BAKA DIARY

Strike Two

2009-10-05T21:19:00.003+02:00

I have a very good friend who used to bail out on virtually ALL social occasions. She couldn't explain why, and those of us in her circle of friends just gradually came to accept that Kay was a flake. Kay didn't see it that way--she found social gatherings uncomfortable and anything more than two or three people was reason to not show up.

I didn't understand it, but looking at her career, it made sense--she spent all day working as a counselor in mental health and juvenile delinquency settings, and the idea of using her leisure time to navigate through the pitfalls of social gatherings with friends, strangers, friends-of-friends and sometimes relatives was probably unappealing.

I don't have her excuse. I'm two-for-two, having missed the JBlogger Convention because of work (training day--not negotiable) and today missed the JBlogger Picnic which I've been looking forward to for a week.

Unlike Kay, I actually LIKE meeting people, and friends of friends (we'll leave relatives out of it for now, with the exception of my sister-in-law and my cousins, who are gems)and listening to other people's take on things--whether or not I agree with them.

But I got up early (0530) to get started early on work, and skipped the gym so I'd be done by 3pm, all with the intention of swinging over to Gan Sacher with my family in tow to meet with bloggers I already know and hopefully bloggers I haven't met yet.

"You guys ready?" I called, shutting down the laptop.

"Do I HAVE to go?" grumbled the teen. "I REALLY don't want to do this."

"I have a headache," the Husband muttered from the couch.

"Oh, c'mon, I've been looking forward to this all week," I remonstrated. "The weather is great, there's a sukkah, we'll stop and get burgers or a felafal so you don't have to prep or pack."

Mike rolled his eyes at me. "This is not something I really want to do...I'll go if you insist because you're my wife, but I'd rather do a lot of other things."

"I don't want to go...." the Kid announced for about the 17th time [yes, I heard you already...]

"But it's Sukkot, and I thought it would be fun to go out and do something together as a family---I want to go, but I don't want to go by myself while you guys just hang out at home...what do YOU want to do?" I asked.

"I dunno." "I dunno."

Men.

"Look, I've been glued to a computer screen for eight hours, unmoving. My eyes hurt. My muscles hurt. My back hurts. I need to GET OUT OF THE HOUSE AND DO SOMETHING!!" I explained as rationally as possible.

"Well, I understand that," my husband conceded. "What do YOU want to do, other than go hang out with a bunch of people I've never met and wouldn't have a clue how to talk to?"

"Why not? They're olim, like us, and Jewish, like us.....you don't have to talk about writing and blogs. Talk about life." I amended cheerily.

He sank lower in the couch. "I really do have a headache. I don't feel like being social."

Sigh.

We finally agreed on the (ugh) Mall -- I could use my gift card to buy books at Steimatzky's, Josh could go look for a new computer game he wants, pick up some decorations for the sukkah, and we could all sit and have a chat over iced coffees...as a family. Something we don't do often enough any more. School, work, the rush of life going by....

It was fun. Then we came home, made dinner and ate in the sukkah, and my back didn't hurt, my eyes didn't hurt and Mike's headache had gone....

So I'm sorry for acting like my flaky friend, and I realize this is the SECOND Jblogger event I've missed...but shalom bayit was important today.

Chag Sameach!

Offsides

2009-10-02T14:19:00.002+02:00

My parents tell me that when I was very little, toddling around, my father and his friends would gather to watch American football at the house during the Fall while their wives would go shopping. This meant that the men were the babysitters for the afternoon, and the toddlers learned to drink beer, eat chips, and acquired new vocabulary, like "Touchdown!"

I've been a football fan all my life as a result, and one of the nicer things about growing up in the Bay Area was going with my family to watch the Oakland Raiders slaughter, or get slaughtered, on the field weekly during The Season.

One concept I caught on to early in football fandom was "offsides." It's a tactic designed to fake your opponent into a mistake that you can capitalize on by getting him penalized. Two teams line up facing each other, with the team in possession of the ball getting ready for offensive maneuvers. The quarterback is calling a code which will signal the snap of the ball and the start of the play. The idea is to get the ball downfield in your team's possession, into the end zone, and score. The closer your team is to the end zone, the better position you're in for scoring.

"Offsides" is what happens while the count is going down. Usually one member of a team at the far end of the line will act as if the ball has gone into play by suddenly jerking, or lifting an arm off the ground, or moving in a fashion indicative of offensive or defensive behavior. He has to do this without the referee seeing him, or it's all over, because you can't deliberately fake the other team into movement. But if he gets away with this subtle movement, and the opposing team member charges across the line before the ball has been snapped, it's a penalty for that team. This is "offsides" and the penalty is that your team loses yardage and ends up in a poorer field position--making it easier for your opponent to score a touchdown.

There's a tremendous amount of willingness of the western world to hand off the ball to Israel these days. Not only does the West drag its feet regarding sanctions, but there is only lip service paid to anything remotely resembling military action, usually something vague like "all options are on the table," whatever that's supposed to mean. The general consensus seems to be, "Let the Israelis do it," while at the same time loudly warning us not to do anything rash.

Thanks for nothing, world.

Having taken out Iraqi and Syrian above-ground nuke facilities virtually next door, the world seems to think that rather than dirty its hands (and upset its trade balance), Israel should be only too happy to hit Iran's nuclear facilities and make the world safer for western interests. The argument seems to be that it's in Israel's best interest to do so, so why not subcontract the dirty work to us and not risk any blow-back from the Axis of Evil.

This is where the concept of "offsides" stops me cold.

If it's all so urgent and important that Iran be stopped from developing nuclear weapons, which they have openly stated that they intend to use against Israel, then why isn't the United Nations doing something? Isn't that the U.N. Mandate? Or why isn't NATO scrambling? Or any Coalition forces? If Iran's nukes are a threat to world peace, (and they definitely are--if Iran can get away with nuking Israel, no one is safe, folks) then why isn't the world collectively flexing its military muscle and telling Iran to stand down?

This collective pushing of Israel into military action smells like "offsides" to me. That's right -- let Israel take its best shot at taking out the almost impossible to hit, multi-site, underground reinforced nuke bunkers, and then when Iran retaliates with the nuclear device (or two, or three--that's all it would take for a country as small as ours)purchased from or donated by North Korea or the Russian mafia and delivered by its proxy Hezbollah, the world will crack its jaw yawning and utter, "oh, isn't that too bad, but Israel had it coming, after all, the Israelis started it."

I have this sense that we're being faked into moving against an opponent simply so he has the opportunity to penalize us and better his field position for the next play.

If Netanyahu were to ask me (and no, he won't) my suggestion would be that we sit tight. Don't move against Iran. Let them get their nuclear bomb (I personally agree with Bret Stevens--I think they've already purchased a couple from North Korea and have them on ice, so hitting their labs is a waste of time anyway), and then see what they do with it. I don't think even the ayatollahs have the stomach to start a nuclear war, all their bombast to the contrary. Go ahead--get your bomb and explain to your starving people that sanctions, gasoline rationing, food shortages and 300% inflation was worth it, and that's why we stole your votes, by the way.

Let them eat nukes.

Will SOMEONE Please Answer The Bird!?

2009-08-31T18:41:00.001+03:00

I was never a big fan of birds as pets. I attribute this to an unfortunate college roommate who shared a suite of rooms with me and 3 other girls. This girl, who I am ashamed to say I treated very badly in the worst post-high-school I'm-so-cool-and-you're-not way, rebuffing her attempts at friendship, purchased a cockatoo.

It was a beautiful bird.

It also awoke with the dawn, as did this roommate, along with my (room) roommate, both science majors. Science students get up early. Us liberal arts types were more likely to stay up late discussing World Hunger and how to fix it, and then sleep through breakfast.

I attributed my dislike of the bird to the hour it woke me. Six o'clock in the morning is now, after years in the work force, with children and pets, the prime of the morning. Back then, it was unholy.

I formed a dislike for this poor bird, I suspect, in part because of my desire to rebuff his owner. I was too insecure as a first year student away from home to simply accept people for who they were, and accept her puppyish uncool attempts at friendship with an open heart.

It's on that List Of Things I Wish I Could Go Back and Do Over Again.

So for years, based on that experience, I decided birds were noisy, dirty and unpleasant. In fact, this bird was none of those things--he was just a cockatoo and a rather cute, friendly one at that.

Moving from the dormitories to a shared house in our rural college town, I discovered the joy of having a yard and the agony of yard work. I also discovered that birds other than cockatoos get up with the sunrise. One in particular liked to sing up the sun first thing in the morning from the branches of a sapling immediately outside my window. At first, I groaned and buried my head under the pillow...but as the days went by, I noticed something. This bird sang with all his heart. He sang with such energy and joy that I couldn't help but smile, even though he woke me up every morning. I came to expect it, to anticipate his song, and when he went wherever birds go in the winter, I missed his song.

Then, years later, I met another woman who kept finches and canaries. I was entranced by them. They sang. They trilled and sang and the sound made my heart glad. During the Single Years, when I hiked the mountains and coasts of the West, I would often go with my best college chum who herself was a fount of knowledge about birds and their calls. She had an eye and could point out a red-tailed hawk on a fence when we were still a half-mile away. She can tell by looking at the sky if its a hawk, an eagle or a vulture, and taught me how to tell the difference. She recognized the calls of certain birds and told me what they were, whether it was the cry of a golden eagle or the cry of a marsh bird.

I started to enjoy birds. I like to listen to their calls, and watch their antics during mating and their nest-building in the spring.

When we first moved to Jerusalem, one of the first books I bought was a book about birds. I have met the Hoopoo, the bee-eater, the wagtail, the golden-bellied bulbul, and the ubiquitous black-and-tan crows of Jerusalem. I saw a bird at Ramat Rachel that rarely visits Israel, but is known to stray off the Great Flyway down the Rift Valley. I am sometimes humbled by the thought that these avians have been migrating that route probably longer than humans have.

Then we moved here, to the edge of the desert. It's quiet here because we have few trees. It's not like Baka, or Rehavia with their riot of foliage in which birds readily shelter. We have pigeons (two spectacularly beautiful examples of which I think stayed on our roof for a bit, since we heard them cooing up there for a week), and crows, but no birdsong.

Until recently.

It's not exactly bird song. But there is some song amidst the other clamor.

Someone across the street purchased a bird. We've spent weeks trying to figure out which condo the bird lives in, but he is up with his owners with the dawn, and he is happy! He trills the sun up, then starts with the rest of his repetoire. He is some kind of mynah or mocking bird or parrot which mimics human noises perfectly. In the weeks since he's taken up residence, he has broken off his song at times to whistle. He has a collection of various whistles which he has assembled from every dog owner in the area. It must confuse the dogs to hear their owners "whistle" them up and then find out they didn't....

He continually picks up new noises to mimic. A few weeks ago, I couldn't figure out what idiot kept opening and closing his car door. Who would repeatedly hit the electric locking mechanism with its dur-dur-durp crescendo?!

The bird. He now perfectly mimics the neighbor's car door which is electronically locked every night and electronically unlocked every morning....

Recently, because of the extremely warm weather, the windows have been opened to catch the breeze in the late afternoons and evenings. The Husband and I were started to get annoyed that some inconsiderate teen out on the street or in the park was constantly taking calls on his cell phone, and letting it ring and ring and ring...

"...I wish someone would pick up the phone!" I growled. After a few evenings of this, the Husband suddenly started laughing.

"What's so funny? Whoever it is should pick up their phone," I complained, as the ringing went on and on and on.

"It's not a phone," he said, grinning. "It's our neighbor--the bird has learned to mimic a cell phone.'

The next day, the bird rang and rang again. "Someone please answer the bird!" Mike said, only half in jest.

This morning, the bird didn't sing up the dawn. I was plugging away at my computer for an hour before I realized we hadn't heard his morning song. "I wonder if he's okay, " I ventured, a bit concerned.

