=jr0510d Journal, from 14 Oct '05 Follows =jr0923j, Posted 12 Oct '05 ------------------------------------------------------------------ The Bush administration -- it is not yet clear if Rowe, Cheney, or both -- and if both, then it would seem to stem from George Jr., a vain vicious petty walking inferirity complex who makes Xixon look the gentleman -- betrayed the identitiy of a CIA Agent. They did so because her husband had challenged Bush's claim, the rationale for his better_than_Daddy_did_it War, that Iraq was developing nuclear weapons. It is said that no_one will likely be charged with betraying the agent's identity via the USA Press, because it is very difficult to prove that the betrayer knew that this was an undercover agent, that that agent was then working as an undercover agent rather than as an overt employee, that the betrayer intended to betray the identity, and that the betrayer knew that it was a crime to betray the identity of an undercover agent. But all that is sophistry. To take the last point first: "Ignorance of the law is no excuse." That is a principle of law. As for whether or not the agent was then working undercover -- that is a red herring, anyone who ever has worked undercover or ever well must safeguard their identity. As to intending to betray the identity -- that a crime is committed unintentionally is never a defense, it is at most a mitigating factor. An intentional killing with premediation is lst degreee murder, an intentional killing in the heat of anger -- and the bible deals with this distindction -- is 2nd degreee murder and carries at most a punishment of life impirsonment, not death -- and an untintentional killing is manslaughter and carries a sentence of some years. As to not knowing that the person whom one betrayed was an undercover agent -- well, that takes us to a verey contrived situation -- it was Satre, I now recall, who imagines a somewhat similar situation -- the protagnoist betrays to the Falangistes the hiding place of Juan Gris, a Republican activist, in the belief that Juan Gris had left that hiding place. If one does not know someone is an agent, what sense does it make to say one has betrayed him. This is John Le Carre's story, from what I read of it, The Tailor of Panamma -- a nobody who is denounced as a spy. In the Valerie Wilson case it is obvious that the Bush administraton knew she was an undercover agent, intentionally betrayed her identity for the pettiest and most spiteful of reasons -- again, Rowe and Cheney are bastards but professional bastards, only Bush, who has never even tried to earn an honest living -- not by doing honest work, but by making an honest effort to do the dishonest work for which he was hired -- could have the immaturity and petty mind_st to have done so. --------------------------------------------------------------- Re: IHT 14 Oct '05 (Brzezinski) Brzezinski, may his brain never lack formaldehyde, writes in passing that Bush's foreign policy "has stamped the United States as the successor to British imperialism and as a partner of Israel in the military repression of the Arabs." It is not clear that Brz is asserting that Israel indulges in 'military repression of the Arabs', subsequent remarks suggest that he is speaking only of erroneous perceptions, not of fact. On the other hand, Brz was National Security Advisor to Jimmy the Grin, the worst enemy Israel has yet had, for he cost us the Sinai. Though on the other hand, we might have kept the Sinai and lost the land of Israel in another war. Or for that matter, have gained the rest of the Egyptian oil fields and at last been able to buy the lasting friendship of the nations of self_styled 'western civilization'. As for the facts, these are well known. Israel, unlike the USA, is not engaged in military repression of Arabs. Israel is concerned with Palestinians who live in the land of Israel, in the so_called Occupied Territories -- or as one must now say, Occupied Territory. Some of these Palestinians may well be descendents of Jews who were never expelled from the land of Israel, or who were expelled and returned. Others are recent descendents of Arabs and other residents of Islamic nations, who came to the land of Israel when it began to regain prosperity but not sovereignty under Jewish Settlement. One could term them economic illegal immigrants, except that the British mandate did not forbid Arab immigration. In administering the civil government of the occupied territories, until it reduced to a position of self_defense by the intifada, Israel did its best, within budget constraints unknown in the USA and in western Europe, to improve the standard of living, safegaurd the human rights, and enhance the civil liberties of the Palestinians living there. Israel, unlike the USA, really is involved in a low_grade war against groups that use terrorist attacls on civillians as their primary tactic. Israel attempts as necessary to disrupt such attacks by minimized and highly selective military action, and by such limited restrictions of movement of the entire Palestinian population as are deemed