So says the headline of today's ישראל היום (a free daily newspaper given out in Israel).
The reason is really simple. Not only did the deal with Labor gain time (3 months until the primaries) for Olmert, he is planning to run in the Kadima primary.
PM: I'll run again despite Labor deal
Prime Minister Ehud Olmert embarrassed the Labor Party on Wednesday when he announced at the Knesset podium that he intends to run for reelection as Kadima chairman despite the deal reached overnight Tuesday in which Labor gave up its effort to initiate an early election.
Even if Olmert does not run, he has made no promise to relinquish the premiership to the victor. He could continue serving as prime minister even if Kadima elects a new leader, because there is nothing in the Kadima bylaws that would force him to step down.
...
Labor secretary-general Eitan Cabel, who negotiated the deal, did not insist on ruling out an Olmert reelection bid, mostly because he thought this was superfluous and because he did not want to embarrass the prime minister. But he ended up being embarrassed and outraged by Olmert's statement at the Knesset.
"I can't deal all day with the question of whether or not I am being lied to," Cabel said. "If Olmert runs, we will quit the coalition and I will submit a motion of no-confidence in the government."
The bottom line is that Labor got absolutely ZERO from this deal, except a black eye for again zigzagging.
Thursday, June 26, 2008
Wednesday, June 25, 2008
Shas is now sitting pretty
Shas must have breathed a huge sigh of relief. They don't really want elections and now they can continue to extort money from Olmert in return for staying in the coalition. I guarantee you that at least once a week we will hear Shas threatening to leave the coalition over some issue. It is patently clear that Olmert will find a way to give Shas money and keep them in the coalition.
It is unclear how this will work out for Shas in the long run. If Olmert actually makes a deal with either the Palestinians (dividing Jerusalem) or Syria (gving back the Golan) it will be a disaster for Shas because their voters will not forgive them for allowing that to happen. On the other hand, if there is no real progress and Shas continues to extort money they will be in an excellent position for the next election.
It is unclear how this will work out for Shas in the long run. If Olmert actually makes a deal with either the Palestinians (dividing Jerusalem) or Syria (gving back the Golan) it will be a disaster for Shas because their voters will not forgive them for allowing that to happen. On the other hand, if there is no real progress and Shas continues to extort money they will be in an excellent position for the next election.
Can politics in Israel sink any lower?
I haven't posted about Israeli politics in a while, here I go again.
It doesn't get any worse then this. Ehud Barak who a month ago stated that he doesn't see how Olmert can continue as PM, made a deal to allow just that.
Labor agreed late Tuesday night not to vote in favor of the bill which calls for the dissolution of the Knesset, whether it is brought to the floor on Wednesday, or any time in the coming weeks.
...
According to the agreement, the Kadima party promised to convene a committee on Wednesday which would begin the process of primaries for choosing a new chairperson. On Monday of next week, the Kadima faction will discuss the results, and 10 days later the Kadima council will convene to determine an exact date for primary elections, to be held before September 25. Should a run-off election be needed as well, that, too, will be held before September 25.
What this means is that Olmert survives until at least October the beginning of the next Knesset session. Let's not forget that Olmert may very well run in the Kadima primaries and win. Then what?
This is absolutely pathetic. The Winograd commission without saying so explicitly told Olmert to go and he ignored what they said. At that point Ehud Barak said that he would work towards replacing Olmert. So far he has done nothing but help Olmert survive. Then came all the corruption investigations culminating in Talansky's infamous testimony. Again Barak made a lot of noise and again is doing nothing.
Let's look at what is going on.
1. The so called "cease fire" has already started to fall apart
2. Gilad Shalit is no closer to coming home.
3. On the Northern front the deal with Hizbullah is also very controversial and may or may not happen.
4. Negotiations with Syria
5. Iran
...
All being done by a Prime Minister who has no moral authority, has a single digit approval rating and is spending a good part of his day fighting off the 5 corruption investigations.
The political system in Israel is absolutely bankrupt. More and more people are losing faith in the system. When all the politicians care about is keeping their seat and there is no real accountability people simply tune out and don't vote.
It doesn't get any worse then this. Ehud Barak who a month ago stated that he doesn't see how Olmert can continue as PM, made a deal to allow just that.
Labor agreed late Tuesday night not to vote in favor of the bill which calls for the dissolution of the Knesset, whether it is brought to the floor on Wednesday, or any time in the coming weeks.
...
According to the agreement, the Kadima party promised to convene a committee on Wednesday which would begin the process of primaries for choosing a new chairperson. On Monday of next week, the Kadima faction will discuss the results, and 10 days later the Kadima council will convene to determine an exact date for primary elections, to be held before September 25. Should a run-off election be needed as well, that, too, will be held before September 25.
What this means is that Olmert survives until at least October the beginning of the next Knesset session. Let's not forget that Olmert may very well run in the Kadima primaries and win. Then what?
This is absolutely pathetic. The Winograd commission without saying so explicitly told Olmert to go and he ignored what they said. At that point Ehud Barak said that he would work towards replacing Olmert. So far he has done nothing but help Olmert survive. Then came all the corruption investigations culminating in Talansky's infamous testimony. Again Barak made a lot of noise and again is doing nothing.
