your official Jew-stamp of approval to anybody who attacks him. That's not only dishonest, it's also pretty damn indecent, too. Particularly when you then bash the ADL in the process because they happen to come on the wrong side of the Darwin-debate. Hey Rabbi, how many Jews do you think respect Abraham Foxman? How does it help Jews to insult him?

Why a Jewish organization uses communal resources to defend Darwin is inexplicable. That Hitler embraced Darwinian views does not mean that Jews must support them any more than it means that Jews should support smoking because the Nazi’s set up stringent anti-smoking laws.

I agree. It also works the other way, though. Jews should no more oppose Darwin than they should stupid facial hair (c.f. the rabid ferret the Toldos Aharon rebbe called a beard). Whether or not Hitler, or Stalin, or the Baal Shem freaking Tov liked a particular belief, or hat, or goulash recipie, does not mean a damn thing- THOUGHTFUL JEWS SHOULD THINK. I know, it's hard, but so is life.

Jews should surely support all efforts to diminish the philosophical role of materialistic evolution on our culture. That doctrine violates the principles of Judaism and it threatens to coarsen the culture creating potential peril, just as it did in Germany seventy years ago. For his efforts we Jews owe gratitude to Dr. D. James Kennedy not pejorative name-calling.

Again, B.S. Maimonides used scientific principles of his age to better understand the Bible and Talmud. As did the Maharal of Prague, who was close friends with Johannes Kepler, among others. Jews of this age should not reject evolution simply because clowns like Lapin accuse it of being anti-Jewish. Look at the facts, look at the Jewish sources, and then decide. Don't let Lapin make your decisions for you- certainly don't let him question the Jew-dentity of people who disagree with him over evolution (like, you know, Rashi). Even if you decide evolution is crap, it still doesn't justify rubber-stamping every anti-Darwin asshat simply because you agree with them on a political point.

The rest of us Jews believe that today’s Islamic extremism is the real problem and that we must ally with religious Christians to defeat this mortal threat. We feel that the correct way to interact with all our fellow-Americans is by generating genuine friendship, respect, and yes, even affection. I call this the politics of Kidush HaShem—encouraging Jews to interact with our non-Jewish fellow citizens in ways that bring credit to the God of Abraham.

Lying and insulting works both ways. This documentary seems to do both. That's not a kiddush hashem, and whatever Foxman and the ADL's faults, going after them for pointing this out is not a kiddush hashem either. Sorry, Dan. One can oppose extremism from all sides without forsaking one's Jew-card. I don't have to choose between Bin Laden and Coral Ridge- I can reject them both. And you, too.

Yoel Bin-Nun on WWIII

Bin-Nun and I don't see eye-to-eye on a lot of stuff, but he's always interesting to check out to see what the moderate Religious Zionists (all one of them) are saying.

Also, the Israeli Justice Minister is being indicted for sexual harrasment. Oy.

Failed Messiah on what went wrong in the Tammuz War

Read here.

3. State support of haredim through its various welfare programs takes money away from very important things like national defense. In other words, there is no free lunch, and a community of people that does not value work, instead intentionally depending on state welfare, carries with it higher costs than is often realized.

4. The IDF spent a huge amount of money planning and implementing the withdrawal from Gush Katif and northern Samaria. It also spent much of its training on that issue, rather than Hezbollah. In other words, if the settlers had accepted the decision of the government, taken their compensation and moved to the Negev or central Israel, the IDF could have spent the last two years doing what it is really supposed to – preparing and training for national defense.

On the one hand, I think FM might be going after his political/religious opponents a bit too much here. On the other hand, he has a definite point that money and loss of morale can be traced to the haredi "nation of learners" phenomenon as well as the massive settler reaction to the pullout. Of course, the orange campaign was to be expected, and protest is part of a democracy. That said, the argument that extra money could have been saved had the protests been different in nature is an i interesting one. I certainly think the point about morale has quite a bit of merit.

Whether you agree or disagree with his analysis, Failed Messiah's last point is dead-on:

Just as Netanyahu's reckless budget cuts endangered soldiers in this war, so did the misbehavior of haredim and settlers. What must be fixed in the IDF will, God willing, be fixed, and politicians will fall because of their incompetence. But can the same be said about the haredim and the settlers?

Indeed. Will there even be a willingness to look at their own behavior, even as they continue to push introspection and teshuvah on everyone else?

More on Israeli fan-shit-hits

The Forward has a good analysis of the ongoing shit-storm.

“I don’t see how they can survive,” a ranking Knesset member in Olmert’s ruling coalition told the Forward. “Things went terribly wrong, and somebody will have to be held accountable.”

“It feels as though they’re all on drugs,” said a West Bank settler rabbi known for his moderate views. The only question was who would go down first: Olmert, the inexperienced commander in chief? His rookie defense minister, Amir Peretz, the former trade union boss? The war’s main architect, Lieutenant General Dan Halutz?

...Even if Halutz is forced out, however, the political leadership — beginning with Olmert and Peretz — can hardly breathe easy. Some of their closest allies now say it was a mistake for Israel to put its fate in the hands of a pair of politicians with no military background. Three formal inquiries have been launched already — by the Defense Ministry, the Knesset and the State Comptroller — and a full-scale judicial commission is considered inevitable.

This is a particularly interesting point. I have to say, when they said they were going to be getting civilian leaders in top posts, I was happy. I thought it was about time that Israel focus on internal problems and issues. I thought it was 'refreshing' that Peretz didn't have a military background- and I loved him when he backed up his campaign promises and cut the defense budget (well, cut it more- as the article points out, Olmert and Peretz basically inherited a bunch of problems from Sharon and Mofaz).

