Monday, 12 January 2009

Israel Matzav: Russia provoking war to raise oil prices?#links#links

Israel Matzav: Russia provoking war to raise oil prices?#links#links

Israel Matzav: Italian UNIFIL contingent finds plastic explosives near base#links#links

Israel Matzav: Italian UNIFIL contingent finds plastic explosives near base#links#links

Israel Matzav: You can take a Muslim out of Gaza but you can't take Gaza out of a Muslim#links#links#links

Israel Matzav: You can take a Muslim out of Gaza but you can't take Gaza out of a Muslim#links#links#links

ARE CEASEFIRES GOOD ?




The post-WWII international order is changing warfare. In many ways, this is good. Yet it's not unreservedly good. One institution that was certainly meant to be good but in reality is problematic is the internationally imposed ceasefire.


Wars have always been part of the human story, and I see no reason to expect this to change. In the past, wars were fought until one side won by destroying the ability of the other side to fight, or the other side sued for peace, or, rarely, a third side convinced the warring parties to desist. In all three scenarios, someone came away from the war with some achievement: the instigators with what they initially intended, or the defenders having proven to the instigators that they couldn't have what they wanted. I realize this is an oversimplification, but it's essentially true none-the-less. The British didn't want a French-dominated Europe at the turn of the 19th century, so they stopped it from happening. (Whether this was "good" or not, I can't say). The Northern states wanted to retain the Union, so they battled until the South agreed to stay put. The Reds wanted to control Russia and call it the Soviet Union, so they battled the Whites until Soviet domination was solid. And so on and on and on.


Countless millions of people lost their lives in these wars, and the suffering was immeasurable. Yet the clarity resulting from the end of hostilities wasn't always bad. Freed slaves were better off than before the war, no matter how you look at it; within the span of human memory the Union contributed to the defeat of the less nice side in the Great War, and at the very edge of living memory, some children who remembered Gettysburg lived to see VE-Day.


The combination of the United Nations Security Council and modern technology that can bring the horrors of war into faraway living rooms mean that many wars are no longer allowed to rage until one side wins. Not all wars, mind you: the Yugoslav wars of the 1990s were mostly resolved on the ground before the world got around to stopping them; the Russians in Georgia last summer stopped inflicting pain when they felt like it, not when anyone stopped them; and the wars of Africa go on, and on, and on.

Those African horrors demonstrate that the international mechanisms work only when there's a will to enforce them. The case of Israel's wars may hint that sometimes, the international determination to enforce ceasefires actively prolong the conflict, since the Arab side knows that Israel won't be allowed to do what would have been obvious throughout history: decisively win. As Tzipi Livni told Newsweek the other day:



Hamas's strategy is resistance and survival. As long as they survive, this is a victory. When they know the international community is putting pressure on Israel, they can hold out, waiting for Israel to be stopped. It is a pity … [But] I cannot tell you that this is the last operation. If they target us again, we will act again. Strongly.


None of us truly doubt that there will be additional rounds, sometime down the road. After all, what do our enemies stand to lose? Or more accurately, what do they stand to lose that would hurt them enough they won't take the risk?

NUMBERS



Here's a link to a lecture given in May 2002 by Hanoch Marmari, at the time editor-in-chief of Haaretz, at an international conference of media types. It's a bit more self-congratulatory than warranted, but otherwise worth reading, even though it's almost seven years old. He enumerates five fundamental sins of the media reporting on the Mideast: Obsessiveness, prejudice, condescension, ignorance, and the fifth, which he adds at the end, naivete. Nor does he shy away from criticizing the media for their heavy-handed interventions in the events themselves:



One day, historians examining this period of crisis will have to consider the circular process by which the media were transformed from observers to participants. From covering the story to playing a major part in it, to stimulating and sometimes agitating the environment for their own media purposes. The media in this cruel Israeli-Palestinian conflict are like a very rich junkie, who parks his Mercedes on the high street of a slum. You can be sure that in no time at all, everyone will be out there, pushing a whole variety of merchandise.


The reason I'm citing him here, however, beyond the value of his comments, is because of the story with which he opened his talk, the story of one Abu Ali of Jenin who told a gullible European journalist the IDF had killed all nine of his children, even while all nine were still very much alive; the European newspaper which turned this into a two-page story somehow never got around to informing its readers that thankfully, the story actually wasn't true. In case you wonder if Abu Ali might at least have been sincere, though mistaken, Marmari makes it quite clear later on that this couldn't have been true: whoever was there and knew the facts, such as his one anti-Israeli reporter Amira Hass, knew fully well that there had been no massacre.


Which means Abu Ali lied. Me, I'd be superstitious to tell someone about the death of my children, but perhaps that's just me.


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


Those of you old enough to remember the turn of the century may recollect the persistent story, repeated endlessly as an article of faith, whereby the international blockade of Iraq throughout the 1990s had caused the death by starvation of half a million Iraqi children. That's 500,000 children, a large number by any standard.


Then, in 2003, the Americans invaded Iraq, and for a few months it was safe enough for Western journalists to wander around the country, reporting on the lack of WMD and how awful the Americans were. One story that didn't get told was the story of the parents of those half a million dead children. So far as I can remember, there was never a single interview with a single Iraqi parent who told about how their child had starved to death. Moreover, there were no pictures of Iraqi children on the verge of starvation. Nor any stories about the allies rushing large convoys of basic foodstuffs to a famished populace.


The entire story disappeared. I'll go out on a branch here and speculate that it was never true, and was tailored from full cloth by a combination of liars who invented it and malicious ignoramuses who gleefully disseminated it.


If anyone wishes to disprove me, I will of retract this allegation once it has been proven wrong.


The invasion of Iraq in 2003 of course gave birth to a whole industry of unverified and often wrong numbers of casualties. Of course, unlike the previous case, when the Americans and British invaded Iraq in 2003 they set in motion a train of events in which many tens of thousands of Iraqis did die, most of them civilians, and most of them at the hands of their fellow Arabs. Yet Google enables you the opportunity of going back to the media reports of 2003 and 2004, where you'll see that the numbers of the purported dead were significantly higher than the numbers being cited in, say, the horrific year of 2006; an indication that once again some observers were not being careful with their numbers, peculiar as this may sound.


Compared to the true and false numbers bandied carelessly around for Iraq, the numbers of dead in Gaza in this campaign are paltry: not hundreds of thousands, but hundreds, period. Were the real number to be in the thousands, we'd be hearing about it; since the IDF itself says its troops have identified hundreds of fighters they have personally killed in battle, it's likely the total is more or less correct. That some of them, probably even a few hundred, really are non-combatants, most horrifically children, is true. Yesterday, according to the reports, the troops reported they had killed up to fifty armed Hamas fighters.


Yet that number deserves to be looked at again. The IDF and the armed wing of Hamas are engaged in fierce face-to-face combat in a densely built city. Hamas prepared for this battle for quite a while, it dug tunnels, stored explosives in homes, booby trapped schools, a zoo, and many residential buildings - and the number of civilian dead on a typical day of fighting is... Five? Ten? Twenty?


That's what the international tumult is about? Did I miss something?


taken from : Yaacov Lozowick's Ruminations (http://yaacovlozowick.blogspot.com/)

COLONIALISM : WHAT FOR ?



There were compelling reasons for European colonialism, created largely in the 19th century, and peaking in the early 20th. Most of them had to do with money: Smallish European countries exploited much larger tracts of territories elsewhere, taking out minerals, selling in their own industrial products, exploiting cheap labor where this made sense, and eventually recruiting large numbers of natives to fight in the European wars of the 20th century. Of course it was more complex, but I think that's a reasonable synopsis. The British, by the way, at least said they were bringing enlightened modernity to benighted primitives, so they had a moral justification; to an extent, this was demonstrably true. The rest of the European colonials don't seem much to have troubled themselves.


Whenever a post-colonial-guilt-ridden-hate-infused critic of Israel sets off on one of their rants about Israel's colonialism, it might be a good tactic to calm then down and ask them, quietly, to describe what precisely Israel's colonial goals are. Certainly not exploitation of Palestinian mineral resources, of which there are none? Selling Israeli produce? To the Palestinians? Huh? Exploiting cheap labor: For a while we were indeed doing this, and the level of Palestinian economic quality of life rose dramatically, but that was before the 1990s; nowadays Israelis employ very few Palestinians because of the security complications, and the sole losers are the Palestinians themselves; the Israelis have replaced them with Africans, Asians and East-Europeans. As for the idea of recruiting them for our wars, well....


Like the British, however, Israel did have the conceit of improving life for the Palestinians. In one case, for example, Israel refurbished the largest hospital in Gaza, and even built an entire second wing, including a large concrete basement.... Yup, this is going exactly where you thought it might be going:

Hamas leaders hiding in basement of Israel-built hospital in Gaza.


takem from : Yaacov Lozowick's Ruminations (http://yaacovlozowick.blogspot.com/)

A MESSAGE TO THE JEWISH PEOPLE AND THE ENTIRE WORLD

Chronicles I - 16:15-18: "Forever remember His covenant that he commanded forever; That He made with Abraham and swore to Isaac; and confirmed in a decree for Jacob, for Israel, as an eternal covenant; saying to You I will give the Land of Cannan as your alloted heritage"

taken from B'NAI ELIM (http://bnaielim.blogspot.com/)

Sunday, 11 January 2009

The Barnyard: Not a Tear!#links#links#links

The Barnyard: Not a Tear!#links#links#links

The Barnyard: Moonbat Leftards Join Hamas Lovers In Jew Hatred Around The World#links#links

The Barnyard: Moonbat Leftards Join Hamas Lovers In Jew Hatred Around The World#links#links

Israel Matzav: A couple of tips from Israeli intelligence#links#links#links#links

Israel Matzav: A couple of tips from Israeli intelligence#links#links#links#links

Israel Matzav: Video: 'Bombs are more precious than children'#links#links#links#links#links

Israel Matzav: Video: 'Bombs are more precious than children'#links#links#links#links#links

Israel Matzav: Video: Hamas exploitation of civilians as human shields#links#links#links#links

Israel Matzav: Video: Hamas exploitation of civilians as human shields#links#links#links#links

Israel Matzav: Will Jews start to flee England?#links#links

Israel Matzav: Will Jews start to flee England?#links#links

Israel Matzav: Hamas calls on Gaza kids to form a human shield#links#links#links#links#links

Israel Matzav: Hamas calls on Gaza kids to form a human shield#links#links#links#links#links

Israel Matzav: Hamas tried to down IAF plane#links#links

Israel Matzav: Hamas tried to down IAF plane#links#links

Israel Matzav: Breaking: Syrians fire on Israel in Golan!#links#links

Israel Matzav: Breaking: Syrians fire on Israel in Golan!#links#links

Israel Matzav: Who'da thunk it: Geraldo Rivera rips Pali ambassador#links#links#links

Israel Matzav: Who'da thunk it: Geraldo Rivera rips Pali ambassador#links#links#links

Israel Matzav: Sky News: How long can Hamas fight?#links#links#links#links#links

Israel Matzav: Sky News: How long can Hamas fight?#links#links#links#links#links

Israel Matzav: Would you let your kid do this?#links#links

Israel Matzav: Would you let your kid do this?#links#links

Israel Matzav: The oldest hatred comes to... Chicago#links#links

Israel Matzav: The oldest hatred comes to... Chicago#links#links

Israel Matzav: Follow the money....#links#links

Israel Matzav: Follow the money....#links#links

Israel Matzav: German police break into private home to remove Israeli flag that 'offended' Muslims#links#links

Israel Matzav: German police break into private home to remove Israeli flag that 'offended' Muslims#links#links

Israel Matzav: NY Times: Bush refused requests for bunker busters, flyover#links#links

Israel Matzav: NY Times: Bush refused requests for bunker busters, flyover#links#links

INNOCENT CIVILIANS...I DON'T THINK SO !



INNOCENT GAZA CIVILIANS


by Steven Plaut


Innocent Gaza civilians, huh? A three hour ceasefire so that"innocent Gazan civilians" can go shopping today?


Are Gaza civilians really innocent? Let us bear in mind that the years of rocket savagery by the Hamas were a direct result of the vast majority of the residents of the Gaza Strip voting for the Hamas in the elections,such as they were, that were held there.


The vast majority of Gazans brought the Hamas into power with their votes. Those same people, and they are the vast majority, are not innocent. Those who did NOT vote for the Hamas voted for other terrorist groups, like the various wings of the Fat'h. Basically no one in Gaza voted against terrorism.


Democracy is not just majority vote decision making but it is also holding that same majority accountable for how it votes and for the consequences of their votes. People who vote for terrorism are legitimate targets for Israeli arms and bombs. And since virtually all Gazans voted for terrorism, at least those above voting age did, let's stop all the silly talk about them being "innocent civilian bystanders."


That is not a call to bomb civilians. It IS a call to ignore the fact that civilians might get hurt in Gaza when Israel bombs armed terrorists.

German and Japanese civilians got hurt when the Allies bombed Nazi Germany and Imperialist Japan. Gazan civilians are no more innocent than were those German and Japanese civilians.


People who do not like it when Gazan civilians get hurt should not support Palestinian terrorism and savagery and aggression.


Israel's official policy should be: Hide a Hamas terrorist in your building and die.


taken from : B'NAI ELIM (http://bnaielim.blogspot.com/)

Israel Matzav: What goes around comes around - even for terrorists

Israel Matzav: What goes around comes around - even for terrorists

Israel Matzav: Streaming video of Jihadi TV#links#links#links#links

Israel Matzav: Streaming video of Jihadi TV#links#links#links#links

Israel Matzav: Is Hamas falling apart?#links#links#links#links

Israel Matzav: Is Hamas falling apart?#links#links#links#links

Saturday, 10 January 2009

JEWISH ANTISEMITES : MAOMI KLEIN



Of course there are Jewish antisemites. There always have been, and there always will be, just like there will always be antisemites. Somebody should write a book about their sorry history some day.


Naomi Klein is a well-known intellectual of the loony Left, who writes books about the evils of many of the things mankind should rightfully be proud of; being against Israel is simply part of that turf. I don't think we're at the top of her list of things to hate, merely comfortably in the middle.


Today she has published a column calling for a boycott against Israel. (Published also at the Guardian, with a more dramatic title).


The vapidness of her thesis is stated clearly in the very first paragraph:


It's time. Long past time. The best strategy to end the increasingly bloody occupation is for Israel to become the target of the kind of global movement that put an end to apartheid in South Africa. In July 2005 a huge coalition of Palestinian groups laid out plans to do just that. They called on "people of conscience all over the world to impose broad boycotts and implement divestment initiatives against Israel similar to those applied to South Africa in the apartheid era". The campaign Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions was born.


A huge coalition of Palestinian groups? Do you think anyone told Ms. Klein about the split between Hamas and Fatah? More interesting, this movement she tells of, has which goal? Putting an end to the occupation? And it was created when? July 2005? Wasn't that the month before the Israelis dismantled their settlements in Gaza, and pulled out all IDF troops?


So the first thing these boycotters, Ms. Klein among them, ought to work out for themselves is what their goal is. The boycotters of South Africa's Apartheid regime had a clear goal: an end to that regime. I suspect if one were to try to be calm and clearheaded and figure out what Israel's boycotters want, the bottom line would be either an end to Israel, or an end to Israel. It's clearly not about the settlements, as Ms. Klein has so helpfully explained.


A boycott against a country so that it ends itself is ridiculous. A yearning that a country disappear is despicable.


Ms. Klein admits she's a hypocrite:


Why single out Israel when the US, Britain and other western countries do the same things in Iraq and Afghanistan?


Boycott is not a dogma; it is a tactic. The reason the strategy should be tried is practical: in a country so small and trade-dependent, it could actually work.


Nice, isn't it? She's a pragmatist. Israel's no worse than others, but it's more vulnerable so let's go for it. Yet there are other countries that also might be vulnerable: Sri Lanka, for example, repressing it's Tamils with what rather looks like brutality, assuming you're looking. Sudan. The the parties involved in the genocide in the Congo. Pakistanis and Indians in Kashmir (40,000 dead over the past decade or so). Ever ask yourself how these paragons of human rights put together their hate-lists? No connections with human rights, I assure you.


Finally, she offers us a bit of comic relief:


For eight years, my books have been published in Israel by a commercial house called Babel. But when I published The Shock Doctrine, I wanted to respect the boycott. On the advice of BDS activists, including the wonderful writer John Berger, I contacted a small publisher called Andalus. Andalus is an activist press, deeply involved in the anti-occupation movement and the only Israeli publisher devoted exclusively to translating Arabic writing into Hebrew. We drafted a contract that guarantees that all proceeds go to Andalus's work, and none to me. I am boycotting the Israeli economy but not Israelis.


Huh? If Andalus is devoted exclusively to translating Arabic writing into Hebrew, does this mean The Shock Doctrine was written in Arabic? Wow. I'm impressed. I didn't know she had it in her. Anyway, I've got a number of Hebrew books on my bookshelf that are translations from the Arabic, and they're all from mainstream Israeli publishers, who of course have no problem with publishing books by Arabs, assuming they're good books. (And if they're merely internal Arab propaganda, there's always MEMRI). Also, if doing business with Israeli firms while donating the proceeds back to the companies themselves counts as boycotting Israel, I've got a company of my own that would really welcome being boycotted! We're over here, folks! We're staunch Zionists! You've just gotta boycott us! It's a mitzva!
taken from : Yaacov Lozowick's Ruminations (http://yaacovlozowick.blogspot.com/)

"EDUCATING" THE PEOPLE


"PEACE" ???


Israel Matzav: Video Hamas doesn't want you to see#links#links#links

Israel Matzav: Video Hamas doesn't want you to see#links#links#links

Israel Matzav: US abstention a warning to Israel?#links#links#links#links

Israel Matzav: US abstention a warning to Israel?#links#links#links#links

Israel Matzav: Pro-'Palestinian' demonstrators: 'Long live Hitler, put Jews in ovens'#links#links#links

Israel Matzav: Pro-'Palestinian' demonstrators: 'Long live Hitler, put Jews in ovens'#links#links#links

Israel Matzav: The best commentary I've seen on Gaza#links#links#links

Israel Matzav: The best commentary I've seen on Gaza#links#links#links

Israel Matzav: Video: IAF destroys rocket launcher in Gaza schoolyard before it can fire#links#links#links

Israel Matzav: Video: IAF destroys rocket launcher in Gaza schoolyard before it can fire#links#links#links

Israel Matzav: Egyptian minister: 'It's all Hamas' fault'#links#links

Israel Matzav: Egyptian minister: 'It's all Hamas' fault'#links#links

HOW TO UNDERSTAND MIKETZ AND VAYIGASH




Written by: admin


A little late, but really great - a nice Guest Post

The parashiot of Miketz and Vayigash feature some strange language and events that bear closer examination. The way I see things, it’s easier toread between the lines if we accept that the point of the parashiot is that “Kol Israel Arevim Ze LaZe” - all Israel are responsible for one another.Some of the [stronger] points in making this claim are Rashi’s or other commentator’s ideas. Any errors are mine, naturally.For those of you who may find it useful to know, I used The Sapirstein Edition of the Chumash.


The Irresponsible, Disunited Brothers
In Miketz, perek MB/chapter 32, pasouk G/verse 3 reads: “Joseph’s brothers - ten of them - went down to buy grain from Egypt.”
Rashi notes that a moment earlier the brothers had been referred to as Jacob’s sons. His explanation for the reference to them as Joseph’sbrothers is that they regretted his sale and were set on ransoming him. But at the same time, the reference to ‘ten of them’ alludes to their divisionamongst themselves as to how they felt towards Joseph personally - their love and hatred for him varied individually.
A moment later, we read that at surface level, the reference to ten brothers prepares us for Benjamin’s absence from the trip. Jacob’sexplanation is that he is concerned about a disaster occurring. Jacob tactfully avoids recalling the blame that the brothers bear for having his first sonkilled (or so he thinks). But it seems clear that Jacob mistrusts his own children to care for the sole remaining child of his favourite wife.
More interestingly, Jacob uses a weird phrasing to explain his worry, “Pen Ikraenu Ason.” The “nu” suffix suggests that he perhaps meant“lest a disaster befall us,” rather than “lest a disaster befall Benjamin.” The first person singular, “we,” often uses the “nu” suffixin conjugation. Jacob was trying to get the brothers to take responsibility for Benjamin.

Repetitions, Repetitions
The next verse makes things even more unusual. We already know from several psoukim in the preceding perek that Joseph was “the ruler over the land,he was the provider to all the people of the land.” After Joseph had succesfully interpreted Pharaoh’s dreams, he’d been made the country’s administratorwith repeated remarks by Pharaoh to the vastness and fullness of Joseph’s power and responsibility for the country’s welfare.
Why does the Torah repeat itself here?
I’d say that the timing explains things. The repetition comes immediately after the preceding distrustful talk. Where Jacob could not trust his ownchildren to take responsibility for their sibling, Pharaoh trusted Joseph enough to entrust him with his country!
The verse concludes with Joseph’s brother bowing to him. At a superficial level, they recognized his political superiority, but perhapsthey were also acknowledging that he was worthy of their respect as a role model. Here was a man of their own approximate age and he was caring for anation.
For simplicity I’ll just quote the following few verses verbatim. “Joseph saw his brothers and he recognized them, but he acted like a strangertoward them and spoke with them harshly. He said to them, ‘From where have you come?’ And they said, ‘From the land of Canaan to buy food.’ Josephrecognized his brothers but they did not recognize him.
When someone doesn’t recognize their child, we say they’ve disowned them and absolved themselves of responsibility for them.A midrash suggests that Joseph was ready to take care of his brothers, but the reverse wasn’t true.
My take is that Joseph acted coldly to to see whether they had changed since the time they’d sold him into slavery. He wanted to avoid tipping them offand risking getting an answer that aimed to please, but wasn’t 100% true. When they said that they came down to buy food - and ommitted to mentionthat they were looking to ransom their brother - he concluded that they still didn’t take responsibility for their earlier actions.
Spies, Bloody Spies!
Feeling perhaps that his brothers haven’t caught the thrust of where he’s going, and hoping to see that they were ready to take responsibility for him,Joseph then charges his brothers with being spies.
They deny it, and repeat that they’re just in town to buy food. They add that “we are all the sons of one man,” are truthful and have never been spies.Rashi interprets that as them including Joseph in the “we” and now recognizing him as a brother, from a flicker of G-dly inspiration.
Unimpressed, Joseph repeats the charge, to which they answer and highlight that their full brotherhood counts 12 members, “one of which is withour father today and one is gone.”
So they acknowledge that Joseph was once a part of their group but no longer, and they also phrase things to avoid taking personal responsibilityfor his absence. He’s just gone, like he’d gotten into a bad mood one day and run away from home.
Joseph, still not getting through, angrily repeats, “That’s what I’ve been saying to you. You’re spies!”
Rashi here cites a midrash that suggests that the real meaning of the conversation regards the brothers’ ransoming intent. Would they pay an exorbitantprice? Yes, they would. What if he wasn’t for sale? They came to kill or be killed, they said.
At this, we might expect Joseph to be pleased to hear the extent to which his brothers were prepared to go for him. Instead, he pressed home his pointabout the spies and threw his brothers in prison for three days.
As I understand things, the point of the accusation was that spies are fundamentally ungrateful people. They mix with their hosts, who take care of them,then repay them poorly with betrayal. Instead of taking care of those who’ve taken care of them, they forgo responsibility to instead cause harm.This may be a bit far-fetched, but we’ll see that on the whole it’s a tenable argument.
When he released his brothers from jail, Joseph challenged them to bring their youngest brother down to Egypt. The guilt that had been eating at themboiled to the surface and they recognized their responsibility finally, with Reuben says, “I told you so.” You would think he’d learned the lesson.
Just a short stretch later, Jacob is apprised of the situation whereby Benjamin must return to Egypt with his brothers if they are to buy foodagain - Joseph would not see them, otherwise. Reuben offers to be the surety for Benjamin, and should he fail to return his little brother,Jacob can kill Reuben’s two sons. Which offer Jacob promptly dismisses, per Rashi, as irresponsible rashness.
The leader - by age of the brothers - having thus been rebuffed, Judah offers to guarantee Benjamin’s safe passage. His words are interesting:
“Send the lad with me and let us arise and go, so we will live and we will not die, neither we nor you nor our children. I will guarantee him; of myown hand you can demand him. If I do not bring him back to you and stand him before you, then I will have sinned to you for all time. For had we notdelayed, by now we could have returned twice.”
The appeal is to the benefit of the collective. This Jacob accepts and sends Benjamin with his brothers.
Back in Joseph’s court, upon seeing that his brothers had brought their youngest sibling down to Egypt without harming him, Joseph welcomes his guestswith feasts. But he’s not entirely convinced that they’ve learned their lesson.
So he has his staff plant his goblet in Benjamin’s baggage before the brothers are set to leave. As they begin their trip, Joseph’s staff catches upand finds the goblet in Benjamin’s bag. Like spies, they are placed in a situation of doing wrong to people who have done them right (by selling themfood). It is time to take put up or shut up, as they say. Joseph asks that Benjamin remain as his slave.
Fortunately, Judah takes responsibility in Miketz, saying amongst other things, “How can I go up to my father without the youth, lest I see theevil that will befall my father?!” Between Judah assuming responsibility for his brother, thus showing that he and the brothers had changed for thebetter, and the appeal to his father’s welfare, Joseph gets through and succeeds. Joseph finally reveals himself to his brothers and the rest,as they say, is history.
So these parashiot teach us that Kol Israel Arevim Ze Lazeh - All Israel Are Responsible For One Another. With terrorists attacking Israel, thismessage is particularly timely. Aish has an interesting piece, http://www.aish.com/jewishissues/jewishsociety/54_Ways_You_Can_Help_Israel.asppart of which was addressed at last night’s rally here in Montreal. (The Florida Jewish site also has a good article http://www.floridajewish.com/18_ways_to_help_israel.php
When addressing the media, we need to not only criticize them, but praise those who do a good job writing accurately and fairly. I need to commendCNN (link) for example, for their coverage Tuesday night that showed an Israeli city’s police station storing all the exploded rockets that hit the town.Anderson Cooper showed the jagged metal placed around the explosive charge to maximize shrapnel (e.g. exploding junk) injuries.
But that’s not all. Pharaoh didn’t just trusting Joseph with the country - but with a wife and prize possessions etc. There are personal benefitsto demonstrating trustworthiness. Of course, if personal benefit is the only motivation for doing the right thing, chances are you won’t earn thattrust in the first place. But it’s great to know that helping others leaves us with more than just happy feelings.
Gab Goldenberg is an internet marketing expert who writes an SEO blog and provides link building services .
taken from : Tzipiyah.com

