The Jerusalem Post has Prime Minister Sharon admitting, “Budget cuts in the haredi sector have been unreasonable.”

Of course, he’s saying that because he wants UTJ to join the coalition. What’s remarkable is that the government decided last week to tell the Supreme Court that it would not accept conversions not conducted in accordance with Jewish Law - with no charedi parties currently in the coalition, and with Shinui’s Paritzky in the position of Interior Minister! We hardly saw a vote like this when Aryeh Deri had that job…

Last night, someone shared with me a recent episode of Law & Order. I don’t think this episode would have aired while Stephen Hill, one of the entertainment world’s more famous baalei teshuva, was playing the role of District Attorney. He would have pointed out the inaccuracies that former Sen. Fred Thompson, and the rest of the cast and crew, simply don’t recognize. What the world got was another wildly skewed version of the life of a Jewish woman, with the Get process playing a supporting role.

A warning to those who might actually plan to watch the show… the following is what’s called a spoiler. In order to discuss what’s wrong with the show, I have to tell you how it ends.

The episode depicts members of the Bukharin community, a group of traditional Sephardic Jews from a region in the southern part of the former Soviet Union. They are described as traditional though not necessarily religious, which is fair enough as it goes. And the idea that one of them could get mixed up with the Russian mob isn’t terribly far-fetched.

We learn, however, that the wife wanted to divorce her mobster husband, but he was refusing to grant a Get, a religious divorce. So the wife remains in their shared home, because were she to leave the house she would lose custody of her children, and no one in her community, including her children, would speak to a woman who left home without a Get!

The folks at PowerLine claim that the following image is from an election rally in the PA.

I haven’t seen this elsewhere, but the problem is that this is entirely too believable. As PowerLine’s Hindrocket (John Hinderaker) puts it, “I get the feeling that the Palestinians still don’t quite have the hang of this democracy thing.”

In a column in Scientific American (Nov., pg. 34) appropriately enough called “Skeptic,” Michael Shermer (publisher of a journal that bears that name) tells us what is wrong with the recent spate of scientific investigations into the efficacy of prayer. “The ultimate fallacy is theological: if G-d is omniscient and omnipresent, he should not need to be reminded or inveigled into healing someone.

You’ve got to sort of wonder how people who do not believe in G-d often claim to know so much about Him, and how He works.

A few weeks ago, a colleague (Rabbi Yitz Etshalom) and I agreed to appear on a radio program called Focus on the Mideast. The station is ultra-leftist (Marxist would be more accurate); the host is a Lebanese Christian not very kindly disposed to the State of Israel.

We figured that it was a perfect learning experience. We would gain some experience in dealing with the arguments the other side uses, with nothing to lose. Given the listener profile of the entire station, we would not be turning anyone off to the Jewish cause, no matter how poorly we fared.

Are we surprised? In the same week that the previously-mentioned op-ed from Peace Now attempts to blame Bush for the violence, a prominent Palestinian editor says that Arafat never intended to make peace at all.

Instead, Arafat signed the Oslo Accords because he hoped it would lead to Jews fleeing Israel. Arafat would never have signed any final peace agreement that would have left Jerusalem in Jewish hands or failed to include a “right of return” for Palestinians (needless to say, a right of return for Jews to their homes in Hebron, much less in Syria, Lebanon, Jordan, Egypt or Morocco has never been up for discussion). And, finally, Arafat founded the Aksa Martyrs Brigades and geared up for the new Intifada following the failure of the Camp David Summit in 2000.

You can read more in the Jerusalem Post, but the short form is “the Peace Process was a ruse to set up a terrorist camp on the West Bank. It didn’t work as well as Arafat wanted, but it has killed almost 1000 Jews and Gaza will be Judenrein, so it’s not doing too badly.”

Slack-jawed disbelief — it’s the only possible reaction. Those with rational minds will be amazed by this gem from the President and CEO of Americans for Peace Now.