But it turns out, no, Israel isn't super-secure. It's not fighting for its last breath, but, yeah, the army actually is important, and having capable people in charge is important, too.

I still think Israel would be better served by looking beyond security issues. But the latest conflict seems to indicate that it can only have the freedom to deal with these other problems when the security issue is, if not "dealt with", then at least stable. For that, you need guys who are at least militarily capable. I'm not talking a Chief of Staff or an army mucky-muck per se, but at least some experience and ability seems necessary.

It's sad, but true.

P.S. The Forward's point about the Knesset numbers is really good, too- as long as Olmert and Peretz can avoid getting prosecuted, they should be able to survive any challenges from the right. Netanyahu might be able to get some defectors, but 20? I don't know.

On the other hand, I don't know if a situation where the majority of the country wishes the government would collapse but can't make it do so is all that desirable, either. Maybe Olmert and Peretz will use the safe zone the Knesset affords them and actually put it towards something productive to get people back in their corner.

Amusing news

Denis Leary decided to comment on Gibson-gate while attending a Red Sox game.

Experience the snarkiness in multimedia!

YouTube

Transcript

Point for you, Shmuley

ShmuRabbi Shmuley Boteach wins this week's "Odious Douche Award Ridiculous Rant Award". The winning submission? This laughable op-ed:

When I was a young boy, all I wanted to see was two parents who loved each other. A daily vitamin also would certainly have done me a world of good. But only my parents' happy marriage could have provided me with peace at my center and the more secure personality I sorely lack. I would take the diarrhea and cough any day over the permanent sense of brokenness that affects children of divorce.

Ok, Shmuley, I'm sorry your parents got divorced and that it screwed you up, but seriously, you might want to get some counseling for these self-esteem issues. I don't think this whole column-thing is doing it for you.

Obviously, breast-feeding is not the same as carrying on an extramarital affair. But when a mother gives her breasts to her son and takes them away from her husband, the effect on the marriage can feel the same.

What?

In the end, there are two effects of breast-feeding that we often refuse to acknowledge. One is the de-eroticization of a woman's body, as her husband witnesses one of the most attractive parts of her body serving a utilitarian rather than romantic purpose. This is not to say that breast-feeding isn't sexy. Indeed, the maternal dimension is a central part of womanliness. But public breast-feeding is profoundly de-eroticizing, and I believe that wives should cover up, even when they nurse their babies in their husband's presence.

"Come on down to Yankel's Burqas! Best Burqas in Crown Heights! Tell them "Shmuley sent you" and get a 5% discount!"

I believe this same problem comes up when men witness childbirth up close. There are certain poses in which a husband should not see his wife.

That's interesting; I believe you've been smoking your yarmulke. Friendly advice? Lay off the velvet, try suede.

By all means, be there for the entire labor, as I have been for the births of each of my eight children. But I strongly agree with the advice of the ancient rabbis that husbands should not be staring at the actual delivery. That is just too erotic a part of a wife's anatomy for it to become a mere birth canal.

The erotic nature of a wife's body is one of the principal elements of attraction in marriage. When a husband ceases to see his wife as a woman, and begins to see her as "the mother of his children," a negative trend has begun in his mind that can only subvert his erotic interest.

Shmuley, I'm telling you as a friend- get some help, dude. Believe or not, most marriage problems are NOT because the husband saw his wife's hoo-ha when she gave birth. Then again, maybe it has something to do with HOW MANY births there are- obviously, Orthodox Jews with 6 to 10 kids are at a much higher risk of suffering from "utilitarian wife disease" than, say, Reform Jews with their 1.6 kids. Maybe that higher birthrate thing isn't all it's cracked up to be.

Edit: Modifactions made after some comments by Irviner Chassid. Also, to reitterate, I would say the basic principle being articulated here is solid, almost to the point of being obvious- ignoring your spouse, for anything or anyone, will get you into trouble. The problem is that Shmuley takes this and then runs somewhere fairly absurd with it.

Now what, Lazer?

This from the other day from our esteemed Rav Captain Crunch:

Ok, let's think this one through.

1- God pissed at secular Israel- leaders and voters, presumably. Particularly since they're anti-Judaism, anti-God and anti-Torah. Got it. Good to know.

2- God uses his exalted agents of change, Hezbollah, to bitch-slap his "favorite" kid out of some bizarre expectation that this will make the Jews stop their evil ways and get their asses in shul. Got that guys? Just think of the Katyushas as "tools of the Lord"- angels on wings of... motherfucking rockets.

3- God prevents the IDF from winning the war to humiliate the Israelis and demonstrate how putting faith in Israel's leadership or military is idolatry. Pwned, Dagon- I mean, Amir.

Ok, fine. I get all this. It's completely bonkers, but let's go with it.

... What's God trying to tell us with this one, Lazer?

The Israel Defense Forces reported that about four mortar rounds were fired inside southern Lebanon after the cease-fire, which went into effect early Monday. But none of them hit Israeli territory...

What's this supposed to mean? Is God losing his touch? I mean, what the hell are the Jews supposed to get from that? This doesn't sound particularly threatening- in fact, it's downright counterproductive! This casts doubt on Hezbollah's military capability and suggests that God might be considering lifting his curse over the land and leadership! Israel's good luck MUST stop now! Its very soul is at risk!

Needless to say, I'm sitting back with baited breath expecting the latest communications from Rabbi Brody's maggid. Stay tuned.

The Shit really is hitting the fan...

Oy upon oys.

Oy squared.

Cubed.

Goddamit!

Ok, time for a new game- who SHOULDN'T be fired?