"His owners probably decided to sleep in, so he's under cover," Mike said nonchalantly.

Sure enough, a short time later, the sunrise song burst full throated from the bird.

I've never even seen this bird. I don't know what he looks like. I don't know what kind of bird he is, but his song makes me glad every single morning, and I listen for him all the time. Every time he sings, he makes me smile. I enjoy his enjoyment of life, and while it seems a little silly to say so, I'm grateful that my neighbors brought him home where I derive some enjoyment from his singing. And even his ringing.

Coming Into The New Year

2009-08-29T21:49:00.012+03:00

Let's see, what's going on in the world?

Gilad Shalit may finally come home. Wouldn't it be great if he could celebrate the Yamim Noraim with his family?

Moody's say Israel has weathered the Financial Meltdown [we'll see if the banks and the government manage to mess it up before this is done...].

Hamas is upping their rocket and missile launches into southern Israel, while executing the Palestinians they don't like at home. Hmmmm...this is hardly even "news" anymore, although the YouTube executions are sort of a coup.....

School is starting on Tuesday, and certain schools in Petach Tikvah are playing like being Jewish is a color....hello, nobody is buying your excuses. BUT the Evil Zionist Settlers have stepped into the breach and proved themselves more menschlich than their counterparts in Petach Tikvah. In the meantime, I'm waiting to see Petach Tikvah's adherents of Jewish apartheid lose their school funding--preferably by Tuesday.

These are the same Evil Settlers who practice this kind of "apartheid." Won't see this in the Aftonbladet.....or Chron or NYT or LA Times, betcha!

Egypt weighed in with "no more Jewish building in East Jerusalem" as a condition for negotiations. [This is going to put a lot of Palestinian wage-earners out of business....maybe they can get employment with the road crews? ]

It's also pretty pointless. The Israeli government cannot stop (nor should it) private building on private land which has already been approved by the Jerusalem municipality. Owners of land, both Arab and Jewish, in East Jerusalem can sell their land to anyone they want--including developers, whether Zionist or Palestinian. Where that land has already been sold and is under development, a foreign government has no business issuing orders to stop "Jewish building." I seem to recall the same kind of laws existed in both South Africa and the pre-Civil-Rights-Act United States. In the latter it was called "segregation" and prohibited non-whites (including Jews) from buying or building in "white" areas; in South Africa, it was called "apartheid." Hosni Mubarak is conditioning peace on an apartheid policy--no Jews in would-be Arab neighborhoods (never mind that before 1948 they were our neighborhoods, too).

Lador is calling for minimum sentences for violent crimes. An excellent idea since we don't get to elect our judiciary, and its continued, misplaced leniency towards violent crime and horrendous traffic offenders is something the public is correctly outraged about. Electing our own trial judges so they are responsible to the public for their decisions would be another good move.

The kangaroo court show trials of Iranian dissidents protesting a stolen election continue, sadly without much vocal support or even notice in the obtuse western elite establishments. Is anyone going to speak up for them outside of Iran? J'accuse, world. {C'mon, Mr. President! You're the leader of the Free World. Stand up and speak out for people who only wanted their votes to count for something!}

And while they are standing trial, the Chinless One visits visits his fellow wanna-be nuclear terrorist to proclaim that "western interference" is the only reason for these protests, and that Iran and Syria must continue their policies together in the region.

And what policies would those be? The establishment of Greater Syria and a Shi'ite Caliphate at the tip of a nuclear weapon? Oh, yeah, and don't forget "Itbach al Yahood!" also, presumably, with your nuclear toys. Hey, Mr. President Obama, you just got slapped in the face in case you didn't notice. So much for holding out the hand of friendship--and meeting the clenched fist. Other countries celebrate the arrival of heads of state with a 21-gun salute. Not coincidentally, this visit corresponded with the biggest bomb and mortar attacks in Baghdad in years, with over 500 wounded and over 100 killed.....I don't believe in coincidence, particularly
al-Qaeda-looking "coincidence."

In the meantime, the Left is lamenting Obama's negative ratings in Israel while excoriating anyone who dares to suggest that the socialist utopia of Sweden may actually harbor antisemitism! Such a surprise! Imagine that, antiSemitism in Europe! Can't be! It's really a Right Wing Plot fomented by Lieberman to distract attention from the Occupation!

Occam's razor, idiots. No conspiracy theory is needed to explain European extreme dislike of Semitic peoples in their midst--it's a matter of historical record. Sweden simply let its benign mask slip. Aftonbladet published a grossly antisemitic article and if the Israeli government can condemn an offensive religious skit, and the Swedish government can block the Mohamed cartoons from the internet, then certainly the Swedes (as represented by their elected representatives) can have the good grace to say that, yes, a blood libel designed to incite hatred against Jews is offensive and we, the nation of Sweden find it reprehensible. Or at least in bad taste. Instead of "We can publish whatever we want [no, you can't--your Constitution prohibits libel, insult and incitement against groups of people] and you thin-skinned Jews will just have to live with it, nah-nah-nah-nah-nah!"

So the Swedish reaction (go read the talkbacks here and abroad) has been along the lines of we-are-the-most-moral-country-on-earth, the embodiment of socialist western humanism, and how DARE you criticize us? And the Israeli and western leftist establishment is rallying to this disgusting perversion of human rights.....a la Stalinism. Good communists justified the Hitler-Stalin pact carving up Poland because Stalin was sacrosanct, the god of communism, and to disagree was heresy.

The same dynamic is at work here: Sweden is the Leftist mythological embodiment of The Good in socialist post-modern society, the role model of multiculturalism, social welfare, and free sex -- so Sweden, the self-appointed moral arbiter of all other nations, is equally sacrosanct and the dirty little secret that Swedes are every bit as antiSemitic as other Europeans has to be buried under heaps of abuse on anyone who dares to utter the heresy that Swedish bigotry is embodied not just in this newspaper article, but in the wide-ranging justifications that Swedes offer to defend it.

By the way, the most interesting posts I've read came from Swedes who hastened to assure me that, no, Sweden isn't antiSemitic at all! Of course if your name is Posner or Cohen, you would never be denied a job or a promotion, unlike if you had a name like...."Mohammed."

They said this. Really. I see...so the bastion of post-modern socialist multiculturalism isn't antiSemitic, it's only Islamophobic. Gee, nice to know that they're prepared to be so selective in their forms of discrimination.....somehow I don't find these admissions reassuring on the issue of racism generally in the Great White Hope of the North, nor does it fill me with confidence that antiSemitism isn't lurking in the dark corners.

But what? Me, worry? Naw, I don't live in Europe, can't do a thing about Iran's nukes, and this week I have more immediate worries.....the Husband went in for a skin biopsy following the sudden appearance of a very strange growth on the back.....the most worrisome part was not one doctor said, "Aw, it's nothing but get it checked anyway." He was shunted from doctor to dermatologist to surgeon in a matter of days (pretty fast for socialized medicine), and we're supposed to get the results in 3-4 weeks. WEEKS?!! I wanted to scream, but no, I was cool because the surgeon was a jerk. Hopefully, his knowledge will equal his arrogance. As a cancer survivor himself, the Husband is a bit concerned about this....my job is to keep him optimistic, and recite Tehillim.

So I am tabling the lesser concerns of war, peace, and world hunger and literacy for now....and just getting through the next month.

“On Rosh Hashanah it is written
On Yom Kippur it is sealed
How many shall pass on, how many shall come to be
Who shall live and who shall die"

Evil is averted by prayer, repentence and tzedakah. The repentence and tzedakah is our endeavor. But while we are Jewish, we are nondenominational in prayer--we'll take everyone's, thank you.

San Francisco Stoplight Rules

2009-08-20T21:59:00.003+03:00

Ages ago, I posted the secret to surviving Israeli traffic: always yield, never hurry.

I need to post an addendum to that advice: San Francisco stoplight rules.

San Francisco is an extremely hilly town with some downright roller-coaster type roads. One of my favorites is Franklin Street heading downhill towards the Gate--can't beat the view or the adrenaline rush.

That said, the two most common forms of accidents (barring bicycle accidents) are (1) people getting killed at crosswalks by vehicles running up on the curb, or alternatively, people stepping into the street at the curb; and (2) red-light runners.

Any native of the area knows, absolutely KNOWS, that when your light turns green, you DO NOT GO. You count "one-Missouri, two-Missouri" while looking left and right to make sure the traffic has actually stopped. To proceed on a green light on the assumption that opposing traffic has actually stopped for the red light is suicidal. I've always blamed it on the hills--there's something about the steep hills that makes braking for a red light unattractive....so drivers just blow through them because they think the impetus of downhill gravity will get them through that intersection before the green-lit cross traffic actually gets into gear.

Nowadays, with instant messaging, car phones, cellphones, CDs and televisions in the cars, it isn't necessarily the hills. All these other distractions make driving anywhere, even on flat freeways in LA, a daily crap shoot.

But today, I saw a reason to add San Francsico stoplight rules.

Yossi was kind enough to give me a lift back from coffee, since I was without wheels. We were talking about something inconsequential as we drove east-bound on the main Gilo ridge road. As we approached the light-controlled intersection that leads out to Gush Etzion, we were about 30 feet behind another car. That other car had the right-of-way because the light was green. Really GREEN--not yellow-about-to-be-green, not green-but-had-just-turned...it was definitively, positively green. The driver in front of us proceeded sedately at the posted limit right into the intersection.

We saw it coming. Barely. We saw a blur of car coming off the Gush road, showing no signs of stopping, and sure enough, he blew through the red light and plowed right into the intersection. And into the front end of the driver who had just entered the intersection on the green light.

The impact knocked the front end off of both cars, and spun them sideways. Fortunately, no one appeared to be gravely hurt -- the at-fault driver got out of his car immediately and approached the other driver who was still seated.

Yossi was already on the phone to the police. He got out of his car and walked up to the cars. I made myself useful by waving on-coming traffic into the adjacent lane, so I couldn't hear the conversation at the scene.

We left, having reported it and seen a paramedic who had been waiting at the Gush bus stop run over with his equipment.

"What did you say to him?" I asked, having seen Yossi direct a comment to the red light runner.

"I told him to be quiet--HE ran the red light so don't berate the other driver," he told me.

"And what did he say?," I asked, knowing that tempers get frayed on the road easily.

"He didn't say anything after that. The ambulance will come for the other driver. He says he isn't hurt, but that's the adrenaline talking--he'll hurt as soon as the shock wears off."

I wasn't even in the accident...but its been replaying itself all day in my head. I'm not sure that there was any way to avoid it, but I've wondered all day if the driver in front of us could have avoided the collision by looking and checking the traffic to his right--even though he had the green light.

Maybe not. But I'm going to start putting my San Francisco-bred instincts to work at the intersections from here on out.

Why Gaza's Borders Are Closed

2009-08-16T15:52:00.003+03:00

For eight years, Palestinians in Gaza fired rockets and mortars into Israel. Hamas sent suicide bombers via various routes from Gaza into Israel, who were sometimes intercepted at the border crossings and sometimes not caught until they were in Israel.

Although slightly dated, this report sums up the game:

Since the Israeli disengagement from Gaza in the summer of 2005, Hamas and its allies have fired more than 6,000 rockets and mortars into Israel.6 The number of rocket attacks increased from November 2007 onward, targeting Sderot and other civilian areas. Palestinian terrorists fired some 200 mortar shells and Kassam rockets at the Erez crossing between Israel and Gaza, resulting in substantial damage and injuries to personnel.

During this period there were some 30 foiled attempts at terrorist infiltration, including at least 20 incidents where Palestinians used medical missions to attempt terror attacks. In June 2006, a female suicide terrorist was arrested at the Erez crossing while on her way to carry out an attack on an Israeli hospital. In May 2007, two female bombers received permits but were caught after slipping through security checks.7 On May 22, 2008, a truck loaded with 4.5 tons of explosives exploded just before reaching the crossing.