necessary. --------------------------------------------------------------- In the last analysis, the Jews of Gaza proved themselves to be freiers. And so one of the great though small Jewish communities of history was uprooted, dispersed, and destroyed, to assuage the anxieties of one corrupt beleagured old man with a genius for political manipulation and intimidation. It is a shocking indictment of an ostensibly democratic decision that no one still can say clearly why Sharon did it. The closest possible explanation, gleaned from a few remarks he let slip, seems to be that he had the childish idea that if he would just get out of there, no one could blame him for whatever he did next. That is, that if there was no longer any Jewish military nor civillian settlement in Gaza, that the pro_Palestinian nations of the world -- which are almost all the nations since Palestinians hold hostage, by threat of terrorism, the Arab oil_bloc -- would see Gaza as a foreign semi_nation, and would not blame Israel for whatever military action it then took to defend itself from the threat of terrorism. Well, that is the sort of discredited rationale that the Bush Administration, whoever they really are, invoked to justify its disasterous occupation of Afghanistan, once a great spiritual people before Russia and then the USA tried to control it, and Iraq, which like Egypt lost its greatest two millenia ago. All the oil_consuming nations, that is, all the self_styled developed world, have a vested interest in taking the Palestinian side against Israel. Ethical considerations barely enter into it, although they cloak their realpolitik in moralisms. The Jews of Gaza resisted their expulsion only by non_violent means. Indeed, non_violence was carried to an extreme, not merely was there no violence against persons, there was no violence against property, nor even civil disruption. The Israel intellectual establishment, represented for English readers by the greatly attenuated and increasingly insipid Jerusalem Post, applauded, offered lots of sympathy, and left them to be thrown out. So one must conclude that a strategy of extreme non_violence failed, and should not be relied upon if, or more likely when, the settlements of Judea and Samaria are threatened. For the USA must continually curry favor with the Arab bloc, the Arab bloc must continually appease the Palestinian terrorist groups, and the Palestinian terrorist groups, and the semblance of Palestinian self_government subsurvient to them, must continually wage a low_grade terrorist war against Israel, in order to distract their own populace from its socio_economic oppression, and in order to extort money from their foreign sponsors. Now I'll turn to a few points raised in a Jlem Post July 29__Aiug 4 article by Judy Siegel-Itzkovich, interviewing Haim Ofer and Nahi Alon on their theory of non_violent conflict resolution, which they used to faciliate the non_violent evacuation of Jewish settlement from Gaza. They make many interesting and reaonable points. I will remark only on a few points. It is of course possible that had the Gaza Jewish community not at last accepted its expulsion, that Israel society would have split in two, a situation which could invite an attack from foreign nations. That risk presumably restrained the Sharon government and the armed forces -- to which the settlers of Gaza also belong, of course. In the last analysis, it was patriotism that caused the settlers of Gaza to de facto acquiesce in their own explusion. Or on the other hand, it is possible that Sharon would have been overthrown, and the Gaza Jewish community would have survived. It can now never be rebuilt. Even if there is again Israeli occupation and resettlement of Gaza, the social/spiritual structure that existed has been destroyed. Challenging the notion of conflict as a 'zero_sum__game', The article states: "It is thus taht strategy for a 'constructive sturggle' demands that the 'enemy' be seen as a pluralistic group with some positive boices that can be reaoned with; radicals should be isolated, but moderates should be talked to." In this drama the term 'Jewish extremist' was very much overused, especially by the non_Jewish quaisi_intellecutal community and its media. In effect, all who favored continued Jewish settlement in Gaza were included in that pejorative. So particularly in this case, but also in the general case, I would say: Why no include so_called radicals in dialogue. And surely that applies to the general struggle against Islamic fundamentalist groups that employ terrorism. For these in large part are intensely if intolerantly religious people. That would certainly apply to Osama ben Laden, though from what I read in my two newspapers (the IHT and the JP), albeit a bit between the lines, it seems that as he fled the USA invasion of Afghanistan he was strangled by the Pakistan secret service, and interred with the fullest Wahabi rites possible, although his body may have been cremated. The interviewer seems surprised that the Association for Civil Rights in Israel, which she terms 'left-wing', supported the right of anti_disengagement protestors to demonstrate. But first of