Also, who says all Israeli Arabs sympathize with Hamas and Hezbollah? From Riad Ali:

I know that many people in the Arab and Muslim world, including Arab citizens of Israel, believe with every fiber of their being in the conspiracy theory. According to them, the hand of Israel and the West is everywhere. Israel is the mother of all evil and the root of all the problems in our region. I am not among those who say that Israel and the West are as pure as the driven snow, but I ask "the blind by choice" in the Muslim world: Who had an interest in destroying Hariri's vision? Who was threatened by the rays of light that came from Lebanon? Who did not want Lebanon to be an oasis in the heart of the dictatorships, most of which had begun to be moldy and malodorous? Israel, the United States, France, Britain? Or rather Syria, Iran and Hezbollah?

...In the eyes of "the blind by choice," Israel is always to blame. If they were to open their eyes for just a moment, they would discover that in the eyes of Iran, Syria and Hezbollah, the democracy that Hariri proposed is the mother of all evil, and not Israel. As far as they are concerned, it is better that Lebanon be bombarded with thousands of smart bombs rather than be bombed by one smart bomb of democracy. It does not take especially sensitive eyes and ears to determine that the first bullet that was fired in this war was fired on February 14, 2005, the day of Hariri's assassination.

The time has come to admit that the mother of all ills in the Arab world is the absence of a secular alternative that has the power to offer people a different way of thinking. An option that is an alternative to the one offered by political Islam. It is not the Israeli occupation that needs to be ended, but rather the fanatic religious occupation of the Arab-Muslim intellect, which is blocking the masses from the pleasure of thinking.

...In one of his brilliant comments, Ra'am-Ta'al MK Ahmed Tibi said that Israel is a country that is "democratic for its Jews and Jewish for it Arabs." You know what? My life's dream is to see one Arab country that is at least "democratic for its Muslims, and Muslim toward its minorities." Amen.

Interesting.

And to prove I'm not always Jew-obsessed...

Let's just burn NASA down. Seriously. I'll throw the first torch (if someone lights the match for me). Come on, I know a guy who can get us a great deal on pitchforks.

The U.S. government has misplaced the original recording of the first moon landing, including astronaut Neil Armstrong's famous "one small step for man, one giant leap for mankind," a NASA spokesman said on Monday.

Armstrong's famous space walk, seen by millions of viewers on July 20, 1969, is among transmissions that NASA has failed to turn up in a year of searching, spokesman Grey Hautaloma said.

"We haven't seen them for quite a while. We've been looking for over a year and they haven't turned up," Hautaloma said.

A whole year, huh? I didn't realize NASA operated according to the same logic used by 14-year-old slackers- "wait a while until you're sure you're screwed, then tell your Dad you lost his stuff."

Sweet fuck

Arik, I never liked you and probably never would have voted for you...

But you didn't deserve to go out this way.

Please, folks, don't let's turn this into another Terri Schiavo- just let the guy go. (In fact, he's already long-gone.)

Brothers coming together

Secular Israeli millionaires joining with the Ultra-Orthodox to provide services for displaced Israelis.

From FailedMessiah:

"The evacuation was done on a first come, first served basis," says Zilbershlag. "Everything was done by private organizations. Nochi Dankner [secular] gave 1,000 hotel accommodations, Gaydamak [secular] set up the tent city [at a cost of more than $500,000 per day], Rabbi Yitzhak David Grossman of Migdal Ha'emek evacuated thousands of people. None of the government ministries wanted to go near the matter. The matter of the refugees in the center of the country hasn't been dealt with at all and it is a huge subject. People have remained without money, without work. There are hair-raising stories."

Of course, the Rabbi isn't without his talking points:

Zilbershlag saw the deterioration coming, before the war, but the picture he is seeing now is even worse than he expected. Israel has turned into a society based on charity, he said, and it is no small irony for an ultra-Orthodox person like himself. "The Zionists deserve it. They had only contempt for the old ultra-Orthodox community that lived off charity, but now they are finding themselves in the same situation. Dankner and Gaydamak have invested more than the ministry of welfare to help the victims of the attacks in the north. Let us not forget - even now, there is no minister of welfare."

Interesting. Seculars and Zionists deserving what they get. There seems to be a lot of that going around. Also, Rav, the issue may be less contempt for the inter-haredi charity system than the govt. subsidies Haredim get for avoiding the army and work force. What do the haredim get for that? Oh, right, Heaven. My bad.

Then again, giving the Rabbi the benefit of the doubt, he may have just been talking about the govt. Zionists. Hard to tell from context.

Point-counter-point from Ha'aretz

Olmert: Yay or Drag-into-street-and-beat-with-stick?

Ari Shavit is getting a lot of play on the Israeli right for saying Olmert should resign. Of course, Shavit was also against the Disengagement, so the right's claim that "even that liberal Pinko says so" doesn't necessarily hold. Still, he makes some good points about some pretty notable mistakes Olmert made early in the war. Is that worthy of kicking him out? I'm not sure. I'd say probably no, but it should also depend on what happens with the cease-fire.

On the other hand (exchanges of opinion? Who needs that? Give me some good old Arutz-Sheva party-line!), we have Akiva Eldar, another longtime Haaretz columnist, saying Olmert should stay. Eldar cites Olmert's capacity to learn and correct his mistakes with relative quickness, saying this suggests an adaptability that will serve him well should he be given the chance to remain in power and apply the lessons learned here towards Syria and Iran. Eeep.

Oh, and while we're talking about all this, it turns out that these coup jokes may turn out to be less funny than we thought. Yikes.

Fedora-tip: FailedMessiah.

Goddammit

Ok, NOW I'm annoyed.

More from the Peanut Gallery

Ok, fine, I realize that technically, that is the "Coo-coo for Cocoa Puffs" bird, who apparently has some sort of idiotic backstory. Who knew?

The point is, our favorite wingnut rabbi, the esteemed Rav Brody, is at it again.

How? Let us count the ways.


1- Screw Katyushas, lashon hara's the "real killer". That's right, Rav Brody is pulling an OJ. You see, even while his northern neighbors are hiding in the ground and going nuts from PTSD, Rabbi Brody is convinced that the real reason all this stuff is going on is because of- you guessed it, gossip. Ok, so that's not exactly what he says, the REAL culprit is God- but more on that later. The point is that since the Talmud says gossip destroys Jewish communities, and everyone in Israel agrees they're all in danger, the Rav has concluded that the way to save everybody is to- that's right! Stop lashon hara! Brilliant! Oh wait... I think I may have just doomed Netanya. My bad. Apologies to my cousin Meir.

2- Back to that minor point from above. You know, the one about this all being God's fault. I mean, sure, on a macro-level this could be argued but... damn, Lazer! Let's see exactly what he's arguing:

Those of our beloved people whose minds aren't occupied with Torah tend to suffer from a self-destruct mode; if they're not fighting against a common enemy, they fight against themselves. Rest assured that if and when the ceasefire goes into effect, a national witch-hunt will begin. The government will blame the army and the army will blame the government. The military and the intelligence agencies will be at each other's throats... In short, our already weak leaders who should be rebuilding our devastated country and military will be busy playing hot-potato with the national blame.

Yeah, what happened to their sense of Jewish unity? We're all supposed to be in this together, right?

If our leaders would listen to me (which they haven't until now), I could save them millions of shekels and a lot of headaches

Those bastards! How dare they not recognize your documented prophecy-powers? Don't they know that you've been recognized as the "Nathan of Gaza" by both the esteemed Super-Holy Razz-a-matazz-Llama-Llama-Ding-Dong Melitzer Rebbe Super-shlita AND the King of Autistics? Plus I hear the Grand-Duke of Giardia has been looking pretty hard at your resume.

I'll tell you, for no charge whatsoever, who is responsible for Israel's political and material failures, the destruction of the Galilee and Haifa, and the breakdown of the myth of invincible Israel - Hashem. Blame everything on Hashem.

Look at the most highly irrational facts: Is it logical that 3,000 guerillas - equipped however well they were equipped - defeat a major international power? Is it logical that the same 3,000 guerillas, with not-state-of -the-art Katyusha missiles, baffle Israel's defenses and destroy the north? Is it logical that the Hizbolla, despite numerous IDF declarations of victory, returned repeatedly to draw IDF blood in Bint Jbeil and Aita-al-Shaab? Is it logical that thousands of IAF sorties that threw hundreds of tons of bombs on the Hizbolla's head barely scratched them? Is it logical that Israel has been unable to defend its major cities? Is it logical that Israel hasn't achieved a single one of its prewar goals? Is it logical that such a diverse government that can't agree about anything passes the UN Resolution calling for an empty ceasefire with only meaningless promises on paper unanimously, 24-0?

The answer to each of the above seven questions is no. None of the above phenomina could ever have happened without Hashem. Therefore, save the time and the money of the witch-hunts; cancel them. Hashem is responsible.

Hashem is teaching us that the doctrine of putting our faith in military power, or in any other human power, is finally dead. This is why I was bitterly against political activism before the disengagement from Gaza last year. Political activism won't mitigate our national crisis now, either. Only tshuva [repentance] can help. Without it, the next round of hostilities will be much more painful.

Oh.... Kay. Yeah.

Hey Lazer, why is Hashem punishing Israel? After all, it's not like they committed the sin of being black, like the folks in Hurricane Katrina. And even if you want to blame the Disengagement of last August, isn't that still kind of inconsistent with your theodicy-system? After all, in America, tens of thousands got displaced, with almost 2,000 dead and another 500 missing? If that's what we got, what about the Israelis, who actually carried it out? Shit, they've only gotten about 150 casualties, 1700 wounded, and 300,000 displaced. They're getting off light! Don't let it get back to him, but it sounds like God's getting kind of lazy.

Ok, ok. Let's let Lazer explain. Go for it, big guy.

Hashem is speaking loud and clear: A secular Israel is no substitute for Torah and Tshuva. Hashem is now burying the myth of "invincible" Israel; Hashem is exposing the ineptitude of secular Israel's arrogant leaders. Hashem is showing that without Hashem, nothing will succeed; this is a message that's been reverberating almost every day here at the Beams.

Sooner or later, all of Israel will make tshuva, but every progressive opportunity will be more difficult. The ceasefire at hand gives Olmert & friends a few more weeks of sidewalk cafes, but you can start the countdown to Iranian missiles falling on Tel Aviv. The calm won't last.

That's right. Hashem is mad because secular Jews suck. Also they don't pay enough attention to him (cue puppy-eyes and pouty-lip). Thanks for that breaking news, Lazer. It's good to know that God continues to be so high-maintenance that he's willing to let a few hundred of his favorite people be blown to bits to prove a point. I think I have a grandmother like that.

Oh, and I just want to let you know how much I appreciate you not doing any finger-pointing! Your unity just... wow, it gets you right *here*, you know? **


So Lazer, I guess what I'm trying to say is... thanks for all your nice and helpful thoughts, and... would you like some milk?

-----
** If by "here", of course, I mean in my ulcer. Mmm, feel that burn!

Isn't it great when everything comes together?

I found a new funny website. It's even better than the Onion. Check it out- Lifesite: Your Life, Family and Culture Outpost featuring daily news and information not widely available in the mainstream media. Catchy, ain't it?

SOMEWHEREVILLE, US, August 11, 2006 (LifeSiteNews.com) – A group of elite scientists working in a top secret lab in an undisclosed location in the United States have said that they were stunned earlier this week when the data that they were working with proved beyond a doubt that in fact absolutely everything in the universe is perfectly ok.

“These results are astounding and strangely anti-intuitive,” explained researcher Dr. Gaudia to Phasmatis News Service. “The results of this research go against all of our expectations. I mean, right now there’s war over in Lebanon and Israel, people are starving to death in third world countries, and everywhere you look it seems people are generally unhappy and depressed. But despite all that, this research has proved beyond a doubt that in fact everything’s ok.”

...Saddam Hussein, the imprisoned ex-dictator of Iraq is reported to have been deeply shaken by the conclusion of the research. “If everything’s ok,” he remarked to his guards, “why have I been killing all those people for so many years? I wish I had known this sooner. If I had I probably would have spent a lot less time killing people and a lot more time swimming.”

Some experts have already speculated that the study will have an enormous impact on the Middle East, along the same lines as the personal effect that it is said to have had upon the former Iraqi dictator.

Already one firefight in Southern Lebanon is reported to have come to a premature end when a communications officer who had just received the news over his radio stepped into the middle of the battlefield, yelling, “Hey! Stop everyone! Everything’s ok!”.

Both Israeli and Hizbollah soldiers proceeded to lay down their weapons and rather sheepishly apologized to one another.

“Sorry about that,” said Corporal Asher to the Hizbollah soldier he had tried to kill with a grenade moments earlier. “Silly sort of thing to do in retrospect. Do you want to go swimming?”

“Oh yes, absolutely,” the unnamed Hizollah soldier reportedly responded. “I do like swimming."

The news of this research has also come as a pleasant surprise to many in the pro-life movement.

“This is really great news,” said Steve Jalsevac, the managing director of LifeSiteNews.com, at a press conference of pro-life leaders. “I mean, I was looking back at all the stories that we’ve been running this past week, and for a moment there I really wasn’t so sure. What with doctors killing their patients and polygamy and embryonic stem cell research and whatnot, for a moment there…”

See, it's like humor, only, you know, without a point. Which makes it much easier to understand, I find.

Progressive Islam Strikes Back

Irshad Manji, the author of "The Trouble with Islam", has an article in Haaretz with some really interesting news.

During the same week that India and Israel were reminded of Islamist brutality, liberal Muslims made progress in reclaiming our faith, both in the East and in the West.

Let us start in the East. For almost three decades, Pakistan has followed a controversial set of laws called "Hudood." Named for "hudd," or penalties prescribed by God, these laws determine punishment in cases of rape and adultery. Finally, the Hudood ordinances are being seriously challenged. And not a moment too soon: Under them, more than 4,600 Pakistani women have been thrown in prison for charges that include adultery. By contrast, virtually all men accused of rape have gotten off. Thanks to a vocal but religiously respectful campaign by civil society groups, Pakistan's Council for Islamic Ideology - an influential body - recently recommended changing the Hudood laws. That move laid the foundation for President Pervez Musharraf to begin releasing 1,300 jailed women who were awaiting trial. Even Muslim clerics in Pakistan now hint that the Hudood laws are not divinely created. The politics behind them tell us so.

...At the same time, the liberal reformation of Islam picked up speed - in Copenhagen, the city that served as Ground Zero for worldwide riots over cartoons of the Prophet Muhammad. A Danish newspaper, Jyllands-Posten, first published the caricatures. I joined 99 other "Muslim Leaders of Tomorrow" in Copenhagen to debate how Islam and the West can enrich each other.

...One delegate tested the young clerics: "Is Islam the only way to salvation?" A Danish imam gripped the microphone. "The short answer," he said, "is no." A British imam disputed that response and an Italian took the middle road. Remarkably, they never accused each other of being evil or insincere. For the first time in my life, I heard the message that in Islam, unity is not uniformity.

Maybe the most compelling insight came from a surprise guest: Flemming Rose, publisher of the reviled Prophet Muhammad cartoons. After addressing us and answering our challenges, Rose confided that the reception we gave him was more civil than anything he has experienced at the hands of humanist groups.

A liberal reformation of Islam will be marked by at least two features: the empowerment of women in the Muslim world and the willingness of Muslims in the West to exercise our freedom of conscience.

I applaud liberal Muslims who have the courage to confront their extremists and challenge them for their faults. I wish them the best of luck as they struggle to take back their image and faith. They are the most valuable weapon liberals and others have as they fight against the popular conception that all Muslims are terrorist or their de-facto supporters. We can't kill every Muslim, nor should we. What we need to do is help change minds and policies- theirs and ours.

That's what these Muslims are doing. They are standing up and putting their money where their bleeding-heart defenders' mouths are. For that, they should have our respect.

Edit: Anyone think this will make it into Arutz-Sheva's "Good News" section? I mean, isn't this a little more significant than "Ancient Latin Translation of King's David's Psalms Found in Irish Bog", where the editors have to torture the text in order to make it even slightly relevant to their readership?

Double-edit: More.

Details...

The Devil's in the details, the saying goes. My experience has been that this is usually true. In fact, the details are the most important part of an argument- after all, they're what lets you know if an analysis is correct.

That's why even if someone has politics I disagree with, I mind that much less than when their argument is based on easily debunked information.

I have a relative, let's call him Great-Uncle Milt. Milt is a nice guy, though a bit of a right-winger. That doesn't bother me, though, what bothers me are the arguments (or lack thereof) that he uses to justifying his politics.

