« August 2006 | Main | October 2006 »
September 29, 2006
Karen is Royalty
On Shabbos evenings Karen often catches me up on important stories that I'm just too lazy to read by myself.
Last Friday night I was totally caught up in Jetta Carleton's brilliant one and only novel, The Moonflower Vine, one of the finest novels I have ever read, when Karen drew my attention to a truly momentous story in The Jewish Press.
"Jewish Descendants of King David to Meet in Jerusalem. Geneologists say that there are about 100 Jewish family names whose bearers are likely to be Jewish descendants of King David.
"Well over 1,000 Jews of royal descent, will participate in a reunion in Jerusalem next spring, May 28-30, 2007. This will also mark the official inauguration of the worlwide Davidic Dynasty Geneology Center and Museum in the Old City of Jerusalem."
For more information and if you want to put a "von" before your Jewish name, click here.
I have to admit, I am less than overwhelmed by this whacky story. I want to get back to my novel about three unmarried sisters in Southern Missouri during the 1920's. It's a bit like Pride and Prejudice--but in the American grain. This is a great American novel and I am completely transported to another time, another place, an utterly different mentality.
Then Karen starts reading the family names that are connected to the Davidic dynasty: The list seems to include every Jewish name in existence--except, naturally, mine: Adler. Fishel. Meisels. Posner. Singer. Twersky...
Singer?
"I am royalty, I am royalty." Karen giggles.
"Listen, do I call you M'Lady from now on or what?"
"Don't feel bad, Robert, you've obviously got seniority, your name is much older. Avrech, you are probably descended from Joseph."
Right. There you go. As Joseph was carried through Egypt, the Bible tells (Genesis, Mikeitz 41, 43) us: He [Pharaoh] also had him [Yosef] ride in his second royal chariot and they proclaimed before him: Avrech! Thus, he appointed him over all the land of Egypt.
Rashi, the great medieval commentator tells us that Avrech is a composite of two words: Av, father, to rach, which means tender in years. Thus, a father in wisdom but tender in years.
I continue reading "The Moonflower Vine." Jetta Carleton's prose is so precise, so dense that I can practically read the minds of the three sisters. Like Harper Lee, Carleton wrote only one book that is a masterpiece, but I'm afraid that no one has ever heard of "The Moonflower Vine."
Abruptly, Karen slaps her hand against the couch.
WHAP!
"What's wrong?" I ask, startled.
"Hey," Karen says cracking up, "I'm a JAP*."
Princess Karen and I wish all our Seraphic Friends a lovely and meaningful Shabbos and a G'mar Tov.
*Jewish American Princess
Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 02:07 PM | Comments (18)
Democrats for Throat-Slitters
Yesterday, a majority of Senate Democrats voted against a measure on the interrogations and trials of terrorism suspects.
Only twelve Democrats crossed party lines to vote for the bill.
The position of the Democrats is clear. They see the war on terror as a conventional law enforcement matter, to be handled by the civil courts, with habeus corpus extended to non-citizens, to men who do not wear uniforms, men who do not wear dog-tags, men who do not have military serial numbers, men who are sworn to slaughter Jews and Christians, men who decapitate and slit the throats of their kidnapped victims.
The Republicans see the war on terror as a long struggle that will call for sacrifice and yes, ruthlessness.
The Democrats tell us that we are less safe since 9-11, yet the mainland has not been attacked in these five years so one can dismiss their charges as opportunistic political hyperbole.
Terrorism is here to stay, and like any evil it can only be stamped out when it is named, confronted and fought with unrelenting resolve.
The Republicans are by no means perfect. But at least they are willing to fight. Republicans understand that evil exists.
Democrats do not believe in evil, they believe in "seeking the root causes of terrorism," and inevitably the root cause, for the majority of Democrats, is American foreign policy.
Such a party cannot be trusted with national security.
Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 12:14 PM | Comments (1)
Babiy Yar
"Yesterday in Kiev there was a commemoration at Babiy Yar, the infamous gorge in which tens of thousands of Ukraine’s Jews were murdered by the invading German army in 1941. (Later on in the occupation, Babi Yar was also used to massacre gypsies, other Ukrainians and Russian prisoners of war.) President Viktor Yuschenko and the presidents of Israel and Croatia all gathered for an event attended by thousands of Ukrainians. A quick taxi ride turned into an hour-long odyssey as traffic all over the city was at a standstill for hours as the scale of the commemoration was so huge."
To read the rest of this story, please click here.
Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 10:51 AM | Comments (2)
Breeding More Terrorists
The Democrats, cherry-picking form the NIE report, leaked by the ever reliably seditious NY Times, tell us over and over again that our presence in Iraq is creating more jihadists. I suppose the Democrats are saying that if we had not liberated Iraq from the Stalinist regime of Saddam Hussein, there would be far less jihadists.
This after 9-11.
But let's just say that there are more jihadists now. And that they are pouring into Iraq. Well, that's good. We've got them in one corner of the world where we can fight and annihilate them--and they are not in, say New York, Los Angeles, or Kansas.
But on a deeper lever, let me speak to this notion of us "creating terrorists."
This is a disgusting and sick ethical inversion. And it's the reason I despise most Liberals as moral fools.
By this very logic one would have to say that the existence of Israel has spawned the modern age of Arab terrorism, and all we have to do is abandon Israel, let genocide run its course, and then we will all sing Kumbaya with our peace loving jihadist brothers and sisters.
Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 10:08 AM | Comments (6)
September 28, 2006
Back to the Past
A wonderful site to explore: When These Streets Heard Yiddish.
Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 02:24 PM | Comments (4)
No Excuses for Terror
This You Tube Documentary is brought to you by British leftists who can no longer stand idly by and remain silent as their nihilistic comrades align themselves with the genocidal anti-Jewish jihadists.
Better do it fast. The last time this British journalist, David Aaronovitch, posted a video piece, You Tube removed it within several hours.
Hat Tip: Seraphic Friend, Jeremiah.
Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 10:41 AM | Comments (9)
September 27, 2006
Free To Be A Muslim Jew-Killer
Ah, Islam, the religion that keeps on giving -- more and more Jew-hatred to the world.
For yet another example of the religion of peace grinnning and calling for the "beautiful murder" of Jews, please click here.
I Have a Dream
Egypt has a peace treaty with Israel, but that doesn't mean that this barbarian can't express his "I Have a Dream" vision.
Here in America too many sit passively and listen to groups like CAIR as they defend Jihadists , as they accuse us of being intolerant of Islam. Just look at this video as CAIR tramples on free speech, as CAIR brings America one step closer to Dhimmitude.
They claim that it is we who are the problem, that it is the democratic, truth-telling west, Jews and Christians, who are oppressing Muslims. In truth, they are on the march as tyrannical oppressors, abroad and here at home.
They are organized in an offensive attack of intimidation against the west, more specifically against Jews for we are an easy target; the first in society to be hated, the last to be defended. The left in America have already abandoned us via Israel. The Democratic Party is slowly but inexorably doing the same.
Unless good and honest people wake up and fight back--refuse to be intimidated by polite shadow Jihad groups -- it will soon be too late.
If your local TV station gives air time to CAIR or an organization like it--call and protest. Contact the advertisers and tell them that you will no longer buy their products.
Never forget that it was a lawsuit and siezure of property brought by Morris Dees and the Southern Poverty Law Center, that bankrupted the Ku Klux Kan.
We should follow the same tactic against these jihadist groups. They are highly vulnerable.
This is a life and death struggle.
Your children and their children's existence is at stake.
These people want to enslave you.
When they say peace, they are speaking of jihad.
When they say love, they are speaking of hate.
And when they speak of tolerance, they are describing your prison.
Jihad vs. Amadeus
What you saw in those two appalling videos above are not isolated incidents, not cultural aberrations. Just look at this story from Germany where a Mozart opera has been cancelled because, gee, what a shock, Muslims have protested, their sensibilities have been offended.
Funny how selective is the Muslim sensibility. I do not recall one single public march or protest when two Fox journalists were kidnapped in Gaza, held for weeks, and then forced to publicly convert to the religion of peace.
Can you imagine if they had been made to convert to Christianity?
Consider Rosie O’Donnell, the great cultural crusader, who, on The View, said that radical Christianity is just as threatning as radical Islam.
Funny, I don't recall any Christian homicide bombers; nor do I know of any Christian schools or clerics who teach doctrines of murder, genocide and Jew-hatred. Gee, have any Seraphic Friends heard of Christians who practice honor killings?
I could go on and on, but really, why bother? Rosie and her truly mad fellow travelers have no interest in truth, merely in advancing their radical agenda of same-sex marriage, even at the cost of aligning themselves with Islam Nazis, an ideology that does not hesitate to have lesbians publicly tortured and murdered by the Islamic death sentence:stoning, preferably by very small stones.
Karen taped this little piece of intellectual madness for me. The audience applauded. And Rosie, a true Hollywood dim-wit, smirked at poor Elisabeth Hasselbeck -- and I felt like weeping, for Rosie is not alone in those who believe quite passionately and self-righteously in such absolute filth.
Long ago I learned that talent, great talent, is often given to very stupid, very shallow people.
Lying Low
Can you imagine if Jews had forced Muslims to convert to Judaism?
Forget for a moment that we are not allowed to proseletyze -- but just imagine. Pogroms, I assure you, would sweep the globe.
The NY Times would find said pogroms "regrettable, but under the circumstances, tragically comprehensible."
This, I guarantee.
The repulsive forced conversion in Gaza should have brought hundreds, no thousands of good and decent Muslims into the streets in protest.
Instead, there was a vast and terrifying silence.
I have heard it said that good and decent Muslims are afraid for their lives. Afraid of the jihadists, and so they lay low.
This is no argument.
This was settled before, during and after World War II when German citizens also fell back on indifference, on a vast genocidal silence, as their Jewish neighbors were murdered en masse.
Evil at the Core
And its root cause is not, as the NY Times naively insists, "poverty and lack of economic progress."
No, this Jew-hatred comes from where it has always come from: pure evil.
And this evil comes from the most "advanced" Arab society in the MIddle East, Egypt. A land that receives more American foreign aid than Israel.
Jew-hatred is everywhere in the Arab world; it is widely accepted, and it is taught in the religious madrassas. Imbided with mother's milk, this rabid Jew-hatred is endemic to the Muslim world, from Jakarta to Damascus it is unquestioned and usually state sponsored.
INTERPOLATION:
Several years ago, archeologists in Saudi Arabia made a startling discovery: ancient writing on several stone tablets in the limitless desert. The archeologists were electrified at what the tablets might mean.
They looked closer at the tablets and realized that the writing inscribed on the stone was... ancient Hebrew. They were, to put it mildly, hugely excited, but knowing their political and religious masters -- truly horrified, truly terrified.
When informed of the tablets, of the ancient and invaluable Hebrew inscriptions, The King of Saudi Arabia--I'm not making this up--ordered this archeological and historical treasure to be reburied under the dunes of the endless desert.
Forever.
Any hint of Jews, of Judaism, of true history, is simply unacceptable to these prehistoric barbarians.
This outrage was revealed by Sandra MacKey in her magnificent, ground breaking book: The Saudis: Inside the Desert Kingdom.
This is still one of the best books about a dysfunctional country. Actually, Saudi Arabia is not a country, it's a corporation fully owned by a truly dysfunctional family. MacKey wrote this stunning book in secret, smuggled the manuscript out of the repressive kingdom at great peril to her life, and after it was published she was promptly barred from entering the kingdom ever again.
In fact, so accurate and scathing is her portrait of this mad, loopy, medieval and blood-drenched country (which, by the way, Ms. MacKey has great affection for) that the Ibn Saud Royal family has farbade her name ever to be spoken in their most royal presence. Now that's the kind of blurb money just cannot buy. But you Seraphic Reader should purchase this book, from its pages you will get a startling glimpse of the Islamic madness we are facing and fighting.
You will get a dose of true horror, something we all badly need for I fear too many of us are are still not prepared, even after 9-11, even after the daily homicide bombings in Iraq where women and children are the targets, yes, I fear that far too many of us still refuse to recognize the hot core of evil that is the Islamic enemy we are fighting.
END INTERPOLATION:
And it has absolutely nothing to do with to Palestinian Israeli conflict.
If you cling to that belief, you are, forgive me, if not delusional, a moron.
Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 10:38 AM | Comments (8)
Jerusalem 360°
This is a unique site. Jerusalem at night, Interactive 360° Panoramas.
The tour consists of several interactive panoramic images which can be controlled by clicking and dragging the mouse (within the image boundaries) or by using the buttons.
To begin your tour of the Old City of Jerusalem, click here.
Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 08:40 AM | Comments (3)
September 26, 2006
Bubba is Back!
Here he is, once again, angrily wagging his finger, running off at the mouth, practically foaming at the mouth, his Arkansas accent deepening along with his self-righteous wrath.
Bubba is back in all his glory.
What a delightful treat.
Bubba: the gift that keeps on giving.
And you just know that when The Finger starts waving, jabbing and wagging and Bubba all purple-faced can't stop talking for one single minute and he just flat-out starts making things up so fast that Fox journalist Chris Wallace can only sit there with a half smile on his face because he just knows that Bubba is digging himself a trench he's not gonna soon be able to crawl out of, well when this happens you just know that Bubba is back, and G-d love him, half of what he says ain't true -- and the other half are just plain lies.
"Well, it depends on what the definition of is... is."
Oh, the good ol' days.
I have to admit, I miss 'em. I miss Bubba. Let's face it, he's really amusing.
It's not often you have a genuine, pathological narcissist sitting in the White House, defacto, the most powerful man in the world.
Bubba's still ticked off about the ABC docudrama, The Path to 9-11. You see, to a true narcissist, and make no mistake about it, clinically Clinton fits the bill to a T, the movie is only about, well, Bubba and his administration.
It's not about the John O'Neill, the brave FBI agent who desperately and relentlessly battled OBL for so many years.
It's not about courageous CIA operatives who were out in the killing fields face-to-face with the Jihadist enemy.
It's not about the destructive political decisions made by the Church Committee that set up a wall between the FBI and the CIA that made it impossible to share vital intelligence.
It's not about the emasculation of the CIA by the Democrats, making it illegal to assasinate America's enemies.
And of course, it's most certainly not about the 3,000 men, women and children, innocents all, butchered on 9-11 by the Islamic Nazis.
Nope, myopic as always, Bubba can only see, well, Bubba.
For in the end, Bubba and his loyalists are fighting a savage but fruitless rear-guard action; an Orwellian attempt to manipulate history in their favor.
Using that infamous Southern charm, plus a strong dose of lies, and Soviet style intimidation, the former President is, make no mistake about it, headed for an ugly final reckoning, an historical crumbling: Bubba the Berlin Wall.
I feel your pain.
Translation: I feel what I feel like feeling when I feel like it -- so that it appears like true compassion.
Did I hear the former President correctly when he said that:
The far right accused him of "being obsessed with OBL."
Huh?
That his administration "contracted" to kill OBL?
Please, more details?
Bubba's defensive explosion is priceless.
Bubba accuses Wallace of "moving his bones" by asking a question, a question about the pusuit of OBL that includes President Bush.
Okay, I've read my Faulkner, my Carson McCullers, my William Styron, my Harper Lee, and perhaps the greatest Southern novelist of them all: Jetta Carleton, but I have never come across this particular southern ditty. So, if any Seraphic Friend can provide a translation, we would be e-tuhnally grateful.
Moving his bones?
Good grief, is this bad Mafia dialogue channeled through the back country roads of hillbilly Arkansas?
Eleven times, Bubba demands that we read Richard A. Clarke's book for the truth.
Uh, reality check, Bubba: Clarke's book is not the only word on the subject. And hardly the final word. Do check out Lawrence Wright's maginficent The Looming Tower. It's elegantly written, honest to all concerned, and serves no political master, least of all the author--which is more than can be said for Clarke's self-serving volume. And do take note that The Looming Tower is written by a New Yorker Magazine staff writer, hardly a member of the vast far right conspiracy you and Hillary seem convinced are out there to destroy your most harmonious partnership.
INTERPOLATION
I'm the only member of this far right conspiracy. I keep trying to recruit others into my clever but evil plot, but everyone turns me down. They tell me that conspiracies do not exist.
Little do they know...
Alone, but filled with iron resolve, I continue to weave my diabolical Seraphic Web.
END INTERPOLATION
Oh, and Clarke's book isn't even that complimentary to the Clinton administration. Clarke makes it clear that there is enough blame to go around.
Makes you wonder if Bubba even read the book.
And has Bubba now set a new precedent? Can President Bush now go on ABC, CBS, NBC, CNN and say something like:
"I'd like to put this interview in context. You are a radical secular, leftist network and as such all your questions are designed to sandbag me as opposed to the soft balls you lob at Third World Dictators you seem to adore. And you got that little smirk on your face and you think you're so clever."
Does this sound, um, acceptable?
Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 08:44 AM | Comments (16)
Moral Confusion
"Take The New York Times editorial page, for example. It is written by people who condemn Pius for his alleged silence and now condemn Benedict for not being quiet. According to the Times, Benedict will only create more anti-Western Muslim violence. But that was exactly the excuse defenders of Pius XII so often offered for why Pius XII did not speak out more forcefully -- that he was afraid it would only engender more Nazi violence. Yet Pius's critics have (correctly) dismissed that excuse out of hand."
To read Dennis Prager's entire article, please click here.
Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 08:41 AM | Comments (0)
September 25, 2006
If I Forget Thee O' Jerusalem
Today is the Fast of Gedalia, that commemorates the killing of the Jewish governor of Judah, a critical event in the downfall of the First Commonwealth.
Here's a lovely video that expresses our love for Jerusalem, for Israel our Biblical homeland; and our love and unyielding devotion to Judiasm--our life's oxygen.
Hat Tip: One of Ariel's ZT'L best friends, Avi Stewart.
Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 04:01 PM | Comments (1)
Steven Vincent - Still in the Red Zone
Steven Vincent was a great and courageous American journalist who was tortured and murdered by Jihadists in Iraq.
Whereas mainstream journalists stayed tucked safely in the Green Zone and filed stories that were gathered and written by Iraqi stringers, Steven Vincent bravely went into the heart of the beast. He wanted to tell the truth. For this he paid with his life.
Journalists everywhere should remember Steven Vincent and hold him up as a shining example of a journalist who put truth above ideology.
Here is Kesher's extraordinary memorial to Steven, a blogblast that Seraphic Secret proudly took part in.
Seraphic Friend David Paulin writes a fine piece about the very short memory of the NY Times.
And a fine follow up article, Snubbed Again.
And here, Steven's widow, Lisa Ramaci writes to NY Times journalist Edward Wong, reminding Wong of Steven's life, work, and of his cruel death.
Dear Mr. Wong,
I am writing regarding your article, Iraq Stumbling in Bid to Purge Its Rogue Police, in Sunday's Times. I must say, although the article was extremely well-researched and written, I am both puzzled and dismayed by the fact that you did not bother to mention Steven's name in it. Given that he broke the story about the rising infiltration of the Basra police force by these rogue elements, and given that he literally gave his life for it, I would have thought a reference to him would not have been out of line, and would indeed have been a graceful and well-deserved tribute to his courage.
But for some reason the Times seems to have totally forgotten about Steven; it's as if he didn't exist, didn't write for them, didn't die as a direct result of an op-ed the paper published. I think now of the series of articles by Michael Moss and David Rohde that ran in May, beginning with Misjudgments Marred US Plans for Iraqi Police, and going on from there. Again, in those thousands of words, not one mention was made of Steven. Not since October 2005, in Kirk Semple's piece from Basra, has there been any real acknowledgment of him; the last time he was mentioned (in passing) in some Times article about Iraq, his name was misspelled. In Ali Fadhil's recent op-ed Iraq's Endangered Journalists, Fadhil actually had the audacity to claim that "foreign reporters have the advantage of being considered untouchable by the Iraqi police and security forces." Dear God, does no one remember history any more? He was only killed a year ago, not in the Mesozoic era!
Was it because he was only a freelancer? Do his kidnapping and murder not matter because he was not employed by some major media organization? Are the facts too unsavory? I can only ascribe this blanket silence of him and the circumstances of his death to those realities. But he was one of you, even if he did not get a steady paycheck, and for you all to close ranks and seemingly agree to pretend he never even existed is absolutely shameful. What would it have taken for you to make a brief reference to him and the circumstances of his death? How many words would it have added? Fadhil, Moss and Rohde never met him, so perhaps their omission is somewhat understandable, but you - you spent time with him, ate with him, talked with him. There is no way you could not remember Steven - he wasn't the kind of guy you can put out of your mind that easily.
You wrote in your lovely email below how much you admired him, but it seems you have forgotten how highly you lauded him one year ago, and now no longer even feel the need to mention his name. However, I take comfort in knowing there are people out there in the blog universe, people I have never even met, who admired Steven and who still do, and who are not afraid or unwilling to write about him despite his mere freelancer status. I refer you to the following sites:
Big Carnival
SeraphicPress
Keshertalk
where you will see that there are still those who feel it important to remind the world of Steven's life and death. I am sure you are a very nice guy - I was touched by the flowers you and Alan sent for the funeral, and took comfort in the words you wrote below - but am very sorry to say I no longer believe them the way I once did. And that is a real shame.
Sincerely,
Lisa Ramaci
As of this morning, Wong has not replied to Lisa's letter.
This is the letter Edward Wong, edwongnyt@yahoo.com, wrote to Lisa Ramaci after Steven Vincent was murdered.
Hi Lisa,
This is Edward Wong, writing from Baghdad. The day we learned of Steven's death, I left a message on a New York number that Steven had given me when I met him in Basra in June. We haven't spoken yet, but I'm just writing to let you know that my thoughts are with you and Steven's other friends and family
members on this weekend, the weekend of his wake and funeral. I know you've spoken with Alan Chin, and he's probably told you that Steven left a remarkable impression on the two of us. We spent many evenings with Steven in Basra, talking for hours over dinners in the Marbid Hotel about the war. I was struck by Steven's strong viewpoints, but most of all by his willingness to set his feet on the ground here and see what was really going on in Iraq. What he sacrificed for the story is a price that no journalist should ever have to pay. But in Basra, I saw a man who was truly determined to make a difference with his work, and that's one of the highest callings one can aspire to. He was fulfilling that in his final days, and nothing filled him with more excitement than communicating to the world what he was seeing with his own eyes. I know that that is small consolation for his loss, but it might provide a little comfort in the darkest moments.
Perhaps we'll meet when I'm back in New York this fall. Please take care.
Best,
Edward Wong
The New York Times
And here is Steven Vincent's blog from Iraq that was the basis for his fine book, In the Red Zone.
Steven's book is still the finest work I've read about Iraq. Don't miss it.
We sincerely hope that Lisa Ramaci will find some measure of comfort knowing that there are thousands of good people who care deeply about her husband's life, death and extraordinary legacy.
Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 10:34 AM | Comments (3)
September 22, 2006
Rosh Hashanah - 5767
The Yom Tovim, the High Holidays, are the most difficult times for us.
Ariel's absence, always a profound presence, sprouts anew; it grows with alarming speed, it widens, it mutates into an emotional wall that feels thoroughly physical, separating us from, well -- everyone but each other.
I can still hear my lone voice reciting the Kaddish on the Rosh Hashanah after Ariel was niftar. How was it that in such a large shul I was the only person saying Kaddish? Yet, there I stood, chanting in a broken and weak voice, alone in a room of over two hundred men and women, barely able to make it through the prayer. Each time I said the Kaddish, I could feel the tension in the room as people strained with me, willing me to somehow chant the words, somehow pull myself together and fulfill this wrenching obligation.
There were moments when I could not believe that it was my voice saying the Kaddish.
There were moments when I could not believe that I was me.
Unlike the other major Jewish holidays--the Yamim Noraim, The Days of Awe--do not mark national/agricultural events in the Jewish calendar.
Rosh Hashanah commemorates a universal event.
The world was created on Rosh Hashanah.
These days are purely religious, time set aside and dedicated to ponder and reaffirm G-d's role as Master of the Universe. We are affirming G-d's annointment as the sole Creator -- King of the Universe.
Our prayer emphasizes our short days on His earth.
Our prayer delves into self-examination.
Spirituality and holiness are pondered.
On Rosh Hashanah the Jew, through admission of sin, prayer, and acts of Teshuva, (good deeds) the Jew beseeches G-d to grant forgiveness. We believe that in His mercy, He will receive the truly penitent. We ask to be inscribed into the Book of Life.
We ask G-d to make his decisions based on his attributes of mercy, rather than inflexible din (law) as he forgave the Jews after the sin of the Golden Calf.
The Gates of Repentance are open until Yom Kippur, the Day of Atonement. At this time, G-d's final decree is established:
"Who will live and who will die; who will be serene and who will be disturbed; who will be poor and who will be rich; who will be humbled and who will be exalted."
Karen and I wish you all a lovely and meaningful Shabbos and Shanah Tova Umituka.
Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 03:06 PM | Comments (6)
Grey Ghost
"John S. Mosby was a successful attorney, and with the outbreak of the Civil War he enlisted in the 1st Virginia Cavalry. He quickly moved up through the ranks, and eventually raised his own partisan unit. At first a battalion, his prowess and charisma allowed him to recruit it up to a regiment. The regiment became known as the famed "Mosby Raiders".
"John Mosby was a key innovator in the tactics of Guerilla warfare. By 1863 his exploits were becoming legendary in the South, and viewed as a less than honorable way to fight by the North. Regardless of perspective he devised a new way of fighting by which a small agile force could harass and defeat a much larger force. In lightning fast raids, his raiders would move in and cut telegraph lines, ambush couriers or small parties, start fires, harass rail transport, and then disappear into the night. His quickness and stealth led to his now famous nickname, "The Grey Ghost".
For our Seraphic Picture of the week, please click here.
Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 02:48 PM | Comments (2)
Blaming the Jews
From You Tube, a pretty incredible piece of reportage from England about Islamic anti-Semitism. The ignorance, the lies, the pure evil depicted will want to make you, well, extend all rights of the Geneva Conventions to these wretched creatures.
Do not, under any circumstances, miss these videos.
Karen and I wish you all a lovely and meaningful Shabbos and Shanah Tova Umituka.
Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 12:31 PM | Comments (6)
The Plight of the Canary
Seraphic Friend "ShrinkWrapped" a psychiatrist, has written a brilliant analyisis of Jewish anti-Semitism--just in time for Rosh Hashanah.
"There are many reasons people have difficulty protecting themselves, ranging from confusion over what threatens them to uncertainty about what they are defending. At the moment, the West shows every indication of suffering from a wide range of ailments that interfere with its ability to defend itself."
To read the rest, please click here.
Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 12:08 PM | Comments (0)
The Democratic Party and Jews
"The Democratic Party has been a congenial political home for many American Jews since the era of FDR. The party welcomed them into its ranks (along with many blacks and urban dwellers) and its programs comported well with many values Jews cherish. The Party was also seen as one that had offered help to the doomed Jews of Europe, opposed prejudice, and supported the fledgling state of Israel from enemies that boasted of its plans to destroy the state.
"Conversely, the Republican Party was perceived to be a WASP enclave, isolationist in its outlook, and weak on support for Israel (though George C. Marshall under the Truman Administration advocated abandoning Israel to the tender mercies of its Arab neighbors).
"However, these views are now anachronistic and need to be revisited."
To read the rest of this important and timely article from The American Thinker, please click here.
Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 11:55 AM | Comments (2)
Intimidation
"How dare you say Islam is a violent religion? I'll kill you for it'' is not exactly the best way to go about refuting the charge. But of course, refuting is not the point here. The point is intimidation.
To read the rest of Charles Krauthammer's splendid article, please click here.
Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 10:06 AM | Comments (0)
NY to Terrorists: Welcome!
By -- Fern Sidman
It has been an exciting week here in the Big Apple. In the spirit of freedom of speech, New York City was the site for the UN sponsored convocation of worldwide terrorists to espouse their demonic views. As we know, diplomatic immunity was granted to the likes of Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinjehad and Venezuelan dictator Hugo Chavez.
9/11 Remembrance
New York City had just concluded its remembrance of the fifth anniversary of the 9/11 attacks that saw the destruction of the World Trade Center and the commemoration of close to 3,000 lives that were snuffed out on that day by the ilk of terrorists whose philosophy bears close resemblance to those who took the rostrum at the UN.
While attempting to tone down his usual incendiary rhetoric, Ahmadinejad took aim the United States for spearheading a campaign of international sanctions against Iran for its uranium enrichment program and its development of a nuclear arsenal. In a transcript of Ahmadinjehad's speech at the UN, published on the National Public Radio web site, he states:
"The Islamic Republic of Iran is a member of the IAEA and is committed to the NPT. All our nuclear activities are transparent, peaceful and under the watchful eyes of IAEA inspectors. Why then are there objections to our legally recognized rights? Which governments object to these rights? Governments that themselves benefit from nuclear energy and the fuel cycle. Some of them have abused nuclear technology for non-peaceful ends including the production of nuclear bombs, and some even have a bleak record of using them against humanity.
"Which organization or Council should address these injustices? Is the Security Council in a position to address them? Can it stop violations of the inalienable rights of countries? Can it prevent certain powers from impeding scientific progress of other countries?
"The abuse of the Security Council, as an instrument of threat and coercion, is indeed a source of grave concern.
"Some permanent members of the Security Council, even when they are themselves parties to international disputes, conveniently threaten others with the Security Council and declare, even before any decision by the Council, the condemnation of their opponents by the Council. The question is: what can justify such exploitation of the Security Council, and doesn't it erode the credibility and effectiveness of the Council? Can such behavior contribute to the ability of the Council to maintain security?"
Moreover, Ahmadinjehad states: "The question needs to be asked: if the Governments of the United States or the United Kingdom who are permanent members of the Security Council, commit aggression, occupation and violation of international law, which of the organs of the UN can take them to account? Can a Council in which they are privileged members address their violations? Has this ever happened? In fact, we have repeatedly seen the reverse. If they have differences with a nation or state, they drag it to the Security Council and as claimants, arrogate to themselves simultaneously the roles of prosecutor, judge and executioner. Is this a just order? Can there be a more vivid case of discrimination and more clear evidence of injustice?
"Regrettably, the persistence of some hegemonic powers in imposing their exclusionist policies on international decision making mechanisms, including the Security Council, has resulted in a growing mistrust in global public opinion, undermining the credibility and effectiveness of this most universal system of collective security."
In this clear reference to the United States as the chief opponent of nuclear development in Iran, Ahmadinjehad excoriates the United States for the development and use of nuclear weapons and refers to its support of other countries that have developed these weapons as well. It is time to make a clear distinction. While it is futile to debate the moral issue of nuclear weapon development, the United States and other countries that have this weaponry do not have the same track record of President Ahmadinjehad. He is a terrorist. His lexicon and vernacular are replete with promises to destroy the western world, and his most venomous words are aimed at his arch nemesis, Israel.
Bloody Record
Ahmadinjehad's track record deserves closer examination. According to journalist Joseph Farah in his report posted on September 20, 2006, on the World Net Daily web site, Ahmadinjehad's hands are not free of blood. He states the following facts concerning the terrorist past of the Iranian President:
* He has been identified by at least six U.S. hostages as a ringleader in the 1979 U.S. Embassy takeover.
* He has been identified by former Iranian President Bani Sadr as Ayatollah Khomeini's liaison with the hostage takers.
* He's been accused of the murder of Kurdish leader Abdul Rahman Ghassemlou in Vienna by officials in Austria who say they have compelling evidence and want an arrest warrant sworn for him
* As mayor of Tehran, he was one of the principal forces behind a campaign to recruit and train suicide bombers specifically to attack the U.S., Israel and Britain.
So much for the man who stands before the world at the United Nations and speaks of such lofty concepts of peace, justice, love and equality. He states: "Today, humanity passionately craves commitment to the Truth, devotion to God, quest for Justice and respect for the dignity of human beings. Rejection of domination and aggression, defense of the oppressed, and longing for peace constitute the legitimate demand of the peoples of the world, particularly the new generations and the spirited youth, who aspire a world free from decadence, aggression and injustice, and replete with love and compassion. The youth have a right to seek justice and the Truth; and they have a right to build their own future on the foundations of love, compassion and tranquility."
While these words play well in front of the cameras, they are in stark contrast to the normally jingoistic and hateful statements he had made in the last two years. His hatred for the western world, and the United States in particular is common knowledge. His demonization of the forces of democracy and justice are well known. His vituperative against all non-Muslims and the labeling of these people as satanic is the cornerstone of his agenda. The term "Islamofascist" has become a rather ubiquitous one as of late, as we hear President Bush make use of it on some occasions. If anyone in this world could be named as the international leader of this ominous movement and philosophy, Ahmadinejad would be the leading contender.
Referring to the United States in his speech at the UN, Ahmadinejad says: "Some occupy the homeland of others, thousands of kilometers away from their borders, interfere in their affairs and control their oil and other resources and strategic routes, while others are bombarded daily in their own homes; their children murdered in the streets and alleys of their own country and their homes reduced to rubble."
He also said, "Occupation of countries, including Iraq, has continued for the last three years. Not a day goes by without hundreds of people getting killed in cold blood. The occupiers are incapable of establishing security in Iraq."
Jews & Israel
Concerning Ahmadinejad's position on Israel and the Jews, it couldn't be clearer. Joseph Farah enumerates these words for us:
* Oct. 26, 2005: "There is no doubt that the new wave (of terrorist attacks) in Palestine will wipe off this disgraceful blot (Israel) from the face of the Islamic world. ... As the imam (Grand Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, leader of the Islamic revolution) said, Israel must be wiped off the map. Anybody who recognizes Israel will burn in the fire of the Islamic nation's fury, (while) any (Islamic leader) who recognizes the Zionist regime means he is acknowledging the surrender and defeat of the Islamic world."
* Dec. 8, 2005: "Some European countries insist on saying that during World War II, Hitler burned millions of Jews and put them in concentration camps. Any historian, commentator or scientist who doubts that is taken to prison or gets condemned. ... Let's assume what the Europeans say is true. ... Let's give some land to the Zionists in Europe or in Germany or Austria. They faced injustice in Europe, so why do the repercussions fall on the Palestinians?"
* Dec. 14, 2005: "Today, they have created a myth in the name of Holocaust and consider it to be above God, religion and the prophets. If you (Europeans) committed this big crime, then why should the oppressed Palestinian nation pay the price? You have to pay the compensation yourself. This is our proposal: Give a part of your own land in Europe, the United States, Canada or Alaska to them so that the Jews can establish their country."
* Jan. 5, 2006: "We must believe in the fact that Islam is not confined to geographical borders, ethnic groups and nations. It's a universal ideology that leads the world to justice. We must prepare ourselves to rule the world, and the only way to do that is to put forth views on the basis of the Expectation of the Return. If we work on the basis of the Expectation of the Return [of the Mahdi], all the affairs of our nation will be streamlined and the administration of the country will become easier."
* Jan. 14, 2006: "They have created a myth in the name of the Holocaust and consider it to be above God, religion and the prophets."
* Feb. 11, 2006: "I ask everybody in the world not to let a group of Zionists who failed in Palestine to insult the prophet. Now in the West insulting the prophet is allowed, but questioning the Holocaust is considered a crime. We ask, why do you insult the prophet? The response is that it is a matter of freedom, while in fact they are hostages of the Zionists. And the people of the U.S. and Europe should pay a heavy price for becoming hostages to Zionists. We ask the West to remove what they created 60 years ago, and if they do not listen to our recommendations, then the Palestinian nation and other nations will eventually do this for them. Do the removal of Israel before it is too late and save yourself from the fury of regional nations."
* April 14, 2006: "Like it or not, the Zionist regime is heading toward annihilation. The Zionist regime is a rotten, dried tree that will be eliminated by one storm. Believe that Palestine will be freed soon."
* July 15, 2006: "Their (Israel's) methods resemble Hitler's. When Hitler wanted to launch an attack, he came up with a pretext. Zionists say they are Hitler's victims, but they have the same nature as Hitler."
* Aug. 1, 2006: "They (Israelis) know no limitations or boundaries at all any more for killing people. Are these people still human beings or just a bunch of bloodthirsty savages? They have made all notorious criminals in the world get a good reputation again."
Ahmadinejad's words at the United Nations were not as candid as his aforementioned statements, however, without referring to Israel by name he said: "The roots of the Palestinian problem go back to the Second World War. Under the pretext of protecting some of the survivors of that War, the land of Palestine was occupied through war, aggression and the displacement of millions of its inhabitants; it was placed under the control of some of the War survivors, bringing even larger population groups from elsewhere in the world, who had not been even affected by the Second World War."
While Ahmadinejad reviles Israel, without even acknowledging its existence, he carefully omits mentioning the terrorist actions of Hamas, Hezbollah, Islamic Jihad, Fatah and the other Palestinian terrorist organizations. He is a clever terrorist who uses the power of words to change the victim into the aggressor and the aggressor into the victim. He chides the world for not condemning Israel and suggests that the UN is under the thumb of the United States, who is Israel's chief supporter.
He couches his rhetoric in palatable terms that can be embraced by the proponents of "peace" in the universe known as the academia and the media.
The Rally That Wasn't
In response to Ahmadinjehad's speech at the UN, over 30,000 people attended a protest rally opposite the UN organized by a multitude of Jewish organizations, ranging from the left wing Meretz party to the right wing Agudath Israel party. Speakers at the rally included Israeli Foreign Minister Tzippy Livni, US Ambassador John Bolton, New York State Governor George Pataki, Holocaust survivor and author Eli Wiesel and human rights lawyer Alan Dershowitz. According to a report from Arutz Sheva, "Also attending the rally and issuing emotional pleas for the release of their captive family members were Carmit Goldwasser, wife of Ehud Goldwasser, and Benny Regev, brother of Eldad Regev – both being held by Hezbullah after being abducted at the beginning of the recent war."
Little is gained in bemoaning the fact that rallies of this nature are totally ineffective. They receive very little or no media coverage and the placid and establishment nature of these rallies do not dissuade the likes of terrorists such as Ahmadinejad and his supporters. While it is commendable that people did take time out to attend this rally and to speak out against terrorism and in support of Israel's kidnapped soldiers, there is no ongoing campaign in the American Jewish community to dramatically spotlight the issues confronting the State of Israel and the Jewish people. There is no organization that has devised and is willing to implement a ceaseless and relentless effort to vociferously counter threats against world Jewry.
Thug #2
If this wasn't enough to digest for one day, the international body ostensibly dedicated to world peace, the United Nations also presented to the world, the Venezuelan dictator Hugo Chavez. As we know, Chavez is a key member of the troika of Iran, Venezuela and Cuba. He endorses the brutal and tyrannical regime of Fidel Castro and provides support and succor to Iranian interests.
When he took the stage, Mr. Chavez stunned delegates at the UN General Assembly by calling Mr. Bush "the devil himself" and saying he left the smell of sulfur hanging in the chamber from his appearance the previous day. He also said that Bush was trying to take over the whole world. According to a report by CBS News in New York, "At the start of his talk Wednesday, during which Chavez referred to President Bush as "the devil," Chavez held up a book by Noam Chomsky, "Hegemony or Survival: America's Quest for Global Dominance," and recommended it to everyone in the General Assembly, as well as to the American people. "The people of the United States should read this ... instead of watching Superman movies," Chavez later told reporters. As of Thursday afternoon, "Hegemony or Survival," originally published in 2003, had jumped into the top 10 of Amazon and Barnes & Noble.com. Metropolitan Books, an imprint of Henry Holt, has ordered an additional paperback printing of 25,000 copies."
Chavez's views on Israel are in sync with that of his political partner, Ahmadinejad. His flagrant condemnations of Israel were fast and furious during the summer war in Lebanon and he was quick to recall his ambassadors in Israel. According to a news report of August 7, 2006 Chavez renewed his criticism of Israel's military offensive in Lebanon, calling it a "new Holocaust." Chavez's comments in his weekly radio and TV broadcast came three days after he said he was recalling Venezuela's top diplomat to Israel to express his government's indignation over Israeli attacks in Lebanon and its actions toward Palestinians. "Israel has gone mad," Chavez said.” They are massacring children, and no one knows how many are buried," he added, accusing Israel of being guilty of a "new Holocaust" and the "terrorist" U.S. government of complicity.
Tyrants at Columbia U. -- Duh!
And while we're on the topic of Jewish leftists, it would appear that Iranian President Ahmadinjehad will have further opportunity to espouse his anti-American and anti-Israel hatred. He has now been invited to spew forth his vitriolic views at Columbia University in New York City.
According to a report in the New York Sun, of September 21, 2006, it states: "Columbia University has invited the president of Iran, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, to give a speech at the Morningside campus, Columbia's president, Lee Bollinger, announced late last night. Mr. Bollinger in a statement said he did not invite the president himself but learned yesterday that his university had extended the invitation to Mr. Ahmadinejad, who is in New York City for the U.N. General Assembly.
It's not certain, however, that the president will attend a world leaders academic summit that is taking place at the school. Because of the short notice, Mr. Bollinger said he couldn't be sure that high-level security arrangements would be put in place in time. Columbia's offer to the president, a Holocaust denier with nuclear ambitions who was labeled by Israel's foreign minister yesterday as the greatest threat to the world's values, is sure to re-ignite protest at a campus that was rocked by a controversy over its anti-Israel professors less than two years ago.
Columbia's last-minute offer to Mr. Ahmadinejad was evidently made under secrecy and confusion. Last night, Columbia's vice president for public affairs, Susan Brown, denied that the invitation had been extended, saying it was "rumors, rumors, rumors." Mr. Bollinger released a statement about it just before midnight.
The report goes on to say that, "Although he said he strongly disagreed with Mr. Ahmadinejad's views, Mr. Bollinger said he would not stop him from speaking at the university's world leaders forum, which began this week and whose top-billed speakers had been the prime ministers of Croatia and Papua New Guinea.
"I happen to find many of President Ahmadinejad's stated beliefs to be repugnant, a view that I'm sure is widely shared within our university community," Mr. Bollinger said. "So whether or not all of the special arrangements needed for such a visit can be made in this unusually short period of time, I have no doubt that Columbia students and faculty would use an open exchange to challenge him sharply and are fully capable of reaching their own conclusions."
There is no question that Columbia University is a hotbed of anti-Israel and anti-American sentiment. It has become the haven for various and sundry Jew haters and Israel bashers to promulgate their theories, all under the guise of freedom of speech and academic freedom. It has on its roster an entire panoply of anti-Israel professors. Columbia University has the dubious distinction of hosting an array of Jew haters, Holocaust denier and detractors of Israel. Several months ago notorious Jewish anti-Semite and Holocaust denier, Prof. Norman Finkelstein graced the university with his presence at the invitation of both Jewish leftists and Arab students.
P.S. Have a Great Rosh Hashanah
And there we have it. A neat, little recap of the day that the terrorists came to New York. As the hours approach before the onset of the Rosh Hashanah holiday, as we prepare ourselves for the day of judgment, we can only look to the Almighty G-d of Israel for protection during these most dangerous times. We beseech the Almighty to inscribe us in the Book of Life, as we attempt to make amends for past misdeeds and we chant our fervent supplications to G-d to give us the strength and temerity and wisdom to battle our enemies. We ask that He give us the opportunity to return to His Torah, as we gird our loins and prepare to defend our faith.
Now is the time to storm the gates of Heaven with our most fervent and heartfelt prayers. Now is time to glorify the name of the Creator of the Universe and to fulfill our mission in this world.
May this Rosh HaShana be the beginning of the era of redemption and may we merit to be the harbingers of the coming of our righteous Messiah speedily in our days.
Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 09:23 AM | Comments (3)
September 21, 2006
Thousands Rally for Israel
Atlas Shrugs has great coverage of the anti-Ahmadinejad, pro-Israel rally in New York. I searched in vain in the liberal press for mention of this huge rally. Nothing in the NY Times. Nothing in the LA Times.
Yet there were between thirty-five to forty-thousand people at the rally.
You would think that this is newsworthy.
But the liberal media, in their infinite wisdom, decided that this event did not happen. Why am I not surprised?
Meryl Yourish has a nice posting about the non-response of the press.
Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 12:09 PM | Comments (6)
Vermeer
If I could own any great painting in the world it would be any painting by the Dutch master, Johannes Vermeer. There is no artist whose work touches me as deeply. Each of his canvases contains worlds within worlds, true narratives -- yet at the core of each canvas there are elemental mysteries.
The subjects of his greatest paintings are portraits of women, and each woman is simply luminous as she withholds a central portion of her soul -- hiding a secret that we the viewer can only guess at.
Vermeer's technical mastery, his astonishing brushwork has never been equaled, and scholars still debate his use of the camera obscura.
His use of color is seemingly modest, yet when closely studied, quite astonishing. Proust, in his monumental million word novel, In Search of Lost Time, rhapsodizes over a tiny patch of yellow wall in Vermeer's "View of Delft."
Here is the best link I've found about Vermeer's work, where you can delve as deeply as you want into this greatest of masters small output of thirty-six works.
Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 09:57 AM | Comments (0)
The Dysfunctional Thug from the Dysfunctional Country
"Hugo Chavez’s bizarre anti-American rant at the United Nations has got Americans asking, “What makes Chavez tick?”
"To understand him, stop thinking of oil-producing Venezuela as a Latin American country. Think of it as a dysfunctional Middle Eastern petro-state. Doing that is the key to understanding Chavez and Venezuela."
To read the rest of Seraphic Friend David Paulin's splendid analysis, please click here.
Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 07:59 AM | Comments (4)
September 20, 2006
When North Korea Falls
An extremely important article about the world's most repressive Stalinist style regime. A must read. RJA
The furor over Kim Jong Il’s missile tests and nuclear brinksmanship obscures the real threat: the prospect of North Korea’s catastrophic collapse. How the regime ends could determine the balance of power in Asia for decades. The likely winner? China
The abbreviation for North Korea used by American military officers says it all: KFR, the Kim Family Regime. It is a regime whose demonization by the American media and policy makers has obscured some vital facts. North Korea’s founder, Kim Il Sung, was not merely a dreary Stalinist tyrant. As defectors from his country will tell you, he was also a popular anti-Japanese guerrilla leader in the mold of Enver Hoxha, the Stalinist tyrant of Albania who led his countrymen in a successful insurgency against the Nazis. Nor is his son Kim Jong Il anything like the childish psychopath parodied in the film Team America: World Police. It’s true that Kim Jong Il was once a playboy. But he has evolved into a canny operator. Andrei Lankov, a professor of history at South Korea’s Kookmin University, in Seoul, says that under different circumstances Kim might have actually become the successful Hollywood film producer that regime propaganda claims he already is.
Kim Jong Il’s succession was aided by the link that his father had established in the North Korean mind between the Kim Family Regime and the Choson Dynasty, which ruled the Korean peninsula for 500 years, starting in the late fourteenth century. Expertly tutored by his father, Kim consolidated power and manipulated the Chinese, the Americans, and the South Koreans into subsidizing him throughout the 1990s. And Kim is hardly impulsive: he has the equivalent of think tanks studying how best to respond to potential attacks from the United States and South Korea—attacks that themselves would be reactions to crises cleverly instigated by the North Korean government in Pyongyang. “The regime constitutes an extremely rational bunch of killers,” Lankov says.
Yet for all Kim’s canniness, there is evidence that he may be losing his edge. And that may be reason to worry: totalitarian regimes close to demise are apt to get panicky and do rash things. The weaker North Korea gets, the more dangerous it becomes. The question that should be of greatest concern to the U.S. military in the Pacific—and the question that will likely determine the global balance of power in Asia for generations—is, What happens when North Korea collapses?
The Nightmare After Iraq
On the Korean peninsula, the Cold War has never ended. On the somber, seaweed-toned border dividing the two Koreas, amid the cries of egrets and Manchurian cranes, I observed South Korean soldiers standing frozen in tae kwon do ready positions, their fists clenched and forearms tightened, staring into the faces of their North Korean counterparts. Each side picks its tallest, most intimidating soldiers for the task (they are still short by American standards).
In the immediate aftermath of the Korean War, the South raised a 328-foot flagpole; the North responded with a 525-foot pole, then put a flag on it whose dry weight is 595 pounds. The North built a two-story building in the Joint Security Area at Panmunjom; the South built a three-story one. The North then added another story to its building. “The land of one-upmanship,” is how one U.S. Army sergeant describes the DMZ, or demilitarized zone. The two sides once held a meeting in Panmunjom that went on for eleven hours. Because there was no formal agreement about when to take a bathroom break, neither side budged. The meeting became known as the “Battle of the Bladders.”
In other divided countries of the twentieth century—Vietnam, Germany, Yemen—the forces of unity ultimately triumphed. But history suggests that unification does not happen through a calibrated political process in which the interests of all sides are respected. Rather, it tends to happen through a cataclysm of events that, piles of white papers and war-gaming exercises notwithstanding, catches experts by surprise.
Given that North Korea’s army of 1.2 million soldiers has been increasingly deployed toward the South Korean border, the Korean peninsula looms as potentially the next American military nightmare. In 1980, 40 percent of North Korean combat forces were deployed south of Pyongyang near the DMZ; by 2003, more than 70 percent were. As the saying goes among American soldiers, “There is no peacetime in the ROK.” (ROK, pronounced “rock,” is militaryspeak for the Republic of Korea.) One has merely to observe the Patriot missile batteries, the reinforced concrete hangars, and the blast barriers at the U.S. Air Force bases at Osan and Kunsan, south of Seoul—which are as heavily fortified as any bases in Iraq—to be aware of this. A marine in Okinawa told me, “North Korea is not some third-rate, Middle Eastern conventional army. These brainwashed Asians—as he crudely put it—”will stand and fight.” American soldiers in Korea refer to the fighting on the peninsula between 1950 and 1953 as “the first Korean War.” The implicit assumption is that there will be a second.
This helps explain why Korea may be the most dismal place in the world for U.S. troops to be deployed—worse, in some ways, than Iraq. While I traveled on the peninsula, numerous members of the combat-arms community, both air and infantry, told me that they would rather be in Iraq or Afghanistan than in Korea, which constitutes the worst of all military worlds. Soldiers and airmen often live on a grueling wartime schedule, with constant drills, and yet they also have to put up with the official folderol that is part of all peacetime bases—the saluting and inspections that fall by the wayside in war zones, where the only thing that matters is how well you fight. The weather on the peninsula is lousy, too: the winds charging down from Siberia make the winters unbearably frigid, and the monsoons coming off the Pacific Ocean make the summers hot and humid. The dust blowing in from the Gobi Desert doesn’t help.
The threat from north of the DMZ is formidable. North Korea boasts 100,000 well-trained special-operations forces and one of the world’s largest biological and chemical arsenals. It has stockpiles of anthrax, cholera, and plague, as well as eight industrial facilities for producing chemical agents—any of which could be launched at Seoul by the army’s conventional artillery. If the governing infrastructure in Pyongyang were to unravel, the result could be widespread lawlessness (compounded by the guerrilla mentality of the Kim Family Regime’s armed forces), as well as mass migration out of and within North Korea. In short, North Korea’s potential for anarchy is equal to that of Iraq, and the potential for the deployment of weapons of mass destruction—either during or after pre-collapse fighting—is far greater.