Let's look at what is going on.
1. The so called "cease fire" has already started to fall apart
2. Gilad Shalit is no closer to coming home.
3. On the Northern front the deal with Hizbullah is also very controversial and may or may not happen.
4. Negotiations with Syria
5. Iran
...
All being done by a Prime Minister who has no moral authority, has a single digit approval rating and is spending a good part of his day fighting off the 5 corruption investigations.
The political system in Israel is absolutely bankrupt. More and more people are losing faith in the system. When all the politicians care about is keeping their seat and there is no real accountability people simply tune out and don't vote.
Monday, June 23, 2008
Looking back at what the leftists said before the disengagement
I was reading an old post and the comments from 2005 (before the disengagement) and was struck by some some of the things said by leftists and how wrong they turned out to be.
Doresh wrote:
Withdrawing from Gaza makes 100% sense. Israel originally at one time in the 70s offered it back to the Egyptions but they didnt want it. Staying there forments more and more hatred. Remember the Arabs living there think its "their land". They regard it as the one bit of land they have managed to keep a hold of. They are desperate to 'keep' it.
Thus pragmatically you have to understand how the other side sees things and figure out what CAN be done. Once Israel withdraws from Gaza it can effectively seal it off and spend its resources more effeciently. Then there will also be one less thing that enrages the Palastinians.
We see how well that worked. Lets see. We sealed Gaza off but they are shooting rockets over the fence. We are probably going to invade Gaza in the fext weeks and reconquer it.
Someone asked DovBear:
But I still haven't figured out how exactly is the IDF going to stop the mortar and rocket fire that is going to get worse as soon as the IDF leaves.
His answer:
I trust the IDF. I trust that leaving Gaza is the right thing to do. And I trust God to make up the difference.
I guess his trust was misplaced.
Here is another beauty from good old Dovie:
And in conclusion, may I propose the blorange prayer:
Elokeinu v'elokai avosaynu, please let this inevitable withdrawal proceed peacefully and please let it deliver a good outcome.
Som much for Dovie and his prayers, the first half was accepted but not the second.
Doresh wrote:
Withdrawing from Gaza makes 100% sense. Israel originally at one time in the 70s offered it back to the Egyptions but they didnt want it. Staying there forments more and more hatred. Remember the Arabs living there think its "their land". They regard it as the one bit of land they have managed to keep a hold of. They are desperate to 'keep' it.
Thus pragmatically you have to understand how the other side sees things and figure out what CAN be done. Once Israel withdraws from Gaza it can effectively seal it off and spend its resources more effeciently. Then there will also be one less thing that enrages the Palastinians.
We see how well that worked. Lets see. We sealed Gaza off but they are shooting rockets over the fence. We are probably going to invade Gaza in the fext weeks and reconquer it.
Someone asked DovBear:
But I still haven't figured out how exactly is the IDF going to stop the mortar and rocket fire that is going to get worse as soon as the IDF leaves.
His answer:
I trust the IDF. I trust that leaving Gaza is the right thing to do. And I trust God to make up the difference.
I guess his trust was misplaced.
Here is another beauty from good old Dovie:
And in conclusion, may I propose the blorange prayer:
Elokeinu v'elokai avosaynu, please let this inevitable withdrawal proceed peacefully and please let it deliver a good outcome.
Som much for Dovie and his prayers, the first half was accepted but not the second.
Age discrimination in Kollels?
I have to say this would never have occurred to me. I would never have thought that there is a phenomenon of age discrimination in kollels. I thought it was only in the secular world that there is a culture of youth. It seems that the Charedi world has been affected as well.
Last week's Mishpacha magazine (in Hebrew) has a long article detailing the problem.
It seems that Avreichim over the age of 40 have a very hard time finding a kollel to learn in. Some of the reasons given are:
1. It is assumed that a young person in his 20's has more zeal for learning then someone who has been learning already for 20+ years.
2. Younger people are less busy and have more time to devote to learning. Someone who is 25 has a few little kids and not s many financial worries. Someone who is 45 probably has 8-10 kids that are older and therefore he is busy trying to marry them off and deal with their problems. He mostly probably is in finanial trouble as a result. As the old saying goes "little kids little problems big kids big problems".
3. The Roshei Kollel feel that they will have more influence on a younger person. They believe that they can have a major influence on the דרך הלימוד of someone who is in their early 20's. However someone in their 40's is already set in their ways.
4. The Roshei Kollel feel awkward about having someone in the kollel their age or older. They also feel that the person will probably not follow the sedarim in the kollel and will learn what they want.
5. Someone who is still just sitting and learing in kollel in their 40's is not going to become a Rosh Yeshiva, Rosh Kollel etc. The fact that they haven't moved up shows that they are not so successful.
These are all stereotypes but there is some truth in all of them. The article points out that the reasons listed above apply mostly to small kollels. Therefore it suggests that older Avreichim should start learning in a big kollel where these issues are not nearly as problematic.
Last week's Mishpacha magazine (in Hebrew) has a long article detailing the problem.