all, ACRI was established as an apolitical group, with sponsors across the political spectrum. And it would seem largely patterned after the USA ACLU, the American Civl Liberties Union, which has continually made a point of taking stands on the principles of civil liberties, regardless of the political and ethical merits of the case, even to the point of litigating in defense of the right of neo_Nazis to demonstrate. In forbidding the demonstrators to demonstrate in the territory of Gaza, a point apparently not challenged by the ACRI , the government seems to have abused the notion of a 'closed military zone', unless it had a bona fide fear that such a demonstration would have provoked a terrorist attack from which it would have been unable to defend the demonstrators. Some had criticized settlers for brining their children to demonstrations. Well, there is a measure of media_oriented exploitation in that. But there is a slo the baby_sitter problem. And while a demonstration is not a great environment for an infant or child, its not mearly as bad as a rock concert, not to mention a traditional Mevo Modi'in Purim service -- in the old days, that is, nowadays they have aged and mellowed. One more bone to pick -- for the body is gone, and all that's left are a few old bones to pick: "Alon stresses, 'even onon_violent measures used by settlers -- such as hunger strikes or soldiers' refusal to carry out orders -- can destablize and topple a democracy. ...the Danger to democracy could be great if the aim is to destroy the ruling order. The government must decide how much it will tolerate.'" But that seems self_serving. I would see such tactics as ethical and legitimate. The danger was not democraccy, but to Sharon's evasion and usurpation of Israel democratic process. Extreme measures that do not cause loss of life nor injury to other citizens are justifiable, and fall within the democratic process (though not always within the law, in the case of civil disruption). That is, the may succeed in changing the prevailing climate of opinion, and hence inducing the democratically elected if not populace_responsive officials to reverse an unwise or unjust position. Well, that's all I have to say on this now. ---------------------------------------------------------------- When I came to Israel, in the late 1980's, it seemed to me that Israel emulated every intellectual fad in the USA, about 20 years later. And surely this is true, and worse, of Israel's treatment of mental illness, where their First Aid seems to be the zombie drugs of the 1950's -- CNS depressants, of which thorazine was the first, and may still be used. Though in fact some Russian intern apparently prescribed something like that for Pascale, in Aquacalda -- that's devils work, to force those soul_blockers -- like putting a pro football lineman against a little girl -- on a fallen angel, a lost dervish. I must remember to keep stealing little tings , and to eat unkosher foods -- scallops fried in butter with lemon, herbs, and a dash of white wine will do quite nicely -- that I may appease my devils and so be saved from such great sins. The Indians, when they weave a rug -- I mean the real Indians, not that subcontinent full of leftovers from a hyper_culture -- they leave a little gap in the border, so the evil spirit, or spirits, I forget which, can get out. But I want to talk about intelligent design. It seems to be that the USA intellectual establishment -- which for me is the IHT -- Inernational Herald Tribune -- is now emulating the worst of the Israel secular/religious KulturKampf -- or rather, the secular side of it, represented to me by HaAretz -- for I have found little intellectual extremism and dogmatism on the religious side, only on the self_styled left_wing secular side. Though in Israel the left_wing are now the affluent Tel Aviv urban Ashkenazim, the poor, needing land to build on, are geater Israel -- upon whom Netanyahu, that snake_oil salesman -- I broke with Likud when Netanyahu adhered to the agreement to quit Hebron, though he could have talked his way out of anything -- is foisting that sophmoric free_market pie_in_the_sky. "A rising tide lifts all boats", which is a great encouragement for all whose social circle is composed entirely of yacht_owners. So it is a militant secularism that I see in the intellectual contempt for the notion of 'intelligent design'. Or more precisely, the notion that there is no rational intellectual alternative to Darwin's xo_called 'theory of evolution'. Or more precisely, that this 'theory' admits no challenge. Now first of all, a theory that can not be disproved is no theory, it is a so_called 'philosophy' -- a closed intellectual construct into which all data can be forced, however much they are deformed in being squeezed in. Such rubrics are useful, but limited. One of the simplest examples is notion, attributed to Plato, that 'no man does evil but through ignorance.' Or the Buddhist notion, to which PVK has taken exception in Zenith lectures, that one is the cause of one's own misfortunes. Or Freudian 'theory'. Or Marxist theory. The JW's -- the self_styled