More Support for the Psak

Turns out that I was not the only one dealing with this halakhic issue. Some blogger wrote about it and you can see his discussion here. DO NOT BE FOOLED - his blog "Biur Chametz" looks exactly like mine. Rackenfracken templates, now I have to change the colors!

Psak Reaction

I wrote that two weeks ago I ruled that the shul wouldn't say tachanun in reaction to the death of Arafat. While most of the congregation applauded the loss of tachanun, if not the loss of our enemy, there was some opposition. One member asked me for the sources of the halakha and I have spent the time since shoring up the halakhic support for the psak.

First of all, the Shulchan Arukh is very clear in Orech Chaim 575:11-13 that when we fast for rain, and the rain falls, we can say Hallel. Siman 576 then expands the need to fast to all difficult situations - including a feared enemy.

In any case, every shul Rav I've spoken to agrees that we have the power to suspend tachanun for a communal simcha, but that wasn't enough for the textually minded. Two poskim - one black, one white - ruled on the matter. Rav Nachum Rabinovich, the Rosh Yeshiva of Ma'ale Adumim, agreed with my decision (said that I did the right thing) and said that since tachanun was a minhag, I as Maara d'Atra could make that decision.

Rav Ephraim Greenblatt (the famed Rivevot Ephraim, whom I know from Memphis) was less enthusiastic about my ruling but said that I had halakhic grounding, specifically the Chaya Adam, klal 155, siman 41.

Rav Greenblatt pointed out that people associate omitting tachanun with the death of a tzadik and thus my psak was difficult. I explained that the omission of tachanun is only with the yahrzeit of a tzadik - the death of a tzadik (according to the Shulchan Arukh) requires everyone who hears to tear kriah! However, the death of an enemy requires rejoicing and the yahrzeit is forgotten (because of the yimach-shemo stuff)

Since then, it was pointed out to me that there were those in Israel who ruled the same as I: see this story from (ugh) Arutz-7.

It's gratifying to know that my halakhic-intuition was on the mark.

Another good source about the Monster

Some more good pieces about the 'Monster':

Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs: Arafat Terrorism

More Arafat im"sh Stories

Some good pieces about the 'Monster'

• From the Boston Globe: Arafat the Monster
• From Honest Reporting: The legacy of Arafat (a shockwave movie)

Arafat is Dead

In my power as Ma'ara D'Atra I declared that we would not say Tachanun today. No, it wasn't just because it's Thursday; after weighing the proper responses to the death of Arafat, no tachanun was a start. This is what I said:

We're told in Pirkei Avot, 4:24:

Shmuel HaKatan said: "When your enemy falls, do not rejoice, and when he stumbles let your heart not be glad, lest God see, and regard it with displeasure, and divert His wrath from him [to you]."

Our response is tempered; despite our joy we cannot respond with Hallel. But we recognize that with the death of Arafat, God has shown us mercy and we acknowledge that by not saying Tachanun.

Arafat was the greatest enemy of the Jews since Hitler.

He is called "the father of modern terrorism" - he gave the world suicide bombers, children as targets, the car-bomb. He also created the falsehood of a "Palestinian" - there is no such thing, no such person, no such state, and Arafat's evil made that falsehood live [one of the only things he let live]

The IDF claimed that for Arafat to die from natural causes outside Israel was the best possible scenario. And for that we're grateful as well.

In response, we will say three chapters of Tehillim: 121, for the ongoing war; 124 - which is about God saving us from enemies, and 125 - where we acknowledge that we must respond to God's mercy with mitzvot. We must increase our tzedaka and other good works today.

[After the tehillim, I had to say a quick comment and "Rebbi Hananya ben Akashya" so I said:]

There's a popular joke about Hitler and now Arafat that whatever day he died would be declared a Jewish holiday. It didn't happen - because we don't celebrate the death of enemies; we ask God to "yimach shemo" - to blot their names out from the world. No day to commemorate the obliterated names.

P.S. Psalms 124 & 125

A Song of Ascents; of David. 'If it had not been God who was for us', let Israel now say; 'If it had not been God who was for us, when men rose up against us, Then they had swallowed us up alive, when their wrath was kindled against us; Then the waters had overwhelmed us, the stream had gone over our soul; Then the proud waters had gone over our soul.' Blessed be God, who hath not given us as a prey to their teeth. Our soul is escaped as a bird out of the snare of the fowlers; the snare is broken, and we are escaped. Our help is in the name of God, who made heaven and earth.

A Song of Ascents. They that trust in God are as mount Zion, which cannot be moved, but abideth for ever. As the mountains are round about Jerusalem, so God is round about His people, from this time forth and for ever. For the rod of wickedness shall not rest upon the lot of the righteous; that the righteous put not forth their hands unto iniquity. Do good, O God, unto the good, and to them that are upright in their hearts. But as for such as turn aside unto their crooked ways, God will lead them away with the workers of iniquity. Peace be upon Israel.

Arafat in a Coma

Yup, so sez the AP. And it would be glorious poetic justice if he died on November 4th - 9 years to the day after his partner, Yizhak Rabin ob'm, died.

{2009 Update, Arafat-Fish pic from here.}

Arafat in Powder Blue PJs

This is the first time I've ever seen the SOB in anything but fatigues!

Red Sox Wins

The Red Sox have won the World Series over the hated Cardinals (they're all commies, if you ask me).

I hate the Cardinals, not for the religious reasons you might think but because during the brief 5 year period that I actually watched and enjoyed baseball - 1984 thru 1988 - I was a strong (nominal) Met fan. And in my rudimentary, Homo floresiensis baseball brain, the team I identified as the Met's greatest rival was the Cardinals. Maybe some baseball historian can back me up here; I just hated them. And I was so frustrated when they went to the Series instead of Houston; not only because I wanted a Texas-Massachusetts warmup, but because I knew the Red Sox would lose and that meant the hated Cardinals would win!

Oops. Curse or not, the Sox on on top (of pop?) with a fox, eating green eggs and beer on a box.

Also, Arafat is doing worse and the projected final results - given the recent polls - is Kerry 288, Bush 250.

Remember the 13th of Cheshvan!

Paging all Snowballs in Hell

Hmm, Arafat collapses and is in bad shape and the Red Sox may win the world series... all in one day!... mark this day on your calendars, people, because it's a special one.

Strength for Israel

I will write soon B"N about why Orthodox Jews seem convinced that you are not frum unless you will vote for Bush. I will also B"N try to explain why a good frum Jew does not need to vote for Bush and quite possibly should not vote for Bush.

Until then, I wish to dispel one more lie. In the Edwards-Cheney debate we saw that Edwards - and by extension Kerry - was very strong for Israel. Cheney, and by more than just extension Bush, was disappointing.

I give you the transcript's exchange:

EDWARDS: Well, first of all, I do agree that we've been largely absent, not entirely absent, but largely absent from the peace-making process over the last four years.

And let me just say a couple of preliminary things and then talk about where we are now.

First, the Israeli people not only have the right to defend themselves, they should defend themselves. They have an obligation to defend themselves.

I mean, if I can, just for a moment, tell you a personal story. I was in Jerusalem a couple of years ago, actually three years ago, in August of 2001, staying at the King David Hotel.

We left in the morning, headed to the airport to leave, and later in the day I found out that that same day, not far from where we were staying, the Sbarro Pizzeria was hit by a suicide bomber in Jerusalem. Fifteen people were killed. Six children were killed.

What are the Israeli people supposed to do? How can they continue to watch Israeli children killed by suicide bombers, killed by terrorists?

They have not only the right to the obligation to defend themselves.

Now, we know that the prime minister has made a decision, a historic decision, to unilaterally withdraw from Gaza. It's important for America to participate in helping with that process.

Now, if Gaza's being used as a platform for attacking the Israeli people, that has to be stopped. And Israel has a right to defend itself. They don't have a partner for peace right now. They certainly don't have a partner in Arafat, and they need a legitimate partner for peace.

And I might add, it is very important for America to crack down on the Saudis who have not had a public prosecution for financing terrorism since 9/11.

And it's important for America to confront the situation in Iran, because Iran is an enormous threat to Israel and to the Israeli people

Cheney's response:

In respect to Israel and Palestine, Gwen, the suicide bombers, in part, were generated by Saddam Hussein, who paid $25,000 to the families of suicide bombers.

I personally think one of the reasons that we don't have as many suicide attacks today in Israel as we've had in the past is because Saddam is no longer in business.

We've been strong supporters of Israel. The president stepped forward and put in place a policy basically that said we will support the establishment of two states. First president ever to say we'll establish and support a Palestinian state nextdoor to Israelis.

But first, there has to be an interlocutor you can trust and deal with. And we won't have that, we don't have it now, in a Yasser Arafat. There has to be reform of the Palestinian system.

To summarize: Edwards says that Israel has a right to unilateral response, Arafat is not a peace partner, Israel can attack Gaza even after they pull out and that Saudi Arabia is a big threat

Cheney says that Saddam Hussein was causing terror attacks in Israel [presumably taking time out to coordinate the 9/11 attacks] and that Cheney is so so proud to say that he supports a Palestinian State.

Who's the friend of Israel??

The Leader of the Free World is an Idiot

That is not an opinion, it is a fact. Anyone who saw last night's press conference (Text of Bush's Press Conference) should come to the same conclusion. If not, you have either (a) lowered your expectations so much that as long as he walks upright and zips his fly, we'll consider it a win, or (b) you are so blinded by ideology that you can't hear any criticism of the standard bearer.

Please, you republicans out there, I am willing to admit that Clinton was a tawdry horndog who couldn't keep his own pants on nor tell the truth when it would help him. I am willing to admit the manifest facts. Please, be honest, be confident in your own ideology and sanity, be a pal, admit that Bush is a joke.

I get peeved when the Israeli Left rationalize Arafat. I understand their position when they say "Arafat is a psychopathic killer but still the only hope for peace." But if they say "He's misunderstood; he wants peace; he is a cuddly dude" then we have no use for these ideologues.

Bush was an embarrassment last night. His two spiritual predecessors, Nixon and Reagan, were never this bad. Nixon knew what was going on even though he sounded like he was as crooked as a snake's support hose. And Reagan never knew what was going on, but he was, hands-down, The Great Communicator.

Bush, last night, couldn't answer a question. Couldn't admit - in even the most minor way - that he could have done better.

Arrogance is a punishable offense to the American mind; just ask Martha Stewart.

I just can't wait till Bush Jr. is back in Texas working for a business someone else built. For you republicans out there, let's make a deal. Howzibout you endure four years of a bad Democrat and we'll call it even. Let 2008 be the real election. Hillary Clinton vs. Jeb Bush, or whatever. Huh? Gimme a call.

Saddam and Shul

I'd be interested to hear what people did in shul Sunday morning in response to the capture of Saddam. I'll relate what I would have done (and what we did).

How do we define, halakhicly, this occasion?

Let's compare it to (a) victory in war against an enemy who wishes to destroy us, (b) the death of an enemy of humanity, (c) death of an enemy of Jews, (d) capture of B or (e) capture of C.

This is the capture of an enemy of Jews (E) and, one can say, the end of a war (A). Even though there's still guerilla warfare in Iraq (e.g. the suicide-slay of 17 people on the very day of Saddam's capture), there's no pretext for the war anymore.

Saddam was a specific enemy of the Jews. Because of the Bush mumbo-jumbo, people forget that Saddam declared unilateral war against Israel in 1991. He was also an enemy of humanity (mass murderer, tyrant, rapist, you name it) but the fact that he particularly aimed his destruction against Jews creates a halakhic reality.

Even if we catch Osama, we won't treat that occasion in the same way. Osama is an enemy of humanity. If we had run in and captured Stalin, we could say he was a target of Jews (although he did vote for the formation of Israel, go figure).

Also, the fact that we captured the enemy alive is a big joy. Killing an enemy, of having the enemy die of other means, is not the same level of joy about God's help. When Arafat dies, bimheira b'yameinu, even if its at the hands of the good guys, doesn't make it a day of true simcha. If we capture him (and put him on trial) then maybe so.

My conclusion was that since Saddam was a specific, unrepentant, enemy of the Jews as well as an enemy of humanity, who was captured by the good guys to be brought to justice, I consider it a day to (a) say Hallel (without a bracha, because I lack that level of authority), and (b) not say tachanun.

No tachanun for the morning, not the day, as in a bris. The joy was of the moment, when we heard the news (even though it had taken place earlier). Tachanun would be back at mincha.

Hallel without a bracha is known as "Tehillim 113-118." A simple way to recognize and thank God.

What we did in shul was: (a) no tachanun, (b) we said aloud, in unison, Mizmor l'Todah and Ezrat Avoteinu (the bracha between Shema and Shemona Esrei), (c) before Shir shel Yom, Rabbi Lookstein told us that this is a day of joy mixed with the sadness that we arrived at the day only after many lives were lost - we were enjoined to give more tzedaka and do teshuva in recognition and thanks, we then added Pslams 121, 124, 125, 130, and 134.

Equal Treatment

The Jerusalem Post reports that Israel News : Jerusalem Post Internet Edition: "Fatah gunmen execute 'collaborator' in Ramallah hospital". This is how I know that Arafat, and the Palestinians, don't want peace. It's even more simple than the fact that Fatah is Arafat's own organization. It's that if Arafat and crew were really interested in peace, they'd be labeled as 'collaborators' and shot!

J. M. Coetzee Wins Nobel Prize for Literature

The NYTimes reports that J. M. Coetzee Wins Nobel Prize for Literature.

It's not often that I've read the Nobel winner's work (it helps that this dude writes in English), but I was forced to do so in my Freshman English class (Lit-141, Vic Brombert). I'm very glad he made me read Coetzee for two reasons:

1. I was still a Freshman which meant that I was still doing the required reading
2. I can unequivocally say that the Nobel Committee has bat-poo for brains.

I have often hated the great works of literature (just as I hate many of the "great" movies). Waiting for the Barbarians (the bat-poo in question) in no manner matched the earlier books in the class (on Modernist fiction), e.g. Primo Levi, Virginia Woolf and a whole mess o'Kafka. And all of them are superlative, none of them Laureates.

Considering that there are a bare few Nobel laureates worth reading (e.g. Winston Churchill) - I don't know why we even care.

But, for those who do, the timetable for the rest is as follows:

Medicine - Monday, Oct 6 (Yom Kippur)
Physics - Teusady, Oct 7 (Isru Chag)
Chemistry - Wednesday, Oct 8 (Nothing, really)
Economics - Wednesday, Oct 8
Peace - Friday, Oct 10 (Erev Sukkot)

In the running for the peace prize: Arafat (again, the Swedes love it when your body-count hits a new order of magnitude... it's like watching the odometer roll-over).

(And if you want to see grade-school art, check out the diplomas the laureates get)

Why We Hate Bush?

Ted Rall demonstrates the danger of liberal philosophy; or at least the danger that poses if I get labeled a liberal. While I generally agree with him that it is moral to despise the government of G.W. Bush, he also despises the Israeli government – an act I consider immoral.

Most Orthodox Jews who support Bush do so because vis-à-vis Israel his government has been the best towards Israel in years. I disagree on principle but agree in action. Meaning that Clinton’s government was closest to Israel – they believed in Israel as a sovereign nation and as a friend – but only with the definition of Israel under the Labor government .

Bush’s crew supports Israel with a freaky neo-conservative, Christian Right, perspective which frightens me to death. But, so far, they support Likud (whom I support), so materially they are doing well for Israel.

Which, all told, is still not all that good. When the American government allows Israel to arrest Arafat, punish terrorists, and protect their citizens, then I will declare that government "good for Israel."

Liberals detest Israel largely because of bias and ignorance. The bias is against any government – the liberals think that individual citizens (especially unionized) are always correct when up against Big Interests (like governments and companies). Ironically, the best definition of a domestic liberal is someone who believes in big government, but that’s the Foreign Policy vs. Domestic Policy flip-flop that a lot of people suffer from (like me, I guess, hmmm).

The ignorance I refer to is the fact that these people are not acquainted with the facts. They see Arafat as a freedom fighter – which he would be if you only read headlines. It’s the same way I treat the Pakistan-Indian conflicts; that is, I don’t know any details and I make decisions based on gut.

So… why do I hate Bush. Rall says its not because Bush is an idiot. Nor because Bush is a hypocrite. Nor because of the fascism. Rather its because Bush stole the 2000 election.

I disagree. The stolen election is infuriating, but (alas) its History and not much we can do about it. I hate Bush because his government is using any excuse possible to mislead the nation as to their real objectives: making themselves rich and oppressing those who they dislike. The Bush administration is low, mean, and petty.

And because Bush & Co. are low, mean, and petty about Domestic issues – I fear that their attitude towards Israel is the same. As my man, Dave Barry, once said: "If he’s nice to you, and mean to the waiter, then he’s not a nice person."

Arafat Update

Here's a copy of the "Cabinet Communique"

**Cabinet Communique - Sept 11, 2003
Information Department, Israel Foreign Ministry - Jerusalem
Website: http://www.mfa.gov.il
E-mail: feedback@mfa.gov.il

Jerusalem, September 11, 2003

Cabinet Communique (Communicated by the Prime Minister's Media Adviser)

Prime Minister Ariel Sharon has today (Thursday), 11.9.2003. instructed the security forces to act relentlessly, continuously and determinedly to eliminate the terrorist organizations and take all appropriate measures against their leaders, commanders and operatives until their criminal activity is halted.

The aforementioned activity will continue night and day, uninterruptedly, until such time as the Israeli government is satisfied that the Palestinian Authority is taking tangible steps to dismantle and eliminate the terrorist organizations.

