Tisha B'Av and Moving to Israel

Tonight is erev Tisha B'Av. It's always been a very hard day for me; to understand the imagery that we find in Eicha. Two years ago I sat at the Kotel all day trying to feel the destruction - but I can't - it's so much easier for me to feel the destruction of the nation through the Holocaust, the descriptions provided in the megillah of what the populace went through during the siege. This is why most shuls watch Holocaust movies - because we cannot connect to the Temple - despite our best efforts most of us cannot do it.

XGH says that this phenomenon is proof that we don't really want the Temple back; I don't think so, it's been 2,000 hard years and we - today's Jews - don't really get it. So we take other aspects of Tisha B'Av the other calamities that have befallen us on this day and connect to those.

Is it bad to do so? No, I don't think so, since it's also an integral part of the day. But this year I'm going to make a concerted effort - like I've done in the past - to think about the Avoda in the Beit HaMikdash and what the Churban really was.

I found RWAC's post to be truly moving, because I feel that I will come out of Tisha B'Av feeling very like that. Today I will accept God's judgment, but I'm moving to Israel in a week. I have the pain of packing and moving boxes in my arms and legs; I can't forget that. There is a day after Tisha B'Av and on Tu B'Av I will move to Israel.

This year's Tisha B'Av promises to not be the average Tisha B'Av. It will be hard and special in it's own way.

Alan Dershowitz on Jimmy Carter

As I start Rabbinical School in less than a month I'm writing a number of posts on American politics so that I can exhaust that section for a while. Torah will become the focus of this blog soon.

This post is copied from The Huffington Post's blog:

When Jimmy Carter used the word "apartheid" in the title of his book, Palestine Peace Not Apartheid, he knew it would deeply offend many Israelis, Jews and other supporters of Israel's efforts to make peace with its Arab neighbors. Yet he deliberately chose that deeply offensive word precisely in order to provoke. As Jeffrey Goldberg of The Washington Post said, it was a case of "bait and switch," since in the text of the book, the word apartheid appears only three times and Carter goes out of his way to explain that what he believe Israel is doing "is unlike in South Africa -- not racism...."

Carter was cautioned by friends not to use the inaccurate and provocative word apartheid, but he insisted on putting it in his title, knowing full well how deeply offensive it would be to so many.

Contrast Carter's insensitivity toward his Jewish readers with his extraordinary oversensitivity toward Muslim readers of Salmon Rushdie's controversial book, The Satanic Verses. When Rushdie was sentenced to death in absentia by the Ayatollah Khomeini, and when Khomeini offered "paradise" to anyone who would murder Rushdie, Carter did not leap to the defense of the threatened author. Instead, he condemned him for his "direct insult to the millions of Muslims whose sacred beliefs have been violated and are suffering in restrained silence..." To be sure, Carter recited the obligatory defense of freedom of speech ("while Rushdie's First Amendment freedoms are important ...), and the obligatory criticism of Khomeini ("it is our duty to condemn the threat of murder....), it is clear that his true sympathies lie with the offended Muslims. This is what he wrote in his article entitled "Rushdie's Book Is An Insult:"

"This is the kind of intercultural wound that is difficult to heal. Western leaders should make it clear that in protecting Rushdie's life and civil rights, there is no endorsement of an insult to the sacred beliefs of our Moslem friends.

We must remember that Iranian and other fundamentalists are not the only Moslems involved. Around the world there are millions of others who are waiting for a thoughtful and constructive response to their concerns."

Carter was relatively silent when millions of Muslims were on a rampage against the Danish cartoons that depicted Mohammed (some positively, others negatively).

His sensitivity seems limited to Muslims and Christians. This is what he said about the film, The Last Temptation of Christ:

...the sacreligious scenes were still distressing to me and many others who share my faith. There is little doubt that the movie producers and Scorsese, a professed Christian, anticipated adverse public reactions and capitalized on them.