Witnesses, who publish 'The WatchTower et. al. from Brooklyn, New York, and distributed it world_wide in almost every language -- do good work in finding exceptions to Drawin's theory. Again -- what is popularly known as Drawin's 'Theory of Evolution' is not a theory -- an hypothesis to be tested qualified and eventually reshaped by empirical observation -- but -- not precisely a 'philosophy', but an intellectual -- 'rubric', to use a catch_all term. A useful shove down an intellectual path where we can conceptually find accomodation for many facts, but not all. It seems to be a blind faith that all evolutionary stems from random variation, and unrestrained competition, such that all possibilities have emerged, and only the best_adapted variations have survived that sort of biologic demolition derby -- 'survival of the fittest'. Bosh; it's survival of the fatest. The fat cats. At least in that Economic Darwinism so popular with the Ayn Rand clan who now rule the USA and all its European satellites, including Israel. The first thing to say about 'intelligent design' is that it's not all that intelligent. Ellen Goodman makes that point in passing (IHT ca. 14 Oct '05), commenting that penguins, lately taken up as the mascot of the Bushie Right -- I mean, they wear black_and_white, just like IBM employees of the 1950's -- penguin males shelter penguin eggs with their feet for 3 months, and walk 70 miles to find food, neither of which seem frightfully intelligent. And somoene else noted, maybe in a copy of the IHT that I read on the beach of Rodos, that human beings really are not all that well designed -- and that a much more efficient model could easily be designed. Something that would ot be prone to back problems, for starters. Those who oppose 'intelligent design' are largely fighting a shiboleth -- a straw man -- a most crudely anthropomorphic model - - of which Michelangelo's Sistine Chapel ceiling is a clear illustration. I think that my motivation for challenging the opposition to 'intelligent design' is from one -- strand, so to speak -- of the teaching of PVK. PVK really is teaching a sort of rational_design, albeit in a non_anthropomorphic way. PVK's thought can accomodate the notion of a quaisi_anthromorphic Supreme Being, but can as well rest on the sort of Taoist notion of supreme being (no caps, lower case), So PVK holds that material creation has its source in non_materiyl 'templates' of increasing subtlety -- a Tibetan notion, if I recall what he said, of material body, subtle body, and very_subtle body. So PVK holds that all physical beings have a magentic field, which has a form not unlike that of the body, and then, more sublte than that, have a subtle body of light, somewhat like the form of the body -- and on through subtler and subtler levels -- rather like the 'Seven Heavens' intimated in Plato's Symposium. That is traditional Sufi metaphysics, and PVK explicates it in greate detail, using modern terminology and where possible alluding to points in what was in his time -- for times change so fast nowadays -- cutting_edge theory in physics. To come back to my first point, and maybe this is my last one too -- it seems to be that those who oppose ''intelligent design' as dogmatic simplified religious philosophy, are themselves expressing a dogmatic quaisi_religion -- dogmatic simplistic materialism. Which of course is about all one can expect from the Isreal left_wing intellecutal establishment -- the leftover Marxism of their youth, ossified. Refreshing and inspiring in its youth and in its time, and darned good for building kibutzim, but really quite confining, intellectually and socially. Pop Darwism is then a tautology. Species are determined by the survival of the fittest, and whatever species have survived are the fittest. I would like to say: presumably both factors come into play. In the actualizing of intelligent design, there will be trial_and_error , within which 'survival of the fittest' is likely to be a factor shaping the path -- which is not a simple linear one, but apt to be rather roundabout -- of evolution. There is a big methodologic problem here. 'Intelligent design' is not precisley 'science' -- whatever 'science' is thought to be -- for the idea is just one more cartoon in USA pop_philosophy. 'Intelligent design' is more like a working hypothesis -- a sort of theoretic construct that 'explains' -- whatever that means -- a large lot of data. Like the wave/particle theory of light, which is a blatant paradox -- for what does it even mean to say that something can simultaneously be both a wave and a particule -- it explains a great deal, but has no intuitive meaning -- that is, no meaning in our everday, our 'middle range', world. I have just read that "Unlike cretionsim, the teaching of which is banned as unconstitutional in the secular US ublic school system, intelligent design claims a basis in science, not religion." (IHT 18 Oct '05 (Joseph Rosenbloom). But surely it the ban upon teaching creationism that is unconstituional, for the constituion stipulates, 'Congress shall make no law regarding ?an establishment of? religion." ---------------------------------------------------------------- Why should I run down to the city to celebrate Sukot, when the whole point is to go out into the fields for the atumnal harvest. Though I don't quite recall what one harvests in the land of Israel in autumn. Apples, on the Golan, but those should not need constant watching. The figs are in Av, as I recall. The grain is cut down by the start of summer, so why do we say that the Sukah must be covered with schvach, which is the leavings of the grain and I think of the grape harvest. In the Jordan Valley we picked somewhat accelerated grapes in mid_winter, but surely they would not last through the drought of summer. Pomegranates are at Rosh HaShana, but those too woul dnot need watching. It almost sounds as if Sukot was devised in cold countries, then retrojected into the sacred texts. One does quickly bump into the glass walls of orthodoxy. Orthodosy rests on a literalistic, anthropomorphic intereptation of the assumption that the Torah, and other sacred texts -- though it is not quite clear which -- are of Divine inspiration -- and moreover of an inspiration in which noting was lost in transmission -- no 'noise' to use the Bell Labs phrase. For an orthodox explication of torah, Shlomo Riskin, who for many years has commented weekly on the portion of the week for the Jerualem Post, is an exemplary fool, an the quintessential establishment apologist. No matter how preposterous the text, he will do his utmost to make it mean something. The Glatt Kosher Dan Hotel in Lugano has an indoor sukah. It sits in the dining room, or rather as part of the dining room. A portion of the ceiling and roof slides back to make room for a thatch covering. But of course the walls of the dining room remain in place. They don't even open the windows. As Gal_Or would say, 'It may be kosher but it stinks.' Or others say, 'kosher like a pig' -- meaning, a pig has its trotters out for all to see, as if to say, look, I have a cloven hoof, therefore I am kosher. No doubt that can be justified from halacha, but not by common sense. One should say rather, as we do at Pesach, that "this we do in memory of the customs of the land of Israel". Incidentally, it simply will no do to say, as we do at Musaf, 'but for our sins we were exiled from the land and are unable to bring the sacrifice'. We are no longer in exile, and the Israel religious establishment chose not to demand re_establishment of the Temple. ------------------------------------------------------------------- Many say, as if it were a truism: Immigrants to a country must learn the language and accept its culture. But first of all, its darned hard to learn a new language, especially as one gets older. I've lived almost 20 years in Israel and still not done so. Second, immigrants bring the riches of their own culture, many of which exceed the riches of the the land to which they have fled. Islamic calligraphy, for example. Third, much of so_called western culture is banal or degenerate. As for those two right_wing fools who got killed in Holland, my sympahty is with the assassains. It is like walking down the streets of Manhattan shouting 'Niggers go home.' Not a good career move. They disdained the Dutch virtue of civility and tolerance, and so lost the right to walk across Holland. Too, it is ennuyant to continually read that 'guest_workers' "do the jobs that citizens do not want to do.' As if this were merely a matter of cultural taste, rather than a matter of being too economically desperate to refuse to worker under unsafe conditions for exhausting hours at exploitative pay. The host country must make more accommodation for the culture of those whom hypocritically its calls its guests. Jewish immigrants in the USA were often confronted with a sign at their workplace: If you don't come in Saturday, don't come in Monday. It is politically incorrect nowadays to castigate faggots, but most traditional religious cultures do. There is much talk nowadays of 'homosexual rights'. But what rights have homosexuals been denied. If you say, they have been denied the right to marry, I will say back, not on the usual definition of marriage. A Pouf may marry a lady, and then become a Senator or Governor of California. ----------------------------------------------------------------- The sharpest criticism of Bush now comes from Frank Rich, a TV critic, and Maureen Dowd, a satirist. That is appropriate, for US democracy, especially the Presidential election, has dgenerated into a TV fantasy, and Bush is walking parody -- Jack Armstrong, The All_American Boy -- a role Tom E. Friedman plays, if not better, then at at least with more liteary polish. ------------------------------------------------------------------ MEDIA BIAS: There is now the start of a tendency to blame Israel for withdrawing from Gaza -- that is, to blame the chaos in Gaza on a sort of Israeli emasculation of its capacity for self_government during Israeli administration, followed by a withdrawal described as precipitious -- as if, before withdrawing, Israel was obliged to have first created a workable local government. A sort of