Events of recent days have reiterated and proven again that Yasser Arafat is a complete obstacle to any process of reconciliation between Israel and the Palestinians. Israel will work to remove this obstacle in a manner, and at a time, of its choosing.

Israel is not interested in the question of the identity of the Palestinian Prime Minister; however, Israel must underscore its position that it will negotiate only with a Prime Minister who acts immediately to dismantle and remove the terrorist organizations, implements and carries out full reforms of the Palestinian Authority, and fully upholds the other commitments that the Palestinian Authority has taken upon itself according to the roadmap, as it has been adopted by the Israeli government.

The Israeli government rejects any idea of a ceasefire as a way of dealing with terror; terror will stop only after the terrorist organizations have been dismantled and liquidated. This is the obligation of the Palestinian Authority and it will be judged solely by its actions and results, not by its statements and declarations.

To these ends, the Cabinet authorizes Defense Minister Shaul Mofaz to use such military forces as may be necessary for increased activity against the terrorist organizations; the Cabinet further directs that the necessary means for the foregoing be put at the disposal of the security forces.

The Cabinet has decided to accelerate the construction of the security fence.

Kill Arafat?

According to the Times, Israel has authorized themselves (I guess) to take Arafat out, someday.

No doubt, the man deserves to die. But put him on trial first. Bring all of the evidence. Then bring out Old Sparky.

Life in the Styx vol. 4, no. 40 (Old Styx)

Life in the Styx vol. 4, no. 40; May 15, 1998 (Excerpts):

FRANK SINATRA

Frank Sinatra, an American icon whose virtuoso talent and notorious public image made him a defining and dominant celebrity for more than five decades, died last night at age 82.

He was "The Chairman of the Board," "Old Blue Eyes," "Frankie," he did things His Way. There, I got the damned cliches out of the way quickly. His talent was too good to let the hacks and jackals of the press apply their pedestrian rot to his legacy.

I urge those of you who know of Sinatra as the opening song of "Married With Children" actually hear some of his music. Those who only know of his attitude from "My Way" to hear the majority of his work -- to know that popular music at one point had lyrics that carried a sober, wise pathos.

And the man could sing! He had a powerful limousine voice that never seemed to end -- he could probably hold a note longer and stronger than almost any singer who thought to be his rival.

And yes, he was the Chairman. His hep-cat, master of the cool years appeal to many across the generations. I am one of those who believe that "My Way" was written purely with me in mind.

While "My Way" does read as a perfect epitaph (first line: And now, the end is near;/ And so I face the final curtain") I prefer another song, possibly my private favorite, that combines his ballistic voice with the maturity and boldness that should be his legacy: "That's Life" [In the original Styx, I sent out the full lyrics]

THE LAST SEINFELD

I find it appropriate that just when the hype from the end of Seinfeld reached the level of farce, when people who classify "The Wedding Singer" as a nostalgia movie are both pining and cynically criticizing their emotions over a TV show that purports to be a classic, fate helps put things in perspective with the death of Sinatra. While Seinfeld may have been the Upper West Side, Frankie was New York.

And I can't help but think that Seinfeld would be grateful. It wasn't he who blew up the hype; it was both NBC who is looking down the barrel of a long painful reconstruction after losing both America's #1 show and pro-football.

It was also the collection of streetwalkers known as the American Press Corps who blew this out of proportion. Thursday morning, the day of the last show, one of the "top stories" on the Reuters wire was a very special scoop indeed. It seems that one of their investigative crack reporters picked up a leak as to the exact plot of the finale! So I read about the car-jacking and the trial 12 hours before it was shown -- serves me right for be a news-junkie, right?

Why was that story news? Why was it a "scoop"? We press-critics each have our high-water mark as to when we declare that the press has gone 'too far' -- some people think it's O.J., some waited until Monicalewinskygate. But in some ways I think this is a far worse sign. It shows that there is no longer any break between entertainment and news. It shows that the only ethics left to the reporters are: (1) a need to "scoop" and (2) a need to destroy privacy.

The only reason why the temptation to know the plot existed was because NBC tried to keep it a secret; and it seems like something so petty and trivial as that was enough to waste a "top story" (not like anything else was happening: nuclear crisis in India-Pakistan, hundreds of people killed in Indonesian riots; Arafat pushing for armed struggle in Israel etc.) See below for more journalistic-wickedness.

SEINFELD: THE PHENOMENON

Everyone should be sick unto death of reading analysis articles about Why Seinfeld Is So Popular. Then there are the counter articles -- probably by the same misanthropic cranks who felt a need to attack Titanic -- who tried to tear down the belief that there's something to miss with the passing of Seinfeld.