The ISA published reports on 11 individuals, including those just cited, who used permits for medical care or for family visits to patients already in Israel for the purpose of carrying out terror-related activities. At Erez, three patients admitted under questioning that they had purchased referral notes with bogus medical information from doctors in Gaza. According to the ISA, terror organizations were making a special effort to recruit women, including those who are pregnant, who are less likely to be closely examined and whose heavy clothing more readily conceals suspicious objects.8 PHR-I forwarded these patients for approval, unaware of their true status.

The Palestinian Authority and the Israeli government entered into an agreement about the borders into Gaza, which were staffed by EU monitors and by PA personnel. Hamas' coup d'etat in Gaza and its gangland-style executions of the Fatah opposition ended PA control over the borders, and Israel closed its border with the now-Hamastan entity.

Since then, mortars, rockets and missiles continued apace, oftentimes aimed at the border crossings on those days where Israel was opening them to allow in items like gasoline or medical supplies.

It's been quiet since the Gaza operation last winter. Until this last week. HaAretz reported that Hamastan once again elected to open fire on the border crossings--just as Palestinians needing medical treatment in Israel were crossing into Israel:

On Sunday, Gaza militants fired mortars at a crossing into Israel just as Palestinian patients were being transferred for treatment, a Palestinian official said.

"It's a miracle nobody was hurt," Health Ministry official Dr. Moaiya Hassanain said.

Two radical Palestinian groups, the Popular Front and the Democratic Front, said they fired 12 mortars at the Erez crossing. The Israel Defense Forces said about six shells exploded near the Erez crossing as the transfer was in progress.

According to the procedure, the Palestinian patients are brought to the crossing in local ambulances and transferred to Israeli ambulances for their trips to hospitals.

Now I understand the Left wing conspiracy of silence about Israeli victims of Hamastan's sporadic missile fire, but hey! aren't these so-called human rights organizations and NGOs there to protect the Palestinians?

Where's the outrage? Not a peep from Human Rights-When-Funded-By-Saudi-AntiSemites-Watch, or B'Tselem? Did you hear Doctors Without Borders condemning the attack? Or the U.N.? W.H.O.? Physicians For Human Rights-Who-Just-Shot-Themselves-In-The-Foot-By-Putting-Political-Gamesmanship-Above-Patient-Care? I googled for their condemnations in vain.

Don't hold your breath.....

Palestinian Myth Making 101

2009-08-16T15:38:00.002+03:00

Myth Number One: Hamas has never used human shields.

The following is the full text of the comments by Hamas representative Fathi Hamad: "For the Palestinian people death became an industry, at which women excel and so do all people on this land: the elderly excel, the Jihad fighters excel, and the children excel. Accordingly [Palestinians] created a human shield of women, children, the elderly and the Jihad fighters against the Zionist bombing machine, as if they were saying to the Zionist enemy: We desire death as you desire life."

Catch it on YouTube:

Then, there's that old adage about a picture being worth a thousand words:

So where is the mainstream media's outrage over firing from a crowd of civilians? What?! They expect that unlike any other attacked country in the world, Israel won't fire back? Hamas is responsible for their dead civilians, not Israel. (Hint: build bomb shelters for your people instead of bunkers for your leaders before you pick the next war).

Nor does Hamas balk at using children. Using human shields is a war crime. Using children as human shields in the hope it will protect you from return fire plumbs new depths of depravity.

Pictures courtesy of PMW and Mere Rhetoric , who did all the heavy lifting--I just plagiarized. It was too good not to share.

Good Fences Make Good Neigbors--Good Roadblocks Make Better Ones

2009-08-13T22:58:00.006+03:00

On July 20, the IDF was putting together a proposal to remove over 100 dirt roadblocks in time for Ramadan this year.

Last month, for the first time in years, a Palestinian could drive from Nablus to Hebron without encountering a roadblock. The roadblocks near Jericho are down so Israelis can now travel through the West Bank to lose their money in Jericho's casino, and Jericho residents can now reach any major town on the West Bank without going through roadblocks.

In May, the IDF began dismantling roadblocks in the West Bank at an accelerated rate. Haaretz reported in June of this year that only 10 manned roadblocks are still extant in the West Bank, and searches are not carried out at every one of them. This is in stark contrast to the last year and a half, when more than 35 manned roadblocks were in operation. More and more, IDF soldiers are posted outside of major city centers to keep Israelis out rather than to check on Palestinians.

Apparently this is part of Netanyahu's policy to take action to improve the day-to-day life of Palestinians in the West Bank in a way that would significantly better the economic conditions in the area. He and Barak apparently believed that lifting roadblocks does not bear a significant domestic political price if there are no terrorist attacks as a result of the easing of restrictions.

That "IF" suddenly changed everything.

If tonight's news announcement is not a false alarm (and since a terror group is claiming responsibility, I believe it's probably true), then all these moves towards slowly draining off the occupation have been for nothing.

Today, a kid in the Air Force was forcibly kidnapped near his base in central Israel.

How would Palestinian terrorists get to central Israel? Hey, look, NO effective roadblocks!!

This terror act, this kidnapping of one of our sons on our own land, is brought to you courtesy of the Palestinian people, whose leadership last week in Bethlehem demanded ALL of Jerusalem, our capital, for their capital; the release of thousands of captured terrorists serving sentences in our jails; the opening of the border crossings of Gaza so as to ease the export of more terrorists to central Israel; and reaffirmed those clauses of the Fatah Internal Order document, which calls for the eradication of Israel and its replacement with a Palestinian Arab Moslem state, and the rejection of all peace initiatives.

So much for giving peace a chance.

Bring back the roadblocks. No one else's child should become Gilad Shalit.

To Live And Die In Oregon

2009-08-13T16:40:00.001+03:00

I managed to track down the story of the Oregon woman who was denied cancer medication. Here's the short version:

Woman's Insurance Denies Cancer Meds, Approves Suicide Meds

64-year-old Barbara Wagner, whose lung cancer had returned and was deemed terminal, had her claim for a $4,000 a month medication to extend her life denied by the state-run Oregon Health Plan while they approved palliative, or comfort, care only.

The rules governing Oregon Health Plan say that drugs must meet a 5% survival rate after five years to be covered by the plan. The prescribed drug, Erlotinib, has a median survival rate of 6.7 months in patients who had already completed chemo.

The Oregon Health Plan provides care to those whose incomes fall under the poverty level. Coverage is prioritized from prevention through chronic disease management, mental health then heart and finally cancer treatment.

Did you catch the key phrases? The Oregon Plan is to cover poor people. Coverage is prioritized. Cancer treatment is the lowest priority.

In other words, if you're poor, we're denying you expensive medication (meds which another commenter pointed out have a survival rate of 40% after the first year, contra the 5% claimed by the state) but we'll gladly pay for meds so you can kill yourself.

Keep in mind that most of the poor are women, minorities and people with disabilities. Women have always suffered a financial gender-gap due to their tailoring their lives to those of their children and spouses.

The talkback comments are always very illuminating, albeit the would-be masters and mistresses of the universe who opine in that forum are harsh indeed. Most wrote in to say she "deserved" to die because she was a smoker and/or old; that they felt $4000/month for meds was outrageous and the state shouldn't pay it just to extend the old lady's life for 6 months (studiously ignoring the writer who commented that the statistic as reported is incorrect and that survival rate is 40% after the first year); why should some other person die because the state wasted all this money on an old woman with cancer, etc....

I doubt they would comment in this fashion if they were the ones with cancer--or if the patient were a spouse, a sibling, a parent, a child.

That's her picture. Does she look like a woman who wants to die? I didn't think so, either.

Another site had this to say:

Oregon state officials controlled the process of healthcare decision-making—not Barbara and her physician. Chemotherapy would cost the state $4,000 every month she remained alive; the drugs for physician-assisted suicide held a one-time expense of less than $100. Barbara’s treatment plan boiled down to accounting. To cover chemotherapy state policy demanded a five percent patient survival rate at five years. As a new drug, Tarceva did not meet this dispassionate criterion. To Oregon, Barbara was no longer a patient; she had become a "negative economic unit."

Well, we certainly can't have THAT--we don't need any "negative economic units" in our society, now, do we? How disgustingly Orwellian.

Am I the only one who finds this appalling and outrageous?

Searching the web, I found this:

For Barbara Wagner, too, there is something of a happy ending: The pharmaceutical company making Tarceva agreed to donate a year's supply of the expensive drug, and to consider providing further medication free of charge if she is still living and wishes to continue taking Tarceva in a year's time.

In other words, Big Business came to the rescue, not the bloody government!

However, for other patients with advanced cancer, there may be few options. The Oregon Health Plan will not cover chemotherapy unless there is a better than 5% chance it will help patients live for five more years. Patients who don't meet that standard get a letter denying coverage for chemo and suggesting comfort care, including pain relief and, potentially, doctor assisted suicide.

Hence, Barbara is not alone:

Since the spread of his prostate cancer, 53-year-old Randy Stroup of Dexter, Ore., has been in a fight for his life. Uninsured and unable to pay for expensive chemotherapy, he applied to Oregon's state-run health plan for help.

Lane Individual Practice Association (LIPA), which administers the Oregon Health Plan in Lane County, responded to Stroup's request with a letter saying the state would not cover Stroup's pricey treatment, but would pay for the cost of physician-assisted suicide.

Got that? He's 53. That's NOT old. I understood that the purpose of government's universal health care was to make sure that people, especially the unemployed and working poor, would be covered by health insurance which is currently purchased through one's employer in group plans which many still decline because even the group plan is too expensive.

So here's Randy with prostate cancer and who needs chemotherapy, and the state's insurance plan tells him, essentially, "drop dead."

Eventually the state reversed its decision and paid for chemotherapy because Randy fought this decision.

Whatever happened to "First, do no harm."?

There are a couple of lessons here:

First, don't be poor and live in Oregon.

Second, be careful what you wish for--any government backed universal health care under consideration should be carefully scrutinized. Your life, your family members' lives, may someday depend upon what is written there.

The Beating Heard 'Round The World

2009-08-12T17:31:00.001+03:00

So I'm watching American news a couple of days ago while trying to get over a massive sinus/ear infection.....that's how you know I am sick: I'm watching television. I am treated to the sight of muscled goons pushing and shoving protesters, yelling at the protesters, and threatening worse physical violence to their supporters and People With Videocameras who are filming this.

No, it's NOT Iran. It's the United States. Yep, the Land of the Free.

The "Town Hall" concept predates the American Revolution. Back in the Old Days, white men of property (excluding slaves, women, indentured servants and poor)would have meetings in the town hall on a regular basis to conduct the town's business--everything from the need for an armory to taxes to stray cows on the Green.

Since then, the membership has been expanded to include all citizens, who all feel we have a perfect right to show up and speak our minds about whatever the government (be it local, state or federal) wants us to do. This was so important a concept that the Constitution enshrined it in the amendments guaranteeing free speech and the right to assemble peaceably.

There seems to be a tax revolt brewing, but now those veterans of the Anti-War Movement in the Sixties are old enough to collect social security and have paid all their lives for health insurance. They have a new beef--socialized health care. They have a right to be heard on the government's plan to "socialize" the health care system, which might include cutting health care benefits for elders on a cost-effectiveness basis. One story floating around (I haven't verified it) is that a woman in Oregon in her 60s wants cancer treatment after a lifetime of smoking. I loathe cigarette smoke and I think smokers should quit. However....Oregon has self-insured state-funded health care. What she reportedly got was a denial of her request for anti-cancer medication but approval for the drugs for euthanasia. In other words, you're too old for us to waste the money on, just go die.

