Seraphic Secret

« April 2006 | Main | June 2006 »

May 31, 2006

The Hebrew Kid and Wyatt Earp

"So, what's next for The Hebrew Kid?"

This question comes my way, oh, a dozen times a week. It seems that people like The Hebrew Kid and the Apache Maiden so much that they crave further adventures for Ariel Isaacson and his family.

Well, have no fear. I have not been idle. In spite of chronic laziness I have been working on the sequel to my award-winning first novel, and the new book is called, The Hebrew Kid and Wyatt Earp.

Did you know that Wyatt Earp, the famous gunfighter and lawman, is buried in a Jewish cemetery in Colma California? Did you know that Earp's second wife, Josephine Marcus was from a prominent Jewish San Francisco family?

Anyway, The Hebrew Kid and Wyatt Earp is a Chanukah story.

Let me briefly set-up this excerpt.

The Isaacson family have finally setled in Tombstone, Arizona. Papa has hung out a shingle as a bootmaker. Doc Holliday, the tubercular dentist and much feared gunfighter who had a prominent role in arranging Ariel's Bar Mitzvah, is also in Tombstone, and makes a living as a gambler. He is addicted to liquor -- and Mama's cholent.

Ariel's older sister Rebecca, still dreams of being invited to an ice-cream social, and in this story will seek a proper husband. Naturally, disaster ensues and Ariel will rescue her from the clutches of a unscrupulous "theatrical producer" who promises to make Rebecca "The Star of the American West." Some things never change.

Have no fear, Lozen plays a prominent role in The Hebrew Kid and Wyatt Earp. Though the terrible and bloody Apache Wars rage on, Ariel and Lozen's friendship remains steadfast though all the forces of society insist on forcing them apart.

Ariel attends the Tombstone one-room school house where he is being bullied by the pint-sized Clanton Gang. And this is where we step in:

Enjoy, and please do let me know how you like--or do not like--what you read.

RJA

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

The Hebrew KId and Wyatt Earp

Stepping out of the schoolhouse, I got hit by a harsh gust of wind. The windowpanes clattered in their frames. It was cold in Tombstone in late October. It felt as if the wind was shoving me down the stairs where Butch and his gang were waiting for me.
The Clanton boys always stuck together. If one of them started in on you, you can be sure that the others were not far behind. Running away was a possibility, and I considered it, but I hated the idea of them calling me a coward, and knowing the Clanton boys they’d be sure to add Jew—cowardly Jew they’d call em. Well, there was nothing to do but do what I had to do.
Butch pushed me with his forefinger, saying: “You and me,” he smiled, “we’re gonna have us a set to. Think you’re so smart, don’tcha?”
I shrugged.
“You going to fight like a man?”
I was just about to agree to the fight, raise my fists and take a proper stance when Butch hauled off and punched me square in the face. The world turned dark for a split second and suddenly I found myself sitting on the ground and studying a thick clot of blood in the palm of my hand. Mama was going to be angry, for the front of my shirt was stained with the blood dripping from my nose. My vision was blurred from hot tears and it felt like a burning poker was being pushed directly through my skull.
Butch and his cousins were laughing and pointing at me.
I looked past Butch’s shoulder and squinted into the rising heat waves. There on a hill in the distance I thought I saw Lozen. The Apache Maiden was seated on her white pony, staring at me and even from this great distance I could see a look of such great sadness on her face. I was filled with such shame. Here was my friend, a great Apache warrior maiden who had taught me how to fight and now she was witnessing this terrible humiliation.
I fought to my feet and charged at Butch. My hands encircled his waist and I held on for dear life. Butch pummeled me with his fists. Over and over again he pounded at the base of my skull, all the while he was laughing and taunting me. He was so much bigger than me that I knew that if I dared let go he would hit me again in the face and who knows what damage he would do.
“Git this boy off me,” Butch ordered.
The brothers pulled me away; and all three boys pummeled me with their fists for what seemed like hours. I curled up into a tiny ball, covered my face with my hands, drew my knees up to my chest and prayed that I would survive this beating. They were punching me and when they got tired of punching, they kicked me and their heavy leather boots crashed into my ribs like steel hammers. Perhaps, I said to myself I should recite the Sh’ma.
And then, I heard the thundering hooves of an approaching horse.
An arm was raised, a Colt’s .45 pointed straight into the sky and a shot exploded in the cool clean air.
Lozen; she was coming to save me. As she always did. But oh my goodness, she would not just fight Butch and his brothers, Lozen was an Apache; she would absolutely massacre them. I couldn’t let that happen. When an Apache warrior goes to battle no quarter is given and none is asked.
From a distance, I heard Butch order Ed and Jake to beat it.
Abruptly, there was silence.
“Lozen,” I whispered hoarsely.
A shadow like a sword fell over me. Blinking, I found myself staring up at a tall man who had the bluest eyes I had ever seen. They were more like chips of ice. The man had a lavishly waxed handle-bar mustache and before I knew it I was aloft, in his arms, being carried along as if on an ocean’s wave. Mounted on his horse, the man held me in his strong arms and held the reins in his teeth.
“Lozen…” I heard my voice saying. Oh, how I missed the Apache Maiden, my one true friend.
The tall man just looked at me in bafflement.
“You took an awful beating, son.”
He spoke in the flat tones of the Midwest.
I just stared into his blue eyes. They seemed limitless.
“I know it hurts to talk, your lips are all tore up, just give over your name and I’ll get you home.”
“Ariel Isaacson,” I managed to whisper, “I’m the Hebrew Kid.”
The tall man made a small clicking sound and tapped the horse with his knees. The horse, a blue roan gelding, immediately obeyed and took off into a gentle walk. I felt as if I was being rocked to sleep. The last thing I remember was the tall man’s eyes, twinkling with amusement as he said, “The Hebrew Kid, well I never.”

I must have dozed off, but when my eyes opened I realized that the tall man had just entered Tombstone, was riding north on Fremont. Still using his teeth, he gently reined in his horse at the O.K. Corral. He asked Mr. Montgomery, the proprietor, “Know the Isaacson family?”
Mr. Montgomery, always with a nugget of chewing tobacco tucked into his cheek, spit out a brown stream and squinted up saying:
“Straight up Fremont, south on Third. Fourth lot on the east side. Isaacson’s Handmade Boots.” Hebrew folk. And who might you be, pilgrim?”
The stranger tipped his black Stetson, and nudged his horse forward without answering Mr. Montgomery’s question.
I looked into the stranger’s face and it occurred to me that perhaps he was Elijah. Elijah the Prophet never died. He ascended to heaven in a whirlwind with a fiery chariot. The sages teach us that Elijah often returns to earth in many different disguises, helping people in times of need.
“Are you the righteous Prophet Elijah?” I managed to whisper.
The tall man’s eyes glittered with amusement.
“Neither prophet, nor righteous, son. Hush and I’ll have you home to your folks in but a few moments.”
The Rabbis also tell us that Elijah will never admit to being Elijah, so naturally I didn’t quite believe the tall stranger when he denied being Elijah.
Papa would know.
My sister Rebecca was on the front porch spinning wool when she caught sight of me cradled in the stranger’s arms.
“Ariel!” she cried. “What has happened?”
Rebecca leaped down the stairs and the stranger gently handed me down into Rebecca’s waiting arms. She propped me up and waited for the stranger to dismount. Once on the ground, he lifted me in his arms and Rebecca led him into our house.
“Mama, Papa,” cried Rebecca, “something has happened to Ariel!”
The stranger carried me into the back room where Rebecca led him. I felt my straw mattress sink beneath my weight and as if from a distance I heard the excited voices of my family.
Papa: “What happened?”
Mama: “My God, all the blood!”
Rebecca: “Who did this? Did you do this to my brother?”
The deep, resonant voice of the stranger: “No, Ma’am.”
Gabriel, my baby brother, wailed in a corner of the room, sensing the pain and unhappiness in our family.
Again, Rebecca demanded to know, “Who committed this outrage?” Though we are from Russia and English our second language, Rebecca has a real flair for our new language. She has read every single book that Mr. Charles Dickens has ever written. As soon as she finishes one volume, she begins another. Actually, I don’t know why she bothers reading them. I believe she can recite the stories by heart. When she reads she sighs. Very loudly. Mama thinks the books are bad for Rebecca; Mama believes that these stories put naughty ideas in Rebecca’s mind. I think the books are just silly, not that I’ve ever read any of them. Well, not all the way through. Papa tells me to learn Torah. That all I need, that all I’ll ever need to know can be found in the Torah.
And of course, Papa is right.
Whack! Rebecca stamped the heel of her boot on the floor and again demanded from the stranger the name of the person who did this outrage—she really liked that word—to me. Meanwhile, Mama was washing the cuts on my face with a warm cloth and Papa was whispering Tehillim into my ear.
The stranger turned his cold gaze on Rebecca and said, “Don’t know their names, little Missy, but I wager they’re just some low-down country trash. Best not get all riled all you’ll get the vapors.”
“Vapors-shmapors,” Rebecca shot back angrily. “I want justice.”
The stranger curled the edges of his mustache, a habitual gesture.
“Justice in Tombstone? Not likely.”
“Who says?” challenged Rebecca.
“Just saying my say, Ma’am.
The stranger kneeled and said: “You got courage, going up against such numbers. When you recover, we’ll discuss the ways and means of justice.”
The stranger walked to the door. He wore a black suit and a boiled white shirt. I spotted the walnut handle of a big Colt’s .45 on his right hip. His boot heels snapped against the floor like gunshots.
“What is your name?” asked Rebecca.
“Wyatt Earp.” He touched the flat brim of his Stetson hat, and stepped out into the white light of the afternoon. I had just met the man who would forever change my life and the life and times of Tombstone.

Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 12:14 PM | Comments (20)

May 30, 2006

Brits For Terror

What do you do when your homeland is bombed, innocent people slaughtered for no reason other than they are not Muslims? What do you do when your homeland is constantly threatened by homegrown Jihadists?

What do you do?

Well, British intellectuals, naturally blame it on the Jews, er, I mean Israel. Read this article from Ha-Aretz.

And this from the NY Times.

Here's a short quote: "The proposal slated to be discussed later this month by NATFHE differs from previous ones. According to the proposal, the current boycott will deal not only with the occupation, but also with discrimination against different populations in Israel, mainly in the field of education."

Never mind the obvious: There is not one Jewish teacher in any Arab institution in the Arab world. That doesn't seem to bother these British academics, nope, not one iota.

But that's because there are no Jews in the Arabs countries.

Why?

Because in 1948 there was a deliberate policy of ethnic cleansing of approximately one millionJews carried out in Egypt, Syria, Iraq, Algeria, Yemen, Morocco, and Libya. Entire communities robbed of their homes and possessions, and ordered to leave their homelands. Israel gathered in these exiles.

To this day, Jews are not allowed to set foot in Saudi Arabia. But that's okay. That's not apartheid. That's, um, being culturally sensitive.

Because if you're not sensitive to the radical Muslims -- they will chop your head off.

Duh.

But again, these little fact means nothing to the good British academics.

And the fact that a million Israeli Arabs lives as full citizens in Israel, again, this means nothing.

That Israel builds a wall to protect itself from murderous homicide bombers, no these self-righteous fools use the language of Hamas, a self-proclaimed genocidal organization, to characterize the wall as "apartheid."

Look, let's be honest about the British. There has always been a vicious undercurrent of antiSemitism in the culture. It ebbs and flows. After WWII, the horrors of the Holocaust put a lid on it. But now Arab antiSemitism has infected and revitalized European antiSemitism to such an extent that it proudly flourishes under the vile guise of antiZionism.

We Jews, we Zionists have made a terrible mistake. We have believed that by being good and honest and generous our humanity would win the day. We have naively believed that by sitting back the truth would prevail.

But defense is suicide. On the battlefield and in the media.

We have allowed the Arabs to take the offence. They attack on every front. They lie using the Nazi tactic of The Big Lie -- and you know what, it works.

There is more misinformation about the Israeli Arab conflict than any other area in modern history. For this we can only blame ourselves for allowing the Arabs to seize the highground.

For instance, Jenin: The IDF killed 56 people in that battle, the overwhelming number of them terrorist combatants. Israel could easily have leveled Jenin with air power, but rather than risk civilian casualties she sent in rifle squads. For this, the IDF paid a high price. In one ambush 13 IDF soldiers were killed.

Yet in the Arab world this fierce battle has been transformed into "Jeningrad." It is understood in the Arab world that some vast slaughter took place in Jenin. There are DVD's in public libraries all over America that spread this vile lie, that show manufactured footage of massive civilian casualties that never took place.

This stuff goes over very well on college campuses. Especially with guilty liberal Jewish students.

It's a massive lie that has morphed into unquestioned truth. All over the Arab world millions of babies are now named, Jenin.

It's time for us to change tactics. We Jews and Zionists must strike back. We must move from a passive defense to a vigorous offence.

Just as we always destroy the Arabs on the battlefield, we can destroy them in the battle of words. But only if we are on the offence and only if we give up any notions of compromise.

Winston Churchill had the political insight to recognize, early on, that western civilization was up against an implacable, genocidal enemy.

We must adopt this mindset before it's too late. The Israeli-Arab conflict is just part of the larger war against Jihad. It has nothing to do with land--gee just what the world needs, another tyrannical, Jihadist Arab state.

For too long we have fooled ourselves into believing that the Israeli-Arab conflict is about land.

That is simply not true. Hama's covenant of death is quite clear about this.

This is an existential battle.

The Arabs have no interest in compromise, have no interest in setting up a separate state for so-called Palestinians--an Arab entity that never existed, it's another vast lie that we have too easily ceded.

We must retrench.

We must deny them... everything.

They are out to isolate and then destroy us.

We must adopt the same ruthless mind set or--

--or we will lose.

Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 08:50 AM | Comments (24)

May 29, 2006

My Chaplain

It was a mysterious process. An envelope would arrive in the mail. He would rip it open. Show it to his wife. Naturally, she would sigh, resigned to the orders. And he would go to the closet, reach in, take out his uniform, the necessary ribbons and signs of rank.

Fully dressed, he was a different man, somehow enobled. It was a magical transformation.

I would stare at my father.

Was that really him? How exciting. And yet at the same time, I was sad because I knew he was going to be gone for several days or weeks and things were going to be tense. It was hard for my mother taking care of me and my sister all by herself while my father was away on "manuevers," that's what we called his trips, fulfilling his Chaplaincy duties.

But one year, I was around seven-years old, something amazing happened. My father leaned over and asked me if I'd like to come along and "be a soldier."

I was out the door in a shot.

Fort Drum, NY. I almost fainted when a squad of soldiers marched past and all of them, as one man, saluted. My father smartly saluted saluted back.

Who is this man? I wondered.

I don't remember many details, or even how long we were there. I do remember thinking that my father was not the man I thought he was. Here in the army, he was crisply efficient. Here in the army, some men affectionately called him "Chappy," and came to him for counseling. Here in the army, he would leap into a battered jeep or helicopter and zoom off to take care of some emergency.

I didn't know Rabbis could have emergencies that involved jumping into helicopters.

I do remember being sorely disappointed that my father did not carry a rifle or pistol.

"Chaplains are not permitted to carry weapons," my father explained.
"That's dumb, what happens if you run into a Nazi," I reasoned.
"Well, I'll bend the rules," my father grinned.

Thank G-d for the Oral Torah.

Here in the army, I vividly remember standing with dozens of soldiers at morning roll call as the American flag was raised. The flag fluttered in the morning wind and I felt the movement deep in the pit of my stomach. I understood, even though I was but a child, that we Jews had found a very special place in this great land called America.

I looked at my father and felt tears well in my eyes as I saw sunlight glint off the silver Star of David on his uniform, and my father, an Orthodox Rabbi in the American Army, the 42nd Rainbow Division, was revealed as a great hero to me.

And to this day, he still is: Colonel Abraham Avrech, Ret. US Army.

Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 08:05 AM | Comments (25)

May 28, 2006

Who Votes Against Israel?

The other day I urged our friends who are registered Democrats to reevaluate their party affiliation and switch to the Republican Party. I argue that the Democratic Party no longer supports Israel, cannot not be trusted with fighting the war on terror, and is sliding into the arms of the Arab lobby, into chronic AntiSemitism.

For proof, just read the roll call below for the Anti-Terrorism Bill. It is positively chilling, and should serve as a wake-up call to those who love Israel, to those who believe that the war on Muslim Jihadists is primary. I thank Naomi Ragen for bringing this to my attention.

Karen and I wish all our readers a lovely and meaningful Memorial Weekend. From the depths of our hearts, we thank our Servicemen past, present and future for their duty.

***

The U.S. Congress has once again proven itself a true friend of Israel and the free world. Notice the party affiliation of those voting against the anti-Terrorism bill. Out of 37 opponents, 32 were from the Democratic party. Remember the names of the opponents next time you go to the voting booth.

============================================================

Who were the 37 Members of Congress that voted Against the
Palestinian Anti-Terrorism Act ?

By Jerome S. Kaufman

By an overwhelming vote of 361-37, the House of
Representatives passed the Palestinian Anti-Terrorism Act,
H.R. 4681. The bill ends direct aid and contact with the
Hamas-run Palestinian Authority until Hamas renounces
violence, recognizes Israel's right to exist, and agrees to
abide by all previous agreements.

"The bill preserves necessary humanitarian aid for the
Palestinian people, while keeping American taxpayer dollars
out of the hands of a government run by terrorists. Hamas is
a terrorist organization, whose involvement in the
governmental process has not altered its stated goal of
destroying Israel."

Instead of using these last few months to work toward better
relations with the Israel, Hamas continues to reject
Israel's right to exist and to endorse continued violence
against the Israeli people. Hamas' newly appointed Foreign
Minister stated in a recent interview that 'there is no
place for the state of Israel on this land.'

A Hamas spokesperson endorsed a recent suicide bombing that
killed nine Israelis, stating that terrorists have "every
right" to carry out suicide bombings against the Israeli
people. This legislation sets out a clear path for the Hamas
government. End your support for terrorism and recognize
Israel's right to exist and you will be recognized as a
legitimate member of the international community. But until
those conditions are met, the United States will not allow
American taxpayer dollars to be used to support or
legitimize a terrorist-led Palestinian Authority.
Commended was the extraordinary work of Rep. Ileana
Ros-Lehtinen (R-FL) and Rep. Tom Lantos (D-CA) who initiated
the Palestinian Anti-Terrorism Act of 2006. The bill is the
farthest U.S. lawmakers have ever gone towards cutting off
the Palestinian leadership from U.S. aid and restricting
assistance through non-governmental organizations.

To voters curious as to Party affiliation of those that
voted against the bill, the following information may be of
interest:

Of the 37 that voted against the bill 31 were Democrats and
only 6 Republicans.

The 37 are listed below:
Arizona: Kolbe (R), Grijalva (D)
California: Becerra (D), Capps(D), Eshoo(D), Farr (D), Lee
(D), G. Miller (R), Stark (D)
Georgia: Marshall (D), McKinney (D)
Illinois: LaHood (R)
Hawaii: Abercrombie (D)
Massachusetts: Capuano (D), McGovern (D)
Maryland: Gilchrest (R)
Michigan: Conyers (D), Dingell (D), Kilpatrick (D)
Minnesota: McCollum (D)
New York: Hinchey (D), Velasquez (D)
North Carolina: Jones (R), Price (D), Watt (D)
Ohio: Kaptur (D), Kucinich (D)
Oregon: Blumenauer (D), DeFazio (D)
Texas: Doggett (D), Paul (R), Thornberry (R)
Washington: McDermott (D)
West Virginia: Rahall (D)
Wisconsin: Moore (D), Obey (D)
Virginia: Moran (D)

Some names will immediately stick out for their long
anti-Israel voting record - Cynthia McKinney (D), Conyers
(D), Dingell (D), Kilpatrick (D), Kucinich (D), Rahall (D),
Obey (D) and most of the others that I have neglected to
mention.

Also of note is that of the 9 representatives who were
present but elected to not vote, all were Democrats. The 9
are listed below:

California: Watson (D)
Illinois: Davis (D), Gutierrez (D), Jackson (D), Rush (D)
Indiana: Carson (D)
Missouri: Clay (D)
New Jersey: Payne (D)
Texas: E.B. Johnson (D)

Perhaps this information will be of some use at your next
visit to the voting booth.

Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 08:18 AM | Comments (51)

May 26, 2006

Yom Yerushalayim

We don't want to start Shabbos without acknowledging the unification of Jerusalem. Here is a fine post by Treppenwitz.

There is talk by the current Israeli government of dividing Jerusalem. Have they forgotten that Jordanian snipers used to sit on the walls of the Old City and casually shoot at Jews?

Have they forgotten... everything?

I recently read General Uzi Narkiss' account of the historic battle and subsequent liberation of Jerusalem. Every soldier should read this book for General Narkiss' analysis of the overall military strategy, the political roadblocks, and the often bloody hand-to-hand battles are masterful.

Ehud Olmert and every member of the the Israeli Parliament should read this book for it brings home the disaster a divided Jerusalem was and always will be.

Karen and I wish all our friends a lovely and meaningful Shabbos.

Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 02:55 PM | Comments (2)

Romper Room: Saudi Style

After 9-11, our good friends the Saudis promised America that they would revise and reform their disgusting antiWestern, AntiSemitic textbooks and schools.

Sure.

Let us be clear. Saudi Arabia is not a country. It's a family corporation that was brought to power in the 1920's by the Al Saud tribe, fanatical Wahhabi Muslims who made ruthless war against all non-Wahhabi tribes. According to the historian Said K. Aburish in his book The Rise, Corruption and Coming Fall of the House of Saud no fewer than 400,000 people were slaughtered during the formative years of the Saudi State.

And these savages have the unmitigated gall to attack Israel in her war against terrorism. But what am I saying? It's okay when Muslims kill Muslims no matter how vast the carnage. Witness the genocide in Darfur. The only people who are protesting are westerners. The Muslim world is shamefully silent. Well, of course, they're too busy loudly defending homicide bombers in Israel. Or screaming about some silly cartoons in a Danish newspaper. Yup, they've got their priorities just right.

The Hijazis in the west, the Asiris in the south, and the Shiites in eastern Arabia all witnessed their Islamic monuments destroyed and, of course, suffered horrendous casualties. They were all eventually cowed into submission. Their loyalty has been bought, or promised, or compelled under threat of torture or that Saudi favorite: beheading. Though, it must be said that the Hijazis still despise the Al Sauds and there is always the fear that the Hijazis will foment a coup. Hence, the Hijazis are locked out of the National Guard, the most powerful branch of the Saudi Army.

The Saudi Arabian royal family are professional liars. They say one thing to the west, and the exact opposite to their people. Let us never forget that in the corrupt, upside down world of the Al Saud dynasty, rhetoric usually replaces reality.

The time will probably come when America will be forced to send these barbarians back into the desert from whence they came. They are friends to no one, not even their own subjects, for they have shamelessly plundered their land's resources in order to enrich their own private treasury.

Naturally they continue to educate their children to hate all non Muslims, and to revile Jews and Christians as less than human. Read on.

Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 02:09 PM | Comments (9)

Cindy Sheehan Revealed

It was bound to happen. Cindy Sheehan has, gulp, written a book.

My good friend Cathy Seipp is a brave fearless woman.

She actually sat down and read it.

Now she reveals Sheehan as the true AntiSemite she is. Seraphic Secret has said over and over again that the danger to Israel, the danger to freedom in America comes from the left. Sheehan's book is a textbook example of leftist, anti-American, pro-Jihadist beliefs.

Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 12:44 PM | Comments (3)

Democrats, Republicans, and Israel

Instead of just providing a link, I'm reprinting Daniel Pipe's entire article because it's that important. It seems that too many Jews are still habitual Democrats, still pulling that old lever because, well, that's the lever they always pulled, the lever their parents pulled. They don't realize, or don't want to face up to the reality that the Democratic Party no longer supports Israel, that the Democratic party has become a viper's nest of AntiSemites.

I'm afraid it's time to face some truly unpleasant facts and to make some extremely difficult political decisions, but the survival of the Jewish state is at stake, as is the survival of the Jewish people.

The Republican Party is by no means perfect, but I do not look for utopian solutions. I live in the real world. And in this world the Republican Party is the party that supports Israel and the Jewish national homeland. The Republicans are the ones who are willing to fight the Jihadists. The Democrats, on the other hand, seem willing to fight, well, global warming, not to mention the NSA and CIA's attempts to eavesdrop on Jihadist phone calls. It is clear that the Democrats cannot be trusted with National Security.

A final note: Many Seraphic friends are registered Democrats. We do not wish to insult anyone and we are by no means naive, we do not live under the illusion that you will all run out and register as Republicans. But in a world where Orwellian language has become the norm, we strive for clarity.

--RJA

Democrats, Republicans, and Israel
by Daniel Pipes

Middle Eastern issues will likely play a role of unprecedented
importance in the American mid-term elections less than a half-year
away. Three topics head the agenda: the course of the Iraq war, the
proper response to Iran's nuclear ambitions, and the soaring price of
fuel.

Despite their prominence, these are momentary issues, where voters will
make decisions based on transient circumstances and without clearly
defined differences between two major parties; what is the Democratic
position on Iraq, anyway, or the Republican one on Iran? A fourth
Middle Eastern issue, the Arab-Israeli conflict, though less high
profile this year, has deeper electoral significance. It is a perennial
topic that helps define the two parties.

The U.S.-Israel bond is the most special "special relationship" in the
world today as well as the family relationship of international
politics. In many areas – foreign policy, strategic cooperation,
economic ties, intellectual connections, religious bonds, and
intervention in one another's domestic politics – the two countries
have unusual if not unique relations. This reaches down even to local
politics; as a 1994 New Yorker article put it, at times, "it seems that
the Middle East – or, at any rate, Israel – is a division" of New York.

In addition, a significant number of Americans (Jews, Evangelicals,
Arabs, Muslims, anti-Semites, leftists) vote according to Israel
policies.

Since Israel came into existence in 1948, Democrats and Republicans have
changed places in their attitudes toward Israel. In the first era,
1948-70, Democrats sympathized more with the Jewish state and
Republicans distinctly less so. Whereas Democrats emphasized spiritual
bonds, Republicans tended to see Israel as a weak state and as a
liability in the Cold War.

The second era began in about 1970 and lasted for 20 years. In the
aftermath of Israel's extraordinary victory in the Six Day War,
President Richard Nixon, a Republican, came to see Israel as a military
powerhouse and useful ally. This new regard rendered Republicans as
positive toward Israel as the Democrats. Noting this reality, I
concluded in a 1985 research piece "Liberals and conservatives support
Israel versus the Arabs in similar proportions."

As the Cold War ended in 1990, the third era began. Democrats cooled to
Israel and Republicans further warmed to it. The left made the
Palestinian Arab cause a centerpiece of its worldview (think of the
Durban conference in 2001), while the right deepened its religious and
political alignment with Israel.

This trend has become increasingly evident. In 2000, survey research
commissioned by the left-wing, anti-Israel activist James Zogby found
"a significant partisan split" on the Arab-Israeli conflict, with
Republicans significantly more pro-Israel than Democrats. For example,
asked the question, "With regard to the Middle East, how do you feel
the next president should relate to the region?" 22% of Republicans and
only 7% of Democrats said he should be pro-Israel.

Recent research by the Gallup Poll finds that 72% of Republicans and 47%
of Democrats sympathize more with the Israelis than Palestinian Arabs. A
detailed look at this same data finds more dramatic results, with
conservative Republicans over five times more sympathetic to Israel
than liberal Democrats.

The Democratic coolness toward Israel fits into a larger pattern of
conspiracy theories about neo-conservatives and anti-Jewish outbursts
by such party luminaries as Jimmy Carter, Jesse Jackson, Cynthia
McKinney, and James Moran. One observer, Sher Zieve, concludes that
among Democrats, "anti-Semitism is and has been on the rise" for some
time.

The current trend appears to be growing, with an attendant sorting out
of Jews and Arabs/Muslims in American politics. This leads me to expect
that Muslims, Arabs, and others hostile to Israel will increasingly vote
Democratic, even as Jews and those friendly to the Jewish state
increasingly vote Republican. In this light, it bears noting that
American Muslims see themselves in direct competition with Jews; the
Brookings Institute's Muqtedar Khan predicts that Muslims in the United
States soon "will not only be able to out-vote, but also out-bid the
Jewish and most other ethnic lobbies."

These developments have potentially profound implications for
U.S.-Israel relations. The cross-party continuity of policy of the past
will end, to be replaced by a major shift whenever the White House
changes hands from one party to the other. As the political consensus
breaks, Israel will be the loser.

From www.danielpipes.org | Original article available at:
www.danielpipes.org/article/3625

Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 08:17 AM | Comments (8)

May 25, 2006

The True Inconvenient Truth

Al Gore is all over the place flogging his inconvenient truth. The left loves global warming because it pulls focus from those nasty Islamofascists who really are evil and who really do threaten our way of life and who really did slaughter 3,000 innocent Americans, wish to slaughter many more, and who really do decapitate people they don't like--infidels, Jews, Americans, Christians, it's a long list.

Hollywood loves global warming because they don't have to deal with evil, which is like really nasty and complicated and goes against all their multi-cultural impulses. And besides, global warming makes corporations the bad guys again.Which is, for Hollywood, the natural order of things. They get to attack big auto, big oil, big utilities. Ignoring the rather inconvenient fact that they all work for massive multi-national corporations. Once again, they get to feel all warm and fuzzy about themselves by driving a little Prius even though they also own a Mercedes, a BMW, and who knows how many other gas guzzlers. These politically incorrect cars are in the garage , out of sight--for the moment. And best of all global warming is, well, global. They don't have to deal with any inconvenient nationalities. It's "We Are the World," all over again.

Global Warming lets the left ignore the Iranian nuclear threat to annihilate Israel and every Jew on the face of the planet. They get to ignore the growing problem of Islamofascism in Western Europe, Easten Europe, Asia, Scandinavia, and in America and Canada.

And our Mexican border? The Democrats are okay, I assume, with rules for baseball, but when it comes to rules for our borders or rules for citizenship, well, they become pliable as rubber.

By focusing on global warming the Democrats get to ignore the rising military threat from China, and the Stalinist state of North Korea.

You see, with global warming, the left have a bigger issue: the world is going to end.

BOOM!

Funny, this used to be what lunatics on streetcorners were always screaming about. You know, people desperately in need of very strong medication.

No, the real inconvenient truth is that Al Gore is the fool he always was; that he insists that global warming is the great threat to civilization is proof positive that he was never fit to be commander-in-chief.

Got to Shrinkwrapped for a fair and sober analysis of global warming.

Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 05:30 PM | Comments (8)

The Meathead Proposition

If you live in California it's important that you vote "No" on Proposition 82. The man behind this proposition is none other than Rob Reiner and it truly is a meathead piece of work. Head on over to Bookworm where he eloquently explains why this benign sounding piece of legislation is, in fact, a time bomb waiting to go off.

Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 11:48 AM | Comments (7)

May 24, 2006

Swapping Films with Robert Avrech

I like to turn Seraphic Secret over to a Seraphic Friend every once in a while. I do this in order to get another perspective on some vital issue, and to be perfectly honest, I do it to give myself a rest. I am, I confess, incredibly lazy. This way I can sit back like a big city news editor and wait for the copy to roll in; then I get to shout "Get me rewrite!" or "Stop the presses!" And Karen rolls her eyeballs.

This brings us to my excellent friend Michael Makiri.

We met in shul, the early Shabbos minyan at Young Israel of Century City, over a steaming bowl of cholent. We started talking about, what else, the movies. Michael told me that he collected, "obscure films that no one's ever heard of."

I took the bait and told Michael that there were not a lot of movies that I had never heard of.

"Really?" said Michael, the master of understatement.

The very next day Michael appeared at my front door, shopping bag in hand, filled with movies that--

--that I had never heard of.

(Deep shudder, head in hands)

I borrowed some movies from Michael, and loaned him some of my favorites. We've been swapping movies ever since.

We thought it would be fun for Michael to write down his side of this story. I have to admit, it's really weird seeing me through his eyes. I sound, well, judge for yourselves.

***

Every few weeks my friend Robert Avrech and I swap films. I come to his house loaded with a shopping bag full of DVD's.

I confess that I am not all that selective in what I pick for him.

Why?

Well, it's just so much fun watching Robert's face and listening to his comments as he is forced, like a West Virginia miner, to dig through the mountain of DVD's, and find something of value.

Every time I come over to Robert's house to swap films, I play a little game with myself; I try and guess which films he'll pick to watch.

Confession: I am never even close to getting it right, but I'm getting better: avoid documentaries and musicals other than Astaire & Rogers.

For movies that he's already seen and hates, Robert shakes his head from side to side and declares, "What an awful, terrible movie," or, "Some films deserve to live in obscurity." Latest example of the obscurity comment was Samson and Delilah, even though the making of that film is part of Sunset Boulevard, an all-time Robert favorite. The disc is summarily plopped into the "no way would I ever spend another second even reading the title on the box" pile.

But if it's a film Robert's seen and appreciates his face lights up as if he's back in Brooklyn and about to spend the afternoon watching his all-time favorite film The Seven Samurai, and you get a comment like: "Great, great film". Note the use of the double adjective. Then comes the best part, Robert, often and in extended detail, describes the emotions he experienced when he first saw the film. Robert launches into what I call his, Film Professor Mode--he does volunteer at a local girl's yeshiva high school where he teaches an Advanced Screenwriting Workshop. As far as I know, the only such course in an Orthodox yeshiva in the United States. Anyway, I always end up learning a whole lot about the screenwriter, and director's and actor's lives. Sometimes, Robert even has some obscure but really amazing anecdote about the film's Cinematographer.

Robert, in case you haven't guessed by now, is a film geek.

A favorite of Robert's is the great comedy writer/director/producer, Preston Sturges. Enthusiastically, Robert loaned me Sullivan's Travels, which I loved. But then Robert described the tragic life of the film's star, the stunning but schizophrenic and alcoholic actress Veronica Lake. This incredibly beautiful and talented woman ended her days as a waitress in a dive, living in a flop house, literally drinking herself to death.

One of the best things about sharing films with Robert is hearing his personal stories, his relationships in the movie industry. For example, his close association with legendary director Sidney Lumet on A Stranger Among Us, or his relationship with sex symbol Raquel Welch when working on Robert's Scandal in a Small Town.

I especially enjoy the conversation when Robert describes the emotional impact certain films and specific scenes made on him at first viewings. The Danish film Day of Wrath is one such film and I am very glad that Robert gently but firmly suggested--actually, ordered me to borrow this obscure but powerful film. It has enriched my life.

If the film is one Robert has already seen and admired it goes into a "maybe I should watch this one again" pile. Bridge on the River Kwai directed by the great David Lean is one such movie classic. After watching it again, Robert, shaking his head in disbelief, commented: "And to think, I almost didn't screen it again. What was I thinking?"

If it's a film Robert has never heard of before, and this is pretty rare, he shoots me a suspicious looks that says "Are you sure I should give this a try"? And I have to promise him that he is allowed to leave the theater and will get a full refund if he's bored to tears. With G-d is Great that's exactly what Robert did. "Audrey Tatou learning Torah, I should have known better!" Robert scolded himself. "What was I thinking watching a French film!?"

Warning: Do not get Robert started on the French and what he calls their "so-called cinema." Such scorn Robert reserves only for, hmm, let's see: French politics, French Rock and Roll, France's Army -- excluding The Foreign Legion, the French language which Robert claims gives him a migraine, The Peugoet, French literature and literary criticism; let's face it, when it comes to French culture Robert gets wildly irrational.

After all this Robert returns the previous batch he watched, and the reviews are in:

Battle of Blood Island: "The worst movie I have ever seen:"

Legend of 1900: "Could have been a good motion picture but was completely miscast. Actually, anything with Tim Roth in the lead role is automatically miscast.

Distant Journey: "What can I say, Michael. I know I'm just a shallow man but this film has the most unattractive cast I have ever seen in a movie. I ended up counting the moles on the actor's faces. Do not watch this film on a full stomach. Gave up after twenty minutes. Life is too short, and this is a well-intentioned Holocaust movie.

Esther Kahn "Unbelievable film, there's one amazing scene about acting here that just knocked me flat. I had to watch this movie twice. I'm going to blog about this movie. This is a real find."

Green Fields and Light Ahead: "OH. MY. GOSH! Edgar Ulmer's Yiddish movies. I have not watched them yet. I'm saving them for a relaxed evening when Karen and I can kick back and really give our full attention to these two classics. This is sooooooo exciting. And get this, Edgar Ulmer could not speak Yiddish.

I leave Robert's house loaded with classic Japanese films: Tokyo Story, Rashomon, and the powerful and haunting Ugetsu; Danish movies, Day of Wrath , and Ordet, which has an ending that Robert breathlessly promised would leave me with my heart in my stomach--and he was not exaggerating.

Robert: "Ordet has the greatest kiss I have ever seen in the movies, that it comes from the cold lips of a woman who was just miraculously resurrected from the dead only makes the kiss that much more, well, interesting."

Robert's absolute favorite genre of movies are American screwball comedies so I've seen such classics as: My Favorite Wife, The Awful Truth, Ball of Fire, Twentieth Century, and Robert's absolute favorite screenplay from a screwball comedy: His Girl Friday.

Robert: "Gosh, I look at that film and I want to be Cary Grant. That's a movie star. And all the women in these movies, remind you of anyone, Michael?"
"Um..."
"Karen, my wife Karen. She's Irene Dunne, Myrna Loy and Rosalind Russell--only the Jewish version!"

Robert loves an amazingly poetic B film called Gun Crazy, "Watch for the bank robbery sequence," Robert enthuses, "There's absolutely nothing like it, and you know why it had to be filmed this way? Because they had no money left, no film. That's greatness, making something out of nothing."

And suddenly Robert is telling me about the direcor, Joseph H. Lewis, a Jewish German director who escaped Hitler's Germany and found a home in Hollywood. From there Robert goes on to describe the unique Jewish emigre community in Hollywood: Max Ophuls, "This director shot the longest takes in the history of Hollywood films. You have to see Lola Montes."

And of course there was the great Billy Wilder. "They were all Jewish, but aggressively secular. They only realized they were Jewish once they couldn't work in the German film industry anymore. But once they settled comfortably in Hollywood, they quickly forgot they were Jewish, and set about becoming more American than the Americans who surrounded them."

We return to the pile of DVD's.

Naturally there are obscure but great American Westerns that bring Robert to the edge of awed silence: Ulzana's Raid is the least romantic film ever made about the Apache Wars.

Robert told me that the first time he saw this unknown movie he almost fainted during one sequence because the torture, violence and human drama is just so dramatically true.

And there is Ride the High Country. The polar opposite of Ulzana's Raid. This is perhaps one of the most romantic and mythic pictures ever made about the twilight days of the American West. This is the film where a dying character whispers: "So long partner."

Here, Robert pauses and reflects for a long moment. "There are some moments in some movies that are more real to me than moments in my own life. Strange, huh?"

I head home with Robert's selection of movies.

I think I have the better deal.

--Michael Makiri

Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 09:55 AM | Comments (24)

May 23, 2006

Presbyterian Terror II

Seraphic friend EV responds and clarifies much that is going on in the PCUSA's divestment campiagn. Read carefully and you'll see that the Antisemites who are pushing for divestment lie to their congregations using feel-good phrases like "investing in peace" to camouflage their odious work. This is a standard tactic used by Jihadists against Israel. It is now quite clear that PCUSA has been penetrated by Palestinian/Jihadist elements. Good and decent Presbyterians should be quite alarmed at what is happening at the higher echelons of their church. Seraphic Secret wishes to thank EV for exposing the subterfuge in PCUSA.

Hi, Robert--

Thank you for posting on the upcoming PCUSA vote. The General Assembly begins June 15 in Birmingham, AL, so time is short.

Allow me to clarify a point. Divestment is ON the books, with the "process of phased, selective divestment" underway. Right now, that process is in its phase of "corporate engagement," and if the engagement doesn't go the way PCUSA sees fit, then shareholder action will take place.

What is needed at the General Assembly is a rescinding of the divestment process that is already law. Currently, there are about 14 overtures from presbyteries (with an additional 6 presbyteries concurring with one or more of the 14) to the General Assembly that call for some kind of halt in the divestment process, ranging from a 2-year suspension to outright rejection. Imo, Items 11-01, 11-02, 11-04, 11-11, 11-14, 11-15, and 11-41 carry the most explicit mandates to terminate and bury divestment. You can read a brief introductory analysis of the multitude of overtures that address Israeli/Palestinian investment/divestment here:

The overture that is most critical of the anti-Israel vote of two years ago is Item 11-01. The fact that this was the first overture of 137 total to be submitted speaks to the passion that the Presbytery of Mississippi put into rejecting the earlier vote. I mention this as an aside: Westminster Presbyterian Church, the congregation that initiated the overture, is in Gulfport. The members of Westminster PC were hit very hard by Katrina, with about 40 percent of the congregation's families losing their homes.

Unfortunately, when some well-meaning congregations approached their presbyteries with proposals to create divestment-rollback overtures, these measures were transmogrified through presbytery leadership pressure into overtures that speak about "investing in peace" while altogether dropping the "end divestment" language. Add to that overtures from places like San Francisco that actually affirm, cheer, and applaud the divestment divestment vote of two years ago, and we have a situation that is not entirely promising.

Moreover, the subterfuge at the presbytery level has been a foretaste of tactics at the national level. Last month, the General Assembly Moderator, in a brash move to circumvent a democratic denominational process, persuaded the General Assembly Council (the GAC is an agency different than the General Assembly) to unanimously endorse a plan that would create a "working group" that would "listen in love" and "study the matter" while LEAVING DIVESTMENT IN PLACE. (Read more in this 2-page Presbyterian analysis here:

Given GAC approval, this proposal will now be sent to the General Assembly. I'm still hazy on the voting protocol for this proposal vis-a-vis the plethora of investment/divestment overtures, but you can be sure of one thing--PCUSA leadership will be pulling every trick in the book to leave divestment intact.

Although it should not be forgotten that PCUSA laity who reject divestment well outnumber those who support it, I do wish to note that approval of divestment is higher among clergy, and clergy make up half of the 534 Commissioners to the General Assembly.

All of the aforementioned factors point to this being a highly engagingconference. G-d willing, I'll be glued to live webcast if it's available.

Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 06:20 PM | Comments (4)

Presbyterian Terror I

"The death of Daniel Wultz is "a gift from Allah, and revenge against American support for Israel," said Abu Nasser, a leader of the Al Aksa Murderers Brigade, one of the Palestinian groups responsible for the Tel Aviv Passover atrocity.

Abu Nasser: "We wish this young dog will go directly to hell. Wultz was part of the American support machine that helps our enemy. I imagine him as one of these Nazis who live here. There is no difference between him and them."

Abu Amin, a leader of Islamic Jihad, another terrorist gang that operates under Hama's umbrella, also rushed to claim responsibility for this outrage, stated: "...that even if you live in America the hand of Allah and the sword of Jihad will reach you, and you and you will find the same end as Wultz."

Asked if his group will specifically target Americans in Israel, the terrorist leader responded: "Killing Americans and Jews in one operation--it can be just great!"

The Church and Hezbollah

Which leads us to the Presbyterian Church USA, henceforth known as PCUSA.

Two years ago. the PCUSA passed a resolution calling for "phased, selective divestment in multinational corporations operating in Israel."

Apparently, this was not, I repeat not a resolution called for by the rank and file of the church, but by a number of radical, need I say, hard left, ahem, leaders.

Not content with the classic leftist divestment tactic, elements of PCUSA, from the Chicago Middle East Task Force met with leaders of the terrorist organization Hezbollah in Lebanon. Hezbollah, in case you don't know, occupies southern Lebanon, has a vast army there, miles of elaborate bunkers, and thousands of rockets trained on every one of Israel's major cities. Hezbollah is funded by Iran. Hezbollah does not (what a shock) recognize Israel's existence and is sworn to "the destruction of the Zionist entity."

Naturally, they are Holocaust deniers. As is the official state sponsored Arab media in every single Arab country.

In 1994 there was a massive blast in the Jewish Community Center in Buenos Aires, Argentina. One hundred Jewish citizens, men women and children, were slaughtered, two-hundred and fifty were gravely wounded. This terrorist atrocity was financed by Iranian intelligence and carried out by Hezbollah operatives. The Argentine government recently released details of its investigation into another terror incident: the terror bombing of the Israeli Embassy on March 17, 1992, in which thirty people were killed and more than two-hundred wounded. That bombing was also conducted by Iranian intelligence services, with Hezbollah playing a key role in its execution.

The Iranians are responsible for designing and building the roadside bombs that are killing our soldiers in Iraq right now.

These are the people PCUSA have climbed into bed with. This is the organization PCUSA has aligned itself with: a notorious terrorist gang that kills Jews and Americans.

At a certain point, naive peaceniks cross a line and become terrorist enablers.

The good news is that Kathy Leuckert, deputy executive associate director of the General Assembly Council, and Peter Sulyok, coordinator of the Advisory Committee on Social Witness Policy, were notified that they were no longer employed by the Presbyterian Church (USA). The bad news is that Leuckert and Sulyok were just two of the staff leaders who were with twenty-two other Presbyterians on a "fact-finding" trip to the Mideast.

Allow me to speculate about the "facts" these distinguished theologians discovered in Lebanon: I think I'm safe in saying that half these "facts" are not true, and the other half are just outright lies.

And I'm being charitable here.

By the way, does anyone else get the funny feeling that people pushing for divestment from Israel believe more in the gospel according to Castro, Mao, Arafat, and Hugo Chavez, than in say, Matthew, Mark Luke, and John?

Just a whacky thought.

I Like Terrorists Better than Jews

During an interview with a Hezbollah-owned television station, Ron Stone, another honorable member of this distinguished delegation said, "As an elder of our church, I'd like to say that, according to my recent experience, relations and conversations with Islamic leaders are a lot easier than dealings and dialogue with Jewish leaders."

We wish this young dog will go directly to hell.

"Also, we praise your initiative for dialogue and mutual understanding," Stone added. "We cherish these statements that bring us closer to you. We treasure the precious words of Hezbollah and your expression of goodwill."

Even if you live in America the hand of Allah and the sword of Jihad will reach you.

And of course, the divestment offensive marches on.

That elements in PCUSA consider Israel the aggressor in this conflict leaves us with only two conclusions about these so-called leaders: They are either the stupidest people on the face of the earth, or they are quite simply Jew haters.

I do not easily use this term, but when a you single out the one democratic state in a sea of vile tyrannies, a state that has sought peace with twenty-two hostile, rejectionist neighbors in every manner shape and form for over fifty years, a state that has granted one million Arabs full citizenship, whereas twenty-two Arab nations are Judenrein, a state that has been under political and military siege from the moment it was born, a state that has tried, repeatedly, and IMHO, traded land for peace--yes when you single out this state and ignore the genocidal pronouncements and somber promises of her enemies, and this state is Jewish, yes, you can no longer hide behind the label of being "merely AntiZionist" you have now crossed into classic Jew hatred.

Officially you are now an Antisemite.

And you know what, it's time for you to take a trip to visit your beloved comrades in Gaza.

Vacation for Presbyterian Leaders--I'll Pay!

Vacation for our distinguished PCUSA Antisemites. Definitely fly El-Al. Safest airline in the skies. You won't have to worry about being hijacked by nasty terrorists.

Oh, gee, what am I saying.?

Wait, I have an idea. You can fly... Air Palestine. They have very interesting flight attendants. There's absolutely no problem with rowdy passengers, know what I mean? They just kill anyone who annoys them. You'll love the silence. Lots of time to read your Bible. Whoops. Sorry. No Bibles allowed.

Koran only flights.

I assume that's okay with you guys, you're like these multi-cultural Christians right? Even as they're sawing through a fellow Christian's neck you're forgiving the barbarians because, well, you understand their point of view, and anyway, deep down you know it's the fault of the Jews, right? I mean, just pick up your copy of "The Protocols of the Elders of Zion." You don't have one? Gee willikers. Well, not to worry. It's the best-selling book, I'm not kidding here, the best-selling book in the Palestinian Territories. Wait, not quite true. I fibbed. The Koran is still the best selling book. After The Koran, The Protocols.

Okay, So, you've arrived in the Zionist entity. You scowl at how western it is. You hate the fast food joints. It's all so corrupt. Everywhere you look you see Zionist soldiers. And they have the chutzpah to check your bags every time you enter a restaurant.

You feel so violated. Jews really are so pushy. What are they looking for anyway?

A bomb?

Oh.

It just goes to show what lack of trust there is.

No wonder the poor powerless Palestinians self-detonate, what choice do they have?

You receive permission from the border police to cross over into lovely scenic Gaza.

There you're going to take a meeting with representatives of the democratically elected government, a few Hamas leaders. They will be incredibly gracious. I mean, you have heard all about the fabled Arab hospitality, right?

You cross the border. Your heart swells with joy for you are feeling such solidarity with your oppressed brethren. They are exactly like the early Christians who were thrown to the lions by the Godless Romans. Well, not exactly like the early Christians who were afterall truly nonviolent; here in Gaza everyone is armed to the teeth, including little children who should be in school but are parading around in... what are those thick belts around their waists?

You are horrified by the poverty, the squalor, the overflowing sewers. The Zionist capitalists have stripped these poor people not only of their culture and dignity but of the most basic materials of their every day lives. Your filled with self-righteous fury. More than ever, you are determined to carry through this program of divestment. Armed militias zoom about in Toyotas. Women covered head-to-toe in black chardors scurry about. One woman is almost hit by your Toyota. She can barely see through the mesh of her Cardor head piece. You feel sorry for her, but you resist the urge to criticize for after all, this is an ancient culture and who are you to judge? You have heard of honor killings, but you have been assured by Hezbollah that these are just Zionist libels.

You angrily murmur about what the occupation has done to these noble Arabs.

Oh, wait, the Zionists no longer occupy Gaza.

Well, so what, their "influence lingers, like poison." You are so glad that have read your Edward Said.

And then, your driver makes a sharp turn. Wait, this doesn't look right. You ask where you are going. Your "guide" points his Chinese Kalachnikov right between your eyes.

It takes a moment, but it gradually dawns on you that you are being kidnapped.

This is, after all, Gaza, and kidnapping is the growth industry here. In fact it is the only business in Gaza, besides murder, drugs, prostitution, car theft, weapons smuggling, and recruiting children for homicide bombing.

It's a charming culture.

You are worth about 1 million American dollars. Actually, you are worth a great deal more. The divestment resolution and publicity has signaled that your church has milions upon millions of dollars to spend on you.

Thus, you are in for a long, a very long confinement.

In the end, it will probably be the mean Israelis who will risk their lives to rescue yours. But, true to your iron-clad conscience you will continue to blame the Jews for the whole affair anyway. After all, it's the Jews who drive the Arabs to such desperate measures.

Final Financial Note

Divest all you want. For every dollar you pull out of a company, I guarantee we will invest two.

Final Historical Note

The Egyptians, The Canaanites, The Moabites, The Philistines, The Hittites, The Amalekites, The Phoenicians, The Persians, The Greeks, The Assyrians, The Romans, The Babylonians, Byzantium, The Caliphite and the Umayyads, The Abbasids, Medieval Christianity, Expulsions, Conversos, The Mamluks, The Ottomans, Hitler: The Holocaust, Stalin: The Communist and Soviet Persecutions, Arafat: Modern Arab Antisemitism.

Take note: Every civilization that has persecuted its Jews now lies on the ash heap of history. To judge a society and the goodness of its values, just look at how it treats its Jewish citizens.

Europe slaughtered her Jews. It can be said that Europe has traded her Jews, productive, brilliant and loyal citizens, for Muslims who hate their adopted country, reject the native language, her culture and obviously her JudeoChristian religions. The Jews of France were sent to Auschwitz and France got Jihad in return.

America is a great land that has treated its Jewish citizens with love and respect, with a kind of devotion that is unique in world history. In return G-d has blessed America with wealth and power.

G-d's covenant with the Jewish people is eternal and will never be broken. Those who bless the Jewish people will in turn be blessed. Those who curse and turn against the Jewish people will end as all the great anti-Jewish empires have ended: in pillars of smoke and piles of ash.

I know that we have many friends in the Presbyterian Church. I ask these good people take control of their church. Rid yourselves of these self-appointed leaders, these Antisemites who masquerade as voices of conscience. If this odious divestment measure passes, not only will it be ineffectual, but it will signal a terrible historical moment, for G-d never forgives and never forgets those who try and destroy the Jewish people.

Let us return where we began, with the young and innocent martyr Daniel Wultz. May his memory be a blessing. May his family find comfort among the mourners of Zion.

Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 02:11 PM | Comments (10)

May 22, 2006

Jews Ashamed to be Jews

Former terrorist Walid Shoebat is frustrated with the suicidal tendencies of the Jewish community. Thanks to our friend Yehudit for bringing this powerful article to our attention.

Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 08:37 AM | Comments (22)

May 21, 2006

Keeping Kosher in Saddam's Palace

Lieutenant Junior Grade Laurie Zimmet, United States Navy is in Iraq. She's Jewish, observant and yearns for... well read for yourself.

Thanks to Yehuda Kaplan, one of Ariel's ZT'L best friends, for bringing this wonderful article to my attention.

Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 09:31 AM | Comments (10)

May 19, 2006

IraniaNazis

It was only a matter of time. Iranian Jews, Christians and other religious minorities are going to be forced to wear colored badges identifying them as non-Muslims.

The world-wide Jihad marches on and we in the west are in complete denial.

The violent Jihadists attack because they sense weakness in the west. A liberal secularism that knows not who it is, and thus concludes that there is nothing worth fighting for.

Where are all the moderate peace-loving Muslims we always always hear so much about?

Why are they not protesting?

The answer is simple. They cannot protest because what the Iranians are doing is completely acceptable by any interpretation of the Koran and Sharia. Just go to Robert Spencer's website Jihadwatch for a complete explanation.

Let us not forget that it was not the Nazis nor the medieval Christians who came up with notion of forcing Jews to wear distinctive clothing or badges, but this was a Muslim innovation.

Wake up or your children will be wearing a yellow star.

Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 10:54 AM | Comments (21)

Ben Franklin Award

I have just learned that my novel, The Hebrew Kid and the Apache Maiden has won the 2006 Ben Franklin Award for Best First Book, Fiction. I could not attend the ceremony but I understand that PMA executive, Howard Fisher made a lovely speech on my behalf in which he told the audience about Ariel ZT'L and how our son inspired this book.

Maggie Anton another Jewish author who has written the fine novel, Rashi's Daughters: Book One - Joheved, also won an award for Best New Voice in Fiction. We'd like to take this opportunity to wish Maggie a hearty Mazal Tov.

Karen and I would like to wish everyone a lovely and meaningful Shabbos.

Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 09:51 AM | Comments (16)

May 18, 2006

Pride & Prejudice II - Questions of Love

Yesterday I posed this question:

I'd like to ask my readers this: in Pride and Prejudice, the novel: when does Elizabeth fall in love with Darcy?

This is no trick question.
This not a philosophical question.
There is a specific moment in the book when Elizabeth acknowledges that she has fallen in love with Darcy.

What is this moment and is it reflected in the film?

Below, the answer:

Late in the novel, Jane asks Elizabeth when she first fell in love with Darcy.

``My dearest sister, now be serious. I want to talk very seriously. Let me know every thing that I am to know, without delay. Will you tell me how long you have loved him?''

``It has been coming on so gradually, that I hardly know when it began. But I believe I must date it from my first seeing his beautiful grounds at Pemberley.''

When she first saw Pemberley.

Are we to believe that Elizabeth is just another female mercenary? What are we to make of this? Seraphic friend and commenter Michael Jennings responded quite correctly in quoting this section from the book:

In the gallery there were many family portraits, but they could have little to fix the attention of a stranger. Elizabeth walked on in quest of the only face whose features would be known to her. At last it arrested her -- and she beheld a striking resemblance of Mr. Darcy, with such a smile over the face as she remembered to have sometimes seen, when he looked at her. She stood several minutes before the picture in earnest contemplation, and returned to it again before they quitted the gallery. Mrs. Reynolds informed them that it had been taken in his father's life time.

There was certainly at this moment, in Elizabeth's mind, a more gentle sensation towards the original than she had ever felt in the height of their acquaintance. The commendation bestowed on him by Mrs. Reynolds was of no trifling nature. What praise is more valuable than the praise of an intelligent servant? As a brother, a landlord, a master, she considered how many people's happiness were in his guardianship! -- How much of pleasure or pain it was in his power to bestow! -- How much of good or evil must be done by him! Every idea that had been brought forward by the housekeeper was favourable to his character, and as she stood before the canvas, on which he was represented, and fixed his eyes upon herself, she thought of his regard with a deeper sentiment of gratitude than it had ever raised before; she remembered its warmth, and softened its impropriety of expression.

Well done, Michael.

Do not be fooled. Lizzie Bennet is not bought by Darcy's wealth. No, in Jane Austen's world almost everything of a man's character was revealed by how he managed his estate. Let us never forget that the country estate was the cornerstone of the British social order in Jane's world. In fact, it was central to the British economic structure. Almost all of the farming was done by "tract farmers" who paid rents to the squire.

Even religion was somewhat controlled by the great country estates. Ministers like the impossible, but ultimately pitiful Mr. Collins, were filled by a squire's appointment.

And so, at Pemberley, Elizabeth sees the well-tended grounds, the thousands of volumes in the library, all which go towards maintaining the core of British culture, which at that time was ascendant in world affairs.

This is all in stark contrast to Lizzie's father and the slow decay that is taking place under his mismanagement of the family farm and fortune.

Elizabeth sees that Darcy is a loving brother to his young and vulnerable sister Georgiana, a fair and beloved employer to his servants, and a respected landlord.

The film gives voice to these feelings in an extended sequence where Elizabeth with her Aunt and Uncle visit Pemberley. Keira Knightley, in a fine performance that relies almost exclusively on looking at inanimate object, stares long and lovingly at a bust of Darcy; she listens attentively as the servants speak glowingly of their employer. And in a fine moment, hidden, she secretly watches Georgiana playing the pianoforte, and then abruptly Darcy enters the room, sweeps his baby sister into his arms and twirls her about. It is a joyous demonstration of brotherly affection, and goes a long way towards clarifying the authentic Darcy.

And so, Pemberley unmasks Darcy as caring and generous and not at all guilty of the excessive pride for which Lizzie had first condemned him.

And Darcy, why does he love Elizabeth?

In the last chapter of the book, Elizabeth asks Darcy to account for his having fallen in love with her?

This is one of my favorite moments in the novel:

``How could you begin?'' said she. ``I can comprehend your going on charmingly, when you had once made a beginning; but what could set you off in the first place?''

``I cannot fix on the hour, or the spot, or the look, or the words, which laid the foundation. It is too long ago. I was in the middle before I knew that I had begun.''

``My beauty you had early withstood, and as for my manners -- my behaviour to you was at least always bordering on the uncivil, and I never spoke to you without rather wishing to give you pain than not. Now be sincere; did you admire me for my impertinence?''

``For the liveliness of your mind, I did.''

For the liveliness of your mind.

Goodness gracious.

Jane Austen was not a revolutionary writer. But she does know that men and women can fall in love for all the wrong reasons. Elizabeth loves Darcy for his character, his goodness and moral probity. And Darcy, bless him, loves Elizabeth not because she dances well, or is just another pretty face, but because he has also fallen in love with her lively mind--as have generations of readers.

Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 10:40 AM | Comments (17)

May 17, 2006

Pride & Prejudice I

A country family must find husbands for five--count 'em 1,2,3,4,5--daughters. There you have the bare bones of Jane Austen's Pride & Prejudice. But Austen's amazing gift for characterization and her perfect ear for dialogue persuades us that this oh-so-mundane material is actually quite miraculous.

Elizabeth Bennet, the second of this pentarchy of daughters, might be the most beloved female in all of English literature.

And so it follows that the actress who plays Elizabeth must bring wit, intelligence, a special kind of beauty, and pride, lots and lots of pride -- for although never smug, Lizzie prides herself on her ability to sniff out fools and hypocrites.

This is no small order for any actress.

I remember the very first time I saw Keira Knightley. It was in the film Bend it Like Beckham. Rail-thin, tomboyish and lovely, I sat up and whispered to myself: Lizzie.

No kidding.

Truth is, any actress I notice I always measure by this yardstick: can she play Lizzie Bennet? Can she bring something unique to this character?

Here's what has to happen: Elizabeth spends much of the book realizing that she has been wrong; that she has made a a series of mistakes in knowing Darcy and consequently in knowing herself truly and deeply.

Every adaptation of Pride & Prejudice is it's own particular universe. The 1939 Greer Garson, Lawrence Olivier version has some great charms. The script is by veteran screenwriter Jane Murfin and Hollywood newcomer Aldous Huxley, who was delighted yet somewhat baffled to receive $1,500 a week to work on what he called "an odd crossword puzzle job."

The costumes in the film are, however, quite weird. Adrian, (Adolph Greenberg) the legendary MGM costume director, apparently did not care for the proper clothing of Jane's era and instead gave everyone the more outrageous outfits of three or four decades later. Check out the hats; they are reason alone to watch this very loose adaptation.

This version is faithful to the spirit and to most of the words. It's not literally faithful, and really the adaptations that adhere too faithfully to the book often get in trouble. I have no patience for Jane Austen purists. Film is an entirely different medium than the novel and one must take advantage of the medium to its best effect.

For instance, in this version, at the edges of the frame we glimpse the Bennet farm; hay is cut and pitched, pigs are rooting about, cows are lowing and chewing, farm workers wearily trudge through mud. There is a good and tactile feel for a working farm struggling to profit so this non-aristocratic family can maintain its tenuous position in the class dominated world of British society.

There's a lovely sequnce where Lizzie, confused and sad, sits on a swing and twirls about as the seasons change. There's certainly nothing like it in the book, but it works just perfectly for it gets across Lizzie's state of mind without any dialogue and with appropriate imagery.

Casting in the film is first-rate, though the actresses who play giggly Kitty and the wayward Lydia, are often hard to tell apart. This is probably due to both actresses not having enough screen time.

Donald Sutherland chooses to soften his interpretation of Lizzie's father. In the BBC version, and in quite a few other versions, the fathers are stiff and haughty; the result of being trapped in a marriage with a shallow and impossible woman--though it must be said, a mother who clearly recognizes her duty to marry off her daughters.

However, Sutherland does nail Daddy Bennet's essential parental laziness when it comes to daughters other than favorites Jane and Lizzie.

It's done in a wonderful scene.

Lydia is about to head off to Brighton with her Aunt and Uncle, where the Regiments are stationed. Lizzie sits on a footstool and in desperate measured tones, reasons and then begs her father not to let Lydia go. Lizzie explains that Lydia will flirt, shame herself and ultimately the family. Daddy Bennet lazily shrugs at Lizzie's moral flashing lights. But of course, he just doesn't care about Lydia, he's far happier to have her out of his hair for a few days. And of course, everything Lizzie predicts will happen, does happen.

You see, Daddy Bennet is actually a terrible father and husband. He mocks his wife in front of his children. We laugh, but imagine being on the receiving end of these zingers. No wonder the Bennet girls have no respect for their mama. No wonder none of the neighbors have any respect for poor Mrs. Bennet. Mr. Bennet has made sure that his wife is a public fool. It only remains for Mrs. Bennet to fulfill this sad role.

Interesting to note, in this film the director and screenwriter hint that Mrs. Bennet is an alcoholic. At each ball she is sloppily drinking to excess. Kitty and Lydia too are well on their way to a life of dipsomania in this film version.

Clearly, Mr. Bennet loves only two of his daughters while treating the other three like useless afterthoughts. This pathology poisons the entire family.

And there is the question of money. Where has the family fortune gone? Mr. Bennet seems to spend all his waking hours in the library puttering about as what little remains dissipates.

Mr. Bennet is the perfect example of the passive aggressive male. Lizzie loves him, but she knows that he has failed in central ways as father and husband; it is never more clearly demonstrated than when he fails to set proper boundaries and allows Lydia to go off to Brighton where she sluts her way into a shameful marriage with the odious Wickham.

Let's turn our attention to love.

I'd like to ask my readers this simple question: in Pride and Prejudice, the novel: when does Elizabeth fall in love with Darcy?

This is no trick question.
This not a philosophical question.
There is a specific moment in the book when Elizabeth acknowledges that she has fallen in love with Darcy.

What is this moment and is it reflected in the film?

Tomorrow, the answer.

Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 01:36 PM | Comments (23)

Fade to Black

Before I continue with my review of Pride & Prejudice, here is a brief, one-minute and four-second commercial interruption. Thanks so much to Seraphic friend Jake Novak for bringing this loving, gentle yet sensible message to our attention.

Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 09:36 AM | Comments (7)

May 16, 2006

500 Volumes, 114 Souls

Watching the opening scene of Pride & Prejudice is painful. My vision is blurred. I am sniffing and snuffling. Finally, I hit the PAUSE button, run to the bathroom--Karen and Offspring #3 groan--where I yank a fistful of tissues, honk! blow my nose, and wipe the silvery strings dripping down my cheeks.

The reasons:

1. Well, simply put, it's just so darn good to be back with Jane again, to be in the comforting embrace of a masterful storyteller. After the painful two-hours plus of The New World, gosh, Jane Austen is... home.

2. Karen is sitting right beside me on our little bedroom couch. Pride & Prejudice is the ultimate story of the desperate need for love and marriage in a proper middle class family.There is so much of Karen in Lizzie. There is so much of me in Darcy's desperate love of Lizzie. Karen is sitting right beside me on our little couch and a major part of me just wants to fall to the ground, grab my wife's knees and thank her, thank her, endlessly express my gratitude for loving me,for marrying me, for putting up with me all these years...

3. Ariel ZT'L, loved this book. Ariel adored the BBC mini-series Pride & Prejudice version. We had a great time in the hospital watching the film, hitting PAUSE, opening the book, and comparing the text to the film. It's not that we demanded purity in the adaptation, no, we were just interested in seeing what we remembered and what we got wrong.

"Daddy," Ariel said with his shy and mischevous smile, Pride & Prejudice, it's just like, well, they're like sooooo Jewish, desperately looking for shidduchim." Austen's clever language, best expressed through Lizzie's wickedly perfect dialogue, never failed to delight Ariel. He giggled and covered his mouth when he laughed.

4. Offspring #3 has read the novel. She has seen the BBC version. She knows what's going to happen in the end. There is no suspense. The soundtrack has no modern music, the dance sequences feature some pretty formal moves, and here the young ladies curtsy and the young men bow. And yet all this formality, I suspect, is something our children unconsciously yearn for. The respect between the sexes is something we all ache for.

These are the reasons tears smear my vision during the very first scene. What a baby am I.

A Few Things About Jane

Jane Austen was born, the seventh of eight children, to the rector of Steventon, George Austen, and his wife, Cassandra Leigh, on December 16, 1775.

The Austens had about five-hundred volumes in the family library. In contrast, there were only 114 people in the village where Jane spent the first twenty-five years of her life.

Think of it: 500 books, 114 souls.

Jane lived during the Napoleonic Wars.

Think of it: The Ogre was trying to destroy civilization as Jane knew it.

Jane's eldest brother, Reverand James Austen (1765-1819) had two wives. Caroline Lefroy, daughter of the second wife, was very close to Jane, and wrote a lovely memoir, My Aunt Jane Austen.

The second son, George Austen (1776-1838) did not grow up with his family. He may have been deaf; he may have had cerebral palsy; he may have suffered from epilepsy. In any case, poor George was shipped away and sent to live with another family. This fate reflects the general treatment afforded "defectives" during the 18th century. George Austen died of dropsy at the age of seventy-two and was described on his death certificate as a "gentleman."

Edward Austen (Knight) (1768-1852) was a charming young lad. He must have been for when he was twelve-years old, Thomas Knight II, a distant cousin of the Austen family, and Knight's young bride, Catherine, requested Edward's company on their--get this--honeymoon.

Believe me, I'm as puzzled as you are.

Anyway, Edward was such a hit on said honeymoon that the young couple formally adopted Edward, and he became heir to their considerable fortune. Lucky Eddie!

Henry Thomas ( 1771-1850) also entered the Church. He wrote of his sister Jane: "Her voice was extremely sweet. She delivered herself with fluency and precision. Indeed she was formed for elegant and rational society, excelling in conversation as much as in composition." Henry was Jane's favorite brother. This is quite funny considering that Henry was feckless and in frequent financial difficulty. When he was well into his fifties he ran out of money and moved back in with his mother. It looks as if Jane had a weakness for her brother the slacker

Brother Francis, (1774-1865) became Sir Francis an Admiral of the fleet.

Jane's baby brother Charles, (1779-1852) became a Rear Admiral in the Royal Navy.

Jane Austen never mentions Napoleon or the wars in any of her books. Though, of course she does mention "officers" and their presence in society is taken for granted.

A note about all these brothers becoming Ministers. These are members of the High Church, Episcopalians, and as such, they lead normal lives, they get married, and have children. In Jane's day if a young man was not in line to inherit money or property from his family, and if he was not hooked up to a wealthy wife, well, going into the Church was not so much a sign of religious piety but a bit like Jewish men becoming accountants--a decent way to make a buck.

Jane's beloved sister, the fifth child in the family, Cassandra Elizabeth (1772-1845) was the most important person in Jane's life. Whenever the sisters were separated they wrote long letters to each other, and virtually all of Jane's letters that we have are those she wrote to Cassandra.

Undoubtedly, the biggest tragedy of Cassandra's life was the death of her fiance the Reverand Thomas Fowle in early 1797. Fowle, probably acting as a private chaplain to one Lord Craven, accompanied Craven to help put down a slave revolt in the West Indies. Tragically, Fowle contracted Yellow Fever, died and was buried at sea. Cassandra never again entertained the thought of marriage; she never really recovered.

In many respects, Cassandra and Jane were "married" to each other. The sisters shared a bedroom for most of their lives. I suspect that their relationship is pretty much similar to that of Jane (Cassandra) and Lizzie (Jane) Bennet in Pride & Prejudice.

Golly, it seems I've spent all this time on my whacky emotional state, and charting Jane's extended family, and have not yet said a word about the film.

It's a fine film.

But too few people, even Jane lovers, Janeites, know the details of Jane Austen's very ordinary life; and her ordinary life bears directly on her novels, how she wrote them, why she wrote them, and why these perfect novels speak so vividly and so passionately to each and every generation of readers that has been blessed to read her words.

"What calm lives they had, those people! No worries about the French Revolution, or the Napoleonic Wars."
--Winston Churchill, on Jane Austen's novels

To be Continued Tomorrow: The Film (At Last)

Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 01:29 PM | Comments (21)

May 15, 2006

I Direct Therefore I am Not

Karen peeks in and asks: "So, what's happening?"
"They're in the forest trading meaningful glances."
Ten minutes later, Karen again checks in with the same question and my reply is pretty much the same.
Twenty minutes later:
"They're still in the forest," I wearily report, "but now they're tenderly frolicking. Touching even. It's like totally lyrical."
Karen rolls her eyeballs. She knew what she was doing when she declined to sit down and watch the DVD of The New World with me.

Terrence Malick has directed four films since 1973. Badlands, which I love, Days of Heaven, again a film I love, and The Thin Red Line, which, like The New World, is where Malick just loses direction, and completely loses interest in telling a coherent story.

Both films are a mess.

Badlands and Days of Heaven flirted mildly with unconventional narrative techniques, but Malick was still enough of a Hollywood writer and director to care about a solid three-act structure. The films are lyrical and powerful and all-American.

If you haven't seen these two films, please, do yourself a favor, run out and rent them. They are either masterpieces or minor masterpieces. In any case, if you care about the movies, these two films have had a profound influence on a whole generation of Hollywood screenwriters and directors.

I still have the shooting scripts for Badlands and Days of Heaven and I read each script at least once a year. They recharge my creative batteries, remind me what excellence is, what I should strive for when I write a movie, a scene, a line of dialogue.

In both films, Malick's bold use of magic-hour photography--shooting in those few precious moments at sunrise and again at sunset--gave both films a unique look and feel. For a while, Malick was the great young Hollywood director. For a brief moment he eclipsed Francis Ford Coppola, George Lucas, Martin Scorsese Steven Spielberg, Brian DePalma and Walter Hill.

Terrence Malick was special; everyone knew it. We all waited for his movie epic.

And then without a word, Terrence Malick dropped out of sight. Well, what can you expect from a man who wrote his Ph.D thesis about Martin Heidegger?

When The Thin Red Line was released in 1999, I ran to see it on opening day. I figured, twenty years away from Hollywood, oh boy, this was the great epic we were all waiting for.

I was, to put it mildly, mistaken.

Oy-vey mistaken.

It takes a lot to make a boring movie about Guadalcanal, one of the epic battles of World War II, of all times. But in this war film Malick focuses on, well, rain pattering on leaves, sun reflecting on water, birds soaring in the air, shots of nature. At one point he does give in and manages to stage a fine set piece as Marines try and take a Japanese machine gun bunker. It's a great and powerful sequence and it only makes you realize how impoverished the rest of the film is.

There are multiple voice-overs, and this device is a disaster. I defy anyone to tell me who the main character in this film is. The Thin Red Line runs nearly three hours and let me tell you, it feels even longer. I actually dozed off a few times during the film. This is shameful. For Malick, not for me. It takes a great deal of dead imagery to make these movie-loving eyes to glaze over.

I left the theater feeling depressed beyond words.

The New World, structurally, is pretty much a carbon copy of The Thin Red Line. It tells the story of John Smith and Pocohantas. Sort of. Again, there are zillions of nature shots, again, there are multiple voice-overs, though this time the voice-overs are limited just to Smith and Pocohantas. The voice-overs are Shakesperian, repetitious, ponderous and as all voice-overs do in all films, they slow the pace of the film and this is an already glacially slow film.

This film does have a main character and Malick wisely chooses Pocohantas, and the actress who plays her, Q'Orianka Kilcher, is magnificent. She is graceful and awkward; giggly tragic; most important she is entirely vulnerable.

The story can pretty much be summarized like this: boy meets girl, boy loses girl; girl meets another boy.

The English are smelly and greasy colonials who rape the land. The "naturals" are at one with nature, without jealousy or lies, and respect mother earth.

What can I say, I expected more complexity from Malick.

I once spoke with Malick after he directed Days of Heaven. He explained to me his philosophy of directing like this: when he directs he's in the process of discovering what his film is about.

Uh-huh.

I remember being kind of stunned by this revelation/explanation/philosophy/whatever. I had read the script for Days of Heaven, a great and luminous screenplay, and it seemed to me that Malick had followed the script pretty carefully. I figured he was speaking, um, metaphorically.

But now it seems that Terrence Malick has taken that dangerous discovery philosphy to heart and it has resulted in two disastrous films. Think of an architect building a skyscraper without drafting any plans; imagine telling Donald Trump: "I'm discovering what the building is about floor by floor."

Right.

Feeling depressed, I joined Karen and Offspring #3 for some serious therapy.

We watched Pride & Prejudice.

Tomorrow, my review.

Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 11:46 AM | Comments (39)

May 12, 2006

Sincerely, and Death to America!

James Lileks give his hysterical take on Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's nutty letter to President Bush.

Sometimes, we just have to laugh.

Karen and I wish everyone a lovely and meaningful Shabbo.

Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 01:12 PM | Comments (8)

May 11, 2006

Angry & Frustrated

Commenter and Seraphic friend Ari Kinsberg wrote this in the comments section.

Robert:

And you were worried about two Neture Karta meshugenes in Teheran? Apparently American Jewish groups like Americans for Peace Now and Israel Policy Forum are fighting AIPAC's efforts to push through the The Palestinian Anti Terrorism Act of 2006. See today's Jerusalem Post website.

My lengthy response:

There is no question that "Americans for Peace Now" and "Israel Policy Forum" are infinitely more dangerous than Neturei Karta.

The NK are few in numbers and have no political clout. And most people recognize that they are, desperately, in need of some powerful medication.

But "Americans for Peace Now" and other such dovish groups have an air of legitimacy. They speak in full sentences, sound reasonable, and have friends in high places. And they are probably on some pretty sophisticated medication already, which would explain their massive memory lapses.

Blame it on Israel

That the PLO unleashed a murderous offensive right after Oslo meant little and is already forgotten by the left. And whatever impression it did make, well, they just blamed it on Israel. Yup, Ariel Sharon provoked the infitada by, gasp!, taking a stroll on the Temple Mount. The chutzpah of a Jew to feel that he has the right to walk where the Holy Temple stood.

The fact that Prime Minister Barak, the most left wing PM in Israeli history, offered the Palis 96% of what they asked for--well, even that wasn't good enough for the left.

That's the beauty of being on the left: no matter what policies are carried out by those in power, the left smugly, self-righteously steps in and says, not enough. Or: it wasn't done correctly. Reminds me (how shocking!) of Communists who blithely excuse genocide in Russia, China, Cambodia, wherever, by chanting the empty mantra: "That wasn't real Communism."

When in fact, that's exactly what Communism was and is and always will be.

The Palestinians lied about Barak's offers, and the left swallowed those lies, or just ignored the historical record.

Killer Peace Movements

Peace movements always end up killing more people than the wars they work so diligently to avoid. Witness the aftermath of the Viet Nam war: close to a million Viet Namese, "American collaborators," were murdered and countless others sent to "reeducation camps."