Take Israel. I support Israel's right to exist and right to defend itself. I've supported it throughout the "Tammuz War" (is that final?), even while noting that not everything it's been doing is necessarily smart or entirely justified.

But Milt's not satisfied. He's been sending the whole family emails comparing the number of Jewish Nobel Prize Winners to Muslim ones. You know, because that's got so much to do with this. Obviously the problem is Hezbollah doesn't have enough authors or physicists.

Milt and I once got in a fight because I wasn't entirely convinced (back in 2000) that Yasser Arafat qualified as "evil"- no matter how much I tried to explain my problems with categorical statements, or the issues with determining "real evil", Milt didn't want to hear it. We didn't speak for a while after that.

The latest from Milt arrived this morning- it's an op-ed by Bernard Lewis. I haven't read Lewis, but I've heard of him. Supposedly he's somewhat controversial for his Middle East analysis, which tends to be overwhelmingly pro-Israel. He's a proponent of the "clash of civilizations" thesis, and doesn't seem terribly enamored with Muslim civilization. Then again, he has been a professor of Islamic studies and Muslim History for over 60 years, so there might be some justification here.

That aside, his latest article isn't very impressive.

During the Cold War, both sides possessed weapons of mass destruction, but neither side used them, deterred by what was known as MAD, mutual assured destruction... Would the same constraints, the same fear of mutual assured destruction, restrain a nuclear-armed Iran from using such weapons against the U.S. or against Israel?

...There is a radical difference between the Islamic Republic of Iran and other governments with nuclear weapons. This difference is expressed in what can only be described as the apocalyptic worldview of Iran's present rulers. This worldview and expectation, vividly expressed in speeches, articles and even schoolbooks, clearly shape the perception and therefore the policies of Ahmadinejad and his disciples.

Lewis is making a big mistake here- judging the whole nation of Iran by the rhetoric of the President. While the President is directly elected by the populace, a few things need to be noted here.

A- In the Iranian primary, Ahmadinejad received 19.5 percent of the vote. This put him in second place and got him into the run-off- but notice, there were plenty of other candidates that the voters were interested in. Not everyone in Iran loves Ahmadinejad. In the run-off campaign, Ahmadinejad got 62 percent of the vote- a clear majority, yes, but again, far from unanimous.

B- Ahmadinejad's rhetoric during his campaign mostly focused on internal Iranian problems, not nuking Israel or America. He was, and remains in Iran, a populist, and that was what people seemed most interested in. He promised to help the poor and stand up to the global community. Fairly attractive proposals.

His ranting about, well, everybody, came later, and so it doesn't quite follow that, assuming Ahmadinejad actually believes what he's saying (and I'm guessing that at least some of it is sabre-rattling rhetoric), that everyone in Iran agrees with him.

The point? Ahmadinejad wasn't voted in as an apocalyptic candidate. And it remains unproven that Iran is an apocalyptic state, either in government or populace. Textbooks exalting martyrdom are disturbing, but what are the statistics of Iranian suicide bombers? I haven't heard of any recently.

A direct attack on the U.S., though possible, is less likely in the immediate future. Israel is a nearer and easier target, and Mr. Ahmadinejad has given indication of thinking along these lines. The Western observer would immediately think of two possible deterrents. The first is that an attack that wipes out Israel would almost certainly wipe out the Palestinians too. The second is that such an attack would evoke a devastating reprisal from Israel against Iran, since one may surely assume that the Israelis have made the necessary arrangements for a counterstrike even after a nuclear holocaust in Israel.

The first of these possible deterrents might well be of concern to the Palestinians--but not apparently to their fanatical champions in the Iranian government. The second deterrent--the threat of direct retaliation on Iran--is, as noted, already weakened by the suicide or martyrdom complex that plagues parts of the Islamic world today, without parallel in other religions, or for that matter in the Islamic past. This complex has become even more important at the present day, because of this new apocalyptic vision.

Some examples here would be really nice. And they should be easy enough to find if they're so rife, right? Or are we categorizing every "death to Israel" speech as apocalyptic?

Lewis goes on to conflate Shi'ite beliefs about the end-times and the Messiah-like "hidden Imam" with Ahmadinejad's supposed policies. Guess what? There's a correlation between the date the grand numnutz said he would respond to the US reg. nukes and some weird-ass shit in the Islamic calendar.

What is the significance of Aug. 22? This year, Aug. 22 corresponds, in the Islamic calendar, to the 27th day of the month of Rajab of the year 1427. This, by tradition, is the night when many Muslims commemorate the night flight of the prophet Muhammad on the winged horse Buraq, first to "the farthest mosque," usually identified with Jerusalem, and then to heaven and back (c.f., Koran XVII.1). This might well be deemed an appropriate date for the apocalyptic ending of Israel and if necessary of the world. It is far from certain that Mr. Ahmadinejad plans any such cataclysmic events precisely for Aug. 22. But it would be wise to bear the possibility in mind.

I agree with the prof here. It's always good to keep totally cracked-up conspiracy theories in mind, just so you don't get surprised. Best-case scenario, you get to be the smart guy. "Told you so!" Worst case? Children throw garbage at your house. But hey, that stuff washes off if you act quickly. Plus there's stuff you can do as deterrence. You know, steal their toys, hold them hostage, etc...

What was I saying? Oh yeah. Doomsday scenarios are great, but don't forget Occam's Razor: "the simplest solution to a problem is probably the correct one". (I also like Hanlon's Razor: "Never assume malice when stupidity will suffice.") In other words, yeah, Mahmoud might be planning a big bang, but it could just as easily be something like, "I'm busy Monday, reschedule my 'fuck-you' memo for Tuesday, will you, Hassan?"