So, at a Town Hall meeting last week in Missouri, the place was rigged for a politcal propaganda piece rather than a free discussion of the issue. Heavily muscled union guys in SEIU shirts were whisked in the "handicapped entrance" while average citizens waiting to get in were locked out. While citizen-opponents were deliberately excluded, one half of the auditorium was roped off and "reserved" for supporters of the health care initiative. The only questions permitted during the town hall meeting were plants written in advance on index cards and submitted by the shills in the audience. Citizens who wanted to ask questions weren't permitted to. After the meeting, the SEIU guys confronted Kenneth Gladney, a black conservative from the city, who was handing out “Don’t Tread On Me” flags. This didn’t go over well with the Obama supporters and union thugs who had attended the meeting, so they allegedly punched him in the face, kicked him in the head, and stomped on him on the pavement. His attorney's letter (now all over the internet) said:

Kenneth was approached by an SEIU representative as Kenneth was handing out “Don’t Tread on Me” flags to other conservatives. The SEIU representative demanded to know why a black man was handing out these flags. The SEIU member used a racial slur against Kenneth, then punched him in the face. Kenneth fell to the ground. Another SEIU member yelled racial epithets at Kenneth as he kicked him in the head and back. Kenneth was also brutally attacked by one other male SEIU member and an unidentified woman. The three men were clearly SEIU members, as they were wearing T-shirts with the SEIU logo.

Kenneth was beaten badly. One assailant fled on foot; three others were arrested. Kenneth was admitted to St. John’s Mercy Medical Center emergency room, where he was treated for his numerous injuries. Kenneth was merely expressing his freedom of speech by handing out the flags. In fact, he merely asked people as they exited the town hall meeting whether they would like a flag. He in no way provoked any argument or altercation, as evidenced by the fact that three assailants were arrested. We hope that Kenneth fully recovers from his injuries; however, he is in great pain at this time. We will be pursuing legal action at our discretion. This was a truly senseless hate crime carried out by racist union thugs.

Aside: Hey, Mr. President, where's your outrage now? A black man is knocked down, apparently called N---- (that's what 'racial epithet' usually means), and has the daylights beat out of him for exercising his free speech rights. Do the words "hate crime" mean anything when a conservative is the victim? Maybe you'd like to buy him a beer?

Another Aside: and if you google Kenneth Gladney, you will see that the Left has circled the wagons, claiming that Gladney is a fraud, that it never happened, or if it happened, he provoked it, or if it happened, it didn't happen the way he says it happened ergo he's a liar, and the proof is he'll never file a hate crime report. Guess what? He filed. The moral bankruptcy of the Left in light of their collective snide dismissal of mostly white Chicago Machine thugs beating a black man in 2009 while their black side-kick calls him a "nigger" is no doubt covered in depth by, uh, Counterpunch, right?

Speaking of moral bankruptcy, the Democrats have responded by calling the citizens, most of them Boomer grandparents, "thugs," conveniently by-passing the hired muscle they imported to quell dissent. They are particularly incensed that people bring pictures of Obama to demonstrations with Hitler-mustaches drawn on -- that was okay for demonizing George Bush, but How Dare You!! when it comes to Obama.

Other Democratic rhetoric, especially on the internet, is downright vile: "chickenhawks," "Republitards," "nazis" and "white trash" are just a few. Jeanne Garofalo played the race card (it's on YouTube) calling protesters "redneck racists" who really aren't opposed to the government debt and the potential for health care rationing--it's REALLY about hating Obama for being black. By this standard, any criticism of presidential policies is immediately trumped by the cry of "racism!" Garofalo then snidely dismisses women who protest as suffering from "Stockholm Syndrome," clearly in thrall to their white urban male masters.

One commenter, in contradiction to some of this Democratic libel, posted that "there have been a total of seven people arrested at town halls so far, all (except one reporter) being SEIU/ACORN/Democrat Party thugs. No anti-Obama demonstrators have been arrested." If that statistic is accurate, then who are the REAL thugs here?

Another pointed out, in contradiction to Pelosi's accusation that protesters are the tools of well-heeled rich big business concerns, that that "the pro-healthcare reformers found their "grass roots" activists by placing ads on craigslist for paid positions. So lets see, the real citizens are paid activists, acorn, and unions? The media is silent on all of that."

By the way, since I live in a country with government-back universal health care, I think it's great. But I also think that citizens who are faced with making a transition to such a system, AND PAYING FOR IT, have a right to sound off in public and ask noisy, uncomfortable questions rather than merely posing for photo ops arranged by Democrats pimping this deal.

Another prominent American used to think so too:

“I’m sick and tired of people who say that if you debate and disagree with this administration, somehow you’re not patriotic. We need to stand up and say we’re Americans, and we have the right to debate and disagree with any administration.”

– Hillary Rodham Clinton

Fatah Shoots Itself In The Foot

2009-08-09T19:38:00.005+03:00

If you do something that damages your chances of achieving what you desire, English has the perfect phrase for it: "shooting yourself in the foot."

I'v watched with equal degrees of horror and hilarity as Fatah shot itself in the foot this week.

These are our peace partners. These are the "moderates."

These are their "non-negotiable" demands, as I've picked up from various news sources:

1. A freeze on all Jewish settlement activity in the disputed territories [but no freeze on Palestinian building, which continues apace].

2. Open the borders of Gaza [to Hamas and its cadres of martyrs ready to engage in more mass murder of Jews in public venues].

When Hell freezes over....

3. ALL of Jerusalem is to be surrendered to the future Palestinian state. Not East Jerusalem. Not parts of Jerusalem. I actually read this twice to make sure I was reading it correctly. All of Western Jerusalem, which is 95+% Jewish, is to be surrendered. Not land over the Green Line. Not mixed neighborhoods. ALL of it.

When Hell freezes over....

And all prisoners must be released [that's Palestinian prisoners--Gilad Shalit doesn't even get a visit from the Red Cross] and Israel killed Arafat [he died of AIDS, according to the Russians] and the conference also endorsed the Aksa Martyrs Brigades as Fatah's official "armed wing." I love this touch -- when was the last time the Republicans or the Social Democrats or any other "political party" had an "armed wing"? Nevermind that the endorsement of this group as Fatah's official armed wing contradicts promises made by the Fatah leadership to the effect that the Aksa Martyrs Brigades have been dismantled.

What?! You BELIEVED the Palestinians when they said they were dismantling their terror apparatus....silly you!

As my Husband the Wit put it, agog with hilarity that this platform saw the light of day -- "oh, yeah, and all Jews should march to the sea, jump in, and while in mid-air, cut our throats."

Does Fatah have any idea how this plays in Israel? How many on the Right are delighted with this platform? Because this makes it very easy, too easy, for Middle Israel to simply shrug and say, "They're being ridiculous. Fuck 'em."

This is not the platform that is going to advance dialogue and the peace process. Fatah couldn't have given a better gift to Netanyahu's coalition -- NO one in the world can take the Palestinians seriously in light of this sabre-rattling. The Fatah platform is now the "obstacle to peace."

So why is there this dichotomy? Why is there the expression of a desire to negotiate, a referral to past offers and agreements, counterbalanced by a conference that sounds like a call to Jihadi crusade?

Because Fatah, now and always, has two faces: one for the international community and one for internal consumption.

The Jerusalem Center For Public Affairs aptly summed up the Two Faces of Fatah:

Will Fatah Give Up the Armed Struggle
at Its Sixth General Congress?

Pinhas Inbari [bakanote: these are excerpts--the entire article can be reached through the links]

•Many observers are watching to see to what extent Fatah's Sixth General Congress will advance or retard the prospects for re-launching the peace process between Israel and the Palestinians. In this regard, the crucial question is: Is Fatah going to waive its historical principle of "armed struggle" and devote itself to peace negotiations based on compromise?

•The two relevant documents to be discussed and approved by the Fatah Congress are the Political Program and Fatah's "Internal Order." The Political Program might be seen as reflecting progress in terms of accepting a political solution and rejecting violence - but it falls short of waiving the principle of armed struggle.

•The real problem lies in the Internal Order document, which restores all of the phrases that were omitted in the Political Program. While the Political Program sought to subordinate the struggle to the need for "international legitimacy," the Internal Order is very clear in rejecting all international peace initiatives.

•In the Internal Order document, Fatah retains the armed struggle as a strategy in order to liberate the whole of Palestine and eliminate Israel. Article 12 calls for "the liberation of Palestine completely and the elimination of the state of the Zionist occupation economically, politically, militarily, and culturally."

•Article 13 calls for "establishing a sovereign democratic Palestinian state on the entire Palestinian territory." While the Political Program lists the "one-state solution" as an option in case the "two-state solution" fails, the Internal Order document mentions the "one-state solution" as the only solution.

•Should there be any question regarding Fatah's objectives, Article 17 states: "The armed popular revolution is the only inevitable way to the liberation of Palestine," while Article 19 notes: "The struggle will not end until the elimination of the Zionist entity and the liberation of Palestine."

Two Documents: One for International Consumption and the Other for Internal Use

The two relevant documents to be discussed and approved by the Fatah Congress are the Political Program and Fatah's "Internal Order." The Political Program might be seen by many as reflecting progress in terms of accepting a political solution and rejecting violence - but it falls short of waiving the principle of armed struggle. The document endorses the Arab Initiative, talks in vague expressions of the "right of return" - using a formula "based on UN Resolution 181" and not on fulfillment of this resolution, and offers the model of the "Intifada of the Stones" (the first intifada) as preferred over the model of military struggle.

The principle of the "armed struggle" is mentioned as an option of the past that must be re-examined in comparison to other options of struggle. The model seen to fit our times is the anti-wall campaigns in Nil'in and Bil'in, but "10,000 times as fierce." The political program uses the term "the struggle" (not quite describing it as the "armed struggle") and even the "peaceful struggle." However, there is more than one reference to the term "the struggle of all options," that includes the armed struggle as well. In an interview with Maan News, the Fatah leader in Lebanon, Sultan Abu al-Einein, made it clear that the "struggle of all options" includes the armed struggle as well.

Fatah's Internal Order Presents a Different Face

Developing the Nil'in-Bil'in model of struggle is problematic because it can easily deteriorate into violence, as past experience shows, but the real problem lies in the Internal Order document. All of the phrases that were omitted in the Political Program are present in this would-be "bureaucratic" document. The term "armed popular struggle" appears at the very beginning. While the Political Program sought to subordinate the struggle to the need for "international legitimacy," the Internal Order is very clear in rejecting all international peace initiatives: "The projects, agreements, and resolutions that were issued or will be issued by the UN or group of states or any separate state on the Palestinian problem that waives the rights of the Palestinians on their homeland is null and void."

Furthermore, Article 22 calls for: "objection by force to all political solutions that are offered as an alternative to the extermination of the occupying Zionist entity in Palestine and all the projects that aim for the elimination of the Palestinian problem, or seek to internationalize it or put an outside custodian on its people from any possible party." This article is in contradiction to the call in the Political Program for greater international involvement in the problem and its welcome for the involvement of international forces in Palestine.

Article 9 states clearly that "the liberation of the Holy Land and the defense of its holy sites (that are forbidden to infidels) is an Arab, Muslim, and humanitarian duty."

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

Feel free to share these platforms, Stateside readers: the spin in the Chronicle and the total absence of these platforms in both the Chron and the NY Times tells me that the West is getting the left-wing Pallywood spin.

One of my lawyer colleagues once postulated that Fatah was the "moderate" political party of the Palestinians and Hamas were the radicals. "Not so," I told him. "Fatah is just Hamas in suits."

They've proved it this week.

Home "Rip-Off" Center

2009-08-07T12:58:00.002+03:00

If I could, I'd open a Home Depot franchise in Israel, if only to give Home Center some grief.

I LIKE the Home Center at the Malcha Mall. They're pretty no-nonsense, and usually helpful.

However.....there is a notable exception.

Home Center in Talpiot in Canyon Hadar.

Today's was the worst of several bad experiences there.