But speak to an old Viet Nam protestor and odds are he/she will just smile at the golden memories:The March on Washington, Joan Baez, The Black Panthers, Kumbaya. Good times. Good times.

Now that Hamas is in power these same peace groups claim that Hamas was elected because the PLO was so corrupt that the Palistinians had no choice.

Funny, while the PLO were in power and people like me were denouncing the utter corruption and murderous tactics of the PLO, the left insisted that the PLO were the "sole and legitimate representatives of the Palestinian people."

You see, rational discourse is impossible when dealing with peaceniks. They insist on having it both ways.

It would be funny but for so many Jews murdered and maimed.

Hamas openly and proudly state that they want to destroy Israel, will not even recognize Israel's existence. Yet Hamas, and this is just priceless, demands money from this non-existent state.

Uh-huh.

And these peace groups demand that we moderate our views, recognize Hamas, release funds, and in the words of former President Jimmy Carter: "...not punish the Palestinian people."

Notice how the left infantalizes the Arabs. It's a not-so-subtle form of racism. We, on the right, have far more respect for Arab culture. It's our belief that when people make a national choice, electing Hamas say, well, you live with that choice, and you do not then spend 24/7 explaining why you had to make that choice--when the reasons are quite clear: they give the people what they want, i.e. a genocidal platform against Israel and Jews everywhere. It's worth noting that Hamas' covenent quotes The Protocols of the Elders of Zion.

Yep, the former President can always be counted on to be absolutely wrong.

Iran: we are now paying very heavily for Carter's treachery and abandonment of our ally, the Shah of Iran.

Carter's words are classic Orwellian double speak.

Let me explain:

1. We're not punishing anybody. As always, the Palestinians are doing what they do best: punishing themselves.
2. No matter how much money you send them, it never goes where it's supposed to go, say hospitals or schools.
3. The money always ends up around the waist of a homicidal Jihadist intent on killing Jewish men, women and children.

Gazanomics

Thirty-five percent of Gaza's 1.4 million people are on the Palestinian Authority payroll. You imagine teachers, doctors, nurses and accountants, right?

Hey, we're dealing with the Palestinians here.

What you're not told by the Mainstream Media about these "jobs" is that they are overwhelmingly in the twelve "security services" that were established by the terrorist leader Yassir Arafat.

Twelve security services. Your eyes are not seeing double.

And we're not talking about nice policemen here, no these are the Al Aqsa Homicide Brigade, and the other competeing terrorist organizations.

Makes you wonder if Palestinian society might be a bit, um, violent?

Hamas stands for a very precise religious and political ideology: the imposition of Sharia, an Islamic Theocracy, and the destruction of Israel, Judaism and Christianity.

The Palestinians adore the message and they voted that party in.

Now they must live with the results of that choice.

That's what mature people do.

And mature national entities do not demand that the western countries they despise and want to destroy -- financially support them.

And we are not obliged to feed murderers.

Arab (dis)Unity

Look, the Saudis share the Palestinians twisted values. Let them donate some bucks. Last time I looked those guys were swimming in money.

What about all the other Arabs countries who are always telling us how much they just love the poor oppressed Palestinians?

Let us examine Arab affection for the Palestinian cause.

After the 1948 Israeli War of Independence, there were close to a million Jewish refugees from Arab lands. These impoverished Jews were welcomed as citizens into Israel.

The Arab refugees from that same war who fled to surrounding Arab countries were not allowed to become citizens. They were shtupped into refugee camps and treated like garbage, made into professional UN welfare witches.

In the years since 1948, Palestinians have attempted to overthrow the governments of Jordan, and Lebanon, and in both countries, they have sparked bloody civil wars that resulted in casualties in the tens of thousands. Casualties that do not come close to those inflicted by Israel on the Palestinians. But those deaths seem to escape the notice of the mainstream media. The unspoken agreement is: if Muslims kill Muslims, well, who are we to intervene, they have their methods of conflict resolution, and tribal massacres are probably a time-honored cultural tradition.

That's what happens when you start speaking and thinking multi-cultural gibberish.

Well, this morning, Steven Erlanger, official spokesman for Hamas, informs us for maybe the tenth time this week through the NY Slime that the people in Gaza are "frustrated and angry."

Gee, you know what that means. When a group, especially Arabs, is angry and frustrated, well, anything goes. You know why? Because, well, they're, um, frustrated and angry.

I thought the people in Gaza were frustrated and angry because Israelis occupied their precious land?"

But wait, the mean Israelis pulled out a few months ago.

So how come Gaza is still frustrated and angry?

Maybe, just maybe it has nothing to do with so-called settlers.

Severe Disconnect

1. They are frustrated and angry because Israel exists.

2. They are frustrated and angry because a handful of poor Jews built a modern democratic state in a sea of backward Arab tyrannies.

3. They are frustrated and angry because the freedom afforded women--Arab, Christian, Druze and Jewish--in Israel, is a direct threat to the oppressive Caliphite they yearn for.

4. They are frustrated and angry because Israel, with the same (actually less) natural resources, has built a first class economy, and the only thing the Arabs manufacture is homicide belts. Heck, we make the all the componenets, they just assemble them.

5. They are frustrated and angry because Israel has an army which could crush them in a six-hour offensive, as any of their beloved Arab neighbors would, but Israelis are Jewish and compassionate, therefore they fight the most morally decent counter-terrorist campaign ever waged.

6. They are frustrated and angry because several million Jews are alive and thriving. Yet since the Seventh Century their religious leaders have promised to convert or destroy the Jews; there is, to put it mildly, a severe disconnect.

7. They are frustrated and angry because Israel is building a security wall and it's getting harder to send homicide bombers into Israel. How dare the Jews make it so difficult to kill them.

8. And finally, they are frustrated and angry because they have been conditioned in this Pavlovian response. Western liberals have enabled the Palestinians in the exact same way that they enabled generations of welfare cases and thus destroyed entire families, and turned neighborhoods into "inner cities."

P.S. I'm angry and frustrated. You know why? That I have to sit down and write this--which should be obvious to anyone with half-a-brain.

Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 11:23 AM | Comments (15)

May 10, 2006

Four Things About Iran

Seraphic Secret is blessed with many knowledgeable readers and commenters. Counted among their numbers are: a TV news producer, several incredibly talented free-lance writers and editors, a soap manufacturer who raises goats, several US Army and Marine Officers, a whole bunch of Israeli soldiers, three (that I know of) ER physicians, bunches of lawyers, a quite a few Orthodox Rebbeim (lurkers, they never comment), an expert on power tools, several psychologists and psychiatrists, software programmers, a computational physicist (whatever that is), various clever entrepreneurs, aspring screenwriters, a Ba'al Te'shuva ex-Communist, Beis Midrash students, Satmar Hasidic ladies who get all splooshy inside from "How I Married Karen," moderate Muslims who fear being murdered by Jihadists, my father and mother: Hi Dad! Hi Mom! -- and one cover girl model.

And every once in a while we're going to turn this blog over to one of our readers because he/she has somethinig valuable to contribute.

David Ribner has his BA from Columbia '06. He is about to leave for London where he will study at Kings College and get his MA in War Studies '07. He also studied at the Freie Universitaet Berlin Summer '05. He speaks Hebrew, French and German. I can also attest to the fact that David, a close friend of my new son-in-law danced up a storm at Offspring #2's wedding, is a fine and articulate young man with a great future. Seraphic Secret is proud to publish some of his first political musings.

I asked David a few questions about Iran.

1. How crazy is the Iranian government?

The sad truth is that the Iranian government is not crazy at all. First, they view it as their right to obtain nuclear weapons as an emerging power and are rightfully upset by the fact that other countries are impinging on their sovereign rights as a nation. And in all honesty, it must be admitted that the United States is doing exactly that. Second, they know that any military operation against them can only delay their nuclear program and not destroy it completely. Only an invasion would be able to do that and America is in no place to be doing that right now. Militarily, the army is bogged down in Iraq and politically, the Bush administration doesn’t have the political capital. Third, they know that Europe and America would be hard pressed to cut off the Iranian oil supply because their citizens would not stand for exceedingly higher gasoline prices. That being said, the Iranians know that they can probably get away with what they are doing, especially with Russia and China willing to veto any Security Council resolutions targeting them.

2. Are the Europeans clueless or are they just deferring to America?

The Europeans are not clueless about the threat; if anything, the French are even more anti-Iran than the US and they are also aware that Iranian missiles can reach the European continent. They are also not deferring to America. While they are negotiating with US support and could not act militarily alone, they have their own reasons to be scared of the Iranian bomb. A number of reasons can plausibly explain their faith in negotiation. First, they are afraid of a refugee problem that would potentially result from war in the region. Second, they have significant Muslim populations which would explode in a wave of rioting, a la France last fall, should their governments take part in any action against Iran. Third, as noted above, a heavy reliance on oil as well as increasing trade with Iran would make the Europeans hard pressed to support sanctions. Thus, I would not classify the Europeans as clueless, rather they are scared and their tenuous domestic situation leaves them impotent to respond to Iran except through negotiated settlement.

3. Are Russia and China playing the old cold war game here?

In short, Russia yes, and China no. Russia certainly sees this as an opportunity to retake the world stage as a major player and is thus using Iran to balance against the US. China is more concerned with the oil they get from Iran. China’s massive economy and infrastructure continue to grow by leaps and bounds and are heavily dependent on Middle East oil. Any disturbance to the current flow would hurt them accordingly and thus they are not anxious to have that cut off. Additionally, both Russia and China are also nuclear powers and significantly larger than Iran and thus any potential threat posed to them by Iranian nuclear weapons is looked upon as remote.

4. Who will bomb Iran: America or Israel? Or will it be the two countries working secretly?

I would first caution you not to take military action for granted. The situation is fluid because we don’t know when exactly Iran will have enough enriched uranium to actually produce a bomb. Estimates vary wildly in years; the most recent being Israel’s chief of military intelligence who put the date at 2010. The political situation in Washington is also a factor. Ample time must be given to both UN negotiations and EU 3 negotiations which may or may not be considered unsuccessful by the time the Bush administration fades from the political scene. Push comes to shove Israel may act alone, but the mission would be very difficult tactically and would run the risk of massive retaliation against Israeli and Jewish targets worldwide. Though the prospect of Iran becoming a nuclear capable country is a real and dangerous threat, the correct mix of political, military, and strategic environments coming together to actually allow action to be taken may never come about. It is important to separate fear and reality even if the alternative is potentially earth-shattering.

4. Finally, what do you make of Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's letter to President Bush?

An attempted publicity stunt to attract international support gone bad. The intention, I believe, was to attract people from the anti-American bandwagon. You should read the Wall Street Journal editorial from today's paper.

David welcomes any questions and comments from Seraphic Secret readers.

Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 12:27 PM | Comments (27)

May 09, 2006

Traffic & Transformations

Please take a moment to sign this important petition. That human traffic is big business across the globe is a hellish shame That a portion of this human slavery takes place on the Holy Land of Israel is an evil and a disgrace which is simply beyond words, beyond imagination.

We'd like to thank our good friend Sara for bringing this petition to our attention. We urge all our readers to sign and send it on to everyone you know.

Seraphic Secret would also like to take this opportunity to wish Sara and her lovely family a heartfelt Mazal Tov on the recent