It seems that Avreichim over the age of 40 have a very hard time finding a kollel to learn in. Some of the reasons given are:
1. It is assumed that a young person in his 20's has more zeal for learning then someone who has been learning already for 20+ years.
2. Younger people are less busy and have more time to devote to learning. Someone who is 25 has a few little kids and not s many financial worries. Someone who is 45 probably has 8-10 kids that are older and therefore he is busy trying to marry them off and deal with their problems. He mostly probably is in finanial trouble as a result. As the old saying goes "little kids little problems big kids big problems".
3. The Roshei Kollel feel that they will have more influence on a younger person. They believe that they can have a major influence on the דרך הלימוד of someone who is in their early 20's. However someone in their 40's is already set in their ways.
4. The Roshei Kollel feel awkward about having someone in the kollel their age or older. They also feel that the person will probably not follow the sedarim in the kollel and will learn what they want.
5. Someone who is still just sitting and learing in kollel in their 40's is not going to become a Rosh Yeshiva, Rosh Kollel etc. The fact that they haven't moved up shows that they are not so successful.
These are all stereotypes but there is some truth in all of them. The article points out that the reasons listed above apply mostly to small kollels. Therefore it suggests that older Avreichim should start learning in a big kollel where these issues are not nearly as problematic.
Sunday, June 22, 2008
Forner Bais Yaakov girl play football
Football Pro Keeps Her Faith on the Gridiron
Gable grew up Orthodox, with nine siblings, in Monsey, N.Y., and is a running back for the New York Nemesis. Six weeks into the 10-week season, the team is undefeated (5-0) and has a strong chance of making it to the National Women’s Football Association’s equivalent of the Super Bowl, to be held July 26.
...
The more daunting challenge for Gable is adhering to Jewish law in a league where all games are played Saturday, women wear pants and the goal is to carry a football on the Sabbath.
“Most Orthodox people would say it’s not in the spirit of Shabbat,” said Gable, who considers herself Modern Orthodox. “I respect that,” Gable said. “I thought about it. I believe rules should be followed strictly, but if I’m not breaking anything, then, I guess I’m allowing myself to be lenient.”
Gable travels to game sites Fridays, finds the hotel closest to the field and makes sure there’s a fence around the stadium (which acts as an eruv — a Sabbath barrier — and permits her to carry things, such as a football, within its boundaries). She then memorizes the route from the hotel to the field, because she can’t carry the map on the Sabbath, and walks as far as five miles to get to the game the next day.
...
Gable was a standout student at the Heredi Orthodox all-girls Bais Yaakov in Passaic, N.J., before graduating from Bruriah High School in Elizabeth, N.J., and attended Michlelet Mevaseret Yerushalayim in Israel during the 2001 intifada. When she returned to the United States, Gable attended SUNY Rockland Community College. In 2006 she graudated from Cornell, where, a year later, she earned a master’s degree in health administration. She now works as an analyst at Hewitt Associates, a health management consulting firm.
Gable grew up Orthodox, with nine siblings, in Monsey, N.Y., and is a running back for the New York Nemesis. Six weeks into the 10-week season, the team is undefeated (5-0) and has a strong chance of making it to the National Women’s Football Association’s equivalent of the Super Bowl, to be held July 26.
...
The more daunting challenge for Gable is adhering to Jewish law in a league where all games are played Saturday, women wear pants and the goal is to carry a football on the Sabbath.
“Most Orthodox people would say it’s not in the spirit of Shabbat,” said Gable, who considers herself Modern Orthodox. “I respect that,” Gable said. “I thought about it. I believe rules should be followed strictly, but if I’m not breaking anything, then, I guess I’m allowing myself to be lenient.”
Gable travels to game sites Fridays, finds the hotel closest to the field and makes sure there’s a fence around the stadium (which acts as an eruv — a Sabbath barrier — and permits her to carry things, such as a football, within its boundaries). She then memorizes the route from the hotel to the field, because she can’t carry the map on the Sabbath, and walks as far as five miles to get to the game the next day.
...
Gable was a standout student at the Heredi Orthodox all-girls Bais Yaakov in Passaic, N.J., before graduating from Bruriah High School in Elizabeth, N.J., and attended Michlelet Mevaseret Yerushalayim in Israel during the 2001 intifada. When she returned to the United States, Gable attended SUNY Rockland Community College. In 2006 she graudated from Cornell, where, a year later, she earned a master’s degree in health administration. She now works as an analyst at Hewitt Associates, a health management consulting firm.
Traveling in America
I was recently traveling in the US (which is why I haven't posted in a while), and would like to relate some of my experiences.
I was in Palo Alto for Shabbos and had a very interesting Shabbos. There is an outreach kollel (http://www.jsn.info/) in Palo Alto as well as 1 Orthodox shul. It is very interesting to see the mix of people in the shul, you have the black hat kollel guys side by side with the students from Stanford, the single guys with long hair etc. It is amazing how well everyone gets along. In Israel many of us live in basically homogeneous communities and this is the complete opposite where you have a very heterogeneous community.
I am always surprised when I visit Northern California how few religious Jