I have to apologize for my tardiness this week. It's bad form to be late on only the second edition, but I woke up Thursday with a cold that I'm not entirely over yet.
Reading Joseph Aaron's flights of fancy didn't make me feel any better, I can tell you that. Nausea was not one of the symptoms of my cold, but reading his column, well...
This week, Joe leaves the Jew bashing for the end, which is kind of nice. Refreshing, really. And he targets people who actually are despicable, which is also a nice bonus. But the majority of the article is just so nuts that it almost defies belief.
Apparently, Muhammed El Baradei, the Egyptian/Muslim/Arab head of the International Atomic Energy Agency, used the word "kosher".
Holy crow! Mashiach has come! An Arab used the word "kosher"!
Gag me. The word has come into such common usage that it's hardly that bizarre. But for Aaron, this is just an example of how good Jews have it. We can all relax and stop worrying about anti-semitism because a friggin' Arab used the word "kosher".
And wow, they mention Hanukkah on TV now. Certainly, the long awaited redemption is here. The goyim are willing to adopt the idiotic equivalency between Hanukkah and the pagan holiday of Christmas, so everything's good. Sounds like the maunderings of any assimilationist, really.
And watch Joseph Aaron in raptures over the announcement that Tootsie Rolls are going to be kosher. There's a big old Muslim dome on the holiest place in the world. Everyone and his brother seems to think that defending ourselves against terrorism is as bad or worse than the terrorism itself. Anti-semitism is more popular today than it has been since the newsreels of the death camps shocked it out of most people. But Tootsie Rolls will be kosher. Halleluj-ah!
I'm not even going to comment on the cutesy story about the Hebrew speaking dog in Montana. I mean, hey. The fact that the light news item folks ran this story definitely makes up for all of the libels about Jews selling Arab organs in what are supposed to be hard news stories.
You know what? Going through this again is bringing back the nausea. So that's about all until next time.
Sunday, December 13, 2009
Saturday, December 5, 2009
Gevalt! Another Blog!
I've started so many blogs. But this one is near and dear to my heart, and since it virtually demands that it be updated on a weekly basis, I'm going to give it a try.
There is a man named Joseph Aaron. Mr. Aaron publishes a weekly paper called the Chicago Jewish News. And each week, Mr. Aaron has two columns of editorial space at the back of the paper in which he inveighs against Jews and praises the non-Jewish world to the skies.
Now... I'm the first one to say that there's much praiseworthy among non-Jews, and a lot to be criticized in the Jewish community. But Joe Aaron is so incredibly and consistently wrongheaded about everything he writes that I felt a voice of sanity was called for.
(We used to refer to the paper in my home as "Joseph Aaron rants against the Jews", btw. As in, "Have you seen this week's Joseph Aaron rants against the Jews?" I thought about referring to him as Clueless Joe, just for the pun, but I decided it would be too juvenile. As enjoyable as that might be, it really won't be hard to take the high road here, because Aaron is just so horrible wrong all the time.)
Aaron has two main planks atop his bully pulpit. One is that there's no such thing as anti-semitism any more, and the fact that there are Jews who are successful in public life proves this, so anyone who says it's any kind of cause for concern any more is a fear-monger who should be mocked and derided. The other is that Jews standing up for themselves are a horrible, horrible embarrassment and should be mocked, derided and shunned.
Both of these views stem from a pathetic fear of non-Jews, and are ultimately more insulting to them than any of the things Aaron rails against. Let's take this week's column as an example, shall we? You can go to the website and click on Joseph Aaron under "Weekly Stories" if you're of a mind to do so. As I write this, they still have last week's column up, but I have the hardcopy right next to me. And I grieve for the trees that gave their life for his drivel.
He starts his column this week talking about Tiger Woods and how all Big Deals are ephemeral. The USSR, Tiger Woods, Michael Jackson, Bernie Madoff, the US economy, etc, ad nauseum. It's kind of boring, and eventually he comes around with "We now return to our regularly scheduled column."
First, one on a long line of Joseph Aaron rants against Jonathan Pollard. Aaron has in the past referred to Pollard as "the worst Jew in the world." Pretty strong words. This time, he says that Pollard "committed a despicable crime which caused harm to this country the true scope of which we will probably never know."
Really.
Pollard passed information to Israel about Saddam Hussein's development of nuclear weapons. Real WMDs. As a result, Israel bombed the Osirak nuclear reactor in Iraq, which prevented Saddam from having real nuclear weapons more than a decade before 9/11. This was information, mind you, which America was obligated by treaty to share with Israel. It harmed America in the sense that it went against American policy at the time, but no one has ever suggested that it actually harmed America's security.
What's Aaron's "proof" that Pollard's "heinous" act harmed America? The fact that he's still in prison. After all, Aaron rants, if Pollard hadn't caused irreparable harm of ultimate horribleness, surely some or other president would have released him by now. Right?