Home Center at Malcha was out of those drying racks that screw into the wall of your mirpesset. But the staffer told us, "I'm sure they still have them in the Talpiot store," so off we trundled to Talpiot, the place that I suspect invented gridlock.

Once we slogged through traffic and parked, we went to Home Center. Two staffers assured us that yes, this item was still in stock and still on sale. Great!

We find that staff member in charge of this section, and he shows us the dugma (the model). "But it's small!" The picture in the brochure showed something that looked like it was two feet across.

"This is only the display model!" he tells us. He takes Yossi to the shelves and pulls down a box that is two feet in length. "And it's 399 shekels?" Yossi asked, reading the sign on the display. "Yes," the salesman answers.

An aside here: the display has two nearly identical sides, the only difference being that one latched in place with a bolt and the other had a hand crank. There is NO other difference, and nothing on either model that identified them by model number. Prominently displayed on the display item is a sign reading "399 NIS" with the number 600 crossed out. Clearly a bargain!

We go to the checkout stand and the clerk says, "No, it's 600 shekels."

Huh?

I said, "Wait, I'll bring you the sign." I raced back to the display, yanked the sign down, and brought it to the checkout stand, where Yossi is now explaining to the clerk and some slightly-more-senior staffer that not only does the sign say "399 shekels" but the salesman told us it was 399 shekels.

I showed the senior salesman the sign. "Too bad, giveret, that's not the price for this model," he sneered.

"Yes, it is, it's ON the display model," I said, puzzled. "Come, I'll show you," and led him away despite Yossi's protest to let it go.

I show him the display. "That's not the price for the model on THIS half of the display--that's the price for the OTHER model on the other half of the display," he says with a brush-off gesture.

"That can't be correct--look, there's only ONE price on this display." I pointed out.

"Yes, and it clearly says "2002" for the model number," he retorted.

"Okay, so where on here do you see a model number? There isn't one!" I retorted back, getting annoyed. "This can't be legal--you put up a sign on a display with two models, don't distinguish between them with any markings, and then claim the sales price is only for 'the other one'?"

He starts to turn away. "This is called bait-and-switch where I come from, and it's illegal. Are you telling me that your store policy is to allow this?" I called after him.

Now he's angry. "I'm not going to make him a gift of it!" he states, his voice rising. "This is the price--600 shekels."

"Listen, if this were an honest store, you would admit an honest mistake and let the customer have the item at the price advertised--which is the price on this sign," I said, trying to sound reasonable.

"Maybe the clerk made a mistake when he told you it was 399 shekels, but its not my mistake, it's not the store's mistake, so the price is the price." He turned away with that very Israeli I-don't-have-time-to-talk-to-a-mere-woman dismissiveness.

"Really?" I said, raising my voice. "You don't care if people think your store engages in illegal pricing? YOU don't care if your store makes a practice of cheating people?"

We're now drawing a crowd.

"You're not the manager, are you?" He conceded he was not, and when I pressed to talk to the manager, he told me to tell the checkout clerk to call him---and started to walk away, again with a dismissive shrug of the shoulders.

"Maybe the manager would care that his staff is cheating people? Maybe the manager would care that your pricing is illegal? May he should know you treat your customers LIKE GARBAGE!"

"And what are you going to do about it?" he sneered.

I'm going to put it in my blog and tell everyone that the Home Center at Canyon Hadar engages in bait-and-switch tactics, doesn't care about making the customers happy, and treats their customers like garbage -- that's what I'm going to do about it.

I looked at the half dozen people watching this exchange with interest. "Don't buy here--they're cheats and liars," I told them. I have enough Hebrew to tell that truth.

Winston Smith Is Alive and Well and Working in Australia

2009-08-04T16:52:00.005+03:00

Winston Smith was the protagonist of Orwell's "1984," a bureaucrat who enjoyed his never-ending job of historical revisionism to match current standards of political correctness.

He's alive and working in Australia! How else can one explain the bizarre and truth-defying results of the "Global Peace Index" published by the Australia-based Institute for Economics and Peace?

But Seth Franzman says it better than I can. You can read the entire article by hitting the link in the post title, or just keep reading:

"On July 30 The Jerusalem Post reported that Israel ranked 141 out of 144 countries on the Global Peace Index published by the Australia-based Institute for Economics and Peace (IEP), making Israel out to be less peaceful than Sudan, Iran and Pakistan.

The message of studies such as this dovetails with the false legitimacy of conferences such as the UN's Durban II which claim to be about racism but are themselves racist. Together they are part of the moral bankruptcy behind so much of the rhetoric about peace, racism, war crimes and justice.

The IEP describes itself as a "vision of humanity" that is bringing "a strategic approach to raising the world's attention and awareness around the importance of peacefulness to humanity's survival." It claims to be dedicated to educating people about the "relationship between economic development, business and peace." Like other "indexes" such as the Freedom Index and Property Rights Index, the institute sifts through mountains of data and then reduces each data set into 23 "indicators." The indicators are then divided into three categories; "measures of ongoing domestic and international conflict, measures of safety and security in society and measures of militarization."

There was enough information about 144 countries that they could be evaluated. Such figures as the number of murders per 100,000 people in a given country and the number of deaths in internal conflicts and "relations with neighboring countries" must all be made into numbers. This system, which is popular in the social sciences, means quantifying such abstract concepts as people's "perception of criminality in society."

This is open to a form of fraud. Israelis may think their society is violent, just as South Africans do, but the murder rate here is 2.65 for every 100,000, whereas in South Africa it is 38. Perception of violence says nothing about violence.

Similarly the index measures the ease of access to weapons, military sophistication and number of heavy weapons - all figures which have no connection to actual levels of violence. But perhaps the indicator with the greatest chutzpah is the "potential for terrorist attacks," which actually punishes a country because people might target it. [My Inner Cynic suggests that this 'category' was invented solely to bash Israeli society....I wonder how Iraq, India, Pakistan, and Great Britain were rated in this category?]

In comparing the Sudan, which scored 140 out of 144, the level of idiocy disguised as banality becomes clear. Sudan, which has caused the deaths of more than 300,000 of its own citizens and displaced millions of them to Chad, scores exactly the same as Israel under the category "number of displaced people as a percentage of population." Perhaps the score for Sudan is the same as Israel because Sudan has achieved a complete genocide of its black Muslim Darfuri population and thus there aren't any displaced left? This isn't exactly a measurement of "absence of violence," which is what the Index claims to measure.

Israel and Sudan also score the same under "number of deaths from organized internal conflict," while Israel scores worse under "number of deaths from organized external conflict." Israel didn't fight any wars against an external enemy in 2008, unless Gaza is "external," and then it is not clear what the "internal" conflict is since there is no conflict inside the Green Line. The creators of the index seem to have punished Israel twice for Gaza while giving Sudan a pass, since Sudan isn't at war with its neighbors, it's just slaughtering people within its borders.

This jury-rigged statistical nonsense leads to a morally bankrupt result. The insinuation of the survey is clear: Israel is one of the most violent places in the world. This jives with the typical surveys in Europe where people place Israel on the top of the list of countries "threatening world peace."

By contrast, countries currently involved in mass human rights violations, genocides and even outright slavery can be considered "peaceful." Countries that resemble one large prison, such as North Korea, are positively wonderful to live in, according to the index. Lebanon, Pakistan, Zimbabwe and the Congo, all of which have central governments that barely function, are doing better than Israel. Egypt, where tourists are forbidden from visiting much of the country, where tourist attractions are like armed police camps and where tourists must travel on special trains for safety, is considered 54th out of 144 countries, a prime place to live, "absent of violence." It is 'absent of violence' apparently because neither the media nor foreigners can visit much of it. [Inner Cynic notes that police states like Egypt tend to have an absence of public violence because of ruthless repression, but that seems to go unnoted in this "Peace Index."]

In the 21st century, genocide masquerades as peace. It is tempting to want to boil every country down to a neat number, but when bias and thoughtlessness is built into the system of doing so, the results are no different than Durban II."

--------

The obvious political agenda of this idiotic "study" aside, I know from living in a major metropolitan area in California that these results are total bunk. From a personal, quality-of-life, overall personal-and-family-safety-issue standpoint, I'm much safer here than I was in said major metropolitan area---even though I am living in one of Israel's biggest cities. I doubt women in Pakistan or Iraq or North Korea feel free to go for walks at night, argue politics in their favorite coffeeshop, and no American would yell at other drivers the way drivers do here--because here, it's just an argument. No one is going to pull a gun out of the glovebox and shoot you.

How To Get Your Own Free Personal Trainer

2009-08-01T21:40:00.002+03:00

Anyone with a gym membership, or who at least spends some time in such places, knows that nearly every gym provides a "personal trainer" to design a fitness program for you. This can be a one-time meeting, usually as a courtesy of the gym, or you can pay for the privilege of having your own private coach.

Before I married, I tried this out. It was a lot of work, and I discovered that I could probably have lost the same 5 lbs on my own without the coaching had I just followed the program he outlined for me.

After that, paying for a personal trainer was decidedly not in my budget--stepchildren and new baby were the new priorities.

However, the gym at which I currently wage Pool Wars does have a personal trainer program.

And I've discovered through my almost-daily attendance that, given the right circumstances, a member can get it for free. The secret? Be female, be blonde and be beautiful.

I don't begrudge her the attention--really! I just find myself trying not to fall off the stairmaster because I'm laughing at the site of BOTH trainers hovering over the Blonde Buxom Beauty as she is spread-eagled on one of our new machines, while two other male members of the gym also crowd in to offer their advice. Apparently the site of a slightly sweaty, disheveled Dolly-Parton-esque type lying on her back, breathing heavily, arms akimbo as she tried to push the weight bar of the machine up, caused a rush of male chivalry to "help" her......

Needless to say, most of the rest of our female membership (40+ and paunchy) needs to pay for this kind of "help."

More Desecration.....

2009-07-31T16:29:00.002+03:00

Yesterday I found Elder of Zion's piece about Jewish "desecration" of the Temple Mount. This alleged "desecration" appears to be nothing more than people walking quietly and apparently respectfully through the courtyards of the Temple Mount.

The use of the word "desecration" is a particularly loaded one, especially in a religious context (yes, I am aware that it is specifically religious but it is mis-used for a lot of other contexts).

Desecration: to treat with sacrilege; profane. Synonyms are: blaspheme, defile, dishonor, pollute, outrage.

These are pretty strong, emotionally laden words.

And they're apparently not confined to the Pallywood Propaganda Corps.

Today, we have an equally repugnant claim of "desecration" --from Shas, the smug, self-congratulatory, self-described guardians of the Torah.

"We are in sorrow for the desolate Mount Zion and for the Kotel square which is sometimes desecrated and soldiers who walk there," wrote Shas Knesset faction director Tzvi Ya'acobson in his weekly column in the Bakehila newspaper.

Ya'acobson made it clear in his article that he was talking about the swearing-in of soldiers at the Western Wall.

Reeeaaallly.....some ultra-Orthodox flunky who has never served in the military, never put his life and limb on the line for the people of Israel, and won't let his daughters do National Service and won't let his sons serve, but expects Other People's Children to fight and die to protect him and his children......the presence of our kids being sworn in for army service is a "desecration"?

Who IS this jerk?

Apparently he's no one Shas wants to avow: "Ya'acobson was only a functionary and not an elected official," the Shas spokesman was quick to point out, no doubt rushing to do damage control. They've already lost a lot of their conservative Sephardi working-class traditional (not Orthodox) votes to Likud this time around, and they should be aware that since almost all Sephardi families have kids who go to the military, this is not going to sit well.

WHAT exactly is behind this claim of "desecration"?

"During these types of ceremonies the access to the Kotel is disrupted," he complained. "Hours beforehand the already limited parking is closed to the real visitors to the Kotel."