wham_bam_thank_you_M'am theory of neo_colonialism. Well, neither the reasoning nor the underlying sexual imagry is entirely consistent; but media bias is a matter of insinuation, not allegation (since allegations can be disconfirmed, and insinuations cannot even be confronted). So in an article headlined "In unruly Gaza, authority goes to the clans", and bylined to Steven Erlanger, who is about as responsible as anyone writing for the IHT -- I think my mother knew his mother, Jean Erlanger, but that's just a guess -- he, or his editor, write: "After 28 years of ocupation, Israel pulled its 9000 settlers and its troops from Gaza in August, leaving it to the Palestinians to run." ----------------------------------------------------------------- Re: IHT 18 Oct '05 (Stout, "Tobacco industry victory") The article notes: "In asking the Supreme Court to reveiw the [ U.S. Cout of Apepals for the District of Columbia] Circuit court's February decision [ that the U.S. could not not under the civil section of the 1970 Racketeer infuenced and Corrupt Oragnaizations Act seek damages from the tobacco industry for "a conspiracy of fraud and deceit to promote smoking"] the government asserted that if the rulling were allowed to stand it would hurt the government's ability to bring similar racketeering cases against business and industries. But that is such a weak government case that one wonders if the Bush administration deliberately put up a weak case. It is not a legal argument, it is a political one. Rather than making an argument that its position can be by extrapolation deemed to be within the legislative intent of the law, under than_unforseen circumstances, the government merely made a political argument that the decision it contested could be used as a prcedent unfavorable to possible further government action. This is apparently the sort of reasoning often heard on this Supreme Court -- the new reactionary WhizKid, Chief Justice Roberts, ropertedly ruled against allowing states to allow the medical use of marijuana, not on the legal merits of the case, nor on the ethical merits of the sitiuaion, nor on the constitutional issue of states' rights, but on the political grounds that a ruling for the plaintiffs, however justified, would tend to set a precedent which would restrict the power of the federal government to legistlate and/or enforce -- I'm not clear which -- unfirom standards restricting the non_therapeutic use of drugs. --------------------------------------------------------------- One rarely finds news in a newspaper, only a rather small collection of ongoing political soap_operas. But an editorial in todays's IHT (18 Oct '05) notes, incorporting the otherwise unreported news , that male circumcision apparaently "reduced men's risk of HIV infection by more than 65 percent." Well, that does seem to confirm the wisdom of the practice of circumcision, though I must say that the Jewish practice of doing it at 8 days seems far more humane, though maybe more risky, than the Muslim practice of doing it at puberty. I have long read that male circumcision reduce the risk of -- cervical, if I recall, though I almost said uterine -- cancer in their partners. Indeed, I once had a disagreement though not argument with a non_Jewish friend on this point. I tend, like most males, to shrink , pardon my pun, from the idea of male circumcision. She said she would insist upon it, to protect the siterhood. ----------------------------------------------------------------- Much of the confusion in pop_politics seems to stem from a 'digital' rather than 'analogue' model of analysis. That applies to the abortion and stem_cell qauestions, and all to the intelligent_design flap. Those aruging presuppose that either it is or it ain't. A fetus either is a sentinent being, or it is merely a biologic conglomeration. That misconceptualization is a derivative of body_soul dualism. On the assumption that cats have no souls, Descartes dropped them out the window. Of course what one needs is a quantitative approach. It's all much more subtle and complex that the shouting matches suggest. Wittgenstein, and Ausin too, pointed that out by actualizing doing -- or rather, sketching -- the analyses tthat everyone else just argued about without ever doing, complacent in their cartoon image of the results which they assumed could be revealed, if any grad student could be found to do the drudge_work. Too, a simplisitc, linear, billard_ball notion of cause_and_effect is presupposed, wit hout even allowing for the notion of 'feedback'. Then when one ladels an unconsciously hypocritic bathetic sentimentalization onto it, one has the right_to_life movement, drawn to increasingly bizzare defenses -- of 8_cell embryos in a test_tube, or a woman with an atrophied brain. -------------------------------------------------------------- MEDIA BIAS: Basler Zeitung: This is one of the major responsible German_language newspapers in Switzerland. Switzerland is predominantly German_reading, if not precisely German_speaking. I read only minimal German, so I can't comprehend even the narrative much less the nuances of articles in this newspaper. 