For a harbinger of the kind of chaos that looms on the peninsula consider Albania, which was for some years the most anarchic country in post-Communist Eastern Europe, save for war-torn Yugoslavia. On a visit to Albania before the Stalinist regime there finally collapsed, I saw vicious gangs of boys as young as eight harassing people. North Korea is reportedly plagued by the same phenomenon outside of its showcase capital. That may be an indication of what lies ahead. In fact, what terrifies South Koreans more than North Korean missiles is North Korean refugees pouring south. The Chinese, for their part, have nightmare visions of millions of North Korean refugees heading north over the Yalu River into Manchuria.
Obviously, it would be reckless not to worry about North Korea’s missile and WMD technologies. In August, there were reports yet again that Kim Jong Il was preparing an underground nuclear test. And the North test fired seven missiles in July. According to U.S. data, three of the missiles were Scud-Cs, and three were No-dong-As with ranges of 300 to 1,000 miles; all were capable of carrying a nuclear warhead. (Whether North Korea has such warheads is not definitively known, but it is widely believed to have in the neighborhood of ten—and the KFR certainly has the materials and technological know-how to build them.) The third type of missile, a Taep’o-dong-2, has a range of 2,300 to 9,300 miles, which means it could conceivably hit the continental United States. Though the Taep’o-dong-2 failed after takeoff during the recent testing, it did so at the point of maximum dynamic pressure—the same point where the space shuttle Challenger exploded, and the moment when things are most likely to go wrong. So this is likely not an insoluble problem for the KFR.
The Seven Stages of Collapse
Kim Jong Il’s compulsion to demonstrate his missile prowess is a sign of his weakness. Contrary to popular perception in the United States, Kim doesn’t stay up at night worrying about what the Americans might do to him; it’s not North Korea’s weakness relative to the United States that preoccupies him. Rather, if he does stay up late worrying, it’s about China. He knows the Chinese have always had a greater interest in North Korea’s geography—with its additional outlets to the sea close to Russia—than they have in the long-term survival of his regime. (Like us, even as they want the regime to survive, the Chinese have plans for the northern half of the Korean peninsula that do not include the “Dear Leader.”) One of Kim’s main goals in so aggressively displaying North Korea’s missile capacity is to compel the United States to deal directly with him, thereby making his otherwise weakening state seem stronger. And the stronger Pyongyang appears to be, the better off it is in its crucial dealings with Beijing, which are what really matter to Kim.
To Kim’s sure dismay, the American response to his recent missile tests was a shrug. President George W. Bush dispatched Christopher Hill, his assistant secretary of state for East Asian and Pacific affairs, to the region rather than Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice. I was in South Korea during the missile firings, and there were few signs of alert on any of the U.S. bases in Korea. Pilots in several fighter squadrons were told not to drink too much on their days off, in case they had to be called in, but that was about the extent of it.
What should concentrate the minds of American strategists is not Kim’s missiles per se but rather what his decision to launch them says about the stability of his regime. Middle- and upper-middle-level U.S. officers based in South Korea and Japan are planning for a meltdown of North Korea that, within days or even hours of its occurrence, could present the world—meaning, really, the American military—with the greatest stabilization operation since the end of World War II. “It could be the mother of all humanitarian relief operations,” Army Special Forces Colonel David Maxwell told me. On one day, a semi-starving population of 23 million people would be Kim Jong Il’s responsibility; on the next, it would be the U.S. military’s, which would have to work out an arrangement with the Chinese People’s Liberation Army (among others) about how to manage the crisis.
Fortunately, the demise of North Korea is more likely to be drawn out. Robert Collins, a retired Army master sergeant and now a civilian area expert for the American military in South Korea, outlined for me seven phases of collapse in the North:
Phase One: resource depletion;
Phase Two: the failure to maintain infrastructure around the country because of resource depletion;
Phase Three: the rise of independent fiefs informally controlled by local party apparatchiks or warlords, along with widespread corruption to circumvent a failing central government;
Phase Four: the attempted suppression of these fiefs by the KFR once it feels that they have become powerful enough;
Phase Five: active resistance against the central government;
Phase Six: the fracture of the regime; and
Phase Seven: the formation of new national leadership.
North Korea probably reached Phase Four in the mid-1990s, but was saved by subsidies from China and South Korea, as well as by famine aid from the United States. It has now gone back to Phase Three.
Kim Jong Il learned a powerful lesson by watching the fall of the Ceausescu Family Regime, in Romania: Take utter and complete control of the military. And so he has. The KFR now rules through the army. There have been only individual defections of North Korean soldiers to the South. Even small, unit-level defections—which would indicate that soldiers are talking to one another and are no longer afraid of exposure by comrades—have not yet occurred. One defector from the North’s special-operations forces told me that soldiers in the ranks are afraid to discuss politics with one another.
The North Korean People’s Army is simply too big to be kept happy and well fed, so the regime concentrates on keeping the elite units comfortable. The defector I spoke to—a scout swimmer—told me that while the special-operations forces live well, the extreme poverty of conventional soldiers would make their loyalty to Kim Jong Il in a difficult war questionable. Would they fight to defend the KFR if there were an unforeseen rebellion? The Romanian example suggests that it depends on the circumstances: when workers revolted in 1987 in Brasov, the Romanian military crushed them; when ethnic Hungarians did so two years later in Timisoara, the military deserted the regime.
How to Prevent Another Iraq
Stephen Bradner, a civilian expert on the region and an adviser to the military in South Korea, has thought a lot about the tactical and operational problems an unraveling North Korean state would present. So has Colonel Maxwell, the chief of staff of U.S. Special Operations in South Korea. “The regime in Pyongyang could collapse without necessarily its army corps and brigades collapsing,” Maxwell says. “So we might have to mount a relief operation at the same time that we’d be conducting combat ops. If there is anybody in the UN who thinks it will just be a matter of feeding people, they’re smoking dope.”
Maxwell has conducted similar operations before: he was the commander of a U.S. Army Special Forces battalion that landed on Basilan Island, in the southern Philippines, in early 2002, part of a mission that combined humanitarian assistance with counterinsurgency operations against Jemaah Islamiyah and the Abu Sayyaf Group, two terrorist organizations. But the Korean peninsula presents a far vaster and more difficult challenge. “The situation in the North could become so messy and ambiguous,” Maxwell says, “that the collapse of the chain of command of the KFR could be more dangerous than the preservation of it, particularly when one considers control over WMD.”
In order to prevent a debacle of the sort that occurred in Iraq—but with potentially deadlier consequences, because of the free-floating WMD—a successful relief operation would require making contacts with KFR generals and various factions of the former North Korean military, who would be vying for control in different regions. If the generals were not absorbed into the operational command structure of the occupying force, Maxwell says, they might form the basis of an insurgency. The Chinese, who have connections inside the North Korean military, would be best positioned to make these contacts—but the role of U.S. Army Special Forces in this effort might be substantial. Green Berets and the CIA would be among the first in, much like in Afghanistan in 2001.
Obviously, the United States could not unilaterally insert troops into a dissolved North Korea. It would likely be a four-power intervention force—the United States, China, South Korea, and Russia—officially sanctioned by the United Nations. Japan would be kept out (though all parties would gladly accept Japanese money for the endeavor).
Although Japan’s proximity to the peninsula gives it the most to fear from reunification, Korean hatred of the Japanese makes participation of Japanese troops in an intervention force unlikely. Between 1910 and 1945, Japan brutally occupied not only Korea but parts of China too, and it defeated Russia on land and at sea in the early twentieth century. Tokyo may have more reason than any other government for wanting to put boots on the ground in a collapsed North Korea, but it won’t be able to, because both China and South Korea would fight tooth and nail to prevent it from doing so.
Whereas Japan’s strategic position would be dramatically weakened by a collapsed North Korean state, China would eventually benefit. A post-KFR Korean peninsula could be more or less under Seoul’s control—and China is now South Korea’s biggest trading partner. Driving along the coast, all I saw at South Korean ports were Chinese ships.
Other factors also work in Beijing’s favor. China harbors thousands of North Korean defectors that it would send back after a collapse, in order to build a favorable political base for China’s gradual economic takeover of the Tumen River region—the northeast Asian river valley where China, Russia, and North Korea intersect, with good port facilities on the Pacific. De facto control of a future Tumen Prosperity Sphere would bolster China’s fiscal strength, helping it to do economic battle with the United States and Japan. If China’s troops could carve out a buffer zone in the part of North Korea near Manchuria—where China is now developing massive infrastructure projects, such as roads and ports—Beijing might then sanction the installation of an international coalition elsewhere in the North.
Russia’s weakness in the Far East is demonstrated by its failure to prevent the creeping demographic conquest of its eastern territories by ethnic Chinese. It will be truculent in guarding its interests on the Korean peninsula. And Russia does have a historical legacy here: North Korea was originally a Soviet creation and client state. Keeping Russian troops out of Korea would probably be more trouble for the other powers than letting some in.
Of course, South Korea would bear the brunt of the economic and social disruption in returning the peninsula to normalcy. No official will say this out loud, but South Korea—along with every other country in the region—has little interest in reunification, unless it were to happen gradually over years or decades. The best outcome would be a South Korean protectorate in much of the North, officially under an international trusteeship, that would keep the two Koreas functionally separate for a significant period of time. This would allow each country time to prepare for a unified Korean state, without the attendant chaos.
Following the Communist regime’s collapse, the early stabilization of the North could fall unofficially to the U.S. Pacific Command (PACOM) and U.S. Forces Korea (which is a semiautonomous subcommand of PACOM), also wearing blue UN helmets. But while the U.S. military would have operational responsibility, it would not have sole control. It would have to lead an unwieldy regional coalition that would need to deploy rapidly in order to stabilize the North and deliver humanitarian assistance. A successful relief operation in North Korea in the weeks following the regime’s collapse could mean the difference between anarchy and prosperity on the peninsula for years to come.
If North Korea Attacks
But what if rather than simply unraveling, the North launched a surprise attack on the South? This is probably less likely to happen now than it was, say, two decades ago, when Kim Il Sung commanded a stronger state and the South Korean armed forces were less mature. But Colonel Maxwell and others are preparing for this possibility.
Simply driving through Seoul, one of the world’s great and congested megacities, makes it clear that a conventional infantry attack on South Korea’s capital is something that not even a fool would contemplate. So if the North were to attack, it would likely resort instead to a low-grade demonstration of “shock and awe,” using its 13,000 artillery pieces and multiple-rocket launchers to fire more than 300,000 shells per hour on the South Korean capital, where close to half the nation’s 49 million people live. The widespread havoc this would cause would be amplified by North Korean special-operations forces, which would infiltrate the South to sabotage water plants and train and bus terminals. Meanwhile, the North Korean People’s Army would march on the city of Uijongbu, north of Seoul, from which it could cross over the Han River and bypass Seoul from the east.
But this strategy would fail. While American A-10 Warthogs, F-16 Vipers, and other aircraft would destroy enemy missile batteries and kill many North Korean troops inside South Korea, submarine-launched missiles and B-2 Spirit bombers sent from Guam and Whiteman Air Force Base in Missouri would take out strategic assets inside North Korea. In the meantime, the South Korean army would quickly occupy the transport hubs, while unleashing its own divisions and special-operations forces on the marauding People’s Army. The KFR knows this; thus any such invasion would have to be the act of a regime in the latter phases of disintegration. North Korea’s lone hope would be that the hourly carnage it could produce—in the time between the first artillery barrage on Seoul and the beginning of a robust military response by South Korea and the United States—would lead the South Korean left, abetted by the United Nations and elements of the global media, to cry out for diplomacy and a negotiated settlement as an alternative to violence.
And there is no question: the violence would be horrific. Iraq and Afghanistan would look clean by comparison. A South Korea filled with North Korean troops would be (in military parlance) a “target-rich environment,” in which the good guys and the bad guys would always be close to each other. “Gnarly chaos,” is how one F-16 Viper pilot described it to me. “The ultimate fog of war.” The battlefield would be made more confusing by the serious language barrier that exists between American pilots and South Korean JTACs, or Joint Tactical Air Controllers, who would have to guide the Americans to many of their targets. A-10 and F-16 pilots in South Korea have complained to me that this weak link in the bilateral military relationship would drive up the instances of friendly-fire and collateral civilian deaths—on which the media undoubtedly would then concentrate. As part of a deal to halt the bloodbath, members of the KFR might be able to negotiate their own post-regime survival.
What Now, Lieutenant?
But middle and upper-middle levels of the American military worry less about an indiscriminate artillery attack on the South than about a very discriminate one. My sources feared that in the aftermath of the KFR’s missile launches in July, the Bush administration might actually have been foolish enough to react militarily—which might have been exactly what Kim Jong Il was hoping for, since it would have allowed him to achieve a primary strategic goal: splitting the alliance between South Korea and the United States. How would that happen? After the United States responded in a targeted fashion to the missile launches or some other future outrage, the North would initiate an intensive five- or ten- minute-long artillery barrage on Seoul, killing some Americans and South Koreans near Yongsan Garrison (”Dragon Mountain”), the American military’s Green Zone in the heart of the city. Then the North would simply stop. And after the shell fire halted, the proverbial question among American officers in a quandary would arise: What now, Lieutenant?
Politically speaking, we would be trumped. The South Korean left—which has been made powerful by an intrusively large American troop presence and by decades of manipulation by the North—would blame the United States for the carnage in Seoul, pointing out that it had been provoked by the Americans’ targeted strike against North Korea. The United Nations and the global media would subtly blame Washington for the crisis—and call not so subtly for peace talks. With that, the KFR would get a new lease on life, with more aid forthcoming from the international community to keep it afloat.
Which is why some of the military and civilian experts I spoke with argue for economic warfare against the North. Stop helping the regime with humanitarian aid, they say. The North Korean population has been on the brink of starvation for decades. The forests are denuded. People are eating tree bark. Stop prolonging the agony. Help the KFR collapse.
Of course, one problem with this strategy is that it could end up making North Korea’s direst military options more likely; as noted, regimes like this one, in the latter stages of collapse, are apt to behave irresponsibly, possibly resorting to WMD. Another problem is that we can’t do much to squeeze the North Koreans economically; it’s China, not the United States, that is really keeping the regime alive. The Chinese are already in the process of gaining operational control over anything in North Korea that has strategic economic and military value: mines, railways, and so on. Thus, any soft landing for the KFR would more likely be orchestrated by Beijing than by Washington, even though the Chinese might not mind saddling the Americans with the short-term military responsibility of stabilizing a collapsed North Korea.
After Reunification
I f the peninsula could be stabilized after the fall of the KFR, this Greater Korea would have an instant, undisputed enemy: Japan. Any Korean politician would be able to stand up in parliament and get political mileage out of an anti-Japanese tirade. The Japanese know this, and it’s helping fuel their remilitarization. (The Japanese navy, in particular, has been emphasizing the latest diesel submarines and Aegis destroyers.) In July, there was a saber-rattling contest between Tokyo and Seoul over disputed islets that South Koreans call Tokdo and the Japanese Takeshima, in what the Koreans refer to as the East Sea and the Japanese the Sea of Japan. Harsh words were exchanged after South Korea sent a survey ship to the area. The United States has a history of underestimating historical-ethnic disputes: in the 1980s, it paid insufficient attention to ethnic tensions in Yugoslavia; more recently, it mistakenly downplayed Sunni-Shiite tensions in Iraq. It should not make the same mistake in Asia.
Here it is useful to review Korean history. In the medieval era, the Koreans fought wars against Chinese dynasties like the Sui and the Tang. But later on, following the rise to power of Korea’s own Choson Dynasty, in 1392, Japan gradually caught up with China as Korea’s principal adversary. There was a brutal Japanese violation of the peninsula at the end of the sixteenth century, culminating in an orgy of rape and murder, and a savage occupation at the beginning of the twentieth, which ended only with the Soviet and American conquests. (The Japanese effect on the peninsula has not been all negative: South Koreans may have trouble admitting it, but Japanese colonialism in the early twentieth century nearly doubled the life expectancy of the average Korean.)
Reunification would provide at least one benefit to Japan. As Park Syung Je, an analyst at the Asia Strategy Institute in Seoul, explained to me, a unified Greater Korea might serve to balance against an even more significant threat to Japan: a rising China. But this Greater Korea would still be a linchpin of China’s twenty-first-century Asian economic-prosperity sphere, a more benign version of Imperial Japan’s Co- Prosperity Sphere of the 1940s. America could be pushed to the margins. Although Korean businessmen would resist economic domination by China, lingering anti-Americanism in South Korea might outweigh that resistance—especially once the generation that still remembers the sacrifices of American servicemen during the 1950s disappears entirely. America’s large troop presence will have granted Korea a free society, just as a similar American presence helped to make Germany a free society. But younger generations of South Koreans may remember U.S. troops only negatively—and what is more indelibly inscribed in the Korean national memory is America’s support for the Japanese occupation of Korea following the Russo-Japanese War of 1904 and 1905. (This was in exchange for Imperial Japan’s support of America’s occupation of the Philippines a few years earlier.)
Greater Korea’s troubled relationship with China may ultimately be determined by what America does, and specifically by the degree to which the United States can get Japan to recognize its war guilt. If Washington continues to maintain a military alliance with Tokyo without Japan’s publicly coming to terms with its past, Greater Korea will move psychologically toward China. President Bush’s recent love fest with Japanese Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi at Graceland may have played well in the United States, but it was seen as an insult in South Korea because of Koizumi’s earlier visit to the Yasukuni Shrine, which honors the Japanese war dead—including war criminals. If the United States continues to treat Japan as a golden stepchild, then China and its implicit ally, Greater Korea, will have a tense relationship with Japan and its implicit allies, the United States and India. But because of its own manifold business interests in China, America could only balance against China very delicately.
China Versus America
With so many complex and subtle interests to weigh here, what should the American strategy be over the long term? South Korean army Colonel Chung Kyung Yung, a professor at Seoul’s National Defense University, says that after the KFR collapses and the North is stabilized, the wisest thing for the United States to do would be to keep 10,000 troops or so on the peninsula. Such a contingent, he told me, would serve as a statement that the United States is not abandoning Korea to a militarily resurgent Japan. The best way to stabilize Asia, Chung emphasizes, would be to prevent Greater Korea—which would be fragile in the period after the North’s collapse—from becoming a source of contention between China and Japan. Peter Beck, the director of the International Crisis Group’s North East Asia Project, agrees. “Because the United States is the furthest away of all these powers,” he told me, “it should be perceived as the least dangerous—the one power without territorial ambitions.”
Unfortunately, South Korean politics might make it more difficult to keep American troops on the peninsula long term. Yes, it’s true that of the few prominent statues of foreigners in the country, two are of Americans (General Douglas MacArthur and General James Van Fleet, the father of the South Korean armed forces). And it is also true that, because of late-nineteenth-century missionary activity, American-style Protestantism is practically the dominant religion in South Korea. (If North Korea collapses, expect Christian evangelism to quickly replace the Communist regime’s Juche ethos of self-reliance: Pyongyang was once the “Jerusalem of Asia” for missionaries.) And yet despite all this, the South Koreans have largely convinced themselves that they need to be as worried about the Americans as they are about the Chinese—just as they have convinced themselves that they should be as afraid of the Japanese as they are of the North Koreans. The fact is that South Koreans may not want any American troops in their country.
Already the American air and ground troops who would defend the South if the KFR were to attack are facing increasing restrictions on their training, because of South Korean political pressures. The A-10 squadron that would be flying nonstop sorties near the DMZ in the event of a war had to train in Thailand this past winter, because of limitations Seoul placed on its flight patterns. This is all part of yet another frustration that U.S. troops in South Korea must endure: having to be on a war footing in order to defend a government that wants to be defended but publicly pretends otherwise.
The truth is, many South Koreans have an interest in the perpetuation of the Kim Family Regime, or something like it, since the KFR’s demise would usher in a period of economic sacrifice that nobody in South Korea is prepared for. A long-standing commitment by the American military has allowed the country to evolve into a materialistic society. Few South Koreans have any interest in the disruption the collapse of the KFR would produce.
Meanwhile, China’s infrastructure investments are already laying the groundwork for a Tibet-like buffer state in much of North Korea, to be ruled indirectly through Beijing’s Korean cronies once the KFR unravels. This buffer state will be less oppressive than the morbid, crushing tyranny it will replace. So from the point of view of the average South Korean, the Chinese look to be offering a better deal than the Americans, whose plan for a free and democratic unified peninsula would require South Korean taxpayers to pay much of the cost. The more that Washington thinks narrowly in terms of a democratic Korean peninsula, the more Beijing has the potential to lock the United States out of it. For there is a yawning distance between the Stalinist KFR tyranny and a stable, Western-style democracy: in between these extremes lie several categories of mixed regimes and benign dictatorships, any of which might offer the North Koreans far more stability as a transition mechanism than anything the United States might be able to provide. No one should forget that South Korea’s prosperity and state cohesion were achieved not under a purely democratic government but under Park Chung Hee’s benign dictatorship of the 1960s and ’70s. Furthermore, North Koreans, who were never ruled by the British, have even less historical experience with democracy than Iraqis. Ultimately, victory on the Korean peninsula will go to the side with the most indirect and nuanced strategy.
The long-term success of America’s basic policy on the peninsula hinges on the willingness of South Koreans to make a significant sacrifice, at some point, for the sake of freedom in the North. But sacrifice is not a word that voters in free and prosperous societies tend to like. If voters in Western-style democracies are good at anything, it’s rationalizing their own selfishness—and it may turn out that the authoritarian Chinese understand the voters of South Korea’s free and democratic society better than we do. If that’s the case, there may never actually be a Greater Korea in the way that we imagine it. Rather, the North’s demise will be carefully managed by Beijing in such a way that the country will go from being a rogue nation to a de facto satellite of the Middle Kingdom—but one with sufficient contact with the South that the Korean yearning for a measure of reunification will be satisfied.
Keep in mind that Asia—largely because it is so economically dynamic—is politically and militarily volatile. Its alliance structures are not nearly as developed as those in Europe, which has NATO and the European Union. Conflicting nationalisms are expressed in Asia through more than just soccer games. Thus, the question of whether it’s to be the American or the Chinese vision of North Korea’s future that gets realized may hinge on political-military decisions made in the midst of an opaque and confusing crisis.
North Korea and the Future of Asia
Before I left Seoul, I met with a local military legend. Retired General Paik Sun Yup, now eighty-six years old, was the 1st Infantry Division commander during the Korean War and worked hand in hand with General MacArthur. When we spoke, Paik insisted that crisis-driven political-military decisions here will ultimately determine the balance of power throughout Asia, the most important region for the world’s economy. “This peninsula is the pivot,” he said.
When I reflected on Paik’s words later, it occurred to me that while the United States is in its fourth year of a war in Iraq, it has been on a war footing in Korea for fifty-six years now. More than ten times as many Americans have been killed on the Korean peninsula as in Mesopotamia. Most Americans hope and expect that we will withdraw from Iraq within a few years—yet we still have 32,000 troops in South Korea, more than half a century after the armistice. Korea provides a sense of America’s daunting, imperial-like burdens.
But South Korea also provides a lesson in what can be accomplished with patience and dogged persistence. The drive from the airport at Inchon to downtown Seoul goes through the heart of a former urban war zone. South Korea’s capital was taken and retaken four times in some of the most intense fighting of the Korean War. Korean men and women who lived through that time will always be grateful for what retired U.S. Army Colonel Robert Killebrew has called American “stick-to-itiveness,” without which we would have little hope of remaining a great power.
In the heart of Seoul lies Yongsan Garrison, a leafy, fortified Little America, guarded and surrounded by high walls. Inside these 630 acres, which closely resemble the Panama Canal Zone before the Americans gave it up, are 8,000 American military and diplomatic personnel in manicured suburban homes surrounded by neatly clipped hedges and backyard barbecue grills. I drove by a high school, baseball and football fields, a driving range, a hospital, a massive commissary, a bowling alley, and restaurants. U.S. Forces Korea and its attendant bureaucracies are located in redbrick buildings that the Americans inherited in 1945 from the Japanese occupiers. Korea is so substantial a military commitment for us that it merits its own, semiautonomous subcommand of PACOM—just as Iraq, unofficially anyway, merits its own four-star subcommand of CENTCOM.
The United States hopes to complete a troop drawdown in South Korea in 2008. Having moved into Yongsan Garrison when Korea’s future seemed highly uncertain, American troops plan to give up this prime downtown real estate and relocate to Camp Humphreys, in Pyongtaek, thirty miles to the south. The number of ground troops will drop to 25,000, and will essentially comprise a skeleton of logistical support shops, which would be able to acquire muscles and tendons in the form of a large invasion force in the event of a war or a regime collapse that necessitated a military intervention.
Patience and dogged persistence are heroic attributes. But while military units can be expected to be heroic, one should not expect a home front to be forever so. And while in the fullness of time patience and dogged persistence can breed success, it is the kind of success that does not necessarily reward the victor but, rather, the player best able to take advantage of the new situation. It is far too early to tell who ultimately will benefit from a stable and prosperous Mesopotamia, if one should ever emerge. But in the case of Korea, it looks like it will be the Chinese.
Originally published in The Atlantic Monthly.
Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 04:54 PM | Comments (4)
Serial No. 3817131
"Rachel Papo is an Israeli who was born in 1970 in Columbus, Ohio but was raised in Israel. She began photographing as a teenager and attended a renowned fine-arts high-school in Haifa, Israel. At age eighteen she served in the Israeli Air Force as a photographer. These two intensive years of service inspired her current photographic project titled after her own number during service -- Serial No. 3817131.
"She earned a BFA in Fine Arts from Ohio State University in Columbus (1991-96), and an MFA in Photography from the School of Visual Arts in New York City (2002-05).
"She began photographing Israeli female soldiers in the summer of 2004 as part of her masters thesis project. She continues to photograph in both Israel and New York, pursuing fine art photography and accepting commissioned projects. Her photographs are included in several public and private collections. She currently resides in Brooklyn, New York.
"Rachel is represented by Paul Kopeikin Gallery in Los Angeles, where her first solo show was recently on display."