Ah, now I understand! You can't park! And parking should be reserved only for the "real visitors" i.e. ultra-Orthodox men who want to pray there. Who you apparently believe are the "real Jews"? Maybe we should just fence off the Kotel and designate it the Private Ultra-Orthodox Prayer Room? Would THAT make you happy? And we can issue special stickers so that you, and only you (and other "Real Jews"), can park your cars in the nearby lot and thus be only a short walk to prayer?

I mean, I can understand that an Islamist might view any infidel walking around the courtyards of a place he reveres as "desecration" (I also think he'd be way over the top, nutso, and the PPC throws the word around for incitement purposes) but your beef is the parking situation?! The fact that YOU can't find parking because a ceremony disrupts it is a "desecration"? The fact that they hold a ceremony honoring those who have sworn to die to protect you is a "desecration"?

Never mind that the Temple itself was open to all the nations; or that women and visitors were allowed also to pray there; that Jews of all stripes from around the world made pilgrimmage for centuries to pray here, and still do.

IT'S NOT YOUR F@$#! PRIVATE PROPERTY, YOU LAZY JERK!

Go ahead. Pray there. But if you can't find parking, take a cab -- the solution is not to ban the families of young servicemen and women from being sworn in at the site of our great loss as a remembrance of what is at stake. From the Romans until today, there are enemies who want us dead or exiled -- and the Kotel, as the last ancient remnant of our allegience to HaShem and our prior sovereignty as a people, is a reminder of all we have to lose if they fail.

Those kids have more right to be there than you do.

I'm thinking we should start a petition to limit increased child allowances only to those who do military or National Service......

More Pallywood Big Lies

2009-07-29T16:53:00.004+03:00

Palestine Today has a web-site, and due to a tip from Elder of Ziyon , I went there to see the scandalous photographs of Jews allegedly "desecrating" the courtyards of the Al-Aksa Mosque.

Here we are, fresh of the presses, "desecrating" wildly:

This tells me that one of two things are going on here. Either something was lost in translation from Arabic to English, or (the more likely, I suspect) the mere presence of Jewish tourists quietly walking around the courtyards is "desecration."

It couldn't be (gasp!) antiSemitism? Or a desire, on the eve of Tisha B'Av, to arouse hatred, fear and loathing in the Palestinians and provoke a riot, a la Second Intifada's Big Lie?

Go to his blog for the full set of photos or to Palestine Today, in the link above.

Settlements: The Answer To Khartoum

2009-07-26T23:17:00.005+03:00

After the 1967 war, the Israeli attitude was, "We'll trade land for peace." The Arab attitude (this was before Palestinians described themselves as national entity, so it was a pronouncement of Arab League states) was the Khartoum Conference: "No negotiation with Israel; no recognition of Israel; no peace with Israel." It sort of set the tone for where we are today.

Following this resounding "Three Noes," the lands liberated from the illegal annexation and occupation by Jordan and Egypt (today referred to as the West Bank and Gaza, respectively) were now in Israeli hands. The Israeli response to the Khartoum Conference was a shrug and "OK, you don't want to trade land for peace, keep the peace and we'll keep the land."

I've been trying to point some of this out, piece-meal, to folks in various conversations, letters and blog comments for years. However, Mr. Puder has wrapped it up succinctly. Now that President Obama's approval rating has dropped below 50%, maybe he'll find more pressing things to do than order Israel to please the Arabists of the State Department.

Wrong, Mr. President — Jewish Settlements Expedited Peace Talks

July 26, 2009 - by Joseph Puder

President Obama demands that Jewish settlements in Judea and Samaria (West Bank) be completely frozen as a precondition to peace negotiations with the Palestinians. If Barack Obama considers the Jewish settlements in Judea and Samaria an obstacle to peace, let him study objectively the course of events that took place in the 1980s. He would surely learn that it was the expansion of the Jewish settlements that drove the Palestinians to the negotiating table, which ultimately led to the Oslo Accords.

In the mid-1980s, Palestinian Liberation Organization chairman Yasser Arafat boasted: “The womb of the Palestinian woman will defeat the Zionist.” Shortly thereafter, large waves of immigrants from the former Soviet Union and Ethiopia arrived in Israel (some of them moved to the settlements) and defused the discussion in Israel over the demographic “time bomb.”

More significantly, in 1988, the Palestinian National Council (PNC) summit endorsed United Nations Resolution 242 and proceeded to declare an independent Palestinian state. The actions of the PNC came at least in part as a reaction to Ariel Sharon’s significant buildup of Jewish settlements in Judea and Samaria. The PNC called additionally for “the annulment of all expropriation and annexation measures and the removal of the settlements established by Israel in the Palestinian and Arab territories since 1967.”

A month later, at UN headquarters in Geneva, Arafat was promised a dialogue with the U.S. if he would “renounce terrorism, and recognize the State of Israel.” At a hastily arranged press conference, Arafat mumbled the words demanded by the Americans, words he was unable to bring himself to utter at the UN session the day before.

Arafat was ultimately driven to do so in recognition of Israel’s establishing facts on the ground and the realization that unless they began to negotiate — preferably with the Americans — there would be nothing left to negotiate over.

The Palestinians and their western sympathizers contend that the “Jewish settlements” are “illegal” according to the Fourth Geneva Convention, which sought to protect against future atrocities such as those committed by the Nazis.

Article 49 of the Fourth Geneva Convention is often cited as the basis by which the settlements are deemed to be “illegal.” However, the wording, which prohibits “individual or mass forcible transfers” and contains a prohibition not to “deport or transfer parts of its own civilian population,” clearly contradicts the fact that those who settled in the land did so voluntarily. Furthermore, the land in question, which had been occupied by Egypt and Jordan since 1948, was captured by Israel in 1967 during a defensive war.

Eugene V. Rostow, former dean of Yale Law School and undersecretary of state for political affairs between 1966 and 1969, noted that “the government of Israel neither ‘deported’ Palestinians nor ‘transferred’ Israelis during or after 1967.” Jewish property owners began to return to their previous homes in Hebron in 1968, acting on their own volition without government authorization.

Rostow also pointed out that the Geneva Convention applied only to acts by one signatory “carried out on the territory of another.” The West Bank, however, did not belong to any signatory power, for Jordan had no sovereign rights or legal claims there. Its legal status was defined as “an unallocated part of the British Mandate.”

Unable to beat Israel on the battlefield, an attempt is being made to delegitimize the state by its actions regarding settlements. Interestingly, the Oslo Accords signed in 1993 by Yasser Arafat do not prohibit settlements.

The settlements have never been and never will be an obstacle to peace. If and when honest and frank negotiations resume and a territorial agreement with the Palestinians is signed, Israel may well dismantle additional settlements in Judea and Samaria. History shows, however, that dismantling settlements and making territorial concessions only makes the Palestinians more aggressive and obstinate.

Israel uprooted Jewish families from their homes in Gaza and Samaria in what became a national trauma. But abandoning the Jewish settlement and their economic assets did not bring peace or reconciliation — instead it brought more violence and more death. For the Palestinians, these unilateral Israeli concessions were a sign of weakness, causing them to launch even more terrorist attacks.

The endlessly repeated refrain about the “occupied territories” is sheer propaganda, since the territories never belonged to Palestinian Arabs. The Palestinian Authority was given control of the areas, and the only reason Israel continues to exert control is in reaction to Palestinian Arab violence.

The real obstacle to peace is the refusal of the Arab world to accept the existence of a Jewish state in their midst. Although it occupies one-thousandth of the combined size of Muslim states, Israel’s existence in the Middle East is, to most Arabs, unacceptable and should be fought to the last drop of (Israeli) blood. The Palestinian struggle is not so much for Palestinian self-determination as it is for the destruction of the Jewish, infidel state.

U.S. pressure on Israel to dismantle the settlements is therefore dangerous because it will bring more violence, more terrorism, and more Israeli deaths. By pressuring Israel on this issue the U.S. will contribute to the creation of an area that will become “Judenrein,” as Jordan, Saudi Arabia, and most of the rest of the Arab world are. And this action would certainly be in contravention to the precepts of the Fourth Geneva Convention.

If Yasser Arafat and his minions were able to negotiate with Israel while the Israeli settlements expanded through natural growth, why should Obama take this “holier than thou” approach? The Obama administration’s focus on the settlements is a ploy to appease the Arabs, especially the Saudis.

A genuine Arab-Palestinian acceptance of peace with the Jewish state is what should be the prerequisite for Obama’s demands.

************

So here are my preconditions: Release Gilad Shalit unconditionally as a confidence-building measure and freeze ALL construction if you want a construction freeze. That's right--if WE don't build, then the Palestinians don't build either. The Palestinian complaint is that we're encroaching on "their" land -- what they choose to ignore is that we're building on land that so far, isn't theirs. And so are they. Their building, as much as ours, prejudices final status of these disputed territories. There is no Palestine, yet, and while I believe there should be one, the faster the Palestinians move towards a realistic settlement, the less likely it is that more disputed territory will have Israeli housing on it.

More MSM Shenanigans

2009-07-23T20:25:00.006+03:00

And you wonder why I detest the Main Stream Media and its in-house idealogues?

This story was forwarded to me by someone who lifted it off HonestReporting's site:

******

In recent days, some ultra-Orthodox residents of Jerusalem violently demonstrated against the decision to open a parking lot on Saturday during the Jewish Sabbath, and against the way authorities handled the case of an ultra-Orthodox woman accused of starving her son.

On Thursday July 16, AFP photographer Ahmad Gharabli snapped [a] photo of one such protester.[He's giving police the finger--ed.]

His caption is straightfoward enough:

An Ultra Orthodox Jewish man gestures during clashes with Israeli forces following demonstrations against the arrest of a woman accused of child abuse in Jerusalem on July 16, 2009. Hundreds of ultra-Orthodox Jews clashed with police for a third day in protest at an 'unjustified' arrest of a religious woman and the opening of a parking lot on Saturdays, the Jewish holy day of rest.

On Monday July 20, the same photo appeared in The Australian's coverage of -- the US-Israel disagreement over construction in eastern Jerusalem. The caption's Down Under version doesn't even state what the demonstration is about:

An Ultra Orthodox Jewish man gestures during clashes with Israeli forces following demonstrations in Jerusalem.

So Australian readers could assume this is an example of Israeli defiance of the US. This, despite the fact that the demonstration that the caption refers to has absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with the published story in The Australian.

Now why would an editor juxtapose a story about Jewish development in eastern Jerusalem with an unrelated image of an ultra-Orthodox demonstrator? What subtle message does The Australian convey here?

******

Subtle? It's about as subtle as a slap in the face. Why would he do this (this is a rhetorical question, right)? It's an editor who has an anti-Israel bias of his or her own, and is violating journalistic ethics by deliberately portraying ultra-Orthodox (too often demonized as "Right Wing Settlers" which is laughable) men in a full-on riot over US demands to stop building in Jerusalem.

You might be surprised (or maybe not) at how much this kind of distortion takes place in the English-speaking MSM. I read The Guardian online; I've listened to BBC's malicious spin on Israel. If I were an Englishwoman subjected to this barrage of propaganda on a regular basis, I would hate Israel. No wonder so many Brits and Aussies do....the distortion by the media amounts to libel, but the thing that makes me truly sad is that they do not portray the real Israel. Israel is portrayed only in terms of war and death, and there is no sense of the vibrancy of the country, of the fierce love of life, of the hospitality, the good works, the caring, the cynicism about politics, the day-to-day encounters between Palestinians and Israelis in the thousands that are normative but never mentioned.

No foreign media covers Seeds of Peace, or Humans Without Borders; no foreign media covers Palestinian-Israeli joint ventures on environmental issues. I happened to be in the chemotherapy unit (I was lost) at Hadassah Hospital the other day, and saw women being treated in the order of their number in line, all of whom apparently knew each other. One couple, a Mitrachi Jew and a Palestinian Arab, came together every week for treatment, and these women, regardless of identities, supported each other.