Peace Now, of course, is the group of left-wing activists that most heartily endorsed the foolishness of the “Peace Plan,” which brought Arafat and his minions back to Israeli territory, and armed them — leading Israel straight into another war. Now that we all know that Arafat remained the brutal terrorist that he always was, and simply used negotiation as a tool to garner as much territory as possible from which to launch his next round of violence, we’re treated to a blame assessment from Peace Now.

If you expected a frank admission of their responsibility, leading with their delusion about a non-existent “Peace Process” which led directly to war, to nearly 1000 Jewish lives lost and counting — you’d be mistaken. Oh no, they say. We’ve found the real villian here: “Israeli and Palestinian leaders,” listing the Israelis first, and George Bush! Because, she says, the “Peace Process” yet lives, and Bush is to blame for not moving it forward.

“Israeli and Palestinian leaders bear most of the responsibility for this carnage. But Mr. Bush also shares some of the blame for failing to more actively pursue an end to the fighting.”

Evelyn Gordon of the Jerusalem Post is an old friend from college. At the beginning of her college career, she was both liberal and non-religious. By the end, she had improved considerably on both counts.

I’ve rarely read a JPost essay of hers with which I disagree, and Do as I say, not as I do is part of the rule. It’s a very good analysis of the treatment of Israel compared to other nations doing the same thing.

There’s a Reform Temple in Pennsylvania that, for several decades, blew a French Horn on Rosh HaShanah. Then younger members started agitating for the use of a real Shofar, instead. The old-timers responded with resentment, saying the youngsters had no respect for the shul’s traditions.

Whether historical or apocryphal, this story certainly comes to mind when reading the The Jewish Week’s treatment of the split between Orthodox and liberal Jews in the last election — in which Staff Writer Steve Lipman calls the Jewish Kerry vote “true to their Democratic roots.” Since when is the Democratic party uniquely representative of Jewish values?

True, the Democratic party is that of liberal values, but only those Jews who have traded in their Judaism for a new ideology could ever side uniquely with one party or the other. Much was made of the “split” this year, but all it would take was another Bush Senior to drive the Orthodox and liberals back into the same Blue column.

Kerry entirely failed to articulate a position that would favor saving Jewish lives, similar to that taken by “W” even before 9/11. The recognition that Palestinian terrorism is *the* major obstruction to peace in Israeli-held territory, and that it must be stopped before Israel can be called upon to make further moves, was a major change in US policy. Bush defended the anti-terrorism wall, while Kerry spoke in defense of it to Jewish audiences — and called it an “obstruction” in front of Arab ones. This was entirely typical Kerry behavior, but that’s almost besides the point.

First of all, my erev Shabbos entry didn’t give examples of violence between 1993 and 1996 that Carter manages to ignore. Alan Miller sent a letter to the NY Times (where Carter’s drivel first appeared), filling in the gap: “From the signing of the Oslo Accords on Sept. 13, 1993, until the murder of Mr. Rabin on Nov. 4, 1995, 77 Israeli, American and Dutch nationals were murdered in eight separate bombings carried out by Palestinian terrorists. In a single bombing, 22 were killed while riding on a bus in Tel Aviv. In February 1994, the Kahanist Dr. Baruch Goldstein gunned down 29 Muslims during prayers at the Cave of the Patriarchs in the city of Hebron.” Very peaceful, Mr. Carter.

Carter is, as I said, too smart in my opinion to be simply dumb. I’m not sure I can say the same of Uri Avnery, a former member of the Irgun turned pro-Arabist, having been a Knesset MP from a party that eventually joined the Arab-dominated “Progressive List for Peace.” He now heads Gush Shmonim, an still believes that Arafat “wanted to make peace.”

I wonder if he’d care to explain that position to all the fathers who lost their daughters to Arafat’s minions. I think afterwards he’d have many fewer teeth, but no fewer brains — since in that department, he evidences having nothing left to lose.