I read a column in Time Magazine, the Marvel Comics of news, that tried ever-so-vainly to convince the reader that Seinfeld was a used-diaper compared to the laudable librettos of "The Andy Griffith Show."

Thank the TV-gods for providing us with Nick at Nite so we can finally match up the cinematic gadlus of the bygone era with ours. Folks, I don't want to surprise you, but early TV sucked. If I had only "Andy Griffith" to watch I'd drink Drano.

But here's a surprise: comedy is a cultural bench-mark. Material is only found to be funny by the intended audience. And it is ooo-kaaay to have different tastes within the genre. But I guess reporters are just two-speed bicycles that can only trash or hype.

SEINFELD'S APPEAL

Of course, I do need to give my two-cents on why Seinfeld was so popular. That is the most interesting question anyway. Especially since the show had a strong amorality that was part of its unavoidable message (something that came to haunt them in the distinctly unfunny finale) and why I couldn't be a regular viewer.

The trick here is to realize that people weren't watching it for the amorality, even though it became an unintended side-effect. This is how the marketplace works: you buy a product because it's the best available, not the best there is; there may be aspects you don't like about your chosen purchase, but they aren't significant enough to dissuade your acquisition.

However, the sub-standards still exist and will affect you. Seinfeld did manage, in my analysis, to debase the discourse on television towards a more tawdry and even raunchy level. Because of the show's power and appeal, they were able to broadcast an episode about masturbation -- a plot-line that I believe is the quintessence of the show -- which would not have been possible had Seinfeld not been so popular. And once you break that barrier of propriety, it's very difficult to go back.

This psycho-social phenomenon can be summed up with this aphorism: there aren't always moral reasons but there are moral consequences. The amorality wasn't why The People watched, but it did affect The People afterwards.

So why did they watch? Very simple: the principle of the show wasn't that it was "about nothing" (a phrase repeated so often that I had a standing threat to pole-axe the next person who said it within ear-shot). The other phrase Seinfeld had for it was: "no hugging, no learning."

All one has to do is compare Seinfeld to the other two comedies that went belly-up this week: "Ellen" and "Murphy Brown." Ellen became a one-trick pinto. It was gay gay gay and I'm not sure if *any* one note show could survive, let alone one with such a moralizing tincture. Murphy Brown was moribund for years and it needed to jolt itself alive with dramatic plot grafts (a baby! a cancer!)

Seinfeld was one place you could go where it was 100% jokes. Once you were over the hurdle of accepting the basic characters & premise, you were guaranteed non-stop payback. And that, very simply, is why it was so popular.

ISRAEL

One message about Israel. This is probably the only instance that I remember where the New York Times, good ol' German Serge Schmemann, was more anti-Israel than even the Reuters wire. Reuters placed the Israeli backlash to the current Palestinian riots by saying, straight out, that the Israelis only fired into the mob when (a) they were fired on first! or (b) when they were about to be over-run. Reuters also claimed that in some areas the Palestinian police were doing little to stop the violence. I didn't save the Reuters story, but here's the AP: [May 14, 1998, 4:41 p.m.]

While most of the marchers -- 1 million by official Palestinian
estimates -- were peaceful, thousands of young men broke away and
headed toward Israeli army outposts. In clash after clash, they
hurled stones at Israeli soldiers who responded with tear gas,
rubber bullets and, sometimes, live rounds.
[...]

Brig. Gen. Yoav Galant, the Israeli commander in Gaza, accused
Arafat's government of deliberately organizing demonstrations so
large as to be uncontrollable. Galant also said Palestinian police
and civilians fired wildly in at least one confrontation, and may
have been responsible for some casualties.

Israeli officials recovered about 200 casings of the type of
bullets used by Palestinian police, he said. Israeli troops also
displayed two armored vehicles that had been shot.

The Times, however, paints the picture like it was a mad orgiastic Klan-like attack by the Israeli army against innocents. See the picture on page A11 (Fri, May 15 1998) to see a pure example of how newspapers can gush falsehood under the guise of news. Disgusting and despicable.

KENNETH STARR

As of last looking, Kenneth Starr is chomping at the bit, trying to break the government stonewall over the Secret Service silence. Besides the obvious lesson that a Secret Service, by definition, is secret, there's the head of the service saying that forcing the agents to testify would lead to the death of a president.

OK, granted, it sounds like the chief is freaking out, but I'd far more trust his opinion on these matters than Starr who, by all accounts -- probably even the psychotic Rep. Dan Burton agrees -- has *got* to have his priorities straightened out!