The western elitists of the press and diplomatic and university circles sneer, a la Walt & Meerscheimer, about how Jews always cry "wolf" (oops, "antiSemitism") whenever Israel is criticized. This is inverse logic. Our accusations of anti-Semitism have to do with a remorseless demonizing of Israel through deliberate lies of commission and omission--this caption in The Australian being a prime example.

Not surprisingly, anti-Semitism fueled by this kind of media coverage is rapidly rising in Europe . Understandably, too, since Europe's endemic Jew-hatred is part of their cultural identity.

There are over 70 conflicts raging in the world right now. Human rights violations of the most egregious sort are taking place: human shields in Sri Lanka; hospital shellings in Sri Lanka; the systematic rape of virgins in Iran so they can be executed for political protest; the burning to death of women in India for failing to bear a son; the countless "honor killings" in Moslem countries; the colonization of Tibet; the mass murder under cover of war in the Congo; Darfur's genocide; torture of political prisoners in Iran.....but the vast majority of news stories these days concern the building of homes along the Green Line in land that was illegally occupied by Jordan and lost to Israel in Jordan's subsequent war of aggression.

Yes, when the building of more condominiums for working class Israelis in Har Homa (land purchased by Jews and later conquered by Jordan) gets more outrage and attention from the U.S. State Department and the French Foreign Ministry, there is something wrong with their priorites. If it isn't simply anti-Semitism, then I submit it is anti-Semitism fueled by something much more malevolent: a willingness to do anything to get cheap oil from the Arab Oil Cartel.

"Why Richard, it profits a man nothing to give his soul for the whole world... but for Wales?"

....but for cheap oil?

Progress (Of A Sort) In Hebrew

2009-07-22T07:07:00.001+03:00

We moved last November.

I did All The Right Things. I changed my teudat zehut (ok, it took a couple of months), but even before that, I went to the bank. I spoke to a bank officer and gave her the new address of our new condo given to us by the kablan.

Har Homa is a neighborhood of condominium buildings that each straddle two streets. The address the kablan gave us is NOT the address the Post Office uses -- the mailboxes are on the OTHER street. **

This, of course, entails another trip back to the bank. A very nice clerk assures me that I don't need to go stand in yet another line, she can change the address in her computer. So I give her the "correct" address of the alternate (front) street.

After a couple of months, we stopped getting bank statements. No problem. For 6.5 NIS, I can get one every month by (you guessed it) going to the bank AND getting it in English!!

More alarming, though, was the fact that our one credit card bill stopped coming. This was playing havoc with my sleep patterns, stress level and ability to figure out what I was spending every month.

I called the number on the credit card. Another nice person took our new address. Problem solved.

Another month went by -- no credit card statement.

I called again and got another nice person who told me I simply needed to go to the bank (since it is a bank-issued card) and tell the bank.

"But I did that already!" I wailed. After some further discussion, she clarified that doing a change of address for the bank statements didn't necessarily mean the change of address was done for the credit card.

I wanted to ask, "Why not?" but I was fairly sure it was a pointless question.

I went back to the bank. It seems that the nice woman on the phone was correct--the change of address for the bank statements does NOT change the address for the credit card statement.

And since I was there.....I asked why I stopped getting my bank statements?

The bank officer checked. It appeared that the clerk who changed my address did not change my incorrect new address to the correct new address....she changed it to our OLD rental address. I don't blame her, I blame my Hebrew.....

NOW it's all fixed. And today the credit card statement came! That's not what amazed me. What absolutely amazed me is that I opened it AND I COULD READ IT!

Now, my Hebrew is vastly in need of improvement but I cannot tell you how thrilled I was to read how much in debt I am despite my language impairment! I'm going through the bill line item by line item and it suddenly dawned on me --I'm reading this --and understanding this -- in HEBREW!!

That's progress, isn't it?

And from now on, we're paying cash for groceries. THAT's the biggest item on the bill!

** A factoid that is often either unknown or ignored in the frantic blatherings of the MSM and Left when they shriek about the Israeli government approving "300 more homes" etc....300 condominiums works out to roughly 20 high-density condo buildings, which is, let's see, oh yeah, this street. Ten buildings on each side. But these Know-Nothing-Nabobs manage to convey the impression that somehow 300 suburban villas are sprawling across the landscape.

Taxi Tales

2009-07-21T10:04:00.002+03:00

I've known Yossi for almost three years now. He never ceases to amaze me.

As any regular reader knows, he's a cab driver. It's a highly competitive field not because it pays so well, but because in the current economic meltdown, everyone who has lost a job has looked for other work. Many of them went and got a cab license and are now plying the streets with rented cabs.

Yes, rented. Many people don't know it, but unless you've purchased your own car, and bought your own "number," all of which comes to a hefty sum, your only recourse is to "rent" a taxi. There are people who own fleets of cabs that they rent out to drivers. Many of the cab-drivers you see aren't raking it in not only because times are tough, and customers are scarce. They also need to pay for their gas daily and their food (few go home for lunch). Many work 16 hour days, especially if they rent. Why? Because renting a cab costs the driver 300 NIS per day or more.

Which is why Yossi amazed me (again) this week. I saw him coming in early to work last week and today. Very early. I also saw him one day collecting money. I was puzzled, but shrugged it off, thinking maybe it was for a birthday or a Lotto ticket or something. In fact, after asking a couple of people, I found it was an entirely different story.

Yossi has worked at his "station" for 8 or 9 years. During that time, he has watched other drivers fall on hard times. It's a job that takes a high toll from family life. Something like seventy-five percent of cab drivers are divorced....after all, a woman could tire of being married to a guy who's never home. And whose income is dicey at best.

One of the drivers Yossi knows is an older guy in his sixties. Divorced. Rents his cab. Works to make a living hand-to-mouth. Lives in a share rental in the cheapest part of town. Eats one meal a day because that's all he can afford. His money goes to his ex-wife and children. He's the walking definition of "working poor."

He fell behind in his rental payments to the owner of the taxi (a guy who, by the way, gave him months of slack to give him a chance to catch up). Finally, the owner of the cab took it back. The driver was suddenly without a job and without a way of making a living. This driver is in his sixties. We're in a Depression. There aren't a lot of jobs out there. Especially for the elderly. The prospects aren't good, here.

Yossi seems to know everyone in Jerusalem. He took this suddenly-unemployed driver aside and told him he could help. Yossi drove this older gentleman to Wadi Joz, to a man he knows who owns a fleet of rental taxis. Who, as it happens, rents his cabs for several hundred shekels less per week than what the driver had been paying. Because Yossi knows the fleet owner and has been on good terms with him for many years, he was able to persuade him to rent a cab to this now-unemployed driver.

Then Yossi went back to his station. He went from driver to driver and pitched them, telling them that look, next week, it could be you or me that falls on hard times. He got every one of them to pitch in 20 shekels or so, and then went to the station manager. He persuaded the station manager to let the elderly driver return to the station with his newly-rented cab by taking these donations and putting them as a "deposit" towards the month's station fee (yes, the drivers also pay a fee to work at their stations).

"The guy's in debt--he's not reliable," the manager protested.

"But he has nothing without work. And all he's done for the last 15 years is work at this station. Look at him! He's old! What else can he do?" Yossi pleaded. The manager likes Yossi a lot. As a matter of fact, everyone who knows Yossi likes him a lot. He's a mensch.

"What's it to you? The guy's not even Jewish!" the manager replied.

"But I'M Jewish!" Yossi retorted, "And I can't see an elderly man go without eating! I have to take responsibility for this!"

"You'll guarantee him?" the manager asked slyly, no doubt thinking this would make Yossi yield. Not!

"I'll sign for him," Yossi declared, thus guaranteeing that he would be on the hook for any payments his colleague fails to make.

I heard this piece-meal from several people over several days, including the station manager.....and didn't understand it in part because my Hebrew is poor and in part because I couldn't really credit what I was hearing.

"YOU got this guy a new cab and got him back on station?" I screeched quietly over coffee this morning. Yossi looked abashed. "Ma la'asot, Sarah?" he said softly. "I could not turn my back and let him go hungry. I had to do something."

I think this is what in the Old Country we called "doing the right thing." G-d bless Yossi and may Israel be filled with many more like him.

If You Can Tear Yourselves Away....

2009-07-16T17:52:00.002+03:00

....from speculation over whether or not Michael Jackson is another Martin Luther King Jr. or murdered (no, in both cases), the Economy, the Left v Right squabbling going on just about everywhere, vacation plans, the Sotomayor hearings, the British Open, the idiocy of Dudu Topaz or the government, and other nonsense....

You might read this by Shirin Sadeghi. There is still a tremendous struggle going on in Iran for democracy, even of the ayatollish variety, and there is a generation that is paying in blood and torture for the right to be heard. Heard in their own country, and lately, sadly, heard over the random noise of the western media which abandons important issues for political partisanship and pop iconography.

I'm printing it here because most people won't use links. They read and move on. But if you link, at the top of the source page are other resources for more information.

On Friday July 19, a large group of mourners gathered at the Ghoba mosque in Tehran to await a speech about the martyrs of the post-election protests by presidential candidate Mir Hossein Mousavi. According to one Iranian blog, 28-year-old Taraneh Mousavi was one of a group of people that was arrested by plainclothesed security forces for attending the gathering.

Taraneh, whose first name is Persian for "song", disappeared into arrest.

Weeks later, according to the blog, her mother received an anonymous call from a government agent saying that her daughter has been hospitalized in Imam Khomeini Hospital in the city of Karaj, just north of Tehran -- hospitalized for "rupturing of her womb and anus in... an unfortunate accident".

When Taraneh's family went to the hospital to find her, they were told she was not there.

According to another Iranian blog which claims to have original information about Taraneh from her family, Iranian security forces contacted Taraneh's family after the hospital visit warning them not to publicize Taraneh's story and not to associate her disappearance with arrests made at post-election protests, claiming instead that she had tried to harm herself because of feeling guilty for having pre-marital sex.

Witnesses have come forward to the various Internet sites who are covering Taraneh's story, stating that she was mentally and physically abused in Tehran's notorious Evin prison and also that a person who matches her physical description and injuries had been treated at the Imam Khomeini Hospital, was unconscious when witnessed and was later transferred out of the hospital while still unconscious.

Taraneh's is not the first allegation of brutal raping of a post-election protester -- according to the UK Guardian, an 18 year old boy in Shiraz was repeatedly gang raped by prison officials while in detention after being arrested for participating in the protests on June 15. That boy's father won't let him back in the family home.

Despite its agitations for reform, Iranian society remains traditional, according to Iranian-British blogger Potkin Azarmehr, and it's the stigma of rape that is being used as a weapon against the protesters. "By killing protesters, the government makes martyrs of them, but by raping them and allowing them to live, it makes them shunned in society," Azarmehr said.

Not that the stigma of rape is exclusive to Iran and other more traditional societies. A friend of Azarmehr's who is presently in Iran told him that he's "sick of hearing that people like Taraneh are better off dead" from friends abroad, just because they "can't handle the fact that she's been raped."

The psychology of threatening protesters and political activists is not a new science. The strategies and ultimate goals are the same for any kind of torture: to humiliate, disembody (through denying the victim authority over his/her own physical self), extract confessions (whether true or false) and ultimately permanently terrorize the victims to prevent further 'disturbances'. The last part often fails spectacularly, as victims tend to feel even more antagonism toward the perpetrators, and even more of a 'do or die' mentality about agitating for change at any cost.

Prison abuse and torture is also about marking these victims as defiled human beings -- it's like a scarlet letter of social isolation against them, to deny them the community support and strength which they need to move past those memories and not be defined by them. This is where others can step in and change the very attitudes toward abuse which so many institutions count on when they commit these crimes.

Taraneh's story must be told and it must be heard. Perhaps her life can still be saved.

Keep her in your prayers and in your hearts.

Pool Wars

2009-07-14T17:53:00.005+03:00

I swim. I have recounted elsewhere my adventures with the Summer Crowd that turns out on halcyon days to swim at my gym.