To view some Rachel's haunting photos, please click here.
Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 10:46 AM | Comments (6)
Fear & Madness
Last night Karen told me that for the first time in her life she actually fears for the future of our children. I agreed with her.
After listening to the thug from Iran tell us that black is white and white is black, and then listening to the tyrants and appeasers in the UN applaud his double-talk, I literally felt sick. Many have said that this is 1938. But Hitler never addressed a UN.
This tyrant comes from an Islamic republic where if a woman is raped she stands a good chance of being stoned to death in public; an Islamic republic where liberal newspapers have been closed; an Islamic republic where television satellite dishes have been confiscated; an Islamic republic where religious minorities, especially Jews, are routinely persecuted; an Islamic republic where the jails are bursting with political and religious prisoners.
This liar who routinely denies the Holocaust, has the temerity to speak of justice, ethics, and common humanity. This fevered jihadist has perfected the use of Orwellian language.
In thinly veiled terms, the Iranian jihadist once again threatened the destruction of Israel, and no one, not one major newspaper takes him to task for his genocidal threats. No, liberal organs such as the NY Times are far too busy worrying about how terrorists and throat slitters are being treated and interrogated. Liberals are far too busy attacking President Bush -- for to attack true evil is beyond their moral compass.
Karen and I are afraid because the tyrants in the UN are labeled, "the international community" by liberals as if this automatically bestows upon them some divine legitimacy, when in fact most of these countries are nothing more than a collection of murdererous dictators and appeasers -- and this includes Russia, China, France and most of Europe.
This thug, this demagogue, this murderer, tyrant, anti-Jew, anti-Christian, anti-Buddhist, is an enemy of Western civilization and we in the West should have treated him as the Jihadist terrorist he is. Instead, he spoke on the same day as President Bush, from the very same platform, thereby boosting his status in the Muslim world, thus hammering another nail in our coffin.
This is madness.
If we cannot even recognize our enemies, how in G-d's name can we fight and defeat them?
P.S. It is time to move the UN to a country that truly represents the nations that sit in their chambers. My vote goes to Sudan. Let the UN representatives who so hate America live and work in an Islamic republic they so deeply yearn for.
Karen writes: The part you omitted from your quote was that the most dreadful aspect of my fear was that Israel would no longer protect us. I always felt that no matter what, that if anti-Semitism threatened our people again, we ultimately had a safe haven. But now it seems Israel does not protect its citizens. Their leaders have become shadow statesmen. Perhaps we used to be men without a country, now we are a country without men.
Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 09:48 AM | Comments (51)
September 19, 2006
Lawsuit Filed to Bankrupt Hamas
On the evening of March 28, 2002, a Hamas gunman, armed with
an automatic rifle, infiltrated the Gavish's house in the
community of Alon Moreh and opened fire on its inhabitants.
The terrorist immediately killed Rachel and David Gavish,
50, their son Avraham Gavish, 20, and Rachel's father
Yitzhak Kanner, 83 before being killed himself by neighbors.
The remaining six children, ages 15 to 22, managed to escape
out of a second floor window. Nitsana
Darshan-Leitner has filed suit againt Hamas in Jerusalem.
If she wins, Hamas will be bankrupt, and all the European
Union funds will go to the victims instead of the
terrorists. God bless her.
Let us all hope and pray that the Gavish children win this lawsuit, and financially gut Hamas. This will be some measure of justice. RJA
Gavish Family Acts to Seize Assets of Islamic Terror
Organization
An unprecedented motion to financially liquidate the Hamas
terrorist organization was filed this morning in the
Jerusalem District Court.
The liquidation motion, which was brought by the
six surviving children of Rachel and
David Gavish z"l, seeks to formally plunge the Islamic
terrorist organization into bankruptcy.
The Plaintiffs have requested a court order authorizing them
to assume control over any and all of Hamas' assets along with the
right to execute against them in order to satisfy a judgment
awarded to them early this year.
The liquidation proceeding has been filed on behalf of the
six Gavish children by Shurat HaDin director Nitsana
Darshan-Leitner.
On February 26, 2006, the Jerusalem District Court handed
down a judgment in favor of the Gavish family in the amount
of N.I.S. 92 million ($20 million U.S.). The historic
judgment marked the first time that Hamas was successfully
sued in an Israeli court.
The case arose from the brutal terrorist attack on the
Gavish family's home which left four members of the
household, including both parents, dead. On the evening of
March 28, 2002, a Hamas gunman, armed with an automatic
rifle, infiltrated the Gavish's house in the community of
Alon Moreh and opened fire on its inhabitants. The terrorist
immediately killed Rachel and David Gavish, 50, their son
Avraham Gavish, 20, and Rachel's father Yitzhak Kanner, 83
before being killed himself by neighbors. The remaining six
children, ages 15 to 22, managed to escape out of a second
floor window.
At trial, Darshan-Leitner urged the District Court to find
the Hamas organization liable for the four deaths and to
award the Gavish family an unprecedented "American-style"
judgment amount.
The Plaintiffs argued that there was no justification nor
mitigating circumstances that could rationalize this heinous
terrorist attack and that the Palestinian terrorist group
should not be provided any leniency by the court.
District Court Judge Aharon Farkash accepted the arguments
and his decision established an important legal precedent
-- the awarding of punitive damages against terrorist
defendants -- for other victims seeking justice against
Palestinian terrorists in the Israeli courts.
As the District Court wrote concerning its rationale for
awarding the Gavish family punitive damages: "With no need
to elaborate, I believe, that the current case is
appropriate for awarding punitive compensation against
the defendant. The sinful act of murder justifies such an award. It is a
terrorist action, which was done with intent and full
awareness to cause the death of the victims and the damage
to their families, since there is no other explanation for this act.
Behind the act is a pure hatred that brought about the death
of the decedents and a very difficult and traumatic
experience upon the plaintiffs -- their survivors."
According to attorney Darshan-Leitner: "Placing Palestinian
terrorist groups in bankruptcy will be a powerful new weapon
in the effort by terror victims to secure a measure of
justice and compensation for the criminal acts committed
against them.
"The liquidation motion seeks to enable the
Gavish children to seize any Hamas assets that can be
located and utilize them to satisfy the NIS 90 million
judgment they were awarded. The court appointed bankruptcy
trustee will have tremendous authority to investigate Hamas
and root out its assets which was not available to terror
victims on their own."
FOR MORE INFORMATION: 972-(0)3-736-1519
Email: info @israellawcenter.org
Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 02:04 PM | Comments (0)
Apache
Here's a great site that has thousands of great historical photos. I've narrowed it down to just a few of my favorite pictures of the Apache people. The spirit of Lozen, the Apache Maiden, hovers within every image.
Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 10:29 AM | Comments (3)
How the Left Enables Nuclear Proliferation
I once wrote wrote an essay about Murderous Peacenicks and how they have brought so much death and destruction to this world. Well, these peaceniks are still with us doing their terrible work. This fine essay from The American Thinker does a nice job of analysing their genocidal work. RJS
"Not everyone may remember that Ellsberg famously leaked the Pentagon Papers to the New York Times, thereby disastrously undermining US support for the Vietnam War, leading the US Congress to withdraw funding for the American effort to put the South in charge of its own fate. The upshot was the scene of chaos and panic while desperate Vietnamese clung to US helicopters lifting up from the roof of the US Embassy. Those Vietnamese had everything to fear from the victorious North, and if they were lucky they only ended up in vast Stalinist concentration camps along with hundreds of thousands of others.
"We do not know exactly how many people died by execution, starvation, forced labor, collectivization, and all the usual horrors of Communist revolutionary regimes. Pathetic news photos followed in the years afterwards, showing Vietnamese “boat people” fleeing Ho Chi Minh’s paradise in their thousands on frail craft and often drowning in their desperation to get away. Next door in Cambodia, Pol Pot began his genocidal massacres free from any possible American interference. The Americans were gone.
"In the upshot, Ellsberg was imminently responsible for the deaths of hundreds of thousands of innocent people in Vietnam and Cambodia. On the American Left this not considered a crime against humanity. Ellsberg is a celebrity well within the mainstream of the Left. They may not say so out loud, but the bottom line is that they want more of the same."
To read the rest of this essay, please click here.
Hat Tip: Seraphic Friend, David Paulin
Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 08:30 AM | Comments (0)
Iran and Israel
We must bear in mind that Iran's imperial ambitions are, at the moment, limitless, politically and religiously. It is all too easy to dismiss their leaders as madmen, as mad mullahs, but this would be a grave mistake. They are extremely clever and cruel tyrants who are determined to bring about the rise of Shia power in the region--and of course destroy the State of Israel, and Jews everywhere. RJA
"While Israel believes its war with Hezb’allah had reinvigorated its deterrence posture, an Iranian attack on Israel is now more likely than before.Two main reasons account for this forecast. First, Tehran must now realize that its strategy of relying on Hezb’allah as a stopgap deterrent to facilitate Iran’s acquisition of nuclear weapons has been wrecked. Israel’s forceful riposte indicated Hezb’allah’s vast arsenal of rockets was for naught deterrence-wise. The anomalous theory that a terror organization could provide a strategic umbrella to its sponsor has been debunked.
"Second, Tehran must be worried that in the war’s wake, the likelihood of an Israeli preemptive attack has gone up. During the war, Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert declared that Israel’s robust reaction and the resilience of its rear under continued bombardment proved that the country was undeterable. The unmistakable implication was that Israel would revert to its once preferred preemptive strategy. Moreover, the war likely caused Israel to assess that the effort to prevent Iran from achieving nuclear weapons must be expedited. Not only was the country reminded of its vulnerability to missile attacks, but the wholesale targeting of their population centers convinced Israelis that when Iran’s leaders speak of “wiping Israel off the map,” they actually mean it. Indeed, the more is the war perceived by Israelis as a failure the greater the alarm over Iran and the higher the probability that Israel would act soon to redress the Middle Eastern power balance in its favor. "
To read the rest of this analysis, please click here.
Hat Tip: Seraphic Friend, David Paulin
Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 08:13 AM | Comments (0)
Head-in-the-Sand Liberals
There are quite a few things I disagree with in this article. However, I am linking to it anyway because I believe its author, Sam Harris, a prominent Liberal, is saying things to his fellow liberals that need to be said. The question is: Will they hear what he is saying? RJA
"At its most extreme, liberal denial has found expression in a growing subculture of conspiracy theorists who believe that the atrocities of 9/11 were orchestrated by our own government. A nationwide poll conducted by the Scripps Survey Research Center at Ohio University found that more than a third of Americans suspect that the federal government "assisted in the 9/11 terrorist attacks or took no action to stop them so the United States could go to war in the Middle East;" 16% believe that the twin towers collapsed not because fully-fueled passenger jets smashed into them but because agents of the Bush administration had secretly rigged them to explode.
"Such an astonishing eruption of masochistic unreason could well mark the decline of liberalism, if not the decline of Western civilization."
To read Sam Harris' entire article, please click here.
Hat Tip, Seraphic Friend, David Paulin
Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 07:57 AM | Comments (2)
September 18, 2006
Steven Vincent: Snubbed Again
"In the old Soviet Union, leaders who fell into disfavor with the Stalinist government invariably had their images air brushed out of official photos.
"And out of history.
"Something similar is going on at The New York Times in respect to Steven Vincent, the only American journalist to have been murdered in Iraq.
Read the rest of Seraphic Friend David Paulin's article here.
Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 04:22 PM | Comments (0)
The Jihad Against the Pope
"But it seems that we are fast getting to the point where people are being intimidated into silence about Islam, since it appears that no one can criticise it without violence and mayhem breaking out. This deadly process of intimidation started in the West in 1989 with the fatwa calling for the murder of Salman Rushdie, after he was held to have insulted Islam in his novel The Satanic Verses.
"Last year, the re-publication of Danish cartoons protesting at Islamic violence that included depictions of the Prophet Mohammed, which Muslims regarded as an insult, led to rioting, kidnap attempts, and the murder of some 140 people across the world.
"As with the Pope’s remarks, the trigger for the violence on each occasion was the claim that Islam had been insulted. But religion generally provokes strong passions, and one faith almost inevitably gives offence to another. If all such offence is to be prevented, vital debate will be stifled, too — and if violence is used to bring this about, freedom itself will be brutally stamped out."
To read the rest of Melanie Phillip's superb analysis, please click here.
Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 02:16 PM | Comments (17)
Al-Qaeda Threatens Jihad Over Pope's remarks
"Ali Khamenei, Iran’s supreme leader, said today that the Pontiff's remarks were the latest "links in the chain" of a US-Israeli conspiracy aimed at creating conflict between religions."
So, the Pope is controlled by an American Zionist conspiracy. These people are absolutely out of their collective minds.
Read the rest of the story here.
This is not complicated. The Islamic world is trying to intimidate us. We shouldn't let them. We should tell them that they are a bunch of savages and if they attack, we will fight back and destroy all those who seek to annihilate us.
Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 12:39 PM | Comments (2)
Somali Cleric Calls for Pope's Death
A hardline cleric linked to Somalia's powerful Islamist movement has called for Muslims to "hunt down" and kill Pope Benedict XVI for his controversial comments about Islam.
Sheikh Abubukar Hassan Malin urged Muslims to find the pontiff and punish him for insulting the Prophet Mohammed and Allah in a speech that he said was as offensive as author Salman Rushdie's novel The Satanic Verses.
"We urge you Muslims wherever you are to hunt down the Pope for his barbaric statements as you have pursued Salman Rushdie, the enemy of Allah who offended our religion," he said in Friday evening prayers.
"Whoever offends our Prophet Mohammed should be killed on the spot by the nearest Muslim," Malin, a prominent cleric in the Somali capital, told worshippers at a mosque in southern Mogadishu.
Read the rest of the story, here.
Will Al NY Times, run an editorial calling on this cleric to retract his call for the assassination of Pope Benedict?
Yeah, sure they will.
Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 12:25 PM | Comments (0)
Photojournalism 2006
The Best Photjournalism of 2006. Take your time and look through these photos. Many will, no doubt, find a place between your heartbeats.
Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 10:56 AM | Comments (2)
Al Dura - The Trial
Meanwhile over in France, a momentous trial is in progress.
"Starting September 14, three Frenchmen go on trial in Paris for questioning the veracity of the 2000 videotape of the putative murder of Palestinian child Mohammed Al-Dura by Israeli soldiers. This tape - promulgated by the French state-run channel France 2 - is often credited with helping instigate the so-called “Al-Aqsa Intifada”. Now, six years later, in the shadow of revelations about media manipulation and “fauxtography” by Reuters and others, these trials take on extraordinary unexpected resonance. Not since the days of Alfred Dreyfus and Emile Zola has the French legal system been put to such a test on basic issues of racism and freedom of expression."
While the mainstream media largely ingnores this event, Pajamas Media is proud to present extensive coverage. They begin with a stage-setting report from their Paris Editor Nidra Poller who will be attending the trials on their behalf.
Click here to read further.
Here is Paris Editor Nidra Poller's Part Two of the trial.
Covering the trial in person is The fine blogger The Augean Stables.
Hat Tip: Seraphic Friends, David Paulin, Jayne Jabore
Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 08:56 AM | Comments (0)
Westminster Cathedral
You must appreciate the irony: the Pope in an aside, quotes a medieval text about the inhumanity and evil of Islam in a speech that is not about Islam but really about reason and faith, and the emptiness of Western values. Naturally the reaction of Muslims all over the world only proves the truth of his words. The Pope goes on to sort-of apologize, but Al NY Times in a feverishly stupid editorial demands the Pope's complete apology. Funny, never once have I seen Al NY Times call on Muslim religious leaders to stop calling Jews pigs and apes--oh and demanding all out genocide against Israel and Jews everywhere. I guess the Times considers this free speech.
Anyway, here's a Catholic Londoner trying to say Sunday Mass in Westminster Cathedral, but the adherents of the religion of peace are responding, ahem, disproportionately.
Hat Tip: Seraphic Friend, David Paulin
Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 08:33 AM | Comments (6)
I Wanna be an Illegal Alien
The Honorable Paul S. Sarbanes
309 Hart Senate Office Building
Washington DC , 20510
Dear Senator Sarbanes,
As a native Marylander and excellent customer of the Internal Revenue Service, I am writing to ask for your assistance. I have contacted the Department of Homeland Security in an effort to determine the process for becoming an illegal alien and they referred me to you.
My primary reason for wishing to change my status from U.S. Citizen to illegal alien stem from the bill which was recently passed by the Senate and for which you voted. If my understanding of this bill's provisions is accurate, as an illegal alien who has been in the United States for five years, all I need to do to become a citizen is to pay a $2,000 fine and income taxes for three of the last five years. I know a good deal when see one and I am anxious to get the process started before everyone figures it out.
Simply put, those of us who have been here legally have had to pay taxes every year so I'm excited about the prospect of avoiding two years of taxes in return for paying a $2,000 fine. Is there any way that I can apply to be illegal retroactively? This would yield an excellent result for me and my family because we paid heavy taxes in 2004 and 2005.
Additionally, as an illegal alien I could begin using the local emergency room as my primary health care provider. Once I have stopped paying premiums for medical insurance, my accountant figures I could save almost $10,000 a year. Another benefit in gaining illegal status would be that my daughter would receive preferential treatment relative to her law school applications, as well as "in-state" tuition rates for many colleges throughout the United States for my son.
Lastly, I understand that illegal status would relieve me of the burden of renewing my driver's license and making those burdensome car insurance premiums. This is very important to me given that I still have college age children driving my car.
If you would provide me with an outline of the process to become illegal (retroactively if possible) and copies of the necessary forms, I would be most appreciative. Thank you for your assistance.
Your Loyal Constituent,
Pete McGlaughlin
Hat Tip: Seraphic Friend, Daniel Wohlgelernter
Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 08:28 AM | Comments (0)
September 17, 2006
Failure of Imagination
Prior to 9/11, most Americans found the idea that international terrorists could mount an attack on their homeland and kill thousands of innocent citizens not just unlikely, but inconceivable. Psychologically, Americans imagined that they lived in a security bubble. Terrorist attacks, including those on U.S. embassies in Tanzania and Kenya, occurred elsewhere. These beliefs were reinforced by the conventional wisdom among terrorism experts, who argued that terrorists sought not mass casualties but rather mass sympathy through limited attacks that called attention to their cause.
As we approach the fifth year without a second successful terrorist attack upon U.S. soil, a chorus of skeptics now suggests that 9/11 was a 100-year flood. They conveniently forget the deadly explosions in Bali, Madrid, London, and Mumbai, and dismiss scores of attacks planned against the United States and others that have been disrupted. [1] The idea that terrorists are currently preparing even more deadly assaults seems as far-fetched to them as the possibility of terrorists crashing passenger jets into the World Trade Center did before that fateful Tuesday morning.
As one attempts to assess where we now stand, and what the risks are, the major conclusion of the bipartisan 9/11 Commission deserves repetition: The principal failure to act to prevent the September 11 attack was a "failure of imagination." [2] A similar failure of imagination leads many today to discount the risk of a nuclear 9/11.
To read the rest of this imortant paper by Graham Allison , please click here.
Hat Tip: Seraphic Friend, David Paulin
Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 11:03 AM | Comments (0)
Daniel Pearl's Killer Released
Pakistan has released thousands of terrorists, among them one of Daniel Pearl's killers.
Hat Tip: Seraphic Friend, David Paulin
Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 10:53 AM | Comments (2)
September 15, 2006
Vintage America
I love photography and I regularly drive Karen and the girls crazy with my relentless digital stalkings.
Naturally, I spend a great deal of time looking at old photographs. I recently discovered this on-line site of vintage American photographs from the years 1939-1943. I've never seen any of these images before. Like the photos of Walker Evans, they uniquely capture a particular American landscape and a rural people who have already passed into history and myth.
Karen and I wish all our Seraphic friends a lovely and meaningful Shabbos.
Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 02:24 PM | Comments (15)
Oriana Fallaci: 1929 -- 2006
One of the most eloquent, prophetic and anti-Jihadist voices of this generation has just passed away.
Oriana Fallaci was a woman of the left, but because she stood for truth above all, she was demonized by her former comrades. The left in Europe and in America are faithful apologists for terrorists and jihadists. Fallaci's enemies could not, would not forgive her uncompromising stand against Islamic fascists.
Fallaci never stopped accusing the European left of being what they are: spineless appeasers and Jew-haters.
Fallaci understood that the West is in a life and death struggle with radical Islam and their fellow travelers. She correctly perceived that Europe is a dying beast -- and for this belief she was excoriated by the chattering classes in the European capitals.
Some major bookstores refused to carry her books; she was labeled a fascist, an ideological traitor.
Seraphic Friend Jeremiah has posted a lovely tribute to La Fallaci.
And here, from Pajamas Media, are many, many more fine memorials for this great woman.
And finally, on Friday nights, Shabbos evening, in every Jewish home all over the world, the husband sings the Eishes Chayil, The Accomplished Woman, to his wife.
Here is the opening verse which I offer as a memorial for Oriana Fallaci:
An accomplished woman, who can find?
Far beyond pearls is her value.
Her husband's heart relies on her
and he shall lack no fortune.
Here are the first few pages of her magnificent book, The Force of Reason.
"I don't like to say that Troy is burning. That Europe is by now a province of Islam or rather a colony of Islam and Italy an outpost of that province, a stronghold of that colony. Saying this amounts to admitting that the Cassandras really do talk to the wind, that in spite of their screams of pain the blind remain blind, the deaf remain deaf, consciences reawoken soon relapse into sleep, and the Mastros Cecco die for nothing. But the truth is just this. From the Strait of Gibraltar to the fjords of Soroy, from the cliffs of Dover to the beaches of Lampedusa, from the steppes of Volgograd to the valleys of the Loire and the hills of Tuscany, the fire is spreading. In each one of our cities there is a second city. A city superimposed and equal to the one that in the Seventies thousands and thousands of Palestinians set up in Beirut installing a State within a State. A government within the goverrnment. A Muslim city, a city ruled by the Koran. An Islamic expansion's stage. The expansionism that no-one has ever managed to overcome. No-one. Not even the armies of Napoleon. Because it is the only art in which the sons of Allah have always excelled, the art of invading and conquering and subjugating. Their most coveted prey has always been Europe, the Christian world, and shall we run a rapid eye over the History that Mr. Doudou would like to control or rather cancel?
"It was in 635 AD, that is three years after Mohammed's death, that the armies of the Crescent Moon invaded Christian Syria and Christian Palestine. It was in 638 that they took Jerusalem and the Holy Sepulchure. It was in 640 that after conquering Persia and Armenia and Mesopotamia, present-day Iraq, they invaded Christian Egypt and overran Christian Maghreb. That is, the present Tunisia and Algeria and Morocco. It was in 668 that for the first time they attacked Constantinople and laid a siege that would last five years. It was in 711 that after crossing the Strait of Gibralter they landed in the most Catholic Iberian Peninsula, took possession of Portugal and Spain where despite the Pelayos and the Cid Campeadors and the other warriors engaged in the Reconquest they remained for no less than eight centuries. And whoever believes in the myth of peaceful coexistence that marked the relationships between the conquered and the conquerors should reread the stories of the burned convents and monestaries, of the profaned churches, of the raped nuns, of the Christian or Jewish women abducted to be locked away in their harems. He should ponder on the crucifixioins of Cordoba, the hangings of Grenada, the beheadings of Toledo and Barcelona, of Seville and Zamora. (The beheadings of Seville, ordered by Mutamid: the king who used those severed heads, heads of Jews and Christians, to adorn his palace. The beheadings of Zamora, ordered by Almanzor: the vizier who was called the-patron-of-the-philosophers, the greatest leader Islamic Spain has ever produced). Christ! Invoking the name of Jesus meant instant execution. Crucifixion, of course, or decapitation or hanging or impalement. Ringing a bell, the same. Wearing green, the colour exclusive to Islam, also. And when a Muslim passed by, every Jew and Christian was obliged to step aside. To bow. And mind to the Jew or the Christian who dared react to the insults of a Muslim. As for the much-flaunted detail that the infidel-dogs were not obliged to convert to Islam, not even encouraged to do so, do you know why they were not? Because those who converted to Islam did not pay taxes. Those who refused, on the contrary, did.
"From Spain, in 721 AD, they passed into the no less Catholic France. Led by Abd al-Rahman, the Governor of Andalusia, they crossed the Pyrenees and took Narbonne. There they massacred the entire male population, enslaved all the women and children, then proceeded towards Carcassonne. From Carcassonne they were to Nimes where they slaughtered nuns and friars. From Nimes they went to Lyons and Dijon where they pillaged every single church... And do you know how long their advance in France lasted? Eleven years. In waves. In 731 a wave of three hundred and eighty thousand infantry and sixteen thousand cavalry reached Bordeaux which surrendered at once. Then from Bordeaux it moved to Poitiers, from Poitiers it moved to Tours and, if in 732 Charles Martel had not won the battle of Poitiers-Tours, today the French too would dance the flamenco. In 827 they landed in Sicily, another target of their voraciousness. Massacring, beheading, impaling, crucifying as usual, they conquered Syracuse and Taormina the Messina and Palermo, and in three-quarters of a century (which is what it took to break the proud resistance of the Sicilians) they Islamized the island. They stayed for over two centuries, in Sicily: until they werre cleared out by the Normans. But in 836 they landed at Brindisi. In 840, at Bari. And they Islamized Puglia too. In 841 they landed at Ancona. Then from the Adriatic they moved back to the Tyrrhenian Sea and in the summer of 846 landed at Ostia. They sacked it, they burned it, and moving upriver from the mouth of the Tiber they reached Rome. They laid siege to it and one night they burst in. They plundered the basilicas of St. Peter and St. Paul, sacked both, and to get rid of them Pope Sergius II had to stipulate an annual tribute of twenty-five thousand pieces of silver. To prevent further attacks, his successor Leon IV had to erect the Leonine Walls.
"Having left Rome, though, they descended on Campania. They stayed there for seventy years destroying Montecassino and tormenting Salerno. A city where, at one time, they amused themselves by sacrificing a nun's virginity every night. Do you know where? On the cathedral's altar. In 898 they landed in Provence. To be precise, in present-day St. Tropez. They settled there, and in 911 crossed the Alps to enter Piedmont. They occupied Turin and Casale, set fire to all the churches and libraries, killed thousands of Christians, then went to Switzerland. Here they reached the Graubunden valley and the lake of Geneva. Then, put off by the snow, did an about-turn and returned to the warm climate of Provence. In 940 they occupied Toulon where they settled and... Today it's fashionable to beat our breast over the Crusades. To blame the West for the Crusades. To see the Crusales as an injustice committed to the detriment of the poor-innocent-Muslims. But before being a series of expeditions to regain possession of the Holy Sepulchure that is of Jerusalem (which had been taken by the Muslims, remember, not by my aunt), the Crusades were the response to four centuries of invasions and occupations. They were a counter-offensive to stem Islamic expansionism in Europe. To deflect it, mors tua vita mea, towards the Orient (meaning India and Indonesia and China) then towards the whole African continent and towards Russia and Siberia where the Tartars converted to Islam were already crushing the followers of Christ. At the conclusion of the Crusades, in fact, the sons of Allah resumed their persecutions as before and more than before.
"By the hand of the Turks, this time. The Turks who were about the prepare the birth to the Ottoman Empire. An empire that until 1700 would concentrate on the West all of its greed: turn Europe into its favourite battlefield. Interpreters and bearers of that greed, the famous Janissaries who still today enrich our language with the synonym of killer fanatic assassin. And do you know who the Janissaries actually were? The chosen troops of the Empire, the super-soldiers as capable of self-immolation as of fighting and massacring and sacking. Do you know where they were recruited or rather pressed into service? In the countries subjugated by the Empire. In Greece, for example, or in Bulgaria, in Romania, in Hungary, in Albania, in Serbia. Often in Italy too, along the coasts plied by their pirates. Those coasts where still today you can see the remains of the watchtowers used for spotting their arrival and warning the towns and villages. And where still resounds the echo of the scream which today is used as a mockery but at that time was a cry of terror and despair: *Mamma, li turchi! Mother, the Turks!. They abducted those killers to be at the age of eleven or twelve, together with even younger children to punt in the seraglios of the sultans and viziers given to paedophilia, and they chose them from the best-looking and strongest of the important families' firstborns. After the conversion they shut them in the military barracks and here, forbidding them to have any kind of amorous or affectionate relations, marriage included, they indoctrinated them as not even Hitler would indoctrinate his Waffen SS. They turned them into the most formidable fighting machine the world has seen since Roman times."
Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 11:00 AM | Comments (10)
Blair: With Friends Like That...
By Caroline Glick
Immediately after the September 11, 2001 attacks on the US,
Blair was instrumental in convincing US President George W.
Bush to view the Palestinian jihad against Israel as a
conflict completely separate from the global jihad. His
success in convincing Bush of this distinction turned the
anti-Semitic - not to mention strategically disastrous -
view that terrorists who kill Israelis should be treated
differently from terrorists who kill anyone else into one of
the cognitive foundations of the US war on Islamic terror.
This foundation was first enunciated in Bush's address of
September 20 to a joint session of Congress where he
identified "every terrorist with global reach" - that is
every terrorist who isn't part of the Palestinian Authority
- as enemies of the US.
Later, Blair was a principal force behind Bush's move to
abandon the guidelines for dealing with the Palestinians
that he enunciated in his speech of June 24, 2002. In that
address, Bush stipulated that the Palestinians needed to
transform themselves from a society that supported terror
into one that combated terror in order to receive US support
for Palestinian statehood.
Shortly after Baghdad fell to coalition forces in April
2003, Blair convinced Bush to accept the road map plan for
Palestinian statehood. The road map, which effectively locks
in US support for Palestinian statehood irrespective of
Palestinian terrorism and radicalism, represented a
practical abandonment of the positions that Bush set out in
his June 24, 2002 address.
During his visit to the region this week, in keeping with
his studied habit, Blair ignored the fact that the
Iranian-backed Hamas government was elected to lead the
Palestinian Authority by a large majority of Palestinians.
He ignored the fact that PA Chairman Mahmoud Abbas has
voiced support for the abduction and continued captivity of
Cpl. Gilad Shalit and for the continuation of the terror war
against Israel.
He ignored the fact that rather than working
to overthrow the Hamas government, Abbas has begged Hamas to
allow Fatah to join its government. To this end, Abbas has
accepted Hamas's policy guidelines rejecting the possibility
of recognizing Israel's right to exist and committing all
Palestinians to unite in the war against Israel.
Ignoring all these inconvenient facts, Blair called on the
Olmert-Livni-Peretz government to renew negotiations with
Abbas on the basis of the road map.
And yet, for all this, Tony Blair is Israel's best friend in
Europe. He is Israel's best friend because, in contrast to
all his colleagues in Britain and the EU, Blair at least
recognizes that the global jihad is a threat to the free
world and that the price of not fighting the forces of jihad
would be the loss of our freedom.
Soon, Israel's closest European friend will exit the world
stage after being effectively sacked by his own Labor Party
last week. British political commentators say the chances
are slim that Blair will manage to hold onto the reins of
power as a lame duck for the next 12 months, as he pledged.
More likely, he will leave 10 Downing Street in a matter of
months.
The two men most likely to succeed Blair - Chancellor Gordon
Brown and Tory leader David Cameron - will be more similar
to French President Jacques Chirac than to Blair in their
attitudes toward Israel and the US. This is the case first
and foremost because that is what the British people expect
of them.
British antipathy towards the US and Israel was clearly
exposed in an opinion poll published on September 6 in the
Times of London. The poll reported that 73 percent of
Britons believe that Blair's foreign policy, and especially
his "support for the invasion of Iraq and refusal to demand
an immediate cease-fire by Israel in the recent war against
Hizbullah, has significantly increased the risk of terrorist
attacks on Britain."
More than 62% said that to "reduce the risk of terrorist
attacks on Britain, the government should change its foreign
policy, in particular by distancing itself from America,
being more critical of Israel and declaring a timetable for
withdrawing from Iraq."
The day after the poll was published, Blair announced that
he would leave office in a year.
Also, on September 7, a committee of members of Parliament
released a report on anti-Semitism in Britain. The all-party
committee found that that since the Palestinian jihad
against Israel began in 2000, anti-Semitism in Britain has
become a mainstream phenomenon. Attacks against Jews in
Britain were at an all time high over the summer.
In their anti-Americanism and anti-Semitism, the British, of
course, are no different from their Continental brethren.
And the situation in Europe is alarming. Writing in
Frontpage magazine this week, Islamic expert Andrew Bostom
reported that in November 2005, Stephen Steinlight, the
former director of education at the US Holocaust Memorial
Council, told a conference in Washington that on average,
Muslims attack Jews in Paris 12 times a day. According to
Steinlight, this means French anti-Semitic violence is
approaching the level of anti-Semitic violence in Germany
during the days of the Weimar Republic.
These attacks against Jews in Europe are accompanied by ever
increasing official hostility towards Israel on the part of
European governments. On the second day of the war with
Hizbullah, Chirac felt comfortable alleging that "Israel's
military offensive against Lebanon is totally
disproportionate." Chirac then acidly asked, "Is destroying
Lebanon the ultimate goal?"
Chirac's remarks opened the floodgates for anti-Israel
propaganda throughout Europe. They were followed by the
barring of El Al cargo planes carrying weapons shipments
from the US from European airports. That prohibition still
stands.
From the moment Chirac launched this unjustified diplomatic
assault against Israel, his government began acting as an
agent of the Lebanese government, which itself acted
throughout the war as Hizbullah's mouthpiece. So from the
second day of the war, the groundwork was already laid for
UN Security Council Resolution 1701, which treats Israel and
Hizbullah as equals and lets both Syria and Iran off the
hook for their central roles in Hizbullah's illegal war
against Israel.
Through their behavior toward both Israel and the US,
Europe's leaders have made clear that they will do just
about anything to please the Muslim world. Even though Iran
has made absolutely clear that it refuses to end uranium
enrichment activities, or even to suspend them, the
Europeans continue to insist on negotiating with the mullahs
and refuse to take even the smallest concrete step against
Iran in the UN Security Council.
As for the Palestinians, the Europeans have made no attempt
to hide their eagerness to renew their monthly transfers of
tens of millions of euros to the Palestinian Authority in
the wake of Hamas's agreement to let Fatah join its jihadist
government.
And in Lebanon, together with the UN, the Europeans have
defined the rules of engagement for UNIFIL in a way that on
the one hand protects Hizbullah, and on the other hand,
prevents Israel from defending itself. Above all else, these
policies clearly demonstrate that the Europeans have defined
ingratiating the Muslim world as their primary geopolitical
interest.
Seemingly unaware of Europe's growing hostility toward
Israel, the Olmert-Livni-Peretz government has succumbed to
the charms of the likes of Chirac, Romano Prodi and Javier
Solana and is systematically abandoning Israel's positions
in favor of Europe's pro-Arab stands.
During his press conference with Blair, Olmert renounced his previous
well-considered demand that Shalit be released before any
meeting can take place between him and Abbas.
During her visit to Washington, Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni
emphasized Israel's desire to renew negotiations with the
Palestinians on the basis of the road map, and the
government's continued support for Abbas.
This, in spite of the fact that the government Abbas
is forming with Hamas will not recognize Israel's right
to exist and will be committed to continuing its jihad against
Israel. In so doing, Olmert and Livni are lending informal approval to the
renewal of European funding of the Palestinian Authority.
Even more troubling is the government's inaction, bordering
on tacit support, regarding the radical Left's campaign to
transfer responsibility for Israel's security from the IDF
to Europe. The campaign, which New York Times columnist Tom
Friedman enthusiastically dubbed, "Land for NATO," in his
column on Wednesday, involves the adoption of the UNIFIL
model in Gaza and Judea and Samaria.
This newest messianic trend is based on the blind
belief that Israel can continue
giving land to the Palestinians in spite of the fact that
the Palestinians are the most radical, pro-jihad society on
the face of the earth, because Europe will protect Israel
from them. Whether under the UN flag or the NATO flag, the
new writ of leftist faith maintains that Europe can replace
the IDF in defending the Jews.
Blair's stubborn refusal to acknowledge the simple fact that
just as the Iranians will not cease uranium enrichment
because they want to build atom bombs, so the Palestinians
will reject all offers of statehood because they prefer to
destroy the Jewish state is infuriating. And yet the fact
remains that he is the last European leader who truly
believes that Israel has an inherent right to exist and
bases his policies on this belief. It is absolutely clear
that in the coming years, Europe's hostility towards Israel
and the Jewish people as a whole will continue to rise.
How then, is Israel to contend with Europe? As Israel's
largest trading partner, relations with Europe are vital to
Israel's economic well-being. So it is clear that Israel
cannot simply turn its back on the free world's Achilles
heel.
At the same time, given Europe's hostility, it is similarly
obvious that the direction of the Olmert-Livni-Peretz
government's policies toward Europe must be reversed. Rather
than enabling Europe to increase its influence in the
region, Israel must take every step possible to minimize
Europe's foothold in its neighborhood.
Israel should use Blair's exit from the world stage as an
opportunity to lock its doors and shutter its windows before
any new European friends can come inside.
Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 10:32 AM | Comments (0)
Iran: Making a Decision
In his televised 9/11 address, President Bush said that we must not ``leave our children to face a Middle East overrun by terrorist states and radical dictators armed with nuclear weapons.'' There's only one such current candidate: Iran.
The next day, he responded thus (as reported by Rich Lowry and Kate O'Beirne of National Review) to a question on Iran: ``It's very important for the American people to see the president try to solve problems diplomatically before resorting to military force.''
Iran's President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad arrives at Havana's Jose Marti airport to attend the Non-Aligned Movement summit hosted by Cuba September 14, 2006. REUTERS/Claudia Daut (CUBA)
``Before'' implies that the one follows the other. The signal is unmistakable. An aerial attack on Iran's nuclear facilities lies just beyond the horizon of diplomacy. With the crisis advancing and the moment of truth approaching, it is important to begin looking now with unflinching honesty at the military option.
The costs will be terrible:
To read the rest of Charles Krauthammer's informative article, please click here.
Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 10:09 AM | Comments (0)
September 13, 2006
Seraphic Duel via Rashomon
The continuing story of the author's love for his wife, Karen. It began when Robert was 9-years old, in the fourth grade in Yeshiva Flatbush. It's a long story and this series will continue for—well, actually, I have no idea how long it will go on. I guess until I finish telling the tale.
I'm looking into the eyes of a perfectly decent man, and I'm thinking of challenging him to a duel. A duel to the death.
Seriously.
DISSOLVE TO:
A half-hour earlier.
Karen and I have just seen a wonderful film, one of my favorites, Akira Kurosawa's modern classic Rashomon, a tale that unfolds in multiple visual and moral dimensions. This masterpiece takes one violent episode, isolates it, and then tells the story from several points of view — in the process, exposing the vanity and lies that motivate the principal characters.
Never before in the history of film have flashbacks been used to such provocative effect. Ultimately, the 8th century Japanese landscape mutates into a complex moral fable in which the following questions are posed:
Who is telling the truth?
What is the truth?
What is a woman's honor worth?
And in this landscape, a moral allegory unfolds where:
A husband's love for his wife is tested, and a wife's love for her husband.
Karen adores this film. Unlike The Seven Samurai, my very favorite film of all time, which bored her to tears, Karen is riveted by Rashomon's relentless narrative drive. Its moral and psychological complexity suit her perfectly.
We have been going out for several months now. So close have we grown that I can actually read Karen's body language even in the velvety dark of a movie theater. By her very breath I can tell if Karen likes a movie or wants to flee.
EXT. MANHATTAN, PIZZA SHOP - NIGHT
Karen and Robert have exited the movie theater. They WALK and TALK along Broadway, but we cannot hear their conversation.
An old fashioned musical interlude, perhaps Cole Porter's Night and Day, indicates that this romance is blossoming. The lights of the city sparkle and glow like a modern fairy tale.
The happy couple halt at a kosher pizza shop.
Karen: Hungry?
INT. PIZZA SHOP - NIGHT
Minutes later.
Quick CUTS:
The usual suspects for a kosher pizza joint: A booth full of yeshiva high school BOYS grossly devouring pizza, pita, fries, and eyeing --
YESHIVA GIRLS --
Adorable in their identical long jeans skirts, lady-like nibbling at the edges of their slices and making a big deal out of not looking at the boys.
A YOUNG COUPLE --
with screaming babies in tow. He's got his head buried in a Mishnah, and wifey is just barely coping.
KAREN & ROBERT --
are alone in a booth. Robert eats, while Karen sips tea. They smile at each other.
Robert: Boy, am I relieved.
Karen: And if I didn't like Rashomon?
Robert shrugs.
Robert: No biggie.
Abruptly, Karen's attention wanders. She sees something off-screen, more precisely, someone, entering the pizza shop. Her expression changes. It's hard to tell what she's feeling.
Robert: You okay?
Karen: Someone just came in.
Robert turns, sees MAX, young modern Orthodox, brimming with self-confidence, Burberry raincoat jauntily slung over his arm.
Robert: Who's that?
Karen: Max.
Karen takes a shallow breath, then:
Karen: We used to go out.
CAMERA MOVES IN ON ROBERT's expression -- as he desperately attempts to cover his shock and dismay.
Time seems to stop.
Robert puts down his slice. He stares at the oily film dripping from the pizza onto his finger. Suddenly, he's no longer hungry. In fact, he' slightly nauseous. Robert looks up again —
ROBERT'S POV:
SLOW MOTION as Max makes his way to the front counter.
The Yeshiva Girls take notice. They whisper to each other and giggle. He is good looking. Tall, dressed in an expensive suit, Max cuts an impressive figure.
END SLOW-MO.
Robert: How long did you, you know, go out with him?
Karen: About six months. No, more like eight months.
Robert: Oh boy.
Karen rises.
Robert: (brightening) We leaving?
Karen: I want you two to meet.
CLOSE-UP: ROBERT -
The last thing he wants is to meet Max. And so he takes a stab at Lame Tactic #1.
Robert: Actually, I'm getting a migraine, we should —
Karen: Robert.
There is a brief duel of eyes.
No contest. Robert retreats faster than the French army.
Robert: Okey-dokey.
Now, Robert watches helplessly as Karen steps over to the counter. Sensing Karen's presence, Max turns. His expression immediately brightens as he finds himself face-to face with his old and very beautiful girlfriend.
Robert's VOICE-OVER: He's still in love with Karen. It's soooo obvious.
Karen and Max chat, but Robert cannot hear what they are saying.
Max turns, looks directly at Robert.
ALL SOUNDS in the pizza shop abruptly FADE as the two men stare at each other. There is perfect silence as their eyes bore into each other like drills.
Gradually, we HEAR a rising THUMP, THUMP, THUMP.
This is Robert's heart beating in his chest like a trapped animal. The dull thumping grows louder and louder as their eyes DUEL back and forth.
SHARP CUT:
KAREN and MAX -
are standing over Robert who's still in the booth, looking in Max's direction. But obviously, a few moments have passed. Robert, ambushed in his emotional turmoil, has lost track of both time and space.
Karen: Robert, Max.
Max: Nice to meet you, Robert.
Robert: Um, yeah, you too.
There is an uncomfortable silence.
Max and Karen sit. Max picks up the thread of his conversation with Karen from the counter — which does not sit well with Robert.
Max: So Karen, the topic for your dissertation, you were saying?
ROBERT'S VOICE-OVER: Max is talking about Karen's choice of topic for her doctorate. I haven't had that conversation with Karen yet, sheesh...
CLOSE-UP: KAREN -
Smiling, as she explains to Max what she's been working on. Her VOICE is but a murky undertone reflecting Robert's hapless POV.
Robert's VO: (cont'd.) Oh my gosh, she's smiling at him. I know what's happening here. Karen realizes that Max is better looking than I am, better dressed, better educated, has much more money, far better prospects, and —
CLOSE-UP: MAX -
Smiling...
Robert's VO: (cont'd.) — and she's going to dump me. Oh my gosh, what am I going to do?
EXTREME CLOSE-UP - KAREN
Her face is softly lit and her beauty is just breath taking. Karen's gaze moves away from Max, and now her eyes pin Robert with the most penetrating gaze this man has ever experienced.
Robert's VO: (cont'd.) I know what I have to do. I'll kill Max. But nicely! I'll challenge him to a duel.
EXT. FOG SHROUDED VALLEY - DAY
For a brief moment, WHITE SCREEN, and then the whiteness shifts, for it is fog.
The thick mist parts to reveal:
Robert, clad in classic 18th century European military attire, is about to meet Max on a field of honor.
KAREN, in a flowing silk and taffeta gown, stands at the edge of the field, dabbing at tears. Helplessly and hopelessly, she watches this tragic duel of honor unfold.
Max unsheaths a frighteningly sharp sword. He unfolds a snow-white linen handkerchief, flings it up in the air, and with lightning speed--SWISH--with one wickedly casual flick of the sword, slices the handkechief in half
Robert's eyes widen in shock. Max twirls his mustache and smirks.
Max's SECOND, a rigidly proper and dignified aristocrat, approaches Robert to agree on the terms of the duel.
The Second speaks in rapid-fire FRENCH.
Robert: Hold it, I don't speak French!
JUMP CUT:
Robert: Did you know that Marcel Proust, this sickly, little effeminate French novelist, fought a duel of honor?
Our VIEW WIDENS to REVEAL that we are back in the PIZZA SHOP. Karen and Max look at Robert, both a bit baffled by what he's just said.
Max: That's really, um, interesting. Is that something you're working on?
Robert: What do you mean?
Max: Well, Karen tells me that you're a screenwriter. Is this a story you're working on?
Robert: (obviously hostile) No, it's not.
Another horribly awkward pause.
Karen studies Robert for a long moment; trying to gauge the level of his mental health.
Robert: When did Karen tell you that I was a screenwriter?
Karen: Robert, weren't you listening, we just said --
Robert: Sorry.
Max jumps in, trying to save the moment.
Max: Movies. That sounds so interesting. Not like my work.
Robert: What do you do, Max?
Max: I — I just told you.
Robert: Right. So you did. I guess I drifted.
Max: I suppose that's what you creative types do; you get inspiration and just get lost in your thoughts.
Robert: Actually, I never get inspired. I think of myself like any working shlub. I get up, go to work, grind away, and some days are good, some days are bad. The whole notion of inspiration is just romantic nonsense.
Max: Wow, had me fooled. Learn something new every day.
Robert's VO: As hard as I try, and golly, do I ever try, I just cannot hate Max. He's good and decent and even though I'm completely obnoxious he does not allow himself to be provoked. He's a mature gentleman. Which really, really baffles me for I have to ask myself: why would Karen choose me over Max?
FADE TO BLACK
INT. PRIVATE STUDY - NIGHT
Robert sits in an easy chair looking directly into the CAMERA and speaks.
Robert: So I'm looking into the eyes of a perfectly decent man, and I'm thinking of challenging him to a duel. I don't know what came over me. I mean, I know that Karen went out with other men before she met me. That was obvious, but it's not something we ever talked about. It's not something I ever thought about. They were faceless men who meant less than nothing.
But suddenly I was confronted with a real live breathing human being. And how do I react? Like a homicidal maniac. I want to, ahem, murder the poor man.
How not normal is that?
You know what happened after we left the pizza shop? Big fight with Karen? Nope. Long talk? Nope. Big interrogation on the part of yours truly? Wrong again.
Here's what happened: nothing.
Zilch.
Max exited the pizza shop. Max exited our life.
I said: "Nice guy."
Karen said: "Uh-huh."
And we never spoke of him again. Ever.
Until now.
FADE to BLACK for this is
Karen adds: The irony of Robert's scenario is that we have spun our own Rashomon. I read the story, and I was shocked. I had no memory of the incident. I only recalled running into Max by accident on the street while I was walking on the Upper West side with Robert. We exchanged a few words and that was it. The human mind is scary.
Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 01:45 PM | Comments (38)
Killing President Bush
"Let me sum up in two words how the unhinged Left copes with the threat of global jihad: "Kill Bush!"
"On the fifth anniversary week of the September 11 attacks, the anger of entertainment industry liberals and anti-war zealots is directed not at Islamic terrorists telling us to convert or die. Not at American al Qaeda operative Adam Gadahn smirking at our country's pain and praising the throat-slitting, children-incinerating hijackers as "strong-willed men."
"No, their thoughts are not focused on killing jihadists. Their dreams lie with killing George W. Bush. The mainstreaming of presidential assassination chic is on."
Click here to read the rest of the mighty Michelle Malkin's article.
Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 09:47 AM | Comments (0)
The Path to 9/11 -- A Postmortem
By Victor Davis Hanson
Links: Seraphic Secret
Americans who watched ABC's The Path to 9/11 saw a well-crafted dramatic interpretation of what rendered the United States, both under the Clinton and Bush administrations, vulnerable to terrorist attack. Perhaps the producers were conservative, but no more so than most of their Hollywood counterparts are liberal--and not to the degree that their politics slanted the presentation of the narrative.
But why, then, the hysteria?
It's hard to believe that Bill Clinton or the film's numerous critics were objecting on any basis of principle--on anything other than furor at pre-election time because some Clintonites, like many others, were portrayed as either distracted or hopelessly naïve about the nature of Islamic fascism.
First, consider the ignorance about the genre of the "docudrama," which is simply the video version of what journalism has been doing for decades--and even centuries. To read Bob Woodward's "meta-histories" is to intrude into the inner thoughts, mental musings, and private conversations of those few Washington insiders who are willing to talk with him, and thereby ensure that their own whitewashed take on events is privileged and becomes the dominant narrative.
Very few of Woodward's characters' cobbled-together reflections can possibly be verbatim transcripts of recorded interviews. Rather in the purest Thucydidean sense, Woodward apparently attempts to "make the speakers say what was in [his] opinion demanded of them by the various occasions, of course adhering as closely as possible to the general sense of what they really said."
Whether the result is factual goes back to the age-old Greek debate over subjective and objective truth. Always controversial is establishing the murky point at which an artist's attempts to portray what "actually happened" so drifts from, or contradicts, what is known from other evidence that it leaves the realm of history and enters that of propaganda or fiction.
Recent tell-all books about Iraq, such as Cobra II, hedge as well, using footnotes that appear to reflect scholarly rigor, but, in fact, sometimes simply cite "unnamed" officials or "senior" officers. There is no chance to establish the veracity of these informants, but some reason to doubt the credibility of an apparently angry source that refuses to be identified. In any case, scholars do not write histories of the Peloponnesian War with footnotes such as "unpublished manuscript of Herodotus" or "unnamed Greek inscription," whose contents are known only to the author and cannot be checked by his peers.
But more importantly, there were various disclaimers in "The Path to 9/11" that repeatedly reminded the viewer of the "fictionalized" nature of the docudrama, that it was impressionistic entertainment drawn from various 9/11 sources. Given that warning, objecting to The Path to 9/11 is not that much different from lamenting that Steven Pressfield's fine Gates of Fire, both for the sake of entertainment, and because of the paucity of information, deviated from the text of Herodotus concerning Thermopylae--although he could have hardly made the Greeks win or King Leonidas and his Spartans survive.
Then there is the second issue of hypocrisy. Few of the present critics worried that a recent fictionizalized film of Ronald Reagan sought to create dialogue that the screenwriter apparently "thought" might best represent what Reagan "might" or "should" or "could" have said--in light of the nature of the evidence and the author's own predispositions. That all such dialogue proved negative to the former president was not so surprising given the political leanings of Hollywood, but still should not have earned such anger from the Right to the point of demanding a cancellation. And such clear bias was not true of "The Path of 9/11," in which Clinton's successors often fared little better in confronting the terrorist challenge.
What are we to say about throat-clearing historians who damned the docudrama (often without seeing it) on grounds of the lack of historical integrity, this from a discipline where postmodernism--there is no objective truth, just rival discourses and narratives constructed on class, race, and gender--was not only appeased, but nearly destroyed the profession.
And what are we to think of Bill Clinton lamenting the movie's supposed deviation from the "truth", or Sandy Berger's concern about protocols, or Madeline Albright's apparent charge of partisanship, this from a former Secretary of State who has traveled the globe plugging her book by faulting her successors to foreign media in a time of war. Although I'm not a fan of docudramas, I found "The Path to 9/11", with its disclaimers, far closer to the "truth" about the saga of bin Laden than what turned up in Bill Clinton's "factual" autobiography.
When ABC cut portions of the most controversial segments before airing the film, there was no outcry from the American Civil Liberties Union that has so often and so loudly lectured us on the dangers not merely of government censorship, but of insidious self-censorship as a result of public pressures.
Nor did the New York Times or the law faculty of Harvard University rush to the producers' defense, despite the long-held and self-acclaimed commitments of both to free speech and the First Amendment at nearly all costs. And, of course, we heard none of the current furor when Oliver Stone produced his wacko conspiracies on the Kennedy assassination and the life of Richard Nixon.
Third, a far greater problem, contrary to the current noise, is not with the docudrama per se--especially when the viewer is clearly and often apprised of this new genre's nature and limitations--but rather with documentaries that do not list any such disclaimers and yet distort truth through clever editing of film clips. A great deal of Michael Moore's documentaries was composed of drive-by interviews of the surprised, senile, or bushwhacked. Many interviews encouraged false impressions, and, unknown to the viewer, were not natural or impromptu, but propped or staged, and so taken out context as to imply the very opposite as intended by the speaker.
Note again, for all this, Mr. Moore was not condemned by historians or lawyers, but rather rewarded with a prominent seat at the Democratic National Convention. Even Bill Clinton would confess that "Fahrenheit 911" was intended to do far more damage to George Bush than "The Path to 9/11" was to himself.
In this regard, concern could be far better voiced about onslaughts against other traditional and trusted genres--Dan Rather's presentation of the news based on forged documents, or Reuters' publishing photo-shopped pictures. And these are neither isolated lapses, nor in the mainstream media do they cut both ways equally against liberals and conservatives. Rather these distortions are concrete manifestations of a long-standing effort on the part of the more theoretical Left to subordinate the means to the ends, as if progressive spirits are to be granted some exemption from bothersome scrutiny and archaic protocols given their purportedly superior moral mission.
There is a final consideration. We are at war. Unlike "Fahrenheit 9/11" that is referenced ad nauseam by the jihadists and still a favorite among al Qaedists, or the current film portraying the imagined assassination of President Bush that played to recent applause in Canada, but gained little condemnation here in America, "The Path to 9/11" won't be popular with our enemies. And that might tell us something. If we know one thing about bin laden and Al Qaeda, they hate the truth and love the lie.
Victor Davis Hanson is a classicist and historian at the Hoover Institution, Stanford University, and author, most recently, of "A War Like No Other: How the Athenians and Spartans Fought the Peloponnesian War." You can reach him by e-mailing author@victorhanson.com.
© 2000-2006 RealClearPolitics.com All Rights Reserved
Hat Tip: Seraphic Friend, David Paulin
Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 08:06 AM | Comments (5)
September 12, 2006
Memory Lapse
Steven Vincent's brutal murder may have been triggered by an Op-Ed he wrote for The New York Times. Why did the paper's editors forget this?
By David Paulin
Steven Vincent, the only American journalist murdered in Iraq, left behind an impressive body of work that is noteworthy for its incisive analysis and moral clarity. His book, “In the Red Zone: A Journey Into the Soul of Iraq,” drew on a number of fine articles, written mainly for conservative magazines such as National Review and FrontPage Magazine.
The quality of Vincent’s work owed much to the fact that he traveled alone, outside the Green Zone. He avoided the mainstream media’s formulaic reporting; it viewed the war, insurgency, and reconstruction through a prism of “mounting” casualties, suicide bombings, and prisoner abuse scandals.
When Vincent was murdered just over one year ago in the southern port city of Basra, the mainstream media responded with extensive coverage. His killing, it was widely noted, may have been in retaliation for an Op-Ed piece that Vincent published, two days earlier, in The New York Times.
Vincent described how the British Army had ignored the infiltration of Basra’s police force by Iranian-backed Shiite militias and political groups, including those loyal to radical cleric Muqtada al-Sadr. This coincided with a spike in fundamentalist violence in the southern port city.
He noted as well that police vehicles apparently were used to abduct and kill people. Coincidently, two days after that article ran, a vehicle similar to what Vincent had described intercepted the writer and his translator, Nour Itais, off a Basra street. Later, Iraqi police found Vincent’s battered body on the outskirts of town with a gunshot wound to the head. Nour was shot and left for dead; but she survived.
Forgotten by The Times?
The Times’ Op-Ed editors appear to have forgotten that Vincent’s Op-Ed piece may be the thing that got him killed. In an Op-Ed the Times ran on Sept. 6, "Iraq's Endangered Journalists," author Ali Fadhil overlooked Vincent’s death when writing about Iraq’s beleaguered journalists.
You can be sure Times’ Op-Ed editors scrutinized every word of that Op-Ed. Yet Fadhil, an Iraqi physician-turned journalist, wrote something that was obviously false: “As dangerous as Iraq is for foreign reporters, they at least have the advantage of being considered untouchable by the Iraqi police and security forces.”
What about Steven Vincent?
Seraphic Friend David Paulin has written a remarkable article about a remarkable man who should never be forgotten. To read the rest of this important story, please click here.
Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 04:26 PM | Comments (0)
On 9/11: Terrorism is Alive and Well
By: Fern Sidman
As the world stops to commemorate the fifth anniversary of the September 11, 2001 attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, it appears that the war on terror has only just begun.
According to a JTA news release of 9/11/06, it would appear that Al Qaida is still planning attacks on the USA. The report states that "On the fifth anniversary of the Sept. 11 attacks, Al-Qaida urged Muslims to attack Israel. In a statement aired Monday by CNN, Ayman al-Zawahiri, Osama bin Laden’s deputy, warned the West that it would suffer further attacks by Islamic terrorists. “You gave us every legitimacy and every opportunity to continue fighting you,” he said. “You should worry about your presence in the Gulf, and the second place you should worry about is Israel.”
In remarks that attested to the fact that the statement was recent, Zawahiri lambasted the United States for supplying Israel with weapons and urged the Muslim world to “rush with everything at its disposal to the aid of its Muslim brothers in Lebanon and Gaza.”
Iran Growing & Glowing
On the Iranian front, The Jerusalem Post of 9/10/06 reports that, "Iran maintained its refusal Sunday to suspend uranium enrichment as the Europeans gave signs that they might be willing to open talks first if Teheran would commit to a freeze soon after the start of negotiations. "The issue of suspension is a thing of the past. We won't return to the past," Foreign Ministry spokesman Hamid Reza Asefi told a press conference in Teheran.
It is clear that the Iranian government does not fear the threat of international sanctions and is planning to fully implement their uranium enrichment program, thereby creating a nuclear arsenal which threatens the very existence of Israel and the Western world.
According to a report from the Israel Today web site, 9/11/06, the head of military intelligence Maj. General Amos Yadlin, warned that "international sanctions would not stop Iran from developing their nuclear program.
Iran is showing great confidence and is continuing to enrich uranium. They are stalling for time, and now they want to continue with the research,” Yadlin said. “We assess that the international pressure must be increased, but the pressure and the sanctions will not stop them.”
Former Iranian President Mohammed Khatami spoke at Harvard University. While condemning the 9/11 attacks on the United States, he expressed his full support for Hizbullah in their battle against Israeli "colonization".
According to a JTA report of 9/11/06, "He also mounted a defense for his successor, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, who has stirred international controversy by calling the Holocaust a “myth” and set up a cartoon competition and academic conference dedicated to those who question the extent of the Nazi genocide. “I personally believe that he really didn’t deny the existence of the Holocaust,” said Khatami.
If this kind of blather wasn't enough for one day, Israel Today (9/11/06) reported that, "Head of Military Intelligence Maj. General Amos Yadlin told the Israeli cabinet that Iran is expected to give between $150 million to $180 million to Hizbullah to rebuild Lebanese homes bombed by Israel during the war.
He also said that Syria is looking into creating a Hizbullah-like guerilla organization to fight Israel on the Golan Heights. Yadlin said in the meeting that Hizbullah is currently looking for new ways of resistance such as using the Palestinians to open multiple fronts, a move which was unsuccessful during the war."
Hizbullah can now continue to appear as a hero to the Lebanese people by bankrolling the rebuilding of their homes and providing a wide variety of social services. It is also clear that Iran is financing the military buildup of Hizbullah forces to the tune of hundreds of millions of dollars. Now that Syria has announced the formation of its own Hizbullah like terrorist organization, there is no doubt that the terrorism will escalate exponentially.
Convergence + Realignment = National Suicide
On another front, it was also reported in Arutz Sheva (9/11/06) that the warring factions of Hamas and Fatah have come to an agreement to settle their disputes and create a national unity government. According to the Arutz Sheva report, Abu Abbas of Fatah and Ismail Haniyeh of Hamas have agreed to form a unity government hoping that the international political boycott of Hamas will be removed. The report states, "The two Arab leaders announced in Gaza this afternoon (Monday) that they had agreed on guidelines for the new Palestinian Authority government.
Abbas' Fatah party was trounced by Hamas in elections earlier this year. He said that the new government's diplomatic plan is based on the Prisoners' Document -- a paper drawn up this past May by several infamous terrorists imprisoned in Israel. Among those who formulated the document were Fatah's Marwan Barghouti, who is serving five life sentences for murdering Israelis, Abdel Halik Al-Natsheh of Hamas, and Islamic Jihad's Bassam Al- Saadi.
The original goal of the document was to restore coordination between the PLO (Fatah) and Hamas, without granting recognition to Israel. The document calls for the establishment of an independent Palestinian state, in Judea, Samaria and Gaza, without withdrawing claims to the area known as pre-1967 Israel, within the Green Line.
The so-called "right of return" for millions of Arabs to Israel is emphasized five times in the paper, and the PLO's stage-by-stage policy is also reaffirmed.
Significantly, the Prisoners' Document encourages further terrorism -- in violation of the Road Map plan's fundamental demands -- by calling for the "widening the circles of resistance" and for the "release of all [terrorist] prisoners" held by Israel "by all means." Support of "those who bore the burden of resistance, in particular the martyrs' families" -- i.e., suicide bombers and their relatives - is encouraged."
At least Hamas is open, honest and forthright about their intentions. They always have been. So much for those who believed that Abu Abbas (AKA Abu Mazen) was dedicated to furthering peace. So much for Prime Minister Olmert's attempts to include Abbas in his convergence-realignment plan. So much for those in the Bush administration who attempted to present Abbas as "the voice of reason" within the PA camp.
Mr. Abbas' ties to terrorism go back all the way to 1972 when he was a finance officer for the group called Black September which was responsible to the murder of eleven Israeli athletes at the Munich Olympic Games.
The Beginning: November 5, 1990
Let us face facts. Terrorism is alive and well. It is a burgeoning movement within the Islamic Fascist world. The historical background of this movement deserves closer examination.
Al Qaida terrorist activities did not begin yesterday or the day before or even on September 11, 2001. It did not even begin in February of 1993 when terrorists bombed the World Trade Center.
The first evidence of Al Qaida terrorism manifested itself on the evening of November 5, 1990 in New York City.
On that night, Egyptian born Al Qaida terrorist El Sayyid Nosair murdered Rabbi Meir Kahane, Z"L.
Within hours after the assassination, the New York City police department labeled this horrific crime as a routine homicide -- without even investigating the suspect.
According to an article by Seamus McGraw on the Court TV web site, crimelibrary.com, it states, "As authorities would later discover, the bullets fired from Nosair's gun were the opening salvo in a war, a war waged by Islamic extremists against America and its interests.
"Within three years of the Kahane shooting, a group of men closely linked to Nosair, men led by the blind Sheik Omar Ahmad Abdul Rahman, would launch the first attack on the World Trade Center, setting off a deadly bomb in the basement of the towering building.
"Later, members of the cabal would be accused of planning a reign of terror against New York, plans that included attacks on the city's bridges and tunnels.
"And a few years after that, a handful of terrorists, under orders from Osama bin Laden and his Al Qaeda network, a network that counted some of Nosair's allies among its members, would ultimately topple those towers, and attack the Pentagon."
And now it would appear that New York City Police Department detective John Molelli has broken his silence concerning his investigation into the crime. According to Arutz Sheva (9/11/06) Detective John Molelli was the first one "to find and examine the papers in Nosair's rented house in Cliffside, New Jersey.
Molleli found and closely examined boxes of notebooks and other papers written in Arabic, complete with diagrams that revealed the existence of a terrorist cell operating in the New Jersey – New York area.
The papers included plans to attack a number of targets in New York City, including the World Trade Center.
Police found photos of the Twin Towers, the Empire State Building and the Washington Monument. They found manuals on how to make bombs. They also found written materials promoting terror attacks on American soil. Detective Molleli broke his silence about the evidence he found and its link to the World Trade Center attacks this year, the fifth since the Twin Towers were completely destroyed in a terror attack that rocked the world."
The report goes on to say that, "The evidence was quickly removed to the offices of the Federal Bureau of Investigations (FBI) and was largely ignored until the 1993 terror attack on the Twin Towers. Six people died and 100 were injured in the bombing. In the wake of the attack, the boxes that Molelli discovered in Nosair's rented house and which had been confiscated by the FBI were finally opened and closely examined, and the Arabic, at last, was translated.
Nosair was later convicted as a co-conspirator of Sheikh Omar Abdel Rahman for the 1993 bombing, as well as conspiracy to attack New York landmarks and assassinate U.S. politicians. Both men were sentenced to life in prison without parole, plus 15 years.
Rabbi Kahane to the Twin Towers
It was only after that trial that Nosair was also convicted of murdering Kahane as part of the “seditious conspiracy.” Nosair continued to manage the affairs of the al-Qaeda terror cell that continued to operate in the U.S. and on September 11, 2001 succeeded in completing the job it attempted in 1993 -- the destruction of the World Trade Center."
It is clear that US authorities never really made an effort to investigate the murder of Rabbi Kahane. It is also clear that the New York DA who prosecuted this case made no effort to uncover facts that could have lead to Nosair's conviction on murder charges.
The murder of Rabbi Kahane was of no importance to authorities. It is also clear that the negligence displayed by the NYPD, the FBI and other investigatory agencies in thoroughly investigating and prosecuting this case directly lead to further terrorist attacks, culminating in the 9/11/01 attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon.
Thousands of lives could have been spared if the US government made a concerted effort to get to the bottom of this heinous conspiracy, rather than immediately sweeping it under the rug.
Terrorism is indeed alive and well. At this moment in time, the world mourns for the victims of 9/11. It is a date that will live in infamy, a date that has signified a drastic change in the world in which we live. We mourn for all victims of Islamic terrorism.
Let us remember and recite the words that we utter after our daily prayers:
Do not fear terror that comes suddenly, nor the holocaust of the wicked when it comes. Plan a conspiracy and it will be annulled, speak your speech and it will not stand, for with us is G-d.
Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 01:36 PM | Comments (3)
Inside the Mosque
As a Palestinian unity government is on the cusp of announcing itself, let no one fool themselves for a moment. These are the same Jew haters we are so familiar with -- only in a rotating line-up. This oily reshuffling is simply a jihadist scam so the Palis can steal more money for the EU and, naturally from the American taxpayer. Money that is never used to build a state -- only to destroy a state: Israel.
We have seen what happens when the Palistenians control their own terriroty: Gaza. Infrastructrure is destroyed. Small businesses are at the mercy of roving gangs of thugs who extract "protection taxes." Neighborhood are carved up along tribal lines. Honor killings increase. Rockets rain into Jewish homes. Gaza is Judenrein, and instead of decreasing tension as promised by the Peace Now movement, it has become a terrorist entity, a bone in the throat of Israel, a cancer that will, sooner or later have to be removed. Even now, Hizbullah are setting up cells in Gaza, preparing for their next onslaught.
We have seen this game a hundred times before, yet no one seems to learn one simple lesson: these people have declared war on us and they are using western money, western resources to destroy western civilization.
And the western world seems to be content to sit by and wallow in some illusory world that everything will be okay if we just "play along with them" if we just "give them a bit more" if we just "understand their point of view" if we just "pressure Israel to...whatever."
It is a mindset where morality no longer exists, where appeasement is the only goal, where denial is the ruling emotion because the chattering classes know not what they believe in so they have nothing to defend--except their expensive trinkets.
Take a look at this video of a top Palistenian shiek preaching in a mosque. His rhetoric is not unique. This type of speech is repeated a hundred times a day in a hundred mosques in the Palistenian territories. The call for genocide against Jews and Christians can be heard in mosques from Detroit to Jacarta--a hundred thousand times a day reaching milions of Muslims.
On this, the day after 9/11 we should all realize that this is World War III, and if we don't start acting like we are in a war, well, we are doomed.
This means: staying the course in Iraq, bombing Iran's nuclear facilities, telling Syria's Baby Assad that if he ships one bullet to Hizbullah, his life will be worth zero. And then following through on that threat.
America and Israel must reestablish credible deterrence.
To step inside the mosque, please click here.
Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 07:37 AM | Comments (0)
September 11, 2006
Ariel: "I Am not a Tragedy"
Karen writes: Since Ariel is not able to speak through the internet, and I feel I know my son pretty well, I feel obligated to modify the somewhat dismal portrait presented in his father's previous post. Ariel vehemently rejected the role of the tragic soul. He bore his illness as just something that happened, he didn't want special treatment, and he surely abhored pity.
I remember the morning of September 11, 2001, as a crisp (for Los Angeles) autumn day, falling in the Jewish Holiday calendar when Ariel was home, not because of illness, but because of vacation. He had been free of cancer for over three years, and his illness was, especially for him, a distant memory. It was no longer a factor in his life. Even when he was sick, he denied that it was a factor in his life!
Ariel, as you would expect for most teenagers, did not want to be singled out as different. His means of coping, was "healthy denial" and so he didn't dwell on his prognosis. He never asked the horrible questions that reverberated constantly in his parents' minds. What would be the point? He worked on living, on being productive, even when he could barely breathe.
And so, he was not a tragic figure. He represented all that was hopeful in life. His will to live and conquer obstacles surely was instrumental in overcoming medical crises. We tend to forget the aggressive, serious initial onslaught of the cancer, and the numerous battles he fought and won. So, I like to think of Ariel as a hero, a fighter, whose courage and resilience overshadows tragedy. That's what he would want.
Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 10:15 PM | Comments (4)
Not a Tragedy
Ariel ZT'L, steps into our bedroom and says, "Do you know what's going on in New York?"
Karen and I shrug.
"Better turn on the TV," says Ariel.
Black smoke is rising from one of the Twin Towers. A newscaster tells us that a passenger jet airliner has hit the World Trade Center.
"How many people work there?" Ariel asks.
"Thousands, tens of thousands, it's a whole world down there," I say.
Ariel is home from Ner Israel Rabbinical Academy. He's recovered from his brain cancer, from years of massive chemotherapy and radiation. It's so good to have him home. Karen and I are thankful for every moment with our son, for every smile, for every single breath he takes.
Arab terror has hit the American mainland. I remember thinking: now maybe Americans will understand what Israel endures on a daily basis.
And then the second plane hits and we are blown into a horrific new age. There is a terrible bloom of fire and I realize that jet fuel has just incinerated hundreds of human beings. I grip Ariel's hand.
"Too tight, Dad."
"Sorry."
After a while Ariel retreats to his room. He says Tehillim. He learns Talmud. He crawls into his mind. I remain locked to the box.
The Twin Towers look like a modern Vesuvias, and then abruptly, they collapse -- flatten like toys.
I call Ariel up to watch the instant replays.
And then it happens, the very first signs that some America and Americans cannot, do not, will not understand. The newscasters refer to the Twin Towers attack as a "tragedy."
Ariel says: "Daddy, this isn't a tragedy, it's an atrocity."
I nod my head.
"Why do they call it a tragedy?"
"They don't understand evil."
Ariel died two years later at the tender age of twenty-two.
That was a tragedy. We could not control it. Fighting the cancer, the effects of the chemotherapy and the radiation, was fighting a force of nature. But Ariel was quite right; 9/11 was no tragedy, it was an atrocity, and if you cannot even recognize evil, well how can you fight it?
Unfortunately, there are many Americans who are clueless about evil--and so they have no idea how to properly memorialize those who were slaughtered on 9/11. For the true memorial for those who were so cruelly murdered in the air and on the ground, is never to forget, and to relentlessly strike back at our jihadist enemies wherever they are -- until they are but dust and ashes.
Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 09:07 AM | Comments (32)
September 10, 2006
Anti-Judaism
By William Kristol
Wall Street Journal
"How odd / Of God / To choose / The Jews." Thus the British
journalist (and communist) William Norman Ewer, in the early
part of the last century. The reply came from Cecil Browne:
"But not so odd / As those who choose / A Jewish God / But
spurn the Jews."
Browne's riposte may have won the poetic exchange. But
Ewer's anti-Judaism prevailed in the next decades in Europe.
Buried there after World War II, hatred of the Jews
flourished for the rest of the 20th century in the Middle
East. Is anti-Judaism now enjoying a broader revival? It
would seem so.
University of Chicago political science professor John
Mearsheimer came to Washington late last month along with
his sidekick, Stephen Walt of Harvard's Kennedy School of
Government.
Speaking to the Council on American-Islamic
Relations, they attacked the "Israel Lobby" (of which they
claim I am a part) for its pernicious deeds, and singled out
several Jews who served or serve in the Bush administration.
These Jews, they explained, have special "attachments" in
the Middle East. The attachment? Their religious belief --
Judaism.
Bigotry now has an academic cachet.
Some of the activists at Moveon.org, the political
organization that raises millions for Democratic candidates
and generates support for left-wing policies, had a curious
reason for cheering the Democratic primary defeat of Sen.
Joe Lieberman. As Robert Goldberg reported in the Washington
Times, after one Moveon member celebrated the defeat of "Jew
Lieberman," 95% of those who responded to the post on the
Moveon Web site expressed their approval.
Meanwhile, over in Europe, Norwegian writer Jostein Gaarder,
author of "Sophie's World," announced in Norway's leading
newspaper, the Aftenposten, the end of Israel: "There is no
turning back. It is time to learn a new lesson: We do no
longer recognize the state of Israel . . . We must now get
used to the idea: The state of Israel in its current form is
history . . . Fear not! The time of trouble shall soon be
over. The state of Israel has seen its Soweto . . . May
spirit and word sweep away the apartheid walls of Israel.
The state of Israel does not exist. It is now without
defense, without skin. May the world therefore have mercy on
the civilian population."
Mr. Gaarder's distaste for Israel seemed to be based on his
dislike of Israel's policies, his revulsion against the God
of Israel ("an insatiable sadist"), and his anger that, "for
two thousand years, we have rehearsed the syllabus of
humanism, but Israel does not listen."
It's not clear who that "we" has been for 2,000 years.
But since Israel has only existed since 1948, it is presumably
the Jews, not merely, Israel, who have not listened.
(It was, however, generous of Mr. Gaarder to call for mercy
for the Jewish civilian population.)
And then there's Mahmoud Ahmadinejad -- bidding fair to be
the most powerful leader in the Islamic world. Mr.
Ahmadinejad has called, of course, for the "the elimination
of the Zionist regime" and "the destruction of Israel."
He wants Israel eliminated because he wants Judaism eliminated
(Christianity will take longer). Javier Solana of the EU and
Kofi Annan of the U.N. are eagerly paying him court. Will
Mr. Solana or Mr. Annan stand up in the presence of Mr.
Ahmadinejad and denounce Jew-hatred? No.
Jews are under attack. And no one seems very concerned.
Liberal Jews are more concerned about Mel Gibson than Mr.
Ahmadinejad. The mainstream Jewish organizations have played
the "anti-Semitism" card so often that it has been devalued.
Much of the world is in denial about the jihadist threat. No
one wants to be alarmist. This is, in a way, understandable.
There are two large Jewish communities in the world. The
Jews of America prosper in comfort and security. The Jews of
Israel have been able to defend themselves. It's not 1938
again.
But the jihadists are on the move. Recently in Gaza,
kidnapped journalists Steve Centanni and Olaf Wiig were
forced to "convert" to Islam before being released. What
would have happened to them if they had been Jewish? And,
incidentally -- if they had refused to "convert," as some
Jews and Christians have in the past -- what would have
happened then?
Mr. Kristol is editor of The Weekly Standard.
Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 09:33 AM | Comments (7)
Her Role -- in the Cold War
When the grande dame of film says, "Oh, let's get that straight," one ought to take special notice; even at age 90, she recalls everything in vivid, Technicolor detail. And what a life it is to remember. She starred with Clark Gable and Vivien Leigh in the most successful picture of all time, "Gone With the Wind"; was romanced by Jimmy Stewart, Howard Hughes and John Huston; victoriously sued her boss, studio mogul Jack Warner, to get out from under his thumb in a case that was the beginning of the end of the studio system; and, as she revealed on one recent afternoon, mentored a 35-year-old Ronald Reagan.
These reasons, and the little fact that she's a splendid actress (two Academy Awards, for "To Each His Own" and "The Heiress"), are why Hollywood has rolled out its red carpet for her this summer. She has been celebrated with events at the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences and a two-week retrospective at the Los Angeles County Museum of Art -- all confirming her status as film royalty.