PARSHAT VAYECHI : THE SEAL OF EXILE



Written by: Nathan Light


This week marks the conclusion of the book of Genesis, the first of five books of the Torah. In brief, the parshah speaks of the final words that our forefather Jacob shares with his children and grand-children before his death, and it describes what occurs after his death, and the death of Joseph.


Normally, between weekly portions the Torah includes a paragraph break between the last sentence of the previous week’s portion and the first sentence of the present week’s portion. However, this week is an exception and begins the portion in the middle of the same line that last week’s portion ended. So, why is this a “sealed” (and not open, i.e. no paragraph break) parshah?


Rashi (Rabbi Shlomo Yitzhaki, 10401105, famed as the author of the first comprehensive commentaries on the Torah) offers two answers; the first is as follows:


“Once Jacob died the eyes and hearts of his descendants were “sealed” due to the suffering of the enslavement, for the Egyptians began to enslave them.”


According to this translation of Rashi, it would imply that immediately following the death of Jacob the Jews were put into slavery by the Egyptians. However, the Torah explicitly states [Exodus: 1: 6-7] that the enslavement only occurred after all of Jacob’s children died! So, what was Rashi really saying!?


Rabbi Uziel Milevsky (an exceptional Torah scholar who passed away about 15 years ago) explained that Rashi’s intention wasn’t that the eyes and hearts of the Jewish people became sealed due to the hardships of the subjugation, rather that they became sealed to the hardships of the subjugation. Meaning: Once Jacob died and consequently ceased influencing his children, they began to enjoy life in exile and eventually succumbed to the spiritual enslavement brought upon them by the Egyptians.


As mentioned above, Rashi also offered a second answer to why the paragraph is sealed:

“Jacob wished to reveal the end to his sons, but it was “sealed” off from him.”


This means that Jacob, through divine knowledge, wanted to tell his sons when the ultimate end of all Jewish exiles would occur, but was somehow prevented (“closed off”) from telling it over to them.


One may suggest that the two answers given by Rashi are not coincidental, but that they are deliberately placed together and linked to one another.


As explained in Answer#2, Jacob wanted to reveal the “end of days” to his offspring but it was “sealed off” from him. But why!? What caused it to be sealed off from him? This is where Answer#1 steps in: It is because the children of Israel “sealed” their eyes and hearts to the Egyptian immorality and chose to immerse themselves in spiritual exile that they were refused to receive the revelation of when our final redemption would occur.

The longing for the “end of days” that was crucial for its arrival, would inevitably diminish from within the children of Israel during their stay in Egypt, and this would ultimately prevent its coming altogether. Therefore, we learn that the first prerequisite in bringing the final redemption is to actually want it to come!

We often express our wishes that Mashiach (the Messiah) should come speedily in our days, but do we really mean it!? This final redemption will bring about an end to all our strife and put a stop to all the ongoing wars amongst mankind, and it will usher in a universal recognition of the Jewish people as a light unto the universe. Of course we want peace, nevertheless we must ask ourselves: Are we truly willing to give up our material pursuits and take upon ourselves all the necessary responsibilities in our devotion to God in order to serve as a model unto all the nations of the world? May we be blessed to make it our priority to ask ourselves this question everyday of our lives, and eventually honestly come to the right answer.

Good Shabbos

NZL
taken from : Tzipiyah.com

Friday, 9 January 2009

"HOW DARE YOU DEFEND YOURSELF"


taken from : ornot2be profile in Stumbleupon (http://ornot2be.stumbleupon.com/about/)

"ISRAEL STARTED"



taken from : http://nikon-man.stumbleupon.com/review/29104344/

Gateway Pundit: 1,000 St. Louisans Pack the JCC to Show Support For Israel

Gateway Pundit: 1,000 St. Louisans Pack the JCC to Show Support For Israel

Israel Matzav: Pre-Sabbath link dump#links#links

Israel Matzav: Pre-Sabbath link dump#links#links

Israel Matzav: 'Humanitarian aid'?#links#links#links

Israel Matzav: 'Humanitarian aid'?#links#links#links

Israel Matzav: Biting the hand that feeds you#links#links

Israel Matzav: Biting the hand that feeds you#links#links

Israel Matzav: Show Kassams falling on Facebook#links#links

Israel Matzav: Show Kassams falling on Facebook#links#links

Israel Matzav: Israel defiant?#links#links

Israel Matzav: Israel defiant?#links#links

Rehovot Terror Attack #links

Rehovot Terror Attack #links

TALKING TO HAMAS



The Guardian announces today, rather breathless from excitement, that Obama will initiate talks with Hamas. Although if you read their own article carefully, it's hardly clear how much this will be new:


"You could do something through the Europeans. You could invent a structure that is multilateral. It is going to be hard for the neocons to swallow," he said. "I think it is going to happen."


But one Middle East expert close to the transition team said: "It is highly unlikely that they will be public about it."

The gloating is fine; everybody needs a good gloat now and then. The substance is more important. Israel has long been talking with Hamas through intermediaries, primarily the Egyptians; the Guardian fails to note that the group which stands to lose the most from a political rehabilitation of Hamas is Abu Mazen's government, a move Obama may be wary of taking even if it would make the Guardian happy.

I have no problem with the Americans hearing directly from Hamas how Hamas sees the world. After all, assuming they start talking, they're going to have to talk about something. If they stick to global warming and economic measures for stimulating the economy, who cares? Once they approach the subject of Hamas living with Israel, what exactly will they talk about? A Hamas demand that Israel disband all its settlements in Gaza as a confidence building measure, perhaps? More likely, the American interlocutors may find Hamas is the problem, not Israel. Amir Taheri reminds why.
taken from : Yaacov Lozowick's Ruminations (http://yaacovlozowick.blogspot.com/)

THE FRUSTRATING ECONOMIST



The most popular article on the website of Time Magazine this morning is titled Can Israel Survive Its Assault on Gaza? It's long, and I didn't manage to read it all way through. Unlike the malice of the Guardian, which intrigues me, the article at Time is simply clueless. Whoever put it together has no understanding of the Middle East, past present or future, and no clue about human nature. I suppose I ought to parse it to expose the utter silliness of the folks at a magazine that must have many millions of loyal readers, but I can't seem to find the energy.


Jeffrey Goldberg sums it up:


Which one will last longer: Israel, or Time Magazine? I'm betting on Israel.


The Economist is a different matter. Unlike the Guardian and its ilk, (and, I have to believe, Time Magazine), the Economist probably comes as close as any media outlet to being influential, both because it's an intelligent paper which respects the intelligence of its readers, and thereby may win their reciprocal respect, and also because it really tries to know what it's talking about. It even regularly publishes letters from its readers chiding it on its inaccuracies.


It's not a Zionist paper, by any stretch of the imagination. When it unfairly blamed Israel for the outbreak of violence that was the second intifada, in October 2000 ("Israel must give up its greed for Palestinian territories and accept a Palestinian state") I canceled my subscription and mostly shunned them for a number of years. (Come to think of it, I never canceled my subscription to the Guardian. Probably because I never had one). By and by, however, I inched back: Israel beat the 2nd intifada because Arik Sharon didn't read the European press and thus was unaware we had no choice but to abjectly surrender to the Palestinians; various Islamists forced an awareness of their maliciousness on at least some people, and so on. It also must be said that the Economist is not antisemitic. Exasperating at times, but it's a free world and most people with opinions exasperate somebody most of the time.


This week's cover story at the Economist is titled "The Hundred Years War", accompanied by a dramatic photo. The very title appealed to me, because it puts the historical depth of the issue right where it belongs, at the very beginning and over-arching everything else. The article delivers on the promise of the title. There's about, oh, 10% of it which I'd quibble with, but these days it's not so common to find an article about Israel where one disagrees with a mere 10%.


Until the very last paragraph. After all the reasonably balanced analysis, what's the bottom line?


There is a limit, however. Taking Hamas down a peg is one thing. But even in the event of Israel “winning” in Gaza, a hundred years of war suggest that the Palestinians cannot be silenced by brute force. Hamas will survive, and with it that strain in Arab thinking which says that a Jewish state does not belong in the Middle East. To counter that view, Israel must show not only that it is too strong to be swept away but also that it is willing to give up the land—the West Bank, not just Gaza—where the promised Palestinian state must stand. Unless it starts doing that convincingly, at a minimum by freezing new settlement, it is Palestine’s zealots who will flourish and its peacemakers who will fall back into silence. All of Israel’s friends, including Barack Obama, should be telling it this.


Some Arabs emphatically and fundamentally reject the right of Jews to control any part of the Middle East, as the Economist tells in the article itself, so what's the solution? Israel must give up land and Obama must force it to do so.
taken from : Yaacov Lozowick's Ruminations (http://yaacovlozowick.blogspot.com/)

Hamas Presents: The Divine Victory

Israel Matzav: 'Youths' riot in support of Hamas in Oslo#links#links#links#links#links

Israel Matzav: 'Youths' riot in support of Hamas in Oslo#links#links#links#links#links

Israel Matzav: Breaking: Security Council 'close' to resolution; Israel: They won't dictate to us; UPDATE: Agreement reached?#links#links

Israel Matzav: Breaking: Security Council 'close' to resolution; Israel: They won't dictate to us; UPDATE: Agreement reached?#links#links

Israel Matzav: Democrats' antipathy to the Gaza operation?#links#links#links#links

Israel Matzav: Democrats' antipathy to the Gaza operation?#links#links#links#links

Israel Matzav: God is on our side#links#links

Israel Matzav: God is on our side#links#links

Israel Matzav: Video: Hamas killing 'Palestinians'#links#links

Israel Matzav: Video: Hamas killing 'Palestinians'#links#links

Israel Matzav: Red Cross attacks Israel over Gaza find#links#links

Israel Matzav: Red Cross attacks Israel over Gaza find#links#links

Israel Matzav: Vatican calls Gaza a 'concentration camp'#links#links

Israel Matzav: Vatican calls Gaza a 'concentration camp'#links#links

Israel Matzav: Video: Damage from Nahariya rocket attack#links#links#links

Israel Matzav: Video: Damage from Nahariya rocket attack#links#links#links

Israel Matzav: Raw video: Givati Brigade in Gaza City#links#links#links

Israel Matzav: Raw video: Givati Brigade in Gaza City#links#links#links

911/WTC - View From Space Station

SHARIAH (ISLAMIC) LAW = PUNISHEMENT - CRUEL AND USUAL


Exclusive: Cruel and Usual Punishment:


The Terrifying Global Implications of Islamic Law
The Editors


In her latest book, Cruel and Usual Punishment: The Terrifying Global Implications of Islamic Law, author Nonie Darwish paints a chilling description of what lies ahead for Western civilizations that continue down the road of political correctness and appeasement as Islamic (Shariah) law creeps its way into free societies across the globe. Darwish, who was born in Cairo, and moved as a child to Gaza with her family, was raised Muslim – her father founding Palestinian fedayeen units which launched terrorist raids across Israel’s southern border. When Nonie was only eight, her father was assassinated by the IDF, after which he was recognized as a shahid, or martyr for Islam. Darwish immigrated to the United States in 1978.

Islamic Law and the ensuing threats to Western civilization are subjects Darwish discusses with a passion and knowledge borne only of one who grew up within it can have. Having left Islam as an adult and having converted to Christianity, she has shared her experiences in Islam with her first book, Now They Call Me Infidel. Now with her second book, Cruel and Usual Punishment: The Terrifying Global Implications of Islamic Law, she explains in layman’s terms the meaning of Shariah law and the implications that face those who embrace it. Nonie Darwish visited with FamilySecurityMatters.org to discuss the book:


Renee Taylor for FSM: What are some of the implications for Western civilizations of accepting Shariah law into their societies?


Nonie Darwish: Today, Muslims have moved to Europe, America, Australia and Canada. They argued for Shariah law and got it. In England now, they are practicing marriage and inheritance laws. It is important for the West to realize and understand that Islamic law does not give equal rights to all. It discriminates between men and women. There are laws for Muslims, laws for non-Muslims. Women and non-Muslims have much more oppressive laws, giving Muslim men authority over them. If we allow such laws, we will find ourselves approving discrimination in our society between people. That is totally against Western democracy and values, especially the U.S. Constitution. I wrote this book because it is very important for the West to understand what they allow. Shariah law itself was not part of Islam when Mohammed died. It was created by the Muslim heads of state because Islam was moving very fast to conquer many countries. They needed Islamic law to rule over all these lands. It is inspired by the Koran and by the Hadith sayings of Mohammed. All areas of Islamic society are rooted in Islamic law, which is tyrannical law.


Slavery, for example, has never been abolished by Islam. If you read Muslim Shariah law, it is full of regulation of slaves. Sexual slavery of women captured in war is allowed, which was practiced by Mohammed. Even today, sexual slaves are accepted and all over the Middle East. Honor killings are rooted in Islamic law. For example, the murders for which a Muslim will never have punishment: to kill an apostate, to kill an adulterer – which is usually a woman, and honor killings. If you allow the killings of an apostate or an adulteress woman in the form of vigilante justice under Islamic law, you are endorsing honor killing. There are so many laws you cannot imagine that are brutal and unfair. A woman, for example, cannot divorce her husband, only a man can divorce her. I have an entire chapter in my book about the Muslim marriage contract. All of this is to open the eyes of the West to something totally against their own value system and democracy.


RT: With the world at risk, why do you think other countries are not taking the situation seriously? There seems to be a lot of appeasement.


ND: Unfortunately, there is no united policy across the West with regard to radical Islam. I believe the reason is there are so many Muslim countries around the world and many of them are oil rich and use oil as a weapon blackmailing Western countries. Appease them and assimilate them. Under Shariah, one of the major threats of a Muslim head of state is jihad. There is a law in Shariah law that says the head is to move Muslims to establish their religion. He must organize jihad against non-Muslim countries. They must be conquered. Why the West is in denial, I do not know. That is why I wrote the book, to inform the average Westerner what Shariah is. The book deals with all aspects of Shariah, what jihad is, and the obligations of Muslims to kill Jews and Christians and any non-Muslims in the jihad to who do not accept Islam.


That is why, unfortunately, when a Muslim leader stands up for Israel, he is labeled an apostate because he is doing something against his own Islamic law. A Muslim head of state must continue the Jihad against non-Muslim countries, especially those who neighbor a Muslim country. When President Sadat signed a peace treaty with Israel, he was assassinated. The reason was he violated Islamic law which demanded he be at permanent war with a non-Muslim adjacent state. This is happening everywhere. In India, Kosovo, Chechnya. If the West stays in denial, we will see the same in France.


RT: How can the average citizen get involved in understanding Islamic Law and how it is going to affect them and their way of life?


ND: It is very important that we separate the law of Islam from the religion of Islam. You see, a religion is private. When a minority comes to a country, they have a relationship with their god. The minute they begin to enforce a law on that country, that act goes into the realm of politics. It goes into the realm of the law of the land. That also violates our separation of church and state, the separation of mosque and state. The West doesn’t understand that under Shariah law, there is no separation of mosque and state. The mosque is the state and the state is the mosque. The West which prides itself on freedom and democracy, freedom of speech, equal rights for women and minorities, they have to understand that this is not a religious right. Muslims will say you are depriving them of their religious rights. No, you are not. This is political Islam. It has nothing to do with a personal relationship with God. It is about trying to control the country which they have immigrated to. America has fought so hard for women’s rights – are we going to start honor killings? There was an honor killing of two beautiful young girls in Texas by their father who was from Egypt, a taxi driver. He was not caught because he left the country. There are so many horrible laws. We must never think this is a religion because the duty of a religion is to protect you with rights. A religion doesn’t discriminate and torture and that is a violation of your rights, a violation of church and state.


A majority of Muslims are much like everyone else. What I am talking about is not the people – the problem is the law which discriminates and oppresses. There are so many oppressed people in the Muslim world. Look at the eyes of the people in the West Bank of Gaza or in Iraq or Egypt. The bottom line in every society is the law. Under Islamic Shariah law, the testimony of a woman is half that of a man. If a man and a woman go to court, guess who wins? This is what I am talking about – I’m not talking about the people, I’m talking about the law. If people don’t have justice under the law, they are living in a jungle. There are stocks and bonds sold from Islamic countries in American called Shariah finance. The profits from such financial deals go in the pockets of those Muslim countries. They use these profits to enforce Shariah law across Africa and other poor countries.


RT: Do most Muslims outside the political hierarchy understand and support Shariah law? Or would they like to see an end to it?


ND: There are some movements against Shariah, but they are calling them apostates and killing them. Unfortunately, under Islamic law, in all the books of Shariah, to deny Shariah is equal to denying Islam. The penalty is death. That is why there is no feminist movement in the Muslim world. I know two feminists in the Middle East, one in Egypt and one in Baharain. The one in Baharain was advocating divorce. She is now prevented from speaking or writing. The one in Egypt has a fatwah against her and had to leave the country because she could not protect herself.


RT: What do you think it would take to stop the encroachment of Islamic law into the West?


ND: The West must understand what Islamic law is without political correctness. The dictatorships in the Middle East are the creation of Shariah law. The only thing the West wants from the Middle East is an honest transaction of here is our dollars, give us your oil, but the Muslim world wants to blackmail the West to convert it to Islam. It is a very high price for oil.


RT: Why do you think non-Muslims, with all the information out there regarding Shariah law, are ignoring the warning signs?


ND: My book is the first book ever to explain Shariah. hariah books themselves are rarely translated into English and very few people want to go into the legal terminologies. I studied for one year to be able to explain Shariah in a way that it is understandable. I did a lot of quotations from Shariah and explained them. It is all documented. The West must wake up and start understanding because Shariah law says that for Muslims it is obligatory to lie if the purpose of the lie is the furtherance of Islam. Many Muslims don’t even know what Shariah law is exactly. They have lived under it for so many years.


RT: Do you believe that, under any circumstance, Shariah law and Western law can co-exist?


ND: No It is totally opposite and if we allow it among Muslims it is not going to end there.


RT: We have had several instances in the United States where Muslims sued their employers for prayer times during work hours, cab drivers refusing to carry passengers with alcohol….


ND: That is how they operate. You have women who want to cover their faces to get a driver’s license. You cannot bend the rules. The police must be able to look at your face and your license to identify you. So what do they want? They want to completely abolish our laws and put in their own laws. It doesn’t work this way.


RT: How does the “peaceful Muslim”, who says they don’t advocate the violent teaching of the Koran, reconcile their beliefs?


ND: I don’t understand. I personally cannot reconcile my beliefs, which is why I left Islam. It is very clear that Jews and Christians are infidels. The Koran has very derogatory words for them. Muslims are ordered not to talk to them, that they are filth. Some Muslims just do the five pillars of Islam – to pray and to fast… To them, that is their religion, which is very minimal and they are happy with those five pillars. They ignore 99% of their religion and only concentrate on the prayer. When something like 9/11 happens, they are silent because they know if they speak out against Jihad, they become apostates. That is why so many Americans are left wondering why are they silent. As much as they might be good people and citizens, they don’t commit crimes, by being silent against the tyranny of radical Islam, they are really feeding the monster. They are not standing up against it.


RT: What are your thoughts on the situation in Israel and what do you think Israel must do to stop Hamas?


ND: It is rooted in Shariah. Why is it an eternal problem for Muslims? Why do they want to destroy Israel? Many Muslims don’t want to tell you the truth. They don’t want to tell you it is their intention to destroy Israel completely. Jews have rooted themselves under Islam. Islamic law does not want them to govern themselves in the Middle East. Muslims these days don’t want to say it is their holy laws to totally eradicate Israel. They complain of occupation. Israel left Gaza. In response, Gaza took all their missiles to the border and started bombing Israel again. This is something the West doesn’t understand. At the end of every Friday prayer, I used to always hear that the Jews and the Christians must be destroyed. This is something we grew up hearing every day. It is such a radical system.


RT: Is there anything we haven’t touched on that you would add for our readers?


ND: The dynamic of the Muslim family, because of polygamy, is very different. Giving one man/one woman marriage has given them [women] respect and honor. If you start giving away the one man/one woman marriage in the West, we give away our future. The reason the Muslim world is so angry is because the Muslim marriage has no dignity and it humiliateswomen. A Muslim woman is so insecure in her marriage and there is no trust between the family members. That is why the Christian marriage and family unit is the most blessed thing America has.


RT: Thank you so much, Nonie, for your valuable insights into Shariah Law and how it threatens us right here in America, too. We are most grateful to you for your candor and courage.


ND: Thank you.


The book is titled Cruel and Usual Punishment: The Terrifying Global Implications of Islamic Law, Cruel and Usual Punishment: The Terrifying Global Implications of Islamic Lawavailable from Amazon.com and other booksellers. For more, visit www.arabsforisrael.com.
taken from B'NAI ELIM (http://bnaielim.blogspot.com/)

Roadside Rambles: Rally- Part III

Roadside Rambles: Rally- Part III

Roadside Rambles: Rally- Part II

Roadside Rambles: Rally- Part II

Roadside Rambles: Rally- Part I

Roadside Rambles: Rally- Part I

WHAT HEZBULLAH CAN TEACH US ABOUT HAMAS



The Rambam (Maimonides), the 12th century rabbinical giant, outlines the stages one must go through to do Tshuva, repentance. Among others stages, one must recognize what one has done wrong, sincerely regret it, take upon oneself never to repeat the transgression and be tested. It's that last stage which is interesting: it cannot be said that a sinner has truly repented until he or she has withstood the temptation of doing it again.


I mention this for what it tells us about human nature. NOT because I regard Hezbullah as having done repentance of any sort.


However: it was a telling event, this morning, when someone not from Hezbullah shot katyushas at Nahariya.


At the end of the war of summer 2006 Hezbullah celebrated its great victory over Israel. That in itself proves nothing. Nasser's Egypt celebrated its victory on the 7th day of the Six Day War: so what. And in Gaza, even if the IDF ends up killing all of the Hamas fighters but leaves three fellows still alive, they'll loudly declare victory. Hezbullah's claim in August 2006, however, was more than hollow declarations, in that the war really had been something of a draw.


After the celebrations, however, there were indications Nassrallah had a clearer idea of reality than he'd been pretending. He admitted in an interview that had he foreseen the vehemence of the Israeli onslaught he'd never have provoked it. He lives underground, rarely appearing in public. Most interestingly, the past two weeks he has been fulminating against Israel (and Egypt), but fulminations are sterile. For all his bravado, he never lifted a finger to assist Hamas when they could have used it.


Michael Totten suggests we read Tony Badran's analysis of what happened today, and since Badran knows about Lebanon and I don't, I won't argue with him when he says Hezbullah had to know about the intention to shoot those katyushas this morning. However, his thesis seems to be that the Iranians had to have somebody make some gesture from Lebanon, so they chose a minor player to make a minor gesture in a way that would give major deniability. This suggests a wariness in provoking Israel that is very healthy. It stems, I'm guessing, both from the pain inflicted in 2006, and the frightening demonstration this time that Israel has gotten its act together.

It's a bit weird to read a rocket attack on Israel as a positive sign, I admit, but the world is often a weird place, since it's populated by people.


All of this has been an introduction to some thoughts about the cease fire in Gaza which seems to be approaching, one way or the other.


I'm in favor. As a matter of fact, I'm in favor irrespective of the minutiae of the details of the agreement, although I hope the details will be the right ones. The reason I'm almost automatically in favor, however, is that it looks like this time we won, and the important players all know it.


The single most important player is Israeli society. We proved to ourselves that after the fiasco of 2006 we got back on our feet and proceeded to fix what needed fixing; having done so, we regained the confidence to defend ourselves efficiently. Since our enemies aren't about to disappear, our renewed confidence in our abilities is very important.

The second important player is Palestinian society. This is the second time in six years that we've demonstrated to them the limits of our patience, and our ability and willingness to act very forcefully when they cross those limits. I'll say it in the most black-and-white way possible: When we really get fed up we're very nasty, we're united in being nasty, and world opinion washes off our back like water off a duck. Yet the Palestinians, unlike the rest of the world, see us close up. Listen to all those Gazans as they damn us when we kill civilians. They keep on saying things like "the Israelis see we're civilians, they knew it's a school, how come they didn't behave as expected and refrain from shooting?" You've never heard Iraqi or Afghanistani victims using that sort of reasoning when mourning their dead.


The Palestinians have thus seen us close up for worse but also for better, and may have a clearer understanding of us than the world's media does.


My point is that the relative tranquility in the West Bank these past two weeks as we've been pummeling Gaza must mean something; moreover, if you listen to Avi Issacharoff and others who know what they're talking about, it may just be possible that many Gazans, too, have understood that Hamas is never going to lead them anywhere they'd like to go. If they follow the Hezbullah model, this may mean they'll continue to fulminate, but they'll hesitate to shoot. Palestinian laws mandate Palestinian elections sometime this year. I don't know if Hamas will allow them to happen, but if they do, perhaps they'll lose?


The final major player is Barack Hussein Obama. Ultimately, should it ever come to it, Israel can and will resist even an American president if he tries to force us to do something we really don't want to do. As I never tire of saying, the Jews are the oldest living group in the world because they insist on it; as a general statement, however, it hasn't hurt that they've often had a good understanding of power structures around them.

When it comes to forging reality, the Guardianistas are impotent. They pontificate, but no-one listens. The same goes for the UN, the EU, and the International Boy Scouts. Not so the President of the United States. He does make a difference. I don't know what the events in Gaza mean for Obama, any more than any of you do. We'll have to wait and see.

taken from : Yaacov Lozowick's Ruminations (http://yaacovlozowick.blogspot.com/)

A COUNTRY AT WAR




Israel is at war. Battling to destroy Hamas, a band of evil people bent on killing and destroying as many Jews as they can. What does a country at war look like? How do people feel? What are Israelis’ reactions to the situation where thousands of soldiers are called up to the front, and where the Jew-haters fire missiles into areas that are closer and closer inland? (The fact that they have been firing missiles onto Jews and their homes, kindergartens, shops, streets for years, even before the Disengagement, and why this has not really bothered most people, is for another time.) I’ll give you a taste of what it’s like to be living in a country that’s at war.


Everywhere you go, you hear people worrying about the ‘Southerners’ - the Israelis who live in the south of Israel, which is the main focus of the missiles from our enemies in ‘Aza (Gaza).


When the news comes on on the news, the bus driver turns up the volume, and everyone is totally silent until it’s over (that’s really something for a busful of Israelis)


Army Radio played ‘Shir Lama’alot, Esa Einay el Heharim…’ (’A Psalm of Ascents; I raise my eyes to the mountains…’) the other day, in support of the soldiers and the residents of the south, and perhaps as some sort of prayer for them.


I also heard Army Radio broadcasting a short interview with the mother of a soldier who had been injured in the war. Her main message: it was miraculous that he was only injured as much as he was injured: thank G-d.


Everywhere you go, you see banners and posters declaring support of the IDF and of the residents from the south.


Also on the radio: a software company started a website where families from the south can be paired up with ‘adopting’ families from other areas, so that they can get some peace and quiet from the terror and anxiety and worry of living in a place where at any moment a missile could land on your roof or head. Families can apply anonymously if they wish.


An initiative of the Chief Rabbi of Rechovot pairs volunteers with soldiers who are in the battlefield, where the volunteer gets the soldier’s Hebrew name, and prays and does Mitzvot as a merit of protection for that soldier. (Want to participate? Send an email to maortlmo@gmail.com )


Organizations are bringing southern residents into the centre of the country for visits, to stay for a while, to take their minds off the situation… Individuals are actively getting involved too.
People are praying for the soldiers’ safety and success, and for the safety of the residents of the south.


I feel a sense of great unity of purpose amongst Israelis of all types and leanings, in the justice and necessity of this war.


Do you have a special story about the war, about a heartwarming response to the situation of the Israelis in the south, or about a strong supportive gesture for the soldiers? Add it in a comment!
May our beloved soldiers succeed in stamping out all evil in ‘Aza, and in destroying our enemies. May they bring calm and tranquility over all of our Land, and may G-d protect and safeguard our soldiers and all our brothers and sisters, precious Jews, especially those in the south, within range of the missiles that our enemies are firing at us.
taken from : Tzipiyah.com

HEROES






“AFTER WATCHING the rosh yeshiva of the high school being interviewed about their son, the Netanels go into their house. I am left standing outside alone with Yonatan’s father, Rabbi Amos, and what am I going to say? Anything I can think of is just going to demean the worth of their beautiful child. But thank God the tears come and I break down and he holds me. So instead of me comforting him, he comforts me.



“God does not give us trials we cannot withstand. The ways of the Redemption are hidden from us, but it’s still the Redemption.”



Some call them simpletons, but those who know them can only thank God that people like these exist in our world. “


taken from : Tzipiyah.com

UNIVERSAL TORAH : VAYECHI

UNIVERSAL TORAH: VAYECHI

By Rabbi Avraham Greenbaum


Torah Reading: VAYECHI Gen. 47:28-50:26. Haftara: I Kings 2:1-12.


AND JACOB LIVED.


"And Jacob lived in the land of Egypt seventeen years" (Gen. 47:28). These were "good" years (17 is the gematria of TOV = "good") as opposed to the first one hundred and thirty years of Jacob's 147-year life. The first hundred and thirty years were riddled with suffering. Through the suffering Jacob endured while struggling to build his family, the House of Israel, he rectified Adam's 130 years of separation from Eve (see Rashi on Genesis 4:25), during which Adam wasted his seed and created demons, instead of peopling the world with Bney Adam.

G-d's first command to Adam was "Be fruitful and multiply and fill the earth and conquer it" (Gen. 1:28). As explained by Rabbi Nachman (Likutey Moharan II:7), this commandment is fulfilled not by producing anthropoid monsters but by giving birth to, raising and educating true Children of Adam, who bear the TZURAH ("form") of ADAM, who was made "in the image of G-d".


Ever since Adam and Eve ate the fruit of the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil, their generations were flawed. Cain killed Abel, Canaan sodomized Noah, the Sodomites wanted to sodomize the angels, the kings of Egypt and of the Philistines and the crown prince of Shechem kidnapped women, Ishmael lived by the sword, Esau was a rapist.

Only Jacob was SHALEM, "Whole" or "Perfect" (Gen. 32:18): Jacob bore the true TZURAH of ADAM, of whom it is said: "And upon the likeness of the throne was a likeness having the appearance of ADAM upon it from above" (Ezekiel 1:26). When man perfects himself, G-d shines through him and is thus revealed in the world.


Jacob is sometimes called Yaakov, sometimes Yisrael. Yaakov is "small" ("Yaakov her SMALL son" Gen. 27:15; "How will Yaakov rise, for he is SMALL" Amos 7:5). In his "small" aspect -- his time of struggle and suffering (MOCHIN D'KATNUS, "constricted consciousness") -- Jacob signifies that the revelation of G-d is as yet incomplete and is still proceeding in stages. But Yisrael, Israel, is Jacob's name of greatness -- "for you have struggled with G-d and with men and you have prevailed" (Gen. 32:29).In his "great" aspect (MOCHIN D'GADLUS, "expanded consciousness") Jacob -- Israel -- signifies that G-d's greatness is revealed and manifest in the world.


This was the case at the time of the Exodus from Egypt and the Giving of the Torah, when the entire world shook with G-d's self-revelation. It was the case during the reigns of King David and his son Solomon, who built the Holy Temple in Jerusalem. And it will be the case again in the near future, when G-d's House of Prayer for All the Nations will stand in the center of the world on Mount Moriah in the Holy City of Jerusalem. [The intensity of the hatred in much of the world today for all that goes by the name of Israel signifies how far the world is from HaShem. But "the people that go in darkness will see great light and those who dwell in the land of the shadow of death, light has shone upon them" (Isaiah 9:11).]


Our parshah of VAYECHI puts the seal on the first of the Five Books of Moses, the book of Genesis (Bereishis), portraying Jacob, the rectified Adam, in his "good" years at the end of his life. They are good years, because Jacob is now reunited with Joseph, who is in his place of true glory ruling over Egypt. Jacob's main love was essentially for Rachel. It was for her that he served Laban, and it was because Joseph was Rachel's firstborn that "Israel loved Joseph out of all his sons" (Gen. 37:3). While Leah signifies the "hidden realm", Rachel signifies G-d's glory revealed in and through this world. This comes about when Jacob-Israel (=ADAM, the Soul complete with its Nefesh, Ru'ach and Neshamah levels) conquers Esau (=the Serpent, ASIYAH, the realm of material activity), using this world to build a sanctuary for G-d.


Our parshah of VAYECHI also contains a number of specific allusions to the Temple in Jerusalem, as in Jacob's blessing to Judah (Gen. 49:11) and especially his blessing to Benjamin (ibid. v. 27). The Temple Altar stood in the territory of Benjamin, son of Rachel. Thus in Jacob's funeral procession, his twelve sons carried him up to the Land of Israel in the same positions in which their descendents the twelve tribes encamped around the Sanctuary in the Wilderness. Jacob and his sons, the House of Israel, are the Sanctuary in which G-d dwells in the world. "And I will dwell within them" (Exodus 25:8).


* * *


HEAR O ISRAEL!


Jacob spent the final "good" years of his life fulfilling the commandment to be spiritually fruitful -- by educating the young, especially his grandson Ephraim (see Rashi on Gen. 48:1: "Ephraim was habitually with Jacob learning"). Jacob'sfinal blessings, will and testament to his sons, with their harsh chastisements, were also intended to be educational.


According to tradition, "At the time when Jacob our father assembled his sons in Egypt at the hour of his death, he commanded and spurred them on in the unification of the name of G-d and that they should follow the path of HaShem that Abraham and Isaac his father walked. He asked them and said, 'My sons, maybe someone among you is flawed and does not stand with me in the Unification of the Name.?' They all answered and said, 'Hear Israel HaShem our G-d HaShem is One' -- that is, 'Hear from us, our father Israel, HaShem our G-d HaShem is one'. The old man answered 'Blessed be the Name of the Glory of His Kingship for ever and ever!' And this is why all Israel has the custom of repeating the expression of the praise used by Israel when he was an old man after this verse". (Rambam, Laws of Recital of Shema Ch. 1:4).


* * *


JACOB'S BLESSINGS


Jacob's death-bed blessings to his sons contain some of the most beautiful flights of Biblical poetry. It is noteworthy that Onkelos, author of the best-known Aramaic Targum (= "translation") of the Five Books of Moses, departs here from his usual practice of giving the simplest, clearest PSHAT (= "simple meaning") of the Biblical text except where DRUSH, Midrash, "searching out" beneath the surface is absolutely indispensable. However here, as in the case of some other highly poetic passages (the Song at the Sea, Bilaam's blessings, the Song of Moses -- HA-AZINU -- and his final blessings), Onkelos felt obliged to introduce MIDRASH into his Targum in order to bring out the essential meaning of the text, which contains allusions to all historical periods and especially the time of Mashiach.


Thus it is Onkelos who informs us that SHILOH (Gen. 49:10) is Mashiach. The Tribes are compared to various animals. Judah is a lion, Issachar is a wide-boned donkey, Dan is a serpent, Naftali a gracious hind, Benjamin a preying fox. In the case of Jacob's children, the animal qualities are elevated in order to destroy the wicked and give the victory to G-d. Thus Onkelos translates Gen. 49:14-15 as: "Yissachar will be wealthy in possessions and his inheritance is between the boundaries. And he saw that his share is good and that the land produces fruits. And he conquered the territories of the nations and destroyed their inhabitants and those who remain of them will serve him and pay him taxes." Onkelos translates the blessing of Benjamin (v. 49:27: "Benjamin is a preying fox, in the morning he devours the prey, in the evening he divides the prey") as: "In the land of Benjamin the Shechinah will dwell (= TISHREI) and in his inheritance the Holy Temple will be built, in the morning and in the afternoon the priests will offer sacrifices and in the evening they will divide the rest of their portions from the other offerings".


Onkelos himself was a GER TZEDEK ("righteous convert"). He was the son of the sister of the Roman Emperor Titus." It is said that before Onkelos converted, he raised the spirits of Titus, Balaam, and Yeshu from hell in order to find out the truth. All three confirmed that the nation of Israel is held in the highest repute in the world to come (Gittin 56b, 57a). Onkelos learned Torah from Rabbi Eliezer ben Hyrcanus ("Rabbi Eliezer the Great") and Rabbi Yehoshua, who were outstanding students of Rabban Yochanan ben Zakkai and were also the teacher-partners of Rabbi Akiva. Onkelos' Targum is the first and most authoritative "commentary" on the Torah.

* * *

AND THE DWELLER OF THE LAND OF THE CANAANITE SAW.

When Joseph went up with his brothers to bury Jacob, "they came to the threshing floor of Atad (= bramble)" (Gen. 50:10). According to Rashi, "It was surrounded by brambles. All the kings of Canaan and princes of Ishmael came to war, but when they saw the crown of Joseph hung on Jacob's ARON (= Ark), they all stood and hung their crowns and surrounded him with crowns from the threshing-floor which was surrounded by a fence of brambles.

The kings and Canaan and princes of Ishmael were confounded by the ARON, the holy ark of Jacob, crowned with the crown of Joseph.


According to tradition, this took place on during Chanukah-time. Jacob's HISTALKUS (ascent) was on 15th Tishri, the first night of Succos. The Egyptians wept for him seventy days, upon which Joseph and his brothers went up to Israel to bury him. The seventieth day after 15th of Tishri is 25th Kislev, the first day of Chanukah. The initial letters of the four Hebrew words in the verse "and the dweller of the land of the Canaanite saw" are the permutation of the name of HaShem that holds sway in the month of Kislev (see Kavanos of Rosh Chodesh Musaf prayers).
There is an integral conceptual connection between Jacob's funeral procession and Chanukah, which is the time of the inauguration of the Temple. Jacob's twelve sons, the holy House of Israel, under the leadership of Joseph the Tzaddik, were taking Jacob -- the archetypal House-Builder -- to his final, eternal house and home in the Cave of Machpelah, the resting place of Adam and Eve as well as the patriarchs and matriarchs.


The funeral procession was a "rehearsal" for the formation in which the twelve tribes would would bring the Ark of the Covenant up from the wilderness and into the Holy Land. This is paradigmatic of the building of the Holy Temple, the House of G-d on the spot where Jacob had his dream of the ladder: "This is none other than the House of G-d and this is the Gate of Heaven" (Gen. 28:17). That place is alluded to in the opening word of the Torah, BEREISHIS, the letters of which, when re-arranged, spell out BAYIS ROSH, the House that is Head (=Tefilin shel Rosh). It was to that place that Joseph promised his brothers that they would return from Egypt: "G-d will surely redeem you and bring you up from this land to the Land which He swore to Abraham, to Isaac and to Jacob" (Gen. 50:24).


CHAZAK! CHAZAK! VE-NIS-CHAZEK!"Be strong! Be strong -- and we will be strong!"


Shabbat Shalom!


Avraham Yehoshua Greenbaum


--AZAMRA INSTITUTEPO Box 50037 Jerusalem 91500 IsraelWebsite: www.azamra.org

Thursday, 8 January 2009

The Barnyard: The Real Issue: Gaza is Jewish#links#links

The Barnyard: The Real Issue: Gaza is Jewish#links#links

Israel Matzav: Video: IDF soldiers with captured weapons and terrorists#links#links#links#links#links

Israel Matzav: Video: IDF soldiers with captured weapons and terrorists#links#links#links#links#links

Israel Matzav: Video: How Hamas operates within a civilian population#links#links#links#links#links

Israel Matzav: Video: How Hamas operates within a civilian population#links#links#links#links#links

Israel Matzav: Nizar Riyyan's suicide complex#links#links

Israel Matzav: Nizar Riyyan's suicide complex#links#links

Israel Matzav: Breaking: Concern over Katyusha fire on Jerusalem, Judea and Samaria#links#links

Israel Matzav: Breaking: Concern over Katyusha fire on Jerusalem, Judea and Samaria#links#links

Israel Matzav: IDF warns Philadelphi corridor residents to flee#links#links

Israel Matzav: IDF warns Philadelphi corridor residents to flee#links#links

Israel Matzav: Video: Hamas Lebanese rep urges loyal 'Israeli Arabs' to shake Israel's foundations#links#links#links#links#links

Israel Matzav: Video: Hamas Lebanese rep urges loyal 'Israeli Arabs' to shake Israel's foundations#links#links#links#links#links

Israel Matzav: Video: Grad Katyusha rocket hits Be'er Sheva#links#links#links

Israel Matzav: Video: Grad Katyusha rocket hits Be'er Sheva#links#links#links
Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...