George Bush once again demonstrated his understanding of terrorism and terrorists. He had nothing positive to say about Arafat, so he chose (wisely, as a head of state) to say nothing about him at all. Here’s the official White House statement, courtesy of Captain’s Quarters:

The death of Yasser Arafat is a significant moment in Palestinian history. We express our condolences to the Palestinian people. For the Palestinian people, we hope that the future will bring peace and the fulfillment of their aspirations for an independent, democratic Palestine that is at peace with its neighbors. During the period of transition that is ahead, we urge all in the region and throughout the world to join in helping make progress toward these goals and toward the ultimate goal of peace.

He hopes the Palestinian people will have a future. Concerning Arafat, his silence is a ringing condemnation of Arafat and his long history of brutal murder, oppression of his own people, and corruption.

Camera.org has a nice little bio of Yasser, explaining why he is “known to many as the ‘father of modern terrorism’” — redesigned by Pajama Hadin:

Jimmy Carter is the only president that I have seen in person. I recall visiting the Air and Space Museum (part of the Smithsonian Institution) as a boy, and there he was, waving from the balcony as he left the Museum theater.

As I learned more about his presidency, I came to believe that he was a nice guy who just found himself completely out of his depth when it came to running the country. But at some point over the past several years, his writings concerning Israel and the Palestinians have forced me to revise that position; he’s really not a very nice guy at all. I know few people of similar stature on this side of the Atlantic who are quite so bigoted.

In his latest editorial, he eulogizes Arafat while blaming Israel and Israelis for Palestinian terrorism. He writes, for example, that the 1993 Oslo Agreements produced an “absence of serious violence [which] was broken when a Jewish nationalist assassinated Mr. Rabin.” Carter fails to explain how a single act of murder led to a series of Hamas bus bombings the following summer, Palestinian policemen firing upon Israelis shortly thereafter, or the war Arafat started in 2000. Nor does Carter explain his apparent belief that there were no homicides anywhere within Israel or PA territory from 1993 until 1996.

He then writes that “In effect, peace efforts of a long line of previous administrations have been abandoned by President Bush and Prime Minister Ariel Sharon. For the last three years of his life, Mr. Arafat was incapacitated and held as a prisoner.” It’s all the fault of Sharon and Bush; Arafat was the victim.

R’ Avi Shafran, Agudah’s director of public affairs, forwarded the following comments:

Jews don’t dance in the streets and fire weapons in celebration when their enemies die, but it would be disingenuous to say that there shouldn’t be a feeling of gratitude to G-d in Jewish hearts for the passing from the scene of a man responsible for the murder of so many innocents. One thing is certain: the world is a better place today than it was yesterday.

Our gratification, though, is tempered by the fact that, unlike when Hitler or Stalin died and their reigns of terror largely perished with them, there is no assurance that Mr. Arafat’s passing will bring any positive change in the calculus of Palestinian terror. But we hope and pray that it does.

The Muslim Sheik dispatched to Arafat’s side was quoted on al-Jazeera saying that euthanasia is forbidden under Islamic law.

Too bad Arafat’s in a coma, otherwise he could blow himself up, since as we know suicide is a mitzvah under Islam… as long as a few Jews die in the process…
http://washingtontimes.com/upi-breaking/20041110-063908-5772r.htm

Daniel Pipes makes a compelling argument that Bush’s new statements about a peaceful Palestinian state, plus Arafat’s much-awaited death, will lead to new risks to Israel. Read it here.

I just stumbled across Uri Zohar’s new web site. Uri Zohar was an Israeli movie star, both as an actor and director, before he became religious.

He’s now on a campaign to save children from Israel’s school system, which has fallen into an amazing level of disarray. The students are exposed to drugs and violence like the inner-city schools of the US, and only about 40% manage to graduate high school.

This video is a must-see. It’s so high impact that we should get English voice-overs and show it in the US. For now, you need to understand Hebrew to get much out of it, but if you can, see this now.

This is the new beginning… a blog that will deliver to the Jewish world the same level of insightful, intelligent, and fun commentary that the best political blogs have brought.

In other words, JewishBulletin.com is to the Jewish media what blogs are to the mainstream media. Look for us to be trashed accordingly — but with your help, you’ll find more accurate and honest info here than anywhere else.

The Blogachover