To read more of this fascinating article, please click here.
Hat Tip: Seraphic Friend, Jeremiah
Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 09:12 AM | Comments (2)
September 08, 2006
Malkin Vents
Don't miss the mighty Michelle Malkin's Video Vent before your Shabbos and weekend begins. Her topic: those wild and whacky Democrats. I'd like to nominate Ms. Malkin as, um, lemme see... Queen of the World.
Karen and I would like to wish all our readers a lovely and meaningful Shabbos, and Chodesh Elul.
Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 03:09 PM | Comments (2)
Democrats as Censors
This from my friend Jason Apuzzo at Libertas:
"Senate Democrats, in an oily and misleading letter to Disney’s Rober Iger, are now implying they may revoke ABC’s license to broadcast over the public airwaves if ABC broadcasts The Path to 9/11. These are the same Democrats, incidentally, who may be running the Senate in a few weeks.
"This is a horrifying and ugly development. I’m not aware of a circumstance in my lifetime in which filmmakers’ right to free expression has been so endangered. Particularly disgusting to me is that these Democrats (Harry Reid, Dick Durbin, Debbie Stabenow, Charles Schumer and Byron Dorgan) have singled-out writer-producer Cyrus Nowrasteh and “conservative blogs” of a certain “political leaning.” It is apparently now becoming illegal for conservatives to actually make films in Hollywood.
"Make no mistake about what’s going on here: the Democratic Party is hearing the first whispers of opposition to their dominance of Hollywood, and they’re trying to crush that opposition right now. They are now threatening to revoke ABC’s license, merely because ABC may have the temerity to broadcast a film critical of the Clintons. [The miniseries is also critical of the Bush Administration, and of Condi Rice in particular.] If this is allowed to happen, the consequences for free speech in this country will be dire. And the damage may already have been done."
To read the rest of Jason's important report, please click here.
Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 12:32 PM | Comments (0)
Annotating the Network Script
In the wake of all the controversy surrounding ABC's docudrama "The Path to 9-11", I believe it would be helpful to explain the process of how these scripts are written and then vetted by the networks.
I have a fair amount of experience in this format. In fact, several years ago, I adapted Jon Krakauer's best selling Into Thin Air (retitled, Into Thin Air: Death on Everest) for ABC. Like "The Path to 9-11" Krakauer's book was based on true facts. Many participants of the Everest climb that were the book's subject were alive and several had tragically died on the climb.
The responsibility for such a project weighs heavily on any responsible screenwriter.
How do you tell the truth and at the same time keep the drama going, for truth is often not terribly dramatic. The writer is often forced to collapse time and events--for film time has absolutely nothing to do with real time; that is the nature of the medium. Sometimes the writer has to use a composite character to represent the attitudes of several. Audiences can only follow so many characters in a particular time frame.
And then there is the human factor. At a certain point the screenwriter must take a point of view, it is the nature of good drama. It is impossible and not particularly desirable to be purely objective. When researching the project, something clicks in this writer's mind and heart and I become a certain character -- take on his view of the world, his faults, his strengths, his values.
At that point, the movie should mutate into a recognizable moral landscape.
Writing "Into Thin Air" was an excruciating process. I had a moral responsibility to those who died and to those who survived. Yet there were serious questions of responsibility -- but Krakauer never really came to any final conclusions in his book, only endless and bottomless questions. So I was left with a moral vacuum -- a not-so- classic tragedy.
When you write a script like "Into Thin Air", and of course, "The Path to 9-11", you are forced to question every scene, every word, every punctuation mark. Is the scene true to the events? Is the dialogue accurate? If I don't have any record of true dialogue and I'm forced to make it up, do I have a consultant who can verify how the real live people talked?
And then the writer has to judge the reliability of his consultants. Often they go Hollywood on you and start telling you things they think they want you to hear. You have to keep arms length from your consultants; you are always walking a knife's edge. You need them, they need you, but is the truth being told? The writer must always be on-guard, suspicious, for if there is one truth I have learned over and over again in Hollywood it is this: everyone has a private agenda.
I must have spent hundreds of hours talking with Jon Krakauer on the phone, trying to get the voices and characters just right. I think I drove Jon crazy.
And then, finally, when you hand in the script you get notes back from the network. Always they demand more drama, more conflict. You tell them that this is the way it happened and you really can't change things. It's a difficult tug of war. You have to be strong, yet pliable. You have to protect your work, your characters, your baby, yet not alienate the network brass -- or they will fire you, and you will no longer have any control.
When the script is finished and the project is given the green-light, you have to annotate the screeenplay for the network's Standards and Practices Dept., AKA: the lawyers.
Here's what the screenwriter has to do: footnote every single scene and piece of dialogue in the movie. In essence the writer has to defend his choices. Is this scene true? What are the sources? Is the dialogue fictional, drawn from the book, or a composite? This process is, you can imagine, laborious.
Several days later, you get notes back -- and they are always a huge shock. You are told that you have to change this and this and this. There are pages and pages of changes. They are afraid of lawsuits. In fact, terrified. The changes are as large as cutting entire scenes, as small as one word changes in dialogue.
I always argue. Do my best to protect my work. There is always a compromise, but again, it's delicate balancing act. You can't be inflexible. Often, they are right, you've been carried away and been unfair to one character you have grown to despise. Often you have gone overboard with a particular dramatic arc and veered too far from the truth. You have to go back and fix it. Discipline is restored. You get closer to the truth and this writer sleeps more soundly at night.
Finally, the lawyers are satisfied, and let me tell you, when the lawyers are happy, you heave a sigh of relief for you feel that if they have given your words their seal of approval, and you are content with the drama -- well, the world is correctly aligned.
I can only imagine that the vetting process on "The Path to 9-11", before any film was shot, must have been excruciating. Far more detailed than what I went through on my film.
Let me add a crucial note. Once you are on location, once the actors are working: stuff happens. Good actors, well, technically speaking, they act. You cannot control them. You cannot, should not, rigidly block them. You can only sit back and let the magic happen. They become the auteurs of the moment, and certain flourishes will arise within a scene that will inevitably modify the tone of any scene, and in an amazing domino effect, thus subtly and not so subtly the film becomes something different than what was on the page. If the director and producer (often the writer) are doing their job, the changes are harmonious with the original intentions of the screenplay. If not, it can be disastrous. This is the nature of the medium. Be it docudrama or so-called documentary, for documentary is just as much artifice as drama -- witness Michael Moore's shameful "Farhenheit 9-11", a tissue of lies -- that is by the way, being used by jihadists as a teaching tool about how to view America.
There is no absolute truth in a docudrama, only shades. A fine writer/producer like Cyrus Nowrasteh would only work at the highest standards of honesty. And as I have indicated, ABC's Standards and Practices are always meticulous in their insistence on accurate script annotation. That ABC is making cuts to "The Path to 9-11" to pacify Clinton and his loyalists is deeply regrettable. Yet, I have no doubt that the film will still make a deep impression on reasonable Americans.
The Path to 9/11 ABC, Sunday and Monday at 8p.m. Eastern and Pacific times; 7, Central. No commercial interruptions.
Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 08:56 AM | Comments (8)
The anti-Simetic Episcopal Church
We received this note from Seraphic Reader Dexter Van Zile:
"The Episcopal Church is not a trustworthy observer of the Arab-Israeli conflict. The church's leaders and constitutive bodies routinely issue one-sided statements about the Arab-Israeli conflict, and its publications portray Israel as exclusively responsible for violence in the region. Moreover, the church has provided substantial support for anti-Israel activists in both the U.S. and disputed territories. Its so-called peace activism amounts to an ad hoc anti-Israel media campaign that serves to delegitimize Israel's rightful place amongst the nations of the world."
We thank Mr. Van Zile for his note and for this valuable link from CAMERA.
Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 08:49 AM | Comments (0)
September 07, 2006
Memo to the Left: Grow Up
The left has grown so used to the MSM obsequiously aligning with its own agenda that it must come as a shock when a balanced, independent, historically grounded, truth-seeking assessment hits the airwaves.
A furious Bill Clinton is warning ABC that its mini-series "The Path to 9/11" grossly misrepresents his pursuit of Osama bin Laden - and he is demanding the network "pull the drama" if changes aren't made.
The left often accuses George Bush of being imperial (and imperious), but a former president throwing his weight around demanding censorship of a free media in order to preserve his reputation and his wife's chances in future elections seems a lot closer to the definition.
To read the rest of Kobayashi Maru's blog, please click here.
Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 04:54 PM | Comments (2)
America, Dumbed Down
"There are those who are defending the efforts of the Clinton supporters in their demands, by citing the criticism Michael Moore got for Farenheit 9/11 and equating the efforts of their respective critics.
"Here's the deal. ABC's production of the 'Path To 9/11' is a docudrama. It is entertainment, based on a true story. Michael Moore presented his deliberate deceit as 'fact' and indeed, even claimed himself to be a journalist in an interview on Canadian television.
"Are there any Americans that are stupid enough to believe that Michael Moore would have 'corrected' the lies he told in his 'journalistic effort, if asked?
"That convicted felon, Sandy 'Pants' Berger, has put in his two cents is laughable and only highlights what are already suspicious motives. Stuffing what he believed were the only copies of classified documents- relating to the Clinton administration's efforts on fighting terror (or lack of said efforts) down his pants, doesn't do much for the Clinton administration's credibility in their attempt to look good."
To read the rest of Sigmund, Carl & Alfred's essay, please click here.
P.S. "The Path to 9-11" is scorching in its criticism of the Clinton and the pre-9-11 Bush administrations, yet it is only Clinton and his followers who insist on editorial changes, on having a monopoly on the interpretation of history. I have said it before, but it needs to be repeated: the Democrats are the party of totalitarian impulses. Their shameful behavior in this matter only serves to buttress my argument. RJA
Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 03:40 PM | Comments (2)
Espying the Jew
"Even the Nuremberg Laws would have cut me more slack than my Internet chastisers: “Article Five Section One: A Jew is an individual who is descended from at least three grandparents who were, racially, full Jews.” Under the 1935 German laws on race, I would have qualified as a bona fide citizen of the Reich. But the cyber-enforcers among my readers run a tighter ship than the Fuhrer. Half my mail reads like some ancient Woody Allen pick-up line: Have you got a little Jew in you? Would you like one?"
Is the mighty Mark Steyn Jewish? Does it matter? Click here to find out.
Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 03:20 PM | Comments (4)
The Jews Bombed in Lebanon, Send me Money!
This from the fine blog: The Jawa Report
New Scam:
I just got this e-mail message from "Miriam Kofi". Her father was bombed by the evil Zionist J-O-Os in Lebanon. Of course, now she's in the Ivory Coast where the daughters of several disposed dictators solicit me for money fortnightly. Send her money so she can go to school in the USA. She swears this is not a scam. I believe her. Now excuse me while I go take my pet Sasquatch out for a walk.
To read "Miriam Kofi's" entire letter, click here, and get a good laugh.
Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 03:03 PM | Comments (0)
Seraphic Samurai
This might be one of my favorite sections from my series How I Married Karen, and so for our new readers, I'm directing you to Virtual Jerusalem, which is running the series on a weekly, Dickensian basis.
In this chapter, Karen absolutely hates The Seven Samurai, my favorite movie of all time, and I am forced to grow up -- really fast.
P.S. There will be a new Chapter of How I Married Karen next week. It's been, um, difficult to write.
Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 02:23 PM | Comments (7)
Why the Left Hates "The Path to 9-11"
Not a word from these critics about the program's greatest strength, which is in the accurate rendering of the enemy, and the warning it might give about the need for continual vigilance.
Critics of the program want to argue that a five hour program has collapsed eight years too brusquely. There is, by the way, zero mention in the five hours of the allegations that Clinton let bin Laden slip through his fingers when the terror chief was offered up by Sudan. There is no Atta meeting in Prague, no suggestion of a Saddam history of terror ties unrelated to 9/11 -- in short, there is no reaching by the writer/producers/director. It is an objective show, and not one that will cheer the right. But any show that does not praise Clinton or hopelessly conflate the eight years of the Clinton tenure with the eight months of the pre-9/11 Bush Administration is to be condemned.
"The Path to 9/11" is a faithful and compelling recreation within the limits of the craft of the fatal nonchalance of the '90s, combined with a salute to the hard-working men and women who struggled against the bureaucratic insanities of that era, represented chiefly in the person of FBI Agent John O'Neill, played by Harvey Keitel, and a supporting cast of brave and never-discouraged lower level Bureau and CIA operatives who understood the risks. In trying to deep-six the series, the Clinton forces are trying to silence their story.
To read the rest of Hugh Hewitt's article, please click here.
Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 09:15 AM | Comments (3)
It's Fascism — and it's Islamic
"The real problem is not that "Islamic fascism" is inaccurate or mean-spirited, but that this identification earns such vehement disdain in Europe and the United States. That hysteria may tell us as much about the state of a demoralized West as the term itself does about our increasingly emboldened enemies."
To read Victor Davis Hanson's entire article, please click here.
Hat Tip: Seraphic Friend, Mordechai Schiller
Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 09:04 AM | Comments (0)
The Shame of the Episcopal Church
Former Iranian President Mohammad Khatami, a terrorist, a torturer, a human monster, has naturally been invited to speak at Harvard and Columbia Universities. I expect such moral blindness from our Ivy Leagues. But now this butcher has also been invited to speak at an Episcopal Church--all this during the week of 9-11. The question is: are these people merely stupid, or willfully blind to true evil, and therefore enablers of a world-class murderer, anti-Semite and Jihadist. There are no other choices.
The Very Rev. Samuel T. Lloyd III, Dean
Washington National Cathedral
3101 Wisconsin Avenue NW
Washington, DC 20016
Dear Rev. Lloyd:
The Jewish Community Relations Council of Greater Washington is deeply disappointed and dismayed to learn that the Washington National Cathedral has decided to host former Iranian President Mohammad Khatami - a figure who has a long documented record of intolerance, anti-Semitism and human rights abuses. Under his leadership, and continuing today, repeated threats were made to destroy the Jewish state. As a prominent national church it is under no obligation to provide a platform to President Khatami. Quite the opposite; the cathedral's reputation is one of compassion and coexistence with other faith communities. This invitation belies that tradition. We ardently hope that you will consider withdrawing it.
Former Iranian President Mohammad Khatami is no moderate. His record is clear: during his time in office Iran expanded its support for international terrorism, pursued the acquisition of nuclear weapons, armed Hizbullah and other anti-Western extremists groups. In fact, as minister of culture, he presided over the creation of Hezbollah.
His reign, like that of his successor, has been repressive, intolerant, and autocratic. All the evidence contradicts his reputation as a reformer. We feel that the decision to invite President Khatami tarnishes the cathedral's tradition and reputation for promoting tolerance and mutual understanding among all people and is in conflict with its publicly stated mission.
At a bare minimum, considering his record as president, his earlier years of public service and the country he represents, he is an inappropriate individual to invite to participate in a discussion on religious tolerance. Your invitation bestows honor upon a dishonorable disseminator of hatred and intolerance.
President Khatami's reign was marked by repeated and public calls for the annihilation of Israel, unflinching progression towards the acquisition of nuclear weapons and the arming and financing of the terrorist group Hezbollah. When most Western leaders condemned Malaysian Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad's virulently anti-Semitic speech to the Organization of the Islamic Conference in October 2003, President Khatami called it "brilliant" and "logical." It was during President Khatami's rule in early 1999 that 13 Iranian Jews were arrested on sham charges of spying for Israel, including a rabbi and a 16-year-old boy. The trial violated all legal norms: it was closed to all observers, the judge served as the investigator and prosecutor, and no evidence was presented. Ten of the Jews were sentenced from 4-13 years in jail.
During President Khatami's rule internal repression continued unabated. Just one year into his presidency, his intelligence services murdered Darioush and Parvaneh Forouhar, leaders of Iran's National Party. More than fifty newspapers were banned, government-funded vigilantes killed unarmed students at Teheran University (with no one ever charged for the crimes) and in an effort to continue to monopolize all control over information to its population, the ban on satellite dishes was maintained and extended to private internet connections. In fact, it was during his rule that Iran accelerated its nuclear weapons program and the ballistic capability to deliver them.
His earlier behavior was not any better. As a member of the council under Ayatollah Khomeini, Khatami did nothing to prevent or protest the murder of 3,000 political prisoners in a single week in 1998. In charge of censorship for a decade in Iran, he banned over 600 books and he stated in the Iran daily Keyhan in 1980 that only clergy should serve in government.
As we have learned from history, one cannot separate the message from the messenger. President Khatami will take advantage of your heartfelt desire to promote peace and tolerance and use the platform to secure legitimacy for Iran's hard line positions. President Khatami may carefully craft his words for your audience, but that deception cannot hide his past actions and outrageous public pronouncements.
In the spirit of brotherhood towards all people, and peace, tolerance and love for all, we respectfully request that the invitation to President Khatami be withdrawn.
Sincerely,
Susan Weinberg, President
Ronald Halber, Executive Director
Washington National Cathedral
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
August 22, 2006
Revised September 5, 2006
Contact: Greg Rixon
(202) 537-2198
GRixon@cathedral.org
FORMER IRANIAN PRESIDENT TO SPEAK
AT WASHINGTON NATIONAL CATHEDRAL
WASHINGTON – Former Iranian President Mohammad Khatami will present an address at Washington National Cathedral on September 7, 2006 at 7:30 pm. Attendance at the address will be by Cathedral invitation only. No additional requests for invitations can be accepted, but as many requests as possible that have been received will be honored.
President Khatami served as Iran's president from 1997 to 2005 and was the first reformist president following the 1979 Islamic Revolution. Elected with the broad support of women and young adults, Khatami is credited with the promotion of the rule of law, democracy, and the inclusion of all Iranians in the political decision-making process. His 1998 U.N. statement calling for a dialogue among the world's civilizations and cultures prompted Secretary General Kofi Annan to declare 2001 the U.N. Year of Dialogue Among Civilizations. In February of this year Khatami founded the International Institute for Dialogue among Civilizations and Cultures in Tehran.
Khatami presently participates in the High-Level Group of the United Nations' Alliance of Civilizations. He is one of 20 international leaders called together by U. N. Secretary General Kofi Annan and the prime ministers of Spain and Turkey to counter the deterioration of relations between societies and nations. The Alliance seeks to establish a relationship of mutual respect between civilizations and rejects religious and political extremism. His visit to the Cathedral will follow a meeting of the Group at the United Nations in New York, September 5th and 6th.
The Reverend Canon John L. Peterson, director of the Center for Global Justice and Reconciliation at the Cathedral noted that Khatami's visit is wholly appropriate at this time of increasing global tensions, since the former president intends to speak on the role the three Abrahamic faiths can play in shaping peace throughout the world. "The Cathedral is a place of reconciliation that opens its doors to people of all faiths, and we have a special commitment to embracing the children of Abraham. We have found that the Cathedral is an important platform for dialogue and open discussion," he said.
Of Khatami's visit Cathedral Dean, the Very Reverend Samuel T. Lloyd III said, "President Khatami's commitment to a dialogue between civilizations and cultures is an important component in the peace process. This is much needed in the world today." Dean Lloyd noted that Khatami is regarded as a man of peace and moderation.
Khatami will be speaking on the role the three Abrahamic faiths—Judaism, Christianity and Islam—can play in shaping the peace process.
Hat Tip: Seraphic Friend, Jake Novak
Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 08:45 AM | Comments (6)
The Islamization of European Anti-Semitism
This very flawed construct—that Muslim Jew hatred is merely a loose amalgam of re-cycled medieval Christian Judeophobic motifs, calumnies from the Czarist Russia “Protocols of the Elders of Zion”, and standard Nazi propaganda—ignores both empirical contemporary observations, and primary, uniquely Islamic components of Jew hatred, both past and present. When the late 23 year-old Parisian Jew Ilan Halimi was being tortured to death, his Muslim torturers, as Nidra Poller wrote in the Wall Street Journal
“…phoned the family on several occasions and made them listen to the recitation of verses from the Koran, while Ilan’s tortured screams could be heard in the background.”
Ilan Halimi’s torturers/murderers did not invoke any non-Islamic sources of anti-Jewish hate, only the Koran.
For the Muslim masses, basic Islamic education in the Koran, hadith (the putative words and deeds of the Muslim prophet Muhammad, as recorded by pious transmitters), and sira (earliest Muslim biographies of Muhammad) may create an immutable superstructure of Jew hatred, onto which non-Muslim sources of Jew hatred are easily grafted. Examples of this archetypal Jew hatred from the sacred Islamic texts, sira, and main early Sunni historiographical accounts, include:
To read the rest of this important article by Andrew G. Bostom, please click here.
Hat Tip: Seraphic Friend, David Paulin
Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 08:29 AM | Comments (0)
September 06, 2006
Terrorists Train & Give Thanks
"Arab terrorists are training in Judea, Samaria and Gaza to carry out kidnappings of Israel soldiers, according to a report by Aaron Klein on the WorldNetDaily Internet site. He quoted a terrorist leader as "thanking" the international community for what he said was its recognition that kidnapping IDF soldiers is not an act of terrorism."
Read the rest of the story at Yoni's blog.
Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 04:41 PM | Comments (0)
Post -- 9/11 Pop Quiz
"What have you learned since the Sept. 11 attacks five years ago? The mass murder of 2,996 innocent people on American soil forced open my eyes to the Islamic holy war against the West, freedom and modernity. The battle has raged not for years or decades, but for centuries -- well before the Crusades began.
"The indelible sight of workers plunging from the Twin Towers -- head first, feet first, solo, hand-in-hand -- roused me from slumber. The photos of children who were incinerated on United Airlines Flight 175 and American Airlines Flight 77 compelled me to start paying attention to the beliefs, goals, language and lies of those who would gladly kill my children the same way. The United Airlines Flight 93 hijackers' final exclamation as they drove the plane into the ground is a Muslim warrior leitmotif I will never again ignore: "Allahu Akbar! Allahu Akbar! Allahu Akbar!"
"So, how much do you know? Take a post-9/11 pop quiz. It's never too late to start pulling your head from the sand:"
To read the rest of the magnificent Michelle Malkin's article, please click here.
Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 09:22 AM | Comments (6)
Democrats & Israel
Democrats Increasingly Turn Their Backs on Israel
A disturbing and dangerous trend is emerging
"We are seeing a disturbing trend in the Democratic Party today, one that the American Jewish community needs to take note of," said Republican Jewish Coalition Executive Director Matt Brooks. "Democrats are increasingly turning their backs on Israel, and have done so even in the midst of Israel's efforts to stop Hezbollah from bombing Israeli cities."
Brooks pointed to increasing evidence of a deep shift in the Democratic Party’s relationship with Israel and the Jewish community:
In an August 15th interview with Der Spiegel magazine, Democratic Party elder statesman and former President Jimmy Carter called Israel's actions against the Hezbollah terrorists in Lebanon "unjustified":
* "I don't think that Israel has any legal or moral justification for their massive bombing of the entire nation of Lebanon. What happened is that Israel is holding almost 10,000 prisoners, so when the militants in Lebanon or in Gaza take one or two soldiers, Israel looks upon this as a justification for an attack on the civilian population of Lebanon and Gaza. I do not think that's justified, no."
In the same interview, Carter said, "I think I represent the vast majority of Democrats in this country. I think there is a substantial portion of American people that completely agree with me."
Recent polling has shown a sharp disparity between Republicans' and Democrats' support for Israel. The Democrats have become the party of neutrality:
A NBC/Wall Street Journal poll in late July showed that there is a strong gap between Republicans and Democrats when it comes to support for Israel. The poll showed that among Republicans, an overwhelming 84% say they sympathize more with Israel (1% sympathize more with Arab states); by comparison, just 43% of Democrats do so (12% sympathize more with Arab states).
This is not an isolated instance.
* In a poll by the Los Angeles Times/Bloomberg at the very end of July, when asked whether the US should be more neutral in the conflict between Israel and Hezbollah or whether the US should align itself with Israel, Democrats supported neutrality over alignment, 54% to 39%. However, by comparison, Republicans strongly supported alignment with the Jewish state 64% to 29%.
These poll results follow several recent political developments:
* Seven Democratic members of the US House of Representatives voted, in the heat of Israel’s battle against Hezbollah, against a resolution passed on July 18 which expressed support for Israel’s right of self defense, called for the return of the kidnapped Israeli soldiers, condemned Iran and Syria for their support of terrorism, and condemned Hamas and Hezbollah for using civilians as shields. Those seven House members (and the committees or subcommittees they would likely chair in a Democrat-controlled House are: Neil Abercrombie of Hawaii, (Armed Services Committee's Tactical Air and Land Forces Subcommittee), John Conyers of Michigan (Judiciary Committee), John Dingell of Michigan (Energy and Commerce Committee), Carolyn Kilpatrick of Michigan,Jim McDermott of Washington, Nick Rahall of West Virginia (Resources Committee), "Pete" Stark of California (Ways and Means Committee's Health Subcommittee). In addition, House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi removed her name as a co-sponsor of this important resolution.
* Democratic voters in Connecticut threw Senator Joe Lieberman out of the Democratic Party, effectively silencing one of the leading voices for Israel in their party.
* Instead, Democrats let stand remarks like those of Democratic Party activist Cindy Sheehan, who declared last year that America and Israel were to blame for terrorism, saying, "You get America out of Iraq and Israel out of Palestine and you'll stop the terrorism." (Dallas, 8/5/2005)
* Congressman John Dingell from Detroit made a shocking statement in late July when he told a local television interviewer on WDIV on July 30th, "I don't take sides for or against Hezbollah or for or against Israel." While he condemned Hezbollah for its "violence", he could draw no moral distinction between Hezbollah's random attacks on Israeli civilians and Israel's targeted self defense response.