Kenneth! (I'm sure he hates 'Ken') Dude! It's just not worth it! Somebody better tackle Starr and hose him down with some PERSPECTIVE. Maybe the secret service, they do that for a living ya know.

A NUCLEAR INDIA

This is bad. We do not need to have India, Pakistan, China, and North Korea in a shoving match. But my grasp of geopolitics doesn't merit a column on this topic. I do want to point out a twinge-ing moral inconsistency by, your friend and mine, the New York Times.

Their Thursday (5-15-98) editorial claimed that the CIA failed because they didn't know about the nuclear tests beforehand. Maybe it's me, but all this complaining can be answered by a simple question -- why didn't we just pay an Indian citizen in their Navy intelligence division to give us information? This hypothetical person, we'll call him Mahatma Pollard, could have been an American hero, right? Right?

Have a good Shabbas.

Life in the Styx vol. 4, no. 29 (Old Styx)

Life in the Styx vol. 4, no. 29, March 5, 1997 (Excerpts):

NEWS BRIEFS

The cover of Tuesday's New York Times, featuring the picture of Clinton about to plant a wet sloppy kiss of Arafat's behind was only marginally less disgusting than the picture of Rudy Giuliani dressed in drag. I have no idea what Clinton is doing anymore. I have given up trying. I wonder what will happen when Arafat declares a Palestinian state the moment a spade-ful of dirt is raised from Har Homa. AS I have said in the past, a state is a very good thing since it will allow Israel to deal with the Palestinians as a belligerent neighbor -- which the Palestinian's seem determined to remain -- as opposed to the overlord-vassal relationship we have now. Remember, the Palestinians have declared war against Israel and they are winning handily. The war is fought on many fronts with many weapons. Israel's inability to see this, especially the otiose astigmatism of the Right, is the main cause of our failures to this date. Cut and Run, Bibi.

SHABBAS IN QUEENS

I spent this past Shabbas in Kew Garden's Hills, Queens for my roommate'S aufrauf (oof-roof?). This was the first extended time I have spent in the Royal Borough, and although I was tempted, David Letterman-like, to use "woman's minyan" as the punch-line for every third joke, I showed admirable restraint. I few comments about Queens, though:

(1) It is a very nice area in terms of having green, leafy thangs lying around in the dirt, but there's a BIIIIG problem with the street names.

They were obviously created by a damaged mind. Get this: [My roommate] lives on 71st Road. But there is a 71st Street, 71st Drive, and 71st Lane as well. All right next to each other. It's like that for every number. Makes you want to pitch the city planners into a vat o'boiling goo and scream in their ears with a bullhorn:

"YO! Jerky! The reason why we use cardinal numbers in the first place is cuz you will NEVER RUN OUT OF THEM! [scream like Sam Kenison]."

Note: there is no functional difference between a street, road, drive, or lane. None. Never had it. Never will. [Laugh like the 7Up guy] (But I'm sure there's some Nimrod out there who will defend the Kings' County Planning Commission; save it for someone who cares).

(2) There are sooo many Jews in Queens. When I was walking to shul in my ol' home-towns, one could find where the synagogue you were going to by playing "follow the Jew." Not so in Kew Gardens! It felt like I was in pre-war Krakow. Hundreds o'Jews going into houses, shuls, yeshivas, park benches, ... everything was turned into a shul there. Not that I'm complaining, it was kinda cool actually, but verrry verrry different from my experiences.

(3) In the bedroom I stayed in, my hosts has their collection of Intellivision cartridges. This brought back immense memories of the whole Atari Culture I grew up in. Of the three denominations, Atari, Intellivision, Coleco, I was of the orthodox Atari faith. Just thinking about it over shabbas made me realize what love and joy I have and had for my Atari 2600. I and [my other roommate](also an Atari acolyte), went through all the great games of our youth -- Warlords, Adventure, Berserk, Yar's Revenge, Superman. So, publicly, I want to thank my parents for allowing me to get an Atari (and to get all those cartridges). This should be good proof to some parents out there that yes, your kids do remember these things. [I'll wax more philosophic about Atari elsewhen].

(4) That Weird Aufrauf feeling. For all those out there unacquainted, an aufrauf is a Shabbat before the wedding that is dedicated to honor the groom and his family; it is held in the groom's home synagogue, as opposed to the wedding which is held usually in the bride's hometown. The groom's friends come in for the aufrauf, are put up in neighbors' houses, and usually eat meals in the synagogue. The weird feeling I refer to is the identity one has as the groom's friend, cuz you are oftentimes a complete stranger in the groom's shul, yet the should becomes your place of meals and you are given a special status more so than a usual guest.

Anyway, I hope the wedding goes through well. It will be in St. Louis; I may take notes.

EMPIRE STATE KILLER

I want people to know that in n my comments in Styxii27, in ever considered the attack on the empire state building to be considered 'terrorism' at all. Rather, I put it under a special, growing, category 'wacko with a gun' (WWAG). Even though this wacko blames the Zionists -- he's a Palestinian and they blame Zionists like wacko Americans blame the UN, it's their term for the secularized devil (why is the Medieval hairy man-goat any different from Timothy McVeigh's black helicopters?) Hamas calls Arafat a Zionist tool (when those guilty of civil disobedience are tortured by Arafat's regime, I'd bet their first thought is 'why is Arafat such a Zionist?')

It is sad, though, that I can put Ali Amu Kamal in a set category (i.e. WWAG). He is an honorary member of Disgruntleds Anonymous (have you noticed that 'disgruntled' has taken on a specific meaning -- the adjective meant to modify a formerly quiet man who kept to himself who one day turns into a mass murderer). Being disgruntled in this highly specific meaning is an American specialty -- and despite the fact that it happened recently in Devonshire & Tasmania, it is an American regularity. Maybe its the full force of Modernity in America with its seismic uncertainties that pry apart weak minds, minds that in simpler times would have been mildly unhinged are blown apart by the bombardment of media images, war, weapons, technology, buzzing like nuclear bees around our heads.

It is as if American society is saying: "Makes sense to me; Kamal was annoyed at the world so he bought a gun and started firing." It's his god given right as an American to bear arms and express his personal opinions with an unmistakable 9mm diction. In fact it should be protected by the First amendment not the second -- because what else conveys the particular message that Kamal wanted to express besides semi-automatic pistol fire?

The WWAG are people who feel that complex problems can be solved with a gun. Call 'em Gordian Knot-Heads. A gun is so glorious, so powerful, so beautiful. In our culture, the gun is turned into a symbol of the fullest expression of the power of man -- a natural extension of will, what we are born to use to set things right. No wonder a gun is called an "equalizer" (it's also called a "mohaska," at least according to Sean Connery in The Untouchables, but that doesn't help my argument much). Weak minds -- the Wackos -- a gun is a natural item to be drawn to (one can extend this to rapists as well). This leads to:

THE FLORIDA ASSASSIN

If you saw the Wednesday 2/26/97 New York Times, you know that right under the follow-up article about the Empire State killer is a story about another YC Grad (JSS) who planted a bomb in a Jacksonville, Florida synagogue in an attempted assassination of Shimon Peres. [Note about the title, I consider anyone who attempts an assassination, yet misses, is still an assassin]. The bomb didn't go off and was found 9 days later by a bunch of kids who were playing with the package during a bat mitzvah. This shows a few things:

(1) This man, Harry Shapiro, is a monster whose brain is a big ol' sack o'puppy chow.

(2) The FBI can solve a case! (Now all the FBI has to hope for is that all criminals turn themselves in on their own accord like Shapiro did). Shapiro also called 911 and warned them about the bomb, claiming he was the Islamic Jihad (which would have fooled no one in Israel cuz we all know the Islamic Jihad has no need to kill Peres).

(3) The GSS (Israel's security agency) is as bad as the FBI. How could they not find the bomb? Shows you that they protect Peres as well as they protected Rabin, eh?

In any case, even though Noam Friedman (from the recent Hebron shooting) and Baruch Goldstein are under the category of WWAG, Yigal Amir and now Harry Shapiro are not so easy to place in the wacko bin. They are more sane; stupid but sane. But maybe not -- it could just be a different style of crazy. They are best described as Extreme.

The Disgruntleds are transferring their need for anxiety relief into an act of violence. People like Friedman, a full-blown whack-a-mole delusional schizophrenic, are drawn to extreme philosophies cuz (a) wacko groups don't really mind the people they take in (b) it's hard to separate the Extreme from the Insane. Whatever the case may be, it just reinforces our need to patrol the wacky denizens of the yeshivas even more.

AVI WEISS

If anyone wants a copy of the remarks Rav Avi Weiss made at the recent conference of Orthodoxy and Feminism, I have a copy I can email out. Don't ask me for my opinions on the matter; I fear that no matter what I say on the matter I will get resoundingly schmeitzed. And we all know that discretion is the better part of valor, and cowardice is just prudence with bad PR.