Lewis closes with a 20-year-old quote from Khomeini where he talks about fighting against the world powers and spreading Islam around the world- "Either we shake one another's hands in joy at the victory of Islam in the world, or all of us will turn to eternal life and martyrdom. In both cases, victory and success are ours."

Lewis says this means that the Iranians don't care about dying, only about where they end up- Heaven or Hell. So much for MAD. Lewis says the only way to avoid this is to appeal to Iranians without a death-wish.

perhaps the only hope is to appeal to those Muslims, Iranians, Arabs and others who do not share these apocalyptic perceptions and aspirations, and feel as much threatened, indeed even more threatened, than we are. There must be many such, probably even a majority in the lands of Islam. Now is the time for them to save their countries, their societies and their religion from the madness of MAD.

This is all correct, but the assumption that most of Iran is PRO-national suicide has not been proven. Should Americans be on our guard? Sure. Should the Israelis? Definitely. But Lewis is not telling us anything new- or even particularly informative. Ahmadinejad and the Imams may be apocalyptic, but it remains an open question whether the rank-and-file Iranians are. We would do well to avoid making assumptions either way.

I hate Fox News part 85- also, go 100th post!

This post would be a lot sweeter if it wasn't devoted to such idiocy. But such is life...

Media Matters- O'Reilly blasts "smear merchants" and "vampires" criticizing Mel Gibson; Rivera smears Olbermann, Stewart, and Colbert

O'REILLY:I think it's sadistic now. I think it's crossed the line. I should mention the networks, but I'm not going to do it tonight. There are certain people who, you know, know they can get a number just beating the living daylights out of this guy. I think the points have been made. And it's into the sadistic area. Am I wrong?

...RIVERA: But remember, he tried to run away and resisted arrest. If he was a gangbanger or a, you know, a guy from -- that wasn't such a big macher over there, believe me, he would not have just been charged with these three misdemeanors.

O'REILLY: Maybe, maybe not. A lot of people get cut slack. It just depends on what's going on.

A: If it had been Ludacris, you would have been for nailing his ass to the wall.
B: I know your mother's Jewish, Geraldo, but please save the Yiddish for weddings and bar mitzvahs.

...O'REILLY:Nobody can make an excuse for what he did. It's inexcusable, OK? No excuses made. That point is on the record.

But there comes a point where the media and individual Americans start to enjoy the suffering of rich and powerful people.

RIVERA: I agree, I agree.

O'REILLY: All right? They wallow in it. They can't get enough of it. They've got blood all over their mouth, these vampires, OK? They're in the media, these people. This is what they live for.

Yeah, welcome to America. It's been this way since, um, forever. Try looking up some political cartoons in the Revolution- era newspapers. I'm betting those guys didn't mind "rubbing in" the fact that George III's kingdom was going to shit. Also, I'm pretty sure it's been this way in most of the rest of the world, too. You think Egyptian slaves didn't whoop it up when they heard the Pharaoh got leprosy or syphillis? I've got an obelisk to sell you.

O'REILLY: That's wrong. It's morally wrong. It's maybe not as bad as what Gibson did, but it's approaching that. Because there comes a point where every human being does stuff wrong. Everyone. We all do wrong things.

*Cough* Falafel-gate.

O'REILLY: And anybody celebrating your suffering is a bad person.

Really now? That's good to know, Bill. Are we to assume that you'll be delivering your hand-written apology to the Clintons in person?

...RIVERA: ...What do I give a damn about these cable people who talk about you or me or Mel Gibson? What do they mean to us?

O'REILLY: But we've had this argument before.

RIVERA: But they mean nothing.

O'REILLY: You're right.

RIVERA: They can't even get a rating.

Actually, I'm fairly sure that Olberman, Colbert and Stewart are kicking O'Reilly's ass- to say nothing of Geraldo's illustrious "talking-mustache-hour".

...O'REILLY: I think we should call these people out. I think we should call these people out.

RIVERA: Then call them by name, then.

O'REILLY: No.

RIVERA: Then don't, then don't --

O'REILLY: Because then you give them more publicity.

RIVERA: Then just say, "It's that schmuck from MSNBC who's doing that," and call him that.

...O'REILLY: I want to get this clear. Nobody will be allowed to apologize for Mel Gibson except Mel Gibson on this program.

...RIVERA: You know, Comedy Central is now a big hit, Stewart and the Colbert guy.

O'REILLY: Yeah, they do OK. They do OK.

RIVERA: They make a living putting on video of old ladies slipping on ice and people laughing. That's their life. That's their life. They exist in a small little place where they count for nothing. The history will be made by those who have affirmative thoughts, who make, you know, innovative suggestions in life and are inclusive.

That's right, 100 years from now no one will remember Jon Stewart's 9/11 speech or his "I'm not your monkey" moment, they'll remember great moments like "Capone's vault". And what a wonderful world it will be. Or something.

Time's relative in yahoo-land

We all knew Lazer Brody lived in a place where logic has no meaning. Apparently he doesn't care much for time, either.

Rav Lazer, responding to reports that Israel is receptive to the idea of Germany being part of a possible international force being deployed as peace keepers to the Israel-Lebanon border, gets his peyess in a tizzy.

Olmert, like a bull in a fine-china shop destroying everything in its path, took the verbal insanity a step further. While welcoming the participation of German soldiers in a stabilization force in South Lebanon, he said, "There is no other nation that Israel considers more of a friend that Germany!"