Matt Brooks said, "Increasingly, the pro-Israel voices in the Democratic Party – Joe Lieberman, Harry Truman and Scoop Jackson – have been replaced by Michael Moore, Cindy Sheehan, Al Sharpton and Jimmy Carter. As President Carter's remarks in Der Spiegel highlighted, what was once the left wing of the Democratic Party is becoming its mainstream. The anti-Israel sentiment which was once the mark of the leftist fringe now appears in major Democratic forums. American Jews, who for decades supported the Democratic Party, need to take a fresh, objective look at the Democratic Party today and decide if it's the party for them."
Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 09:14 AM | Comments (3)
More on "The Path to 9/11"
"The story here is the backlash that the Disney/ABC execs experienced was completely unexpected and is what caused them to question themselves and make these changes at all. Had this been the Bush Admin pressuring, they wouldn't have even taken the call. The execs and studio bosses are dyed in the wool liberals and huge supporters of Clinton and the Democratic Party in general. They had no idea any of this could happen. As I understand this, the lawyers and production team spent literally months corroborating every story point down to the sentence. The fact that they were the attacked and vilified by their "own team" took them completely by surprise; this is the first time they've been labeled right-wing, conservative conspiracists."
To read the rest of Hugh Hewitt's story, please click here.
Hat Tip: Seraphic Friend, Yehudit at Kesher
Democrats should admit that the Clinton administration did not take Islamic terrorist threats seriously. Republicans should also admit that the Bush administration did not take Jihadist threats seriously--until 9/11. To pretend otherwise is truly disgusting. RJA
Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 08:31 AM | Comments (7)
September 05, 2006
U.N. Cooperated with Hizbullah
The father of one of the three Israel Defense Forces soldier kidnapped in October 2000 by Hezbollah on Tuesday accused the United Nations of cooperating in the abduction.
"The film makes it clear that the United Nations cooperated," said Haim Avraham on Tuesday after viewing new footage of the attack on the Israel-Lebanon border that led to the abduction of his son, Benny, along with Adi Avitan and Omar Souad.
"We have said this to Kofi Annan but he preferred to lie," Avraham said.
To read the rest of this article, please click here.
Hat Tip: Seraphic Friend, Maurice
Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 11:39 AM | Comments (0)
The Effects of Religion
"The third monotheistic faith is Islam. There are many millions of decent and kind Muslims in the world. But there are also at least a hundred million Muslims (i.e., 10 percent) who support killing innocents in the name of Allah and Islam. And there are more than that who believe in the ideal of using force to spread Islam throughout the world.
"So the question is this: How many kind and decent Muslims are kind and decent because of Islam, and how many evil Muslims are evil because of Islam?"
To read Dennis Prager's entire article, please click here.
Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 11:33 AM | Comments (4)
Flight 93
by Naomi Ragen
Although I have been avoiding Hollywood movies about terror
attacks, for fear of running into another Spielberg,
terrorist-apologist piece of crap, I read reviews of Flight
93, and decided to chance it.
For those unaware of the movie, it is the real-time
reenactment of the fourth plane to be hijacked on 9/11. The
first three hit the World Trade Center and the Pentagon.
Flight 93 crashed in an open field in Pennsylvania on its
way to crash into the White House. It was taken down by the
passengers who revolted against the killers in an effort to
wrest control of the cockpit from them.
What I expected to see was the killers and the passengers
with their families before the flight, some background.
Instead, the movie simply follows the killers the morning of
9/11 from their homes and their Muslim morning prayers
Newark Airport, making you feel as if you are sitting with
them in the departure lounge (a place I have been many
times) on that fateful day. They look absolutely ordinary,
and not even very Middle-Eastern, so that you wouldn't give
them a second look. We see the other passengers talking on
their cell phones, doing crosswords -- absolutely nothing we
all haven't seen and been a part of a hundred times.
What gives this film its unique position is its stark,
almost brutal, honesty. It simply follows the story as
accurately as it can, showing the day from the point of view
of the flight controllers, military, flight 93 pilots and
passengers. Since we all know the end, the tension can be
cut with a buzz saw. But ultimately, what you have is an
amazing work, a film that allows you to forget you are
watching a film and not sitting on the plane on that fateful
day. What the film manages to accomplish, by not ramming
an oh-so- politically correct point of view down your throat
ala Tony Kushner-- or any point of view-- is that the clouds
are brushed away and you are forced to see, no matter your
political take, the stark reality, the enormity of the evil
perpetrated that day in the name of someone's god (I do not
capitalize to distinguish this entity from the real God), by
people who have the sick audacity to lift hands covered with
the blood of innocent strangers palms up in prayer.
Why is this important? I'll tell you. Because people
refuse to see it for what it is. Refuse to get it. They
want to tell themselves: "There are two sides to every
story, and you, the victim, couldn't have been blameless.
Because if you were, than I, who am certainly blameless,
could have something similarly horrible and unjust happen to
me." Sometimes, when I talk to people about the horrors of
Islamic terrorism, they stare at me blankly. That is when I
wish they could have been sitting with me in the Park Hotel
on Seder night. I wish they could have seen the children
and their parents and grandparents in the lobby, hugging
each other. I wish they could have heard the sound of ten
kilograms of explosives detonating, blowing out all the
windows. I wish they could have seen the blood-drenched
floor. Perhaps then they would understand that there is good
and evil, and it's absolute.
Writer-director Paul Greengrass' detailed, precise real-time
re-creation of this terrorist act does exactly that. All
those who have been unable or unwilling to understand what
is at stake in the war against terror will perhaps awaken
from their long, dangerous sleep, which does nothing but
allow the terrorists to keep on killing.
It's a film that will shake you to the core. It will
frighten you. And ultimately, it will enlighten you to the
truth of the human condition, to good and evil, and to how
really simple it all is when you open your eyes and see
clearly. Everyone should see this, except victims of
terror, because they've already seen it.
Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 11:28 AM | Comments (0)
September 04, 2006
Adopting Jihadist Tactics
I have to admit that this does not surprise me, when citizens feel that their government is not protecting their lives, their homes, their very national existence, they rise to their own defense. The question is: will this movement rise in America?
"Far-right extremists have adopted the tactics of Islamic jihadis by posting videos on the internet in which they threaten to behead British Muslims.
"The films show balaclava-clad white British men brandishing guns, knives and clubs, calling on all Muslims to leave Britain or be killed. One appears to be a soldier who has served in the Gulf.
"In one film, a man tells Muslims to "go home" or risk being burned alive. He threatens, "I'll cut your head off", and claims to have "comrades" across Britain who have "had enough".
To read the rest of this story, please click here.
Hat Tip: Caerdroia
Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 11:17 AM | Comments (7)
Bush Assasination Movie
I thought I was inured to every form of madness from Liberals in the movie industry, but even this stuns me.
"By now you may have heard that a film called Death of a President, a film which dramatizes the assassination of President Bush in the style of a retrospective documentary, will be broadcast on British television in October. The assassination scene itself was created by superimposing a digital likeness of President Bush over an actor’s face.
"Articles have appeared about this in The New York Times, The LA Times, and This is London. According to Hollywood Reporter, the film will be getting (unsurprisingly) a debut at The Toronto Film Festival on Sept. 10th - one day before the fifth anniversary of 9/11. I’m sure Hollywood’s acquisitions brass will give it a warm reception."
To read the rest of Govindini Murty's article, please click here.
This article gives a pretty complete plot synopsis. The film is even more disgusting than Govindini's article indicates.
Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 11:00 AM | Comments (0)
Conversion by Kalachnikov
"The most shocking thing about the Centanni-Wiig "conversion" is the silence that has followed. First, there is silence from Islam. Shouldn't Muslim religious leaders, and particularly "beautiful and kind-hearted" Palestinian Muslim religious leaders, vehemently condemn the forced conversions? As Bostom put it, "Will such Muslim authorities at least recognize the acute predicament of Centanni and Wiig by issuing a fatwa stating that their 'conversion,' being under duress, was not bona fide, condemning in advance any Muslim who might now attack these journalists for 'apostasy' from Islam?"
To read the entire essay by Diana West, please click here.
Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 10:24 AM | Comments (4)
Mormons Financing Terrorism
"Mormons are among the most patriotic Americans.
"So, why are they the new financiers of Islamic terrorism and instruction for young children in beheadings?
"The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints, the Mormon Church, is the single largest donor to the U.S. branch of Islamic Relief Worldwide (IRW), also known as Islamic Relief. In the past year, it donated $1.6 million to the charity.
"But Islamic Relief is not just any charity. The Israeli government says it is a Hamas front group. It is also under investigation by the American government."
To read the rest of Debbie Schlussel's article, please click here.
Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 10:03 AM | Comments (0)
The Stabbing of a Palestinian Apologist
by Daniel Pipes
FrontPageMagazine.com August 28, 2006
An Italian named Angelo Frammartino, 25, espoused the
typical anti-Israel views of a far-leftist, as he expressed
in a letter to a newspaper in 2006:
"We must face the fact that a situation of no violence is a
luxury in many parts of the world, but we do not seek to
avoid legitimate acts of defense. . I never dreamed of
condemning resistance, the blood of the Vietnamese, the
blood of the people who were under colonialist occupation or
the blood of the young Palestinians from the first
intifada."
Angelo Frammartino
Actively to forward his beliefs, Frammartino went to Israel
in early August 2006 to serve as a volunteer with ARCI, a
far-leftist NGO, working with Palestinian children at the
Burj al-Luqluq community center in eastern Jerusalem.
But on August 10, he was stabbed in a terrorist assault at
Sultan Suleiman Street, near Herod's Gate in Jerusalem,
twice in the back and once in the neck. He died shortly
after, only two days before his planned return to Italy. The
killer, soon identified as Ashraf Hanaisha, 24, turned out
to be a Palestinian affiliated with Palestinian Islamic
Jihad. A resident of the village of Qabatiya in the Jenin
area, Hanaisha apparently planned to attack a Jewish Israeli
but made a mistake.
Damage control soon followed. The Palestinian Authority's
news agency, WAFA, carried a statement by the Burj al Luqluq
community center condemning the murder in no uncertain
terms: "Nothing could describe our emotions for what
happened. Our thoughts are with the family and friends of
Angelo, they have our deepest sympathy." Several Palestinian
NGOs then organized a vigil in Frammartino's memory. For her
part, Hanaisha's mother launched an appeal, via the Italian
newspaper La Repubblica, for the forgiveness of her son.
In response to this outpouring, Frammartino's parents did
forgive Hanaisha. From the family home in Monterotondo, the
father, Michelangelo, said that "he welcomes and
appreciates, despite the undeletable sorrow, the plea for
forgiveness made by the murderer's mother" and he expressed
a hope that the parents' gesture "will bring to an end this
extremely sad story." The father went further, telling the
Corriere della Sera newspaper that he felt no hatred toward
his son's murderer:
Angelo was working to promote peace. The message he sought
to convey is greater than anything else. . the circumstances
confirm that Angelo was a victim of the war, of the
injustice in the world. When we are talking about a
situation of tension, absence of common sense dominates. I
do not feel hatred because Angelo's thought, the principles
that always motivated him, were definitely not of hatred or
revenge.
Comments:
(1) These signals from Qabatiya to Monterotondo and back
amounted to a curious and despicable pas de deux, with each
side remorsefully implying things would be just fine if only
Hanaisha had killed his intended victim: "Sorry, I thought
he was a Jew," reads the headline in La Stampa. The
Palestinians conveyed a message of "Excuse us, we did not
mean to kill your son," while the family replied with a
"Understood, we accept that you made a mistake."
(2) Writing in the Jerusalem Post, Barbara Sofer suggests an
excellent way to honor the memory of Angelo Frammartino, by
having his family join in solidarity with another
high-profile victim of Palestinian violence. She notes that
the Koby Mandell Foundation, named for another young man
brutally murdered by Palestinian terrorists, "provides
therapeutic camping experiences for terror survivors or the
families of those murdered by terrorists. . It's
non-political, hosts Jews and non-Jews, and works on
building character." Sofer suggests that those who want to
honor Frammartino's memory "might want to support this camp
that works to mitigate the evil brought by those who duped
and killed their son."
(3) Even if he was a political extremist, all accounts
portray Frammartino as a gentle soul. If so, that only
confirms how much out of depth he was in Jerusalem. As Calev
Ben-David points out, also in the Jerusalem Post, his death
is a reminder "that outsiders who come to this region, even
with the best of intentions, should first understand that
they, no less than Israelis - or, for that matter, those in
the Arab world who truly want peace - can just as easily
fall victim to those here who have only the worst of
intentions."
(4) Put more cruelly, given Frammartino's idiotic views ("I
never dreamed of condemning resistance"), had he survived
his knifing, perhaps surviving in a state of total bodily
paralysis, would he have seen the attack on him as
terrorism? Or would he have learned nothing and still
considered it an act of legitimate self-defense?
Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 09:58 AM | Comments (3)
September 03, 2006
Mrs. Goldwasser in LA
Karni and Omri Goldwasser, Ehud Goldwasser's wife and father are making an appearance at the Simon Wiesenthal Center Tuesday night September 5, at 7PM.
Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 11:59 AM | Comments (1)
Proud to be Jewish
With war raging in the Middle East, with global
terror reaching new heights, with global anti-Semitism on the rise, I
thought it might be a good time to reflect on why I'm proud,
more than ever, to be a Jew.
I'm proud to be a Jew because Jews don't kidnap.
I'm proud to be a Jew because Jewish education does
not consist of teaching martyrdom and hatred.
I'm proud to be a Jew because my religious leaders
and religious services don't whip me into a frenzy to kill others.
I'm proud to be a Jew because in the middle of a
war, Jews still demonstrate and protest to protect the rights of the
Arab-Israeli minority to voice their opposition to the war.
I'm proud to be a Jew because even when Israel is
wrongly and falsely accused of killing innocent civilians, Jewish
leaders apologize immediately for any loss of life - instead
of celebrating these deaths by passing out candy and shooting celebratory
gunshots into the air.
When the world accuses Israel of massacre in Jenin -
when the world accuses Israel of bombing civilians on a Gaza beach
- when the world accuses Israel of shooting a child cowering
against a wall - when the world accuses Israel of bombing a Lebanese
apartment building killing 56 civilians - when all of these
accusations turn out to be totally false - to be vicious anti -Semitic lies -
and when all along I knew in my heart that these stories justcould not be true
- and I'm later proven to be right - then I'm proud to be a Jew.
I'm proud to be a Jew because the Israeli Army is
so, so good, that when it takes more than four weeks to wipe out a
sophisticated enemy who has prepared six years for this war, the world
criticizes the IDF for not getting the job done quickly.
I'm proud to be a Jew when my army, the Israeli
army, drops leaflets and makes calls to Lebanese citizens
on their cell phones to warn them to evacuate before bombing begins.
I'm proud to be a Jew when the democracies of the
world talk about fighting the war on terror, but only Israel is left alone to
bear the burden of eradicating Hezbollah, the proxy army of Iran and
Syria.
I'm proud to be a Jew when entire Israeli towns in
the north-Nahariya, Kiryat Shimona, Safed, are reduced to ghost towns
due to the constant shelling, and yet not one looter has
appeared to empty out the property of others.
When Israel must defend its very right to exist,
when it must fight a well armed enemy representing the Islamic fascists, as
President Bush has called them, when Israel must conduct this war on
terror with its hands tied behind its back so as not to take an innocent life
lest the media have something true to report, that it must fight this war of survival under
the cloud of "disproportionality", as if thousands of Katusha rockets falling on its
citizenry is somehow "proportionate"- when Israel simultaneously pushes
back these threats both in the North and in
the South under the added pressure of a biased media, then I'm proud to be a Jew.
I'm proud to be a Jew when the Edinburgh Scottish film festival tells an
Israeli director to stay home although his film is being screened and the
director says "No, I'm coming."
I'm proud to be a Jew when the UN's Human Rights
Commission consists of countries like Syria, Libya and Iran and Israel is
not asked to join.
I'm proud to be a Jew when magician David Blaine announces his trip to
Israel next week to entertain the children living in bomb shelters and tells
the press he's doing it to encourage other performers to stand up for Israel
and its right to defend itself.
I'm proud to be a Jew when a Russian/Israeli businessman single-handedly
creates not one but two tent cities on the beach to house Israelis fleeing the
North and provides shelter, bedding, food and drink, showers and bathrooms - all done
without red tape in a matter of 24 hours - to house over 6,000
Israeli's, one of whom described it as a "poor man's Club Med."
I am proud to be a Jew when Israelis on the left and on the right
support the government's decision to fight - when
97% of the country is united in its own defense -
when Israeli's from Jerusalem give shelter to
families from Haifa - when food from the Negev is donated to
feed soldiers at the front - when the IDF deploys soldiers on special
assignments to deliver diapers to shelters and to entertain
and calm the frightened children.
I'm proud to be a Jew when the three weeks preceding
Tisha B'Av reminds us of the terrible things we have endured as a
people and as a nation - and yet immediately thereafter, Hashem offers us
consolation, redemption and hope - plus the promise that we shall defeat our
enemies, that we shall endure, that Am Yisrael Chai.
Hat Tip: Seraphic Friend, Naomi Regan
Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 11:42 AM | Comments (4)
British anti-Semitism
"British Jews are facing a wave of anti-Semitic attacks prompted by Israel’s conflict with Hezbollah in Lebanon. Synagogues have been daubed with graffiti, Jewish leaders have had hate-mail and ordinary people have been subjected to insults and vandalism.
"On Thursday an all-party parliamentary inquiry will state that anti-Semitic violence has become endemic in Britain, both on the streets and university campuses. The report will call for urgent action from the Government, the police and educational establishments."
To read the rest of this aritcle, please click here.
Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 11:38 AM | Comments (0)
Harvard Terrorism
"The John F. Kennedy School of Government at Harvard University, fresh from having established itself as a headwater of anti-Israel agitation, is choosing to mark the fifth anniversary of the terrorist attacks in an astounding way — by hosting Mohammed Khatemi, a former president of Iran, an enemy state levying a terrorist war against America. Mr. Khatemi has been invited to speak on, of all things, "Ethics of Tolerance in the Age of Violence." The title insults the intelligence of all those who would attend. What in the world is a man who presided over the July 9, 1999, crackdown on Tehran University, where hundreds of students were arrested and tortured, doing speaking about "tolerance" at a university?
"What a disgusting way for Harvard to mark the fifth anniversary of the outbreak of a war that has claimed thousands of American lives and is still in full tilt. Not that Mr. Khatemi won't feel right at home at the Kennedy School. A professor there who had served as its academic dean, Stephen Walt, co-wrote a paper earlier this year that sounds pretty much like what Mr. Khatemi says. Here's a side-by-side comparison..."
To read the rest of this article, please click here.
Hat Tip: Seraphic Friend, David Paulin
Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 11:28 AM | Comments (0)
The Path to 9/11
My friend, Govindini Murty, over at the fine Conservative Hollywood blog Libertas, posted the very first review of ABC's upcoming mini-series "The Path to 9/11." Democrats and supporters of the Clinton administration will not be pleased with this film. Naturally, there is a growing controversy. To read more about this, please click here.
Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 10:09 AM | Comments (5)
September 01, 2006
Seraphic Mailbag
I get a fair amount of private e-mail from readers of this blog. Here are some choice selections:
Dear Mr. Avrech:
I have a great story to tell. I just need a writer. Would you be interested in making a movie about my life story? I'm sure it is fascinating to a great and wide audience. I do kiruv [out-reach] work and what I do is heart lifting. Just like big box office Hollywood movies. Please get in touch with me ASAP.
Dear Mr. Hollywood Big-Shot:
You call yourself a Torah Jew? Allow me to disagree!!! How dare you claim to be a good Jew and make such movies like "Stranger Among Us" where you show such a lie like a Chasidic young man dancing and kissing the shicksah Melanie Giffith!!?? You are WORST than the terrorists!!!!! And I'm sure that your poor parents and entire family are completely ashamed of you. Are you so greedy that you will do ANYTHING for money!!!
Dear Robert:
You may not remember me but we went to high school together. We were not exactly friends, but we did have a cordial relationship. I remember how even back in BTA [Brooklyn Talmudical Academy] you were always writing stories and poems in a private notebook. You also talked about movies with a kind of maturity the rest of us lacked. You took them very seriously whereas we just thought of movies as light entertainment. I'd like to tell you how proud we all are of you that you've "made it" in Hollywood. Why am I writing to you after all these years? Well, as a tax attorney, I have some amazing stories to tell and all I need is a writer to put them down. You would not believe the things people do to shelter their funds from the government...
Dear Mr. Avrech:
I have been reading your blog for a long time now and want to thank you for such a wonderful web site. I especially like, no love, your memoir: How I Married Karen. It's nice to know that a man can be so romantic. I am writing to ask for some career advice. I am married, very happily, with five children. But I have always enjoyed writing. I like writing poems and short stories. I had a poem published in my high school yearbook. I realize this is no big deal, actually to a famous Hollywood writer like you it probably sounds laughable, but for me it meant so much at the time. Anyway, I was wondering if you could tell me how I can start writing screenplays and get into the movie business?
Dear Mr. Avrech:
You are the man who made that filthy movie "Body Double." Yet on your website you say that you are Shomer Shabbos and a religious Jew. This is impossible. No religious Jew could ever have anything to do with such a disgusting piece of pornography. Do you learn Torah and Talmud? If so, you have learned nothing. It is Jews like you who have single-handedly blocked the coming of the Moshiach [Messiah]. Are you not ashamed of yourself? How does your wife, the daughter of a well known Rav, look you in the face every day? How do your children admit that you are their father to their friends in their yeshivas? And how do you look at yourself in the mirror every day? You should do T'shuvah [repentance]. And in this I can be of help. Yes, Mr. Avrech, I a poor, humble Yid can offer a path to true T'shuva to a man like you. The organization I work for is in desperate need of funds...
Avrech:
Your movies s**k. So does your wimpy blog. I've been writing screenplays in this town for years now and the fact that a no-talent loser like you can get movies made and even get an Emmy just proves that these people have absolutely no standards.
Karen and I wish all our readers a lovely and meaningful Shabbos.
Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 10:19 AM | Comments (37)
Not Forgotten
"Fifty days after Ehud Goldwasser and Eldad Regev were kidnapped by the Hizbullah and 68 days after Gilad Shalit was kidnapped by Hamas, some 40,000 people assemble at the Rabin Square in Tel Aviv for a rally calling on the government to bring to the kidnapped soldiers' release..."
To read the reast of Miri Chason's article, please click here.
Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 10:10 AM | Comments (3)
Fixing Israel
"Today's agenda must concern one thing: Israel's power. There will be no peace and there will be no end to the occupation without restoring Israel's power. There will be no enlightenment and no free society without renewing Israel's power. Without renewing Israel's power there will be no start-ups here and no clubs. There won't even be a bubble.
"However, renewal of Israel's power cannot take place without ethics and without truth. Without modesty and without substance. Without restoring faith and a sense of responsibility. Therefore, the Prime Minister and Chief of Staff of Arrogance must both go. Not only because they have been wrong all the way. Not only because they have been wrong, have been deceptive and have cooked up a disaster. But because getting rid of both will distance us from the distorted values that both of them represent. Separation from both of them will detach us from the evil spirit that tricked us for years.
"Parting from Olmert and Halutz will not solve the deeply ingrained problem, but it will allow us to start dealing with it. It will allow Israel to embark on a long path toward a new beginning..."
To read the reast of Ari Shavit's superb article, please click here.
Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 09:38 AM | Comments (0)
Cutting the Roots
"I took part in a blogger conference call with former Chief of Staff Moshe (Boogie) Yaalon yesterday, sponsored by OneJerusalem. I am not completely sure, but judging from the bloggers who asked questions I seem to be one of the few Israeli bloggers who took part. I would like to write about what he said from the perspective of someone who has lived in Israel for 15 years..."
To read the rest of West Bank Mama's excellent summary and analysis, please click here.
Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 09:26 AM | Comments (1)
Love Israel?
If you are a child and you love to draw, and you love Israel, well, here's a wonderful place to go: We Love Israel. A lovely site that deserves to be seen.
Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 09:16 AM | Comments (2)
Profiling the Dead
"One of the biggest concerns for prospective airline passengers is the screening process of flight cargo. According to reports, only a small percentage of cargo that is loaded onto planes is screened for explosives. And of the cargo that is in fact screened, rarely does it include large containers. The question needs to be asked: What if, in our laxity, these containers became a preferred method of attack by terrorists? And what if the contents of the containers being used for the attacks were once living and breathing?
"Just like with any other religion, Muslim funerals have their own distinct customs and traditions. As stated in the ‘Muslim Funeral Guide for the residents of the Chicagoland,’ the funerals include: the preparation and washing of the deceased (Ghusl); the placing of a shroud (Kafan) over the body; transportation from the funeral home to the mosque for prayers; and transportation from the mosque back to the funeral home. It is the movement of the body to and from the mosque that is of concern."
To read the rest of this article by Joe Kaufman and Jeffrey Epstein, please click here.
Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 08:58 AM | Comments (0)
Hollow Victory
"Most importantly, Hezbollah's political gains within Lebanon during the war have proved illusory. As the dust settles, the Lebanese are furious at Hezbollah for provoking a war that brought them nothing but devastation -- and then crowing about victory amid the ruins.
"The Western press was once again taken in by the mystique of the ``Arab street.'' The mob came out to cheer Hezbollah for raining rockets on Israel -- surprise! -- and the Arab governments that had initially criticized Hezbollah went conveniently silent. Now that the mob has gone home, Hezbollah is under renewed attack -- in newspapers in Saudi Arabia, Kuwait and Egypt, as well as by many Lebanese, including influential Shiite academics and clan leaders. The Arabs know where their interests lie. And they do not lie with a Shiite militia that fights for Iran.
To read the rest of Charles Krathammer's fine article, please click here.
Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 08:43 AM | Comments (0)