Yet Carter fully "anticipated" and "capitalized" on the deliberately offensive title of his best-selling book. Nor do I recall any condemnation by him of Mel Gibson's film, The Passion of the Christ, that was deeply offensive to many Jews.

Jimmy Carter's sensitivities seem to have a gaping hole when it comes to Jews. There is a term for that.

It's a little late; okay, a lot late, but I think his observations are right on the money. It's errors of obmission that have plagued Carter's policies since he took the oath of office. Presidents and other politicians, however, are no super-humans they are allowed to make mistakes; but every so often they need to admit to them.

Carter - and I wrote my thesis on his public speeches regarding the Camp David Accords - has never tried to put Israel's interests first. It was always what would Israel give up to get Peace - as if peace was only desired on one side. During the Accords there was a lot of rhetoric tossed around trying to get Sadat to come to the table without looking weak, very little desire to court Begin. Carter never cared about what was good for Israel or the Jews; should we be surprised then that his book only cared for one side and not an honest look for the truth?

Al Gore: Soothsayer of Truth...

Al Gore: Soothsayer of Truth...
by Michelle Kraus

The debacle of the Scooter Libby conviction and sentence commutation further "assaults" our Democracy

The popularity of Barack Obama finally makes sense after this week's Scooter Libby events. Al Gore is right again. There is an "assault on reason." We are living in a country starved for a vision: one of democracy and hope.

The stage is set for Barack Obama: Speaker for the Gospel of Hope. He speaks the words that call the discouraged and disheartened to contribute to him empowered to hope one more time. His voice has truly become the Voice of Hope, as Al Gore's is the Voice of Reason. It is in this context that his broad popularity finally makes sense. His words nourish those starving for these words.

As we listen to these two great men, a possible and hopeful future takes shape in stark contrast to the bleak and amoral present -- an America whose people are reeling from the daily "assaults" on our morality from the war on the Constitution and, in particular, our Constitutional rights, or the insane war on terror with its huge daily costs in green dollars and spilled red blood.

Democrats and Republicans alike, now is the time for you to stand up and speak the Truth from your hearts and minds. The only candidate to talk about the loss of the Constitution in the last series of debates was Senator Chris Dodd.

Where were you all before this week?

Inspire. Give voice to those who hunger for it.

Bring power back to the American people. Let them believe again!

It is time to hear all the voices of the Democratic candidates for President and for the media to encourage them to be heard.

It time for our candidates to stop politicking and posturing, and talk to the American people. Give them a vision. Give them hope. Show them the roadmap back to prosperity. Return their dignity.

Why is Obama the only one who has figured out how to give voice to the thirst of the American people for what is truly "right"?

Why is Ann Coulter still on the air? She's a purposeful and inflammatory distraction.

Are we missing the basics or being so distracted that the people are not really hearing the voices of Senator Hillary Clinton, former Senator John Edwards, Governor Bill Richardson, Senator Joe Biden, Senator Chris Dodd and all of the others?

Alas, why is Gore still the only soothsayer of the truth?

That's really it for me; America has lost it's vision. We've been lead astray - unpurposefully IMO - by Presidents, unmotivated Congressman, and even political commentators. I don't necessarily think that Obama is the hope that America needs, but that's only one small facet of her column. The crazy thing is that a first term Senator from Illinois is one of the two frontrunner's for the Democratic ticket.

All I know is this, with the current state of affairs in the US, it's time for a change. I don't care if you like Hillary or not, but if she's elected it will be 28 years of Bush-Clinton rule. America doesn't need that.

Alan Johnston is Free

Alan Johnston, the BBC reporter who was taken hostage in Gaza, has been freed by Hamas forces. I truly believe, and CNN speaks of it, that the only reason Hamas decided to do something was that they sorely need some good publicity.

The captors - the Army of Islam - have been connected to Fatah; which is curious since Abbas was not able to do anything about it.

Either way, I'm glad he's safe and unharmed.