19 Oct, heading, 'KollektivStrafe fur Palastinenser The photo shows a demure woman, modestly dressed, walking past two soldiers one of whom clearly holds a weapon. Of course this is an everyday occurrence in Israel -- soldiers do carry weapons, and one does walk past them every day. Still, there is the contrast of the vulnerability of the woman, and the power of the soldiers. I assume that the Swiss media take a fashionbly anti_Israel position. Israel, in particular the Foreign Ministry which as the portfolio for hasbara (public relations) and sits on it, is much at fault for not having made a major effort to counter anti_Israel bias, with its attendant romanticization of the Palestinians. --------------------------------------------------------------- Just finished reading Jeffry Archer -- this time, Kane and Abel. Archer is under_rated, except by himself. He writes masterfully, indulging himself only in wit, not in the loquacious self_pity and pettiness that permeates Bellow, Pop fiction of course, manipulatively sentimental, but the right sentiments -- nobility and all that. And so a somewhat elevating catharsis -- leads the reader to experience in imagination what he dare not risk in action (the realm o fassiyah, to use the kabalistic term). So Archer is a good man, and it is an outrage that he was locked up in jail, really in spite, for having lied to defend the reputation of a friend, as I recall. He is said to have been masterful and love_making, one wishes he would write a most explicit book on it, preferably with his wife (who forgave him his continual infidelities because of it), and other applicable consultants. How he was humbled and tempered by his prison experience I do not yet know, though he did write of it. Of course he is a rogue, or was, but I try to be one too. Something I took from Bob "Wertz" Armitage, zl'b, a founder of New Buffalo, and buried there, up on a hillside. To be a rogue, even a petty thief ('St. Genet)' as Satre wrote of Jean Genet) is a way of acting out one's sense of ironic humour. Finding the world so badly fallen below one's dreams, why not steal a little bit of it in compensation. A mastaerful story_teller, who writes without self_indulgence, excepte in wit. Pop fiction of course, but excellente in that genere. This story has a predictable but almost neo_classical plot. Marilyn Strauss one told me that Mozart once said that his one genius was to be able to see an entirely symphony in mind before he wrote it. ------------------------------------------------------------------ purrav -- davening beyond the mezuzah If he is on the far side of the mezuzah, through an open door, is he counted in the minyan. Of course -- if he can hear the baal tfilla as well as the most hard_or_hearing person who would be counted in the minyan were he inside the mezuzah. For a mezuzah is merely a reminder -- of our obligation to sonstantly adhere to the Shma. And what better place to put a reminder than on the doorposts of one's rooms (unless, of course, one is a professional burgular who keeps in trim by entering only through windows wherever he goes, even home). A mezuzah does not demarcate a 'scared space' -- that is a superstitiom -- a pagan superstition at that -- for it presupposes G_d is not ominipresent, but rather dwells only in sacred spaces. Yet a Psalm of King David says the contrary: [ even if, heaven forfend ] I make my home in hell, THOU art there. If the room is crowded, I prefer to daven outsdie the open door. And I can defend that by saying -- 4 ells. That is, one needs room, not merely for one's body, but also for one's aura. To which you can respond, but on Yom Kippur in the Temple, they were packed like sardines. To which I would reply: 2nd Temple times were already darned late in the ballgame. I mean, call that neo_classical pseudo_Greek pile architecture. And look who built it. If King Herod had contributed to a Presidential Race, even George E. Bush would have sent back his check. And besides, look at the way they treated that long_haired hippie from Natzereth -- sure he could be a pain in the backside, and not much respect for his elders and betters -- I mean really, an apprentice carpenter from the hills who went down to hang around with the fishderman -- and told them fish stories too, or so we hear -- but as harmless a dude as ever slept in a field. And then some. So the pagans have seperate gods for adifferent places and environments -- earth, fire, the deeps, love, war -- Then what was all that flap about 'de_sanctifying' the Gaza Bet Knessets -- for a Bet Knesset is merely that, a place of meeting, not sacred space per se , santified only by what occurs there -- That flap, since you ask, was merely politicans trying to appease the superstitious amongs the religious bloc -------------------------------------------------------------- Teh Mahzor needs a good edit -- especially Rosh HaShana, and especially the Enlgish trnslations -- It also needs a new layout -- something multi_coloured would do nicely, we've got to get away from this black_and_white model -- because everything ain't black_and_white -- so set off the