I'll leave it to the adults reading this to find the flaw in that reasoning. Or to laugh at the idiocy. Or to write a letter to the Chicago Jewish News pointing out what a lunkhead Aaron is.
He calls Pollard "a horrible crook". Now, I know "crook" means "criminal", and that Pollard committed a crime, but you don't usually hear people convicted of espionage being called "crooks". Not unless you're trying to make them sound worse than they are.
I'll skip his ranting against the head of Rubashkins, because from everything I've heard, Rubashkin was a crook. I'm actually embarrassed myself by the lunatic fringe calling his conviction a "blood libel". Sheesh, some perspective, people.
Then he comes to the call in Israel for soldiers to refuse orders if they're ordered to kick more Jews out of their homes. You may have been lucky enough to miss Joseph Aaron's rants against Gush Katif and his teary eyed support for Sharon's war crimes against 9,000 innocent Jews, many of whom had lived their entire lives in Gush Katif. I'd like to excise that from my memory, but what can you do?
In the Israeli army, there are three types of orders. A legal order, such as "drop and give me 50." An illegal order, such as "drop on that broken glass and give me 50." And a manifestly illegal order, such as "shoot that civilian in the head and then drop and give me 50."
In the Israeli army, if you receive a legal or illegal order, you must carry it out. If it's an illegal order, you can complain to a superior officer after the fact and get the person who gave you the illegal order in trouble, but if you disobey an illegal order, you go to jail. A manifestly illegal order is one that any person of any moral fiber whatsoever should know better than to obey. A war crime, really.
Now... tell me. How is it not a manifestly illegal order to take 9,000 innocent men, women and children and throw them out of their homes? Many of the expellees had been born there and lived all their lives there. Others had lived there for well over 25 years. They had homes, families, communities, jobs, property. Now they have nothing. And all the expectations for the great "disengagement" came to nothing. It didn't make the Arabs concilatory; they used the evacuated land as a staging ground for terror attacks. It didn't gain any "moral capital" with all the moral vipers who see Arab terror and Israeli defense as being the same thing.
Next, Aaron gets to the case of Nofrat Frenkel. This was a Conservative Jewish woman who went to the Kotel and put on a tallis. And got arrested for it. Joseph Aaron is outraged, of course, because he doesn't think there's anything in Jewish law against women wearing a tallis. His proof is that one of the most left wing members of the Orthodox rabbinate, Asher Lopatin, lets women daven with a tallis in his shul. But it isn't even a matter of whether Jewish law permits it or not. She wasn't arrested because Jewish law has a problem with a woman wearing a tallis. She was arrested because she broke the law. It seems that a soldier who breaks the law for moral reasons is a rotten person in Joseph Aaron's mind, but that a woman who breaks the law because she doesn't like it is just fine.
The Kotel (Western Wall for those who don't know the name) is a synagogue. An Orthodox synagogue, mind you. Imagine a woman walking into a Catholic church (l'havdil) with a priest's clerical collar and robes on. That's what we're talking about. The Women at the Wall group has done its best to use political protest and media manipulation to change this fact, but fact it remains, and Nofrat Frenkel absolutely knew that what she was doing was illegal. It was win-win for her. If no one did anything, she could (and would) claim that a precedent had been set. Since she was arrested, she could (and did) claim religious persecution. More of the media manipulation that this group is so fond of.
Anyway, I need to go drink something to get the foetid taste of Joseph Aaron's rants out of my mouth. More next week (unless he takes the week off).
There is a man named Joseph Aaron. Mr. Aaron publishes a weekly paper called the Chicago Jewish News. And each week, Mr. Aaron has two columns of editorial space at the back of the paper in which he inveighs against Jews and praises the non-Jewish world to the skies.
Now... I'm the first one to say that there's much praiseworthy among non-Jews, and a lot to be criticized in the Jewish community. But Joe Aaron is so incredibly and consistently wrongheaded about everything he writes that I felt a voice of sanity was called for.
(We used to refer to the paper in my home as "Joseph Aaron rants against the Jews", btw. As in, "Have you seen this week's Joseph Aaron rants against the Jews?" I thought about referring to him as Clueless Joe, just for the pun, but I decided it would be too juvenile. As enjoyable as that might be, it really won't be hard to take the high road here, because Aaron is just so horrible wrong all the time.)
Aaron has two main planks atop his bully pulpit. One is that there's no such thing as anti-semitism any more, and the fact that there are Jews who are successful in public life proves this, so anyone who says it's any kind of cause for concern any more is a fear-monger who should be mocked and derided. The other is that Jews standing up for themselves are a horrible, horrible embarrassment and should be mocked, derided and shunned.
Both of these views stem from a pathetic fear of non-Jews, and are ultimately more insulting to them than any of the things Aaron rails against. Let's take this week's column as an example, shall we? You can go to the website and click on Joseph Aaron under "Weekly Stories" if you're of a mind to do so. As I write this, they still have last week's column up, but I have the hardcopy right next to me. And I grieve for the trees that gave their life for his drivel.
He starts his column this week talking about Tiger Woods and how all Big Deals are ephemeral. The USSR, Tiger Woods, Michael Jackson, Bernie Madoff, the US economy, etc, ad nauseum. It's kind of boring, and eventually he comes around with "We now return to our regularly scheduled column."
First, one on a long line of Joseph Aaron rants against Jonathan Pollard. Aaron has in the past referred to Pollard as "the worst Jew in the world." Pretty strong words. This time, he says that Pollard "committed a despicable crime which caused harm to this country the true scope of which we will probably never know."
Really.
Pollard passed information to Israel about Saddam Hussein's development of nuclear weapons. Real WMDs. As a result, Israel bombed the Osirak nuclear reactor in Iraq, which prevented Saddam from having real nuclear weapons more than a decade before 9/11. This was information, mind you, which America was obligated by treaty to share with Israel. It harmed America in the sense that it went against American policy at the time, but no one has ever suggested that it actually harmed America's security.
What's Aaron's "proof" that Pollard's "heinous" act harmed America? The fact that he's still in prison. After all, Aaron rants, if Pollard hadn't caused irreparable harm of ultimate horribleness, surely some or other president would have released him by now. Right?
I'll leave it to the adults reading this to find the flaw in that reasoning. Or to laugh at the idiocy. Or to write a letter to the Chicago Jewish News pointing out what a lunkhead Aaron is.
He calls Pollard "a horrible crook". Now, I know "crook" means "criminal", and that Pollard committed a crime, but you don't usually hear people convicted of espionage being called "crooks". Not unless you're trying to make them sound worse than they are.
I'll skip his ranting against the head of Rubashkins, because from everything I've heard, Rubashkin was a crook. I'm actually embarrassed myself by the lunatic fringe calling his conviction a "blood libel". Sheesh, some perspective, people.
Then he comes to the call in Israel for soldiers to refuse orders if they're ordered to kick more Jews out of their homes. You may have been lucky enough to miss Joseph Aaron's rants against Gush Katif and his teary eyed support for Sharon's war crimes against 9,000 innocent Jews, many of whom had lived their entire lives in Gush Katif. I'd like to excise that from my memory, but what can you do?
In the Israeli army, there are three types of orders. A legal order, such as "drop and give me 50." An illegal order, such as "drop on that broken glass and give me 50." And a manifestly illegal order, such as "shoot that civilian in the head and then drop and give me 50."
In the Israeli army, if you receive a legal or illegal order, you must carry it out. If it's an illegal order, you can complain to a superior officer after the fact and get the person who gave you the illegal order in trouble, but if you disobey an illegal order, you go to jail. A manifestly illegal order is one that any person of any moral fiber whatsoever should know better than to obey. A war crime, really.
Now... tell me. How is it not a manifestly illegal order to take 9,000 innocent men, women and children and throw them out of their homes? Many of the expellees had been born there and lived all their lives there. Others had lived there for well over 25 years. They had homes, families, communities, jobs, property. Now they have nothing. And all the expectations for the great "disengagement" came to nothing. It didn't make the Arabs concilatory; they used the evacuated land as a staging ground for terror attacks. It didn't gain any "moral capital" with all the moral vipers who see Arab terror and Israeli defense as being the same thing.
Next, Aaron gets to the case of Nofrat Frenkel. This was a Conservative Jewish woman who went to the Kotel and put on a tallis. And got arrested for it. Joseph Aaron is outraged, of course, because he doesn't think there's anything in Jewish law against women wearing a tallis. His proof is that one of the most left wing members of the Orthodox rabbinate, Asher Lopatin, lets women daven with a tallis in his shul. But it isn't even a matter of whether Jewish law permits it or not. She wasn't arrested because Jewish law has a problem with a woman wearing a tallis. She was arrested because she broke the law. It seems that a soldier who breaks the law for moral reasons is a rotten person in Joseph Aaron's mind, but that a woman who breaks the law because she doesn't like it is just fine.
The Kotel (Western Wall for those who don't know the name) is a synagogue. An Orthodox synagogue, mind you. Imagine a woman walking into a Catholic church (l'havdil) with a priest's clerical collar and robes on. That's what we're talking about. The Women at the Wall group has done its best to use political protest and media manipulation to change this fact, but fact it remains, and Nofrat Frenkel absolutely knew that what she was doing was illegal. It was win-win for her. If no one did anything, she could (and would) claim that a precedent had been set. Since she was arrested, she could (and did) claim religious persecution. More of the media manipulation that this group is so fond of.
Anyway, I need to go drink something to get the foetid taste of Joseph Aaron's rants out of my mouth. More next week (unless he takes the week off).
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