The blood of 6,000,000 Jews cries out of the ground. The memories of survivors who haven't had a decent night's sleep in the last 61 years testify against you, Mr. Prime Minister. You have no right to speak for Israel, for we don't agree with you, with your ego-sick anti-Torah leadership, with your plans for withdrawal from Jewish lands, or with your expression of love with Germany. Here's why, in case you don't remember:

German soldier publicly humiliating Polish Jew by cutting off his beard in public, 1939

Are you willing to call the Germans our best friends? Do you believe that the sons and grandsons of Amalek have changed their skins? I certainly don't; I'm sorry to say that I've been to Germany a dozen times - they're still Germans.

Brilliant, Lazer. Sins of the father and all that. Clearly, any Germans in the region will have nothing on their minds other than finding the nearest batch of pesticides to drop into a bomb shelter. Come on. Germany has been a close ally of Israel for decades, (there are over 100 Israel-Germany sister cities) and consistently backs it at the UN and EU, to the point that it has been singled out for attack by Iran's President Wackjob. Even Begin finally backed off Germany when his job demanded it.

At four o'clock on the afternoon of Holocaust Memorial Day, 1981, Prime Minister Menachem Begin entered the Knesset cabinet room to welcome 30 top-ranking leaders of the United Jewish Appeal [now the United Jewish Communities].... Irving Bernstein, the indomitable executive vice president of the UJA...bayoneted into the prime minister to ask, "Tell us, Mr. Begin, how the memory of the Holocaust influences your attitude toward Germany today."

For the briefest moment Begin stared balefully back at Bernstein. Burying his face in his hands, he whispered between his fingers, amid an astonishing silence, that the subject was deeply emotional for him.

"I have a special attitude concerning what the Germans did to our people," You see, I know how my mother, my father, my brother, and my two cousins - one four years old, one five years old - went to their deaths."

..."I live with this. It colors everything I do. I will live with this until the day I die."...he remarked with renewed composure, "But now, baruch Hashem - thank God - we have the means to defend ourselves. We have Israel. We have our courageous Israel Defense Forces.

"And because we have Israel and the IDF, can there be no pardon, ever?" asked Bob, a lively fellow from Denver with a southern drawl and sparkling blue eyes. "Doesn't there come a time when we have to put the past behind us?"

"No, Bob, I can't do that. I shall never forgive the German people. Every German I see of that generation I think to myself - for all I know, that man murdered my father, my mother, and our little children. And when I speak of my father, I speak of all the fathers. And when I speak of my mother, I speak of all the mothers.

..."The Germans bear collective responsibility for a horror the like of which has not been known since God created Satan. So long as that embodiment of all evil - Adolf Hitler - brought them victories, they hailed him. When his fortunes declined, they began to turn their backs on him - a little. So, no, I will never shake the hand of a German - never!"

"But what do you do when you have to officially shake a German's hand?" asked a middle-aged lady in a flowery frock, named Charlotte.

"Oh, then it is quite a different matter," Begin reassured her. "As prime minister I have to fulfill my official role. When the German foreign minister, Mr. Genschar, was here recently I received him with courtesy, and we talked of many important matters."

If you seriously think Israel's biggest worry right now is Germany offering to help it defend its border, you might want to upgrade to a higher yarmulke size- this one seems to be cutting off brain circulation. Should a UN force be accepted automatically? No, it's something of a gamble- but not because "ze Germans" are involved. Damn. And that "sons of Amalek" crap is getting old- Olmert is a bona fide "Hebrew", and that doesn't seem to be helping him get on your good side. I know, maybe he's descended from Korah! (Oh wait, so was Samuel the prophet. Damn.)

Oh, and nice Godwin toss-in. Putz. Nothing like exploiting the Holocaust for political purposes. Obviously that's what Yad Vashem's for. Then again, if it's good for the Anti-Disengagement folks, I guess it's good enough for Lazer.


But wait, there's more!

I don't want to go into a military or strategic analysis of what's transpired until now. That's not my task. Also, looking to pin the blame on the government, the ministers, the intel community, or the military leadership also serves no purpose.

There's only one factor to blame - Hashem.

Hashem won't let Olmert and Peretz succeed, no matter what they decide. Hashem gives Nasrulla and his henchmen the power to keep on truckin' those Katyushas. Why? Hashem wants us - as a nation and individually - to make tshuva.

And he's willing to kill as many Jews as it takes. There's a word for that, Lazer- ASSHOLERY. I thought we were supposed to reject human sacrifice, right? We're more evolved, light unto the nations, yada yada? Or is that just Reform narishkeit? Where's my ceremonial dagger? No, not that one, the good one, with the deerbone handle and the cool blood grooves.

Hashem gives Nasrulla power to serve as a whip against Israel. Tshuva is the spiritual weapon that can defeat Nasrulla. Trying to defeat the Hizbolla without tshuva is like trying to defeat Hashem - sorry, it can't be done.

So might makes right? Then why not follow the Romans or the Greeks? Wasn't the whole Maccabee lesson supposed to be about overcoming odds and sticking up for yourself?

Your God is helping your enemies kill you and you're saying the answer is to suck up to him. I'm no Torah scholar, but that sounds like some serious BS to me. At LEAST whip out some Levi Yitzhak of Berdichev class-action suit action on his ass.

[For the non-initiates (from Dershowitz's "Genesis of Justice")]:

The most famous post-biblical example of chutzpah against heaven was the eighteenth-century master Rabbi Levi Yitzhak of Berditchev, who repeatedly invoked God's contract in challenging God's injustice towards his covenental partners. On one occaison he threatened to expose God's promises as "false". On another he sued God and threatened to refuse to cooperate with plans to keep the Jewish people in exile.

If it's all the same to you, Lazer, I'm with the Berditcher on this. Hold my calls.