piyutim that were once interjected into the Amidah's, and now nobody dares take them out (Evelyn Garfield said that) -- set them off as sub_points, as commentaries -- the old idea of using different sized type fonts is fine, but only if you do it right -- because otherwise I forget where I am, and even that I'm in an Amidah -- The Mahzor is spiritually lower, not higher, than the Siddur -- it is written to drive hom the most basic points, for the benefit of those who come to shul only once a year . So an orthodox service, reading everyt ihh in the Mahzor, with no additions, is much less spiritual -- and dated, of course -- than a non_ort hodox, creative service. The baal tifilla must let the worlds sing themselves. The cheapest way to create an illuison of spirit uality is to slow down the tempo -- fake chasidut -- That was how it seemd to be at teh Lugano shul on the day of Yom Kippur -- I asked, do they think they're hasidim', and Aryeh said, 'They think theyj're the last word in Judaism.' Because what you get by slowing down the tempo is not mysticism, but only the illusion of a mystic hit -- something like trance. Too, embellishment must come from the heart and soul -- better to omit it than to fake it. Fake is Amalek, the anithesis of spirtuality. Or if not Amalek, at least bad a hillul -- a hollowing out of something that could be real. We always betray ourselves. theyx ome in purity of heart, and we seel them our leftovers and say, this is what you were looking for. That is hillul, taking the NAME in vanity. -------------------------------------------------------------- A free internet is essentail to post_modernist art. And all art now is post_modernist, that is, retrospective -- unless one chooses a monistic form. We mut be free to include whatever quotatations fit into our particular picture_puzzle. T.S. Eliot, and then Pound ('il miglior fabro') were the first. Bob Dylan in the next generation, a coloquialist, like Pound. Delmore Schwarz was a neo_classicist, and in that his tragedy. For when he saw that his world had failed him, he went mad and turned to self_annihilation -- pickling his gizzards in booze, the crudest degradation of his timme. Did I say that, or he. --------------------------------------------------------------- I can not again fast without water on Yom Kippur, it leaves me to be the plaything of all my petty rages. Especially without a mahzor that I can read, and a nusach and chevre to hang onto. The Lugano minyans move thoruth it in strength, or so they seem, while stand learning, gaunt an exhausted all day long. ------------------------------------------------------------- The petty cruelty of people. That wraith on the Modi'in Va'ad Ganovim, and all in vain too. "He will do anything to try to make money except work." (sa) "How many times must a man look down and pretend that he just doesn't see." (Bob Dylan) Well, I worked hard for Zenith Camp, and long hours too, they took it and left without leaving behind even thanks for the cold grey autumn days. A Sufi endures and carries on, not showing his wounds. Whatever happens, an Israeli can improvise. ---------------------------------------------------------------- I buy one bowl of soup and one of rice and one pot of green tea and pay in 6_Ming coins the last of my spare change, the smallest pseudo_silver of the realm. I ask to take upstairs what I'm too tired to eat now. I ask her to hand me my staff a hand_carved smoothed Alpenstock. She says, You walk like an old lady. I walked over Gotthard late this summer -- all but the last half up, when the headwind got cold. (Lugano, 11 Tishrei -- motzi Yom Kippur) Cf. PVK: apr. In my youth I climbed mountain cliffs, and now I must fear -- altitude. "But I can still -- " ---------------------------------------------------------------- it's wisps and wraiths on Internet almost ghosts -- or even 'the undead' whom we seem to write to. One who lives amidst the passed is doing nothing rather fast. (Lugano--Bellinzona train, 11 Tishrei '05) ---------------------------------------------------------------- From the Halls, of Montezuma California, to the Shurs, of Tripoli New Jersey, greetings: ----------------------------------------------------------------- I jaywalk. Done so for almost 60 years. Delivery truck cuts the corner sees me doesn't slow down. I bang his door with my cane held half_way. Swiss driver in a neat beard looks mad enough to get out and hit me. I just walk on rather quickly up a one_way street thatnk Heaven. First time for everything. (Lugano, 14 Oct '05 -- 11 Tishrei ) --------------------------------------------------------------- If you have no money the Swiss don't mind, but they will never give you anything when you don't have money. The Swiss have faith that there will always be somebody with money. (Oliveone, 14 Oct '05 -- 11 Tishrei) ----------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------------------------------------- sa, Campra, 19 Oct '05 -- 16 Tishrei -- 2nd day of Sukot -- 16 Ramadan =============================================================== ================================================================