One Angry Jew

Today is the fourth day of the Sabbath week, today I am angry at...

2006-08-23T11:44:00.000-07:00

Jewish Die-In at Penn Station, New York

...these fuckers.

I’m not above criticizing Israel or hearing other thoughtful points of view.

But it must be so nice to sit back and wallow in self-righteousness. What would my fellow Jews laying the streets of NYC suggest we do to retrieve the kidnapped soldiers and stop the missile launches against Israeli civilians? I would like to hear some suggestions for securing the Jewish state.

And that last girl’s reference to the Holocaust and accusing Israel of “genocide” in Lebanon is just plain irresponsible and inflammatory.

Today I am Angry at...

2006-08-16T20:07:00.000-07:00

Hitler for ruining a really cool facial hair look for generations to come.

Oh yeah, I'm also angry about that whole Holocaust thing that Ahmedinejad says didn't happen.

Who I am Angry at Today

2006-08-13T15:09:00.000-07:00

There are so many Jews to be angry at this week. I obviously am angry with Olmert for throwing in the towel in a fight that we can win. By calling a time out he is ensuring the fight will do nothing but continue. But still, I hate to be angry at any Zionist living in Israel at this stressful time.

So instead I will be angry at these assholes. You can always turn to the Neturay Karta for their sheer cowardice. The worst of the worst of the Jews.

One Enlightened Jew

2006-08-09T13:32:00.000-07:00

Dr. Thane Rosenbaum, a hell of a writer and speaker, sees the light.

The Wall Street Journal

Red State Jews

by THANE ROSENBAUM

August 9, 2006; Page A10

This is a soul-searching moment for the Jewish left.
Actually, for many Jewish liberals, navigating the gloomy
politics of the Middle East is like walking with two left feet.

I would know. For six years I was the literary editor of
Tikkun magazine, a leading voice for progressive Jewish
politics that never avoided subjecting Israel to moral
scrutiny. I also teach human rights at a Jesuit university,
imparting the lessons of reciprocal grievances and the moral
necessity to regard all people with dignity and mutual
respect. And I am deeply sensitive to Palestinian pain, and
mortified when innocent civilians are used as human shields
and then cynically martyred as casualties of war.

Yet, since 9/11 and the second intifada, where suicide
bombings and beheadings have become the calling cards of
Arab diplomacy, and with Hamas and Hezbollah emerging as
elected entities that, paradoxically, reject the first
principles of liberal democracy, I feel a great deal of
moral anguish. Perhaps I have been naive all along.

And I am not alone. Many Jews are in my position -- the
children and grandchildren of labor leaders, socialists,
pacifists, humanitarians, antiwar protestors --
instinctively leaning left, rejecting war, unwilling to
demonize, and insisting that violence only breeds more
violence. Most of all we share the profound belief that
killing, humiliation and the infliction of unnecessary pain
are not Jewish attributes.

However, the world as we know it today -- post-Holocaust,
post-9/11, post-sanity -- is not cooperating. Given the
realities of the new Middle East, perhaps it is time for a
reality check. For this reason, many Jewish liberals are
surrendering to the mindset that there are no solutions
other than to allow Israel to defend itself -- with whatever
means necessary. Unfortunately, the inevitability of Israel
coincides with the inevitability of anti-Semitism.

This is what more politically conservative Jews and hardcore
Zionists maintained from the outset. And it was this
nightmare that the Jewish left always refused to imagine. So
we lay awake at night, afraid to sleep. Surely the Arabs
were tired, too. Surely they would want to improve their
societies and educate their children rather than strap bombs
on to them.

If the Palestinians didn't want that for themselves, if
building a nation was not their priority, then peace in
exchange for territories was nothing but a pipe dream. It
was all wish-fulfillment, morally and practically necessary,
yet ultimately motivated by a weary Israeli society -- the
harsh reality of Arab animus, the spiritual toll that the
occupation had taken on a Jewish state battered by negative
world opinion.

Despite the deep cynicism, however, Israel knew that it must
try. It would have to set aside nearly 60 years of hard-won
experience, starting from the very first days of its
independence, and believe that the Arab world had softened,
would become more welcoming neighbors, and would stop
chanting: "Not in our backyard -- the Middle East is for
Arabs only."

It is true that Israel has entered into peace agreements
with Egypt and Jordan that have brought some measure of
historic stability to the region. But with Israel having
withdrawn from Lebanon and Gaza, and with Israeli public
opinion virtually united in favor of near-total withdrawal
from the West Bank, why are rockets being launched at Israel
now, why are their soldiers being kidnapped if the
aspirations of the Palestinian people, and the intentions of
Hamas and Hezbollah, stand for something other than the
total destruction of Israel? And if Palestinians and the
Lebanese are electing terrorists and giving them the
portfolio of statesmen, then what message is being sent to
moderate voices, what incentives are there to negotiate, and
how can any of this sobering news be recast in a more favorable light?

The Jewish left is now in shambles. Peace Now advocates have
lost their momentum, and, in some sense, their moral
clarity. Opinion polls in Israel are showing near unanimous
support for stronger incursions into Lebanon. And until
kidnapped soldiers are returned and acts of terror
curtailed, any further conversations about the future of the
West Bank have been set aside.

Not unlike the deep divisions between the values of red- and
blue-state America, world Jewry (or more properly, leftist Jewry - MS)
is being forced to reconsider all of its underlying assumptions about
peace in the Middle East. The recent disastrous events in Lebanon
and Gaza have inadvertently created a newly united Jewish
consciousness -- bringing right and left together into one
deeply cynical red state.

The Very Least You Can Do

2006-08-08T23:22:00.000-07:00

I don't know if my prayers help but I will keep trying.

Who I'm Angry at Today

2006-08-08T23:08:00.000-07:00

Joe Lieberman: for being a puppet-headed loser and making my people look bad

Abe Foxman, Reason Enough to Hate the Jews

2006-08-08T22:55:00.000-07:00

Who elected Abe Foxman spokesman of the Jewish people? He certainly does not speak for me.

Why should Mel Gibson feel obliged to show anything to the ADL, let alone a movie he financed completely from his own pocket? So what if The Passion references from a single gospel? Is Mr. Foxman an expert on the New Testament? Mel Gibson is religious man who is free to make whatever movie he wants and reference any scripture in which he believes.

Boasting that Steven Speilberg ran The Prince of Egypt past the ADL doesn’t exactly help Foxman’s argument. That movie fictionalizes the story of Exodus, assuming Moses guilt-ridden for turning on his “brother” Ramses, in order make it more politically correct. It is a far greater bastardization than The Passion in regard to accuracy of Testament.

In insisting that Mel Gibson or anyone run their work past the ADL, Foxman perpetuates another awful stereotype -– that Jews control the media.