Well, happy days are here again. Once again, it is July. Once again, the fair weather swimmers are turning out.

We have lap lanes at the pool. However, the large open area which is usually full of splashing children and cooling-off-adults by lunchtime is generally used by serious lap swimmers in the early hours of the morning as an addition to the lap lanes. Despite a lack of floats separating the lanes in the space, it's pretty easy to figure out that there are four lanes, two lanes on each side of the two black lines.

I've been here early mornings enough to know that when all four lanes are full, I need to swim the (more crowded)lap lanes where everyone understands how to swim counterclockwise. The draw of the open area is that when you stake out a lane, you get the lane to yourself.

Most of the time.

Today I was an early arrival and saw that two lanes were open in the Open Area. I staked out one and started the warm-up laps. I was approximately half done with the morning lap routine when something dark and large plowed into sight.

Lo and behold! A large woman in a dark swimsuit doing a "backstroke." That word is in quotes for a reason. She's actually on her back, doing a frog kick and paddling like a turtle with her arms, totally clueless as to her location in the pool and swimming in both my lane and the empty lane next to me.

Ok, not a problem. I can cope by stopping and treading water until her wake passes (as she swims into the third lane over and gets mowed down by a guy doing his power crawl at Olympic speeds). I simply move a bit to the north in my lane to minimize the possibility of more collisions.

NOT good enough. She's decided that the "lane" is the entire space between the two black lines and that she's entitled to all of it. That is, in reality, two lanes that she is now straddling. I understood not navigating well on her back -- but in the alternate lap she did a breaststroke and could see where she was swimming. She planted herself squarely in the middle of the two lanes and proceeded to swim s l o w l y up the middle, effectively squeezing me out of my lane.

I haven't lived in Israel for three years for nothing. My friends in the Old Country have indicated that I'm, uh, "a bit too confrontational" to start with. Moi?!

I am not going to be pushed out of my lane, I decide. I swim straight up the lane while she's coming back on her upside-down-turtle stroke. She's still squarely in the middle of the lane. I swim in my lane, and end up brushing against her as I pass. I kick. Hard. I've always had a strong kick and I really thrashed to make sure I got as much water as possible into the air and all over her.

Return lap. She's now coming down the middle of both lanes doing the breast-stroke, determinedly. I do the crawl right past her, not giving an inch of my lane up.

She punches me!

Listen, I've had enough accidental close encounters in a pool during my life to understand that bumping-in-passing is an assumed risk.

This wasn't an accident. Had the lifeguard seen it, it would have looked as if she just happened to stroke into my ribs in passing. But in the water, there was a level of force beyond mere grazing.

No problem. No more Ms. Nice Guy.

I took back the center of my lane, instead of inching to the side to allow her more room. This meant that on my return lap, I swam right over her since she continued to plant herself in the middle of both lanes -- meaning she was half in my lane. I pull a pretty mean crawl, and it gives me quite a push in the water, especially when I'm, well, pissed off. Excuse my French.

So, I swim smack dab in the middle of my lane and end up doing the crawl over her left shoulder and she flounders on her back.

Ah, but my Opposition has clearly done pool wars before. On her next pass, she reaches out and scratches me with her nails down the ribs. And never breaks stride...I kick harder in passing, trying to get as much water as possible in her face.

But now I have her measure. And now I am determined that I'm not giving one centimeter of pool space.

Neither is she. She has now planted herself so, despite the empty lane next to me, she is three-quarters into my lane on her return. As I head up my lane, I see a kind of Pool-Chicken taking place: which of us will yield? Which of us will give way and either pull up or pull over?

Neither of us, it turns out. She swims right into me.

Enough! I stop. I tread water. I reach with both hands and push. HARD. I SHOVE her into her lane and as she yells, "What's the matter? What are you doing?" I yell back:
"Get out of my lane, you bitch!"

No, its not nice. But it was very effective. She moved into her lane and stayed there the rest of my workout.

Sometimes being "a little too confrontational" isn't all bad.

But the irony in all this is that I go to the pool for stress release. Hah!

My Life As A Critic

2009-07-13T12:18:00.005+03:00

Ever faced a bookshelf in a store or library and wondered, "Do I really want to check that out/buy that?"

I read a lot. Probably a book or two a week. (I have little interest in television besides the news and History Channel.) Fortunately, my employer has just started an in-office library which allows employees to check out books and DVDs. The employees have indicated their enthusiasm by also contributing books we've read and enjoyed, so everyone benefits.

But....what to do when you don't know if you really want that book?

West Bank Mama has introduced me to Goodreads which not only makes recommendations and allows friends to share recommendations, but now offers a reviewing service. I can now write a review of a book, and annoy all my friends by posting it on my blog and Facebook pages.

Here you go:

The Pillars of the Earth by Ken Follett

My review

rating: 5 of 5 stars
This is simply one of the best books ever written. It recounts the struggle of medieval not-quite-English-yet folks during the Civil War of the 12th century (think "Cadfael"). The characters and events revolve around the building of a cathedral, through which the author sketches the socio-economic dynamics of life in this one shire. The characters and conflicts are exceptionally well drawn, and the period is fascinating. The social change wrought by war and famine is also riveting: if you ever thought the Middle Ages were stable and boring, you won't after reading this book.

I can't date when I read this book because I read it over again approximately once a year. I just finished this year's read. It's really that good.

****************************

Not very profound, huh? It certainly doesn't do credit to the book. Ken Follett is better known for contemporary thrillers, yet in his Forward to the most recent edition of The Pillars of the Earth, he expressed pleasure and surprise that of all the books he has written, this is the one that seems to have the most universal appeal and is consistently at the top of the publisher's "sell" lists. He confesses to a fascination with Gothic cathedrals......maybe that's why I enjoy the book so much. I share that fascination.

J'Accuse! Ilan Halimi and French Justice

2009-07-11T21:36:00.004+03:00

A colleague and friend once asked me why California still had a death penalty.

"Because if there are not state-controlled executions, people will do their own killings," I said. To me, this seemed perfectly apparent. My friend, a young defense attorney, was horrified. "But that's not justice," he protested.

"No, it's the state's attempt to minimize revenge killings by putting them into a judicial strait-jacket and making the death penalty very limited and very controlled," I told him. I don't have any authority for this. It was simply my impression after years in a prosecutor's office.

Any prisoner on Death Row was referred to as a "dead man walking" by other prisoners.

What does this have to do with Ilan Halimi?

Ilan Halimi was a young French Jewish kid of working class Moroccan-born parents who was lured by a pretty gang member to go out on a 'date,' then was kidnapped and tortured to death over a three week period. During that period, his gangster captors repeatedly called his family to demand a ransom "because Jews are rich, everyone knows that," and tortured him during the calls so his family was in agony.

The family is poor. When they told his captors this, their response was: "Go to the synagogue and have your compatriots come up with the money."

When the family complained to the police, the police shrugged it off. Not until he was found naked and dying in the streets did the police take any action. When he died, the police dismissed the claim that his torture/murder was anti-Semitic. That denial lasted until the first arrest, when one gang member boasted that they had kidnapped and killed Ilan because he was a Jew.

Youssouf Fofana, the gang leader and reputed mastermind of this depravity, was sentenced to "life" in prison.

Fofana is a Moslem. Many of his cohorts are Moslems. They read excerpts from the Quran to Halimi's family during telephone calls in which the family could hear Ilan screaming during torture.

Have you heard one word of regret from the Moslem community anywhere in the world? Aren't Moslems offended that one of their own could butcher a young man who has done nothing, and quote the Quran while doing it?

Fofana was one of 27 people on trial in the kidnapping, torture and murder of Ilan Halimi, who was only 23 years old. A month after the start of the trial, Fofana admitted to having stabbed and set fire to Halimi, pouring flammable liquid over him and setting it alight. Testimony indicated that acid was thrown on Ilan. Ilan's throat was cut by Fofana just before he was released, but he didn't die immediately. He was able to walk, and died while trying to reach help.

French journalist Guy Millière reported that “the screams must have been loud because the torture was especially atrocious: the thugs cut bits off the flesh of the young man, they cut his fingers and ears, they burned him with acid, and in the end poured flammable liquid on him and set him on fire.” Reports of Ilan's death stated that over 80% of his body has been "butchered." Ilan died on the way to the hospital.

But no one in the buildings where he was tortured heard anything. So they say. All "good citizens" like those in the Third Reich who never noticed the ethnic cleansing going on all around them. It's not clear from the news reports so far if the custodian who provided the apartment to his captors was convicted of aiding and abetting.

Today, all but two of his murderers were convicted. The longest sentence, a "life sentence" for Fofana, means his killer can be paroled in 22 years. Others received varying sentences but many will get what is called "good time/work time" credit: they will only serve half their sentence if their prison behavior is good and they will also receive credit for their time in custody to date.

His two main accomplices, Samir Ait Abdelmalek and Jean-Christophe Soumbou, were given sentences of 15 and 18 years, respectively. Another man who was a minor at the time also received a 15-year prison term, while Emma, a young girl used to attract Halimi, was sentenced to nine years in prison.

The 22 others were convicted of a variety of crimes, including kidnapping by an organized group, sequestration that resulted in death, or failing to assist a person in danger. Those acting as jailers received 10 to 12 year terms.

22 years or less for a three week exercise in sadism? For torturing a young man targeted solely for being a Jew? For pouring acid on him? For cutting his throat? For cutting flesh from his body? For pouring flammable liquid on him and setting him on fire?

For money.

For Jew-hatred.

France should be ashamed of herself if she calls this "justice." If Ilan Halimi were my child, Fofana would be a dead man walking. France is too dainty to execute barbarians? Fine, I'll do it myself.

Islam should be ashamed of not excommunicating these barbarians. Where are the fatwas calling for Fofana's death for Insulting Islam? Because torture murder of someone innocent in the name of Islam when it's really just for cold cash is an insult to Islam.

If he were my child, I'd build a guillotine in the streets in front of the court house. Bring back the guillotine. Or give me a hunting license.

If It Ends With Money......

2009-07-08T21:13:00.002+03:00

I would hear this phrase, "if it ends with money" in both English and Hebrew. The English came courtesy of friends who spoke English to me so I wouldn't have to struggle to keep up so much.

I didn't get it.

"If it ends with money"? What is this, a profit-making venture they're talking about? It was always in the context of bad news if not outright disaster.

I'd heard it so much, and sooo did not understand, and I was already embarassed by my limited Hebrew skills so I didn't want to blurt out, "WHAT are you talking about?"

The reason I didn't understand became clear last week. It's a PART of a phrase. Yes, it applies to disasters, usually of the major medical or automobile kind.

Your teenager was in an accident and the car will be in the garage for a week. But he's fine. "Thank G-d! If it ends with money...."

Your elderly mother dropped a heavy vase which shattered all over the floor. No one was hurt. "Thank G-d! If it ends with money...."

Your brother is confronted by an angry tus-tus driver who is shouting that he was cut off in traffic. The driver slams his helmet into your brother's car and shatters the windshield. Your brother is fine but needs a new windshield. "Thank G-d! If it ends with money...."

You've just received the results of a blood test, and your doctor tells you your have some wierd syndrome you've never heard of before--and it's easily cured but the medicine isn't in the health basket and it's expensive. "Thank G-d! If it ends with money...."

Last week, a neighbor's car died. While she was driving it. In the middle of a busy boulevard. She had it towed to the garage and it was eventually fixed for 1500 NIS she didn't really have in her budget. "But thank G-d you weren't hit!" I exclaimed, knowing how busy that road is.

"Yes, exactly what I was saying," she responded, "If it ends with money...."

"If it starts with money and it ends with money, thank G-d, because it's only money," our other friend chimed in. No one died. No one was injured. It's money, it's not life or limb. It can be fixed.

NOW I get it.