The Zionist Conspiracy |
|
|
A clandestine undertaking on behalf of Israel, the Jets and the Jews. 
|
Monday, February 26, 2007
The Orthomom Controversy I haven't commented about the lawsuit involving Orthomom, because many others have expressed most of my sentiments. But I will add two thoughts: First, while I agree that Pamela Greenbaum's legal action is almost certainly meritless and is the wrong way to react to being insulted, I also believe that it is worthwhile to reflect on the nastiness that has infected the Jblogosphere. People routinely call each other names and ridicule and attack people with whom they disagree. There is an extraordinary amount of immaturity in how people deal with others on blogs and other Internet forums. One of the best things about not being anonymous is that when I have crossed the line, I have been held accountable for what I have written. People have confronted me with what I wrote about them. In some instances, I believed what I wrote to have been fair criticism, and I explained my position to those who felt wronged. In other situations, I agreed that I was wrong, apologized, and revised the offending material. Overall, this has caused me to think twice (and three times) before criticizing someone, and I think this is to my betterment, and to the betterment of this blog. My second comment is about the pending litigation. Yes, I agree that it is probably without merit. That said, much of the legal opinion presented on Jblogs has been offbase and shows a lack of understanding of the legal system. For example, just because something is not defamation per se does not mean that it is definitely not defamatory. Just because a statement is almost certainly opinion does not mean that it will be immediately dismissed as a matter of law, and that a Judge might not authorize discovery to find out whether what was written was protected opinion or could have had malicious motivation. Just because five Judges would go one way does not mean a sixth Judge couldn't go the other way. The bottom line is that litigation is unpredictable. I am not sure that those who have Orthomom's interests in mind have done her any favors in suggesting the opposite. We Must Withdraw From Iraq The Bush Administration has had more than enough time to come up with some sort of coherent strategy in Iraq. It remains as clueless as ever. The notion that 20,000 more troops will save the day even as our allies diminish the number of their soldiers stationed in Iraq is irrational. How many of us even know who our allies and who our enemies are? Do we support the Sunnis or the Shiites? Does it depend on the day? There is no reason for the U.S. to maintain an occupation force in Iraq. It is immoral to send soldiers there to die or be permanently maimed. Military families have already paid an obscene price for this abomination. We must begin to withdraw immediately. Withdrawal of all ground forces does not mean that the U.S. should allow Iran, al Qaeda and other enemies to take control of Iraq. The Bush Administration and Congress must find ways to protect U.S. interests in Iraq - and the region generally - without resorting to a failed and endless occupation. Thursday, February 22, 2007
Archives When I returned from hiatus, Blogger immediately forced me to switch to New Blogger. That caused my archives to disappear because the archives text on my ancient 2003 template is not compatible with New Blogger. I refuse to change my template, both because I like the retro/classic look of this blog, and also because if I do I believe I would lose all of my old (Haloscan) comments. While I haven't been able to figure out how to restore the full list of archives, I have added an archives menu to the template, which apparently does work with New Blogger. So archives are once again accessible. This likely is not important to any remaining readers I have, but access to my nearly 1200 posts is meaningful to me. 27 Years After The Miracle Maybe being a sports fan is a silly waste of time. At the very least nobody can deny that there are many more important things in the world and in one's life. Yet certain great moments in sports will remain cherished memories. I didn't see the USA vs. USSR 1980 Olympics semifinals game, which occurred early on Friday night 27 years ago today. But I had been home sick throughout the 1980 Winter Olympics, spending my days watching bobsledding and the hockey victories, and my nights watching Eric Heiden's incredible five gold medals in speedskating. I was eagerly anticipating the game against the Soviets. When I brought the Times into the house early on shabbos morning and saw the good news, I was happy and excited. But not surprised. Having recently turned seven years old, and not yet having suffered through decades of sports disasters, I had been naive enough to think that the good guys were going to win. Celebrating 73 Dead IDF Soldiers Yesterday was the 10th anniversary in the Hebrew calendar of the February 1997 collision of two IDF helicopters, resulting in the loss of 73 IDF soldiers on their way to southern Lebanon. The crash was a national tragedy, and was one of the catalysts for the erosion in national support for Israel's presence in southern Lebanon, eventually resulting in Israel's withdrawal in 2000. One of my law school classmates was a Lebanese Christian. During the first year of law school, I'd often talk about the Middle East with him and Avi, a modern Orthodox classmate. Basically, our Arab friend said that he was interested in business opportunities. He seemed like a moderate Arab who could accept Israel. By the time Yigal Amir murdered Prime Minister Rabin during my second year of law school, my Lebanese classmate was a bit less of a moderate, but not quite an extremist. He asked me if I was celebrating the murder. Of course not, I told him. He said he thought Orthodox Jews all wanted Rabin dead. As for him, he said he had mixed feelings. On one hand, Rabin was an Israeli leader and on that basis, he was happy to see him dead. On the other hand, Rabin was leading the peace process, and he wanted the peace process to succeed. Most other Arabs, he assured me, were simply happy that Rabin was dead, and even happier that it was a fellow Israeli who had killed him. He told me he was happy that I opposed the murder and supported the peace process, as opposed to the Likud fanatics. I explained that while I opposed the murder and supported the principle of a peace process, I thought Oslo was a sham and was a Likud supporter. That didn't seem to make any sense to him. If I opposed Oslo, why was I so upset about the Rabin murder? After Binyamin Netanyahu was elected prime minister shortly after the end of our second year, my classmate's politics took a different turn. He organized anti-Israel events under the guise of human rights, and railed against Netanyahu and Ariel Sharon, then a minister in Netanyahu's government. I told him that I understood why someone from Lebanon disliked Sharon, even if I disagreed with his depiction of Sharon as a wanton murderer. But Sharon was just a cabinet minister, not even a senior one, I assured him. After the helicopter crash, Avi and I were discussing the tragedy in the school lounge, when our Lebanese classmate overheard us and matter-of-factly expressed his delight. On an intellectual level I understood where he was coming from. Israel was the enemy. But why was he so happy about something so painful to us? Didn't he understand that the soldiers were just boys with parents, siblings, friends? I didn't expect him to mourn or even to empathize, but was disappointed that he was celebrating. I didn't express these thoughts, but he must have sensed them. Later, he approached me to tell me that his excitement was nothing personal, explaining that while Avi was a nice guy, he had been an IDF soldier, and he (i.e. the Lebanese fellow) would kill him on the battlefield if he had the chance. I thought it was bizarre that he felt the need to say that. A month later, as I was driving to school, I heard on the radio that a Jordanian soldier had murdered 7 Israeli schoolgirls. As I walked into the school building, there was my Arab classmate, taking up a large table on the first floor of the law school with a protest about Israel's purported human rights abuses against Palestinian children. I sent out a mass e-mail to the entire school, asking whether anyone cared about the human rights of the Israeli girls who had been shot dead. There was a bit of back-and-forth e-mail debate, along with some angry debate between me (and a few other Jewish students) and a number of Arab students. I knew that most of the students in school resented the intrusion to their e-mail. I was really trying to resonate with my fellow Jewish students, who disproportionately seemed to take a special interest in the Arab propaganda. My classmate approached me to discuss the matter. He insisted that the murder of the schoolgirls was a Mossad conspiracy to take some international pressure off Netanyahu. I told him that I saw no point in discussing the Middle East with him anymore. I last saw my classmate during bar review the summer after graduation. He asked me if I would be spending time "in Tel Aviv" after the bar. I told him that I hoped to go to Israel before starting my working life, but that I would probably stay in Jerusalem. "Maybe one day we'll meet in Jerusalem and have some shawarma and hummus," he said. Wednesday, February 21, 2007
Nets Malaise Are the Nets about to give away Jason Kidd and Vince Carter in a massive salary dump for a bunch of expiring contracts? While I can understand trying to trade Carter even for much less than equal value, the only possible explanation for trading Kidd would be that owner Bruce Ratner has decided to stop losing millions on the Nets, even as he stands to make hundreds of millions on his Atlantic Yards project. The Nets' prospective move to Brooklyn was, of course, the trojan horse used by Ratner to gain support for Atlantic Yards. What's so frustrating about all of this is that before dismantling their team, the Nets could try changing coaches. It's obvious that Lawrence Frank is not motivating his players. The Nets' best course would be to replace Frank if things don't turn around during this remainder of the 2006-07 season. Monday, February 19, 2007
Shabbat And Non-Frum Jews Recently, Jewboy ripped Uri Orbach for Orbach's recent Ynet article asking his secular friends not to come over on Shabbat. According to Jewboy, "the attitude exhibited in this piece can be described as arrogant, juvenile, antagonistic, and ignorant ... to demonstrate such hostility to secular Jews in today's day and age is simply unforgivable." I do not agree with Jewboy, as I told him in the comments to his blog. I do not think Orbach was expressing any hostility to secular Jews. Indeed, Orbach emphasizes that he has many secular friends. Furthermore, Orbach is known as a religious Zionist Israeli who believes that dati and chiloni Israelis (and those in the middle) have much in common and are all part of one nation. (See this article, for example.) Orbach requested that his secular friends "stop by on Sunday, Monday, and bring all of your kids with you. But not on Shabbat. It's too complicated." I think Jewboy and most of the other critics of Orbach's piece are well-meaning, but make the mistake of equating Orbach's request with a rejection of kiruv - Jewish outreach. I'm all for kiruv. When it comes to kiruv, awkward things happen, such as lights being turned off or a cell phone ringing. But those things result from innocent mistakes; it is pretty clear that the rules are those of the frum hosts, and the non-frum guests understand and accept this. Orbach is talking about something else - secular friends or family coming over with no intention of "playing by the rules" of shabbos. Orbach isn't demanding that they observe shabbos in his home and play by his rules. Instead, he's simply suggesting that they visit another day. Even live-and-let-live observant Jews who accept that their secular friends have no interest in going to shul would be quite discomfited if those friends come into their home and use their phone, their microwave, or their DVD during shabbos. It takes away from their own observance of shabbos - or at least they feel it does. Kiruv aside, shabbos and the many rules related to its observance can result in tensions when frum and non-frum people get together. What happens when a non-frum relative wants to drive to a bar mitzvah or shabbos bris and is told not to? Why is it that many baal teshuvas find it better to be somewhere other than their parents' home on shabbos? Often these issues can't be avoided. When it comes to family, perhaps it's worthwhile to try to find common ground. But when it comes to social visits from friends, coming over on Tuesday can solve lots of potential problems. Friday, February 16, 2007
Beth Samuels This post contains quotes from conversations that occurred in 1995. While I can represent that the quotes are substantially accurate, they are based on my memory and therefore are paraphrased. During interview week before the start of my second year of law school, I mentioned to a classmate that I was interested in participating in Columbia's Wednesday night learning program. Wednesday night learning was from 8:00-9:00 P.M., and I would be taking Rabbi Saul Berman's Jewish law class on Wednesdays from 6:00-7:40, so it seemed like a good idea. A young woman called me on the evening of September 5, 1995, saying that she heard I was interested in coming to Wednesday night learning. I told her that I'd be particularly interested in learning with a non-observant college student. "Great! We're starting tomorrow night. Just ask for me - my name is Beth Samuels." The thing is, I did want to come to Wednesday night learning, but ... tomorrow night I couldn't do it. I was busy tomorrow night. "Tomorrow night is a little difficult for me ... I need to be in Brooklyn by 8:30," I said. "You really should come tomorrow night. It's the first week of the semester. Everyone will be there." Beth said. "I guess I could come at around 7:45 but I could only stay for a few minutes. Is that okay? I can definitely be there next week, it's just tomorrow night is hard." "Sure! I'll see you tomorrow night," Beth said. I had actually thought about skipping Rabbi Berman's class, but the first class is usually important to attend. So after the class, on the evening of Wednesday September 6, 1995, I walked quickly to Earl Hall. I could only stay for a few minutes. It was one thing for me to miss the first 4 innings, but I had to be home by the 5th inning, when the Orioles vs. Angels game became official and Cal Ripken had played his record 2131st consecutive game. This was not something I could miss. I walked into Earl Hall. Couldn't miss the sidurim and chumashim next to the safe sex pamphlets. I didn't need to look for Beth. "Hi! I'm Beth," said Beth, introducing herself a few seconds after I arrived. I told her that I couldn't stay, just wanted to stop by, see what Wednesday night learning looked like, and that I'd be back there next week. Before I could say anything, she was gone. She was back two minutes later, and introduced me to my chavrusa, a guy from Pennsylvania named Steve. I didn't stay until 9, but I stayed a lot longer than a few minutes. When I got home the last out of the top of the 5th had been made. The celebration and ceremonies had started around 10 minutes earlier. I made sure to come to Wednesday night learning for the full hour the next week. Actually, I had gotten into a car accident during the ensuing Saturday night, had headaches, some nausea, was a bit disoriented and had to take two trains home, but I knew I had to come, as I told Beth and Steve I would. I took a class with Rabbi Berman during both semesters of my second year of law school, and learned with Steve afterward each week. * * * During my second and third years of law school - her last two years of college - I knew Beth from Wednesday night learning and from attending mincha at Earl Hall. She was a campus leader who organized all kinds of Jewish activities. I lived in Brooklyn rather than on campus, and wouldn't say I knew her very well, but in addition to Wednesday night learning, I did talk with her a few times about shabbatons and other Jewish events she set up, and about a new organization and publication for young unaffiliated Jews that she was involved in starting up. After law school, I saw her perhaps a few times on the Upper West Side. Her name would sometimes come up - she was involved with Drisha, and was going to Yale for a PhD in math. Last month I was juggling a number of different cases on a busy Monday morning. There were depositions to prepare for, subpoenas to respond to, and motions to oppose. I remembered that I had two weddings in Brooklyn that week that I needed to be on time for. It was going to be a very long day in the office. I quickly and impatiently checked my non-work related e-mail. Yeah, the Jets lost the wildcard. Thanks for the reminder. A friend e-mailed about his trip to LA. He wrote: "I do not know if you remember a girl at Columbia who ran the learning program once a week named Beth Samuels ... She graduated and went to Drisha. Then she got married and received a Ph.D. in Math at Yale ... She was most recently a math professor at [Berkeley]. She and her husband had two kids... On Shabbos, the wife suddenly mentioned to her husband that Beth died on Friday." * * * It's almost always a shock when a 31 year old woman passes away. I thought about Beth's energy, her dynamic personality. I was very saddened by her tragic passing. It was almost unfathomable that she was no longer alive. There were still depositions to prepare for, subpoenas to respond to, and motions to oppose. It was a long day at the office but not as long a day as I thought it would be. I remembered that I had two weddings in Brooklyn that week that would keep me away from home until late. So I went home before it was too late to spend some time with my children. May Beth's family be comforted among the mourners of Zion and Jerusalem and may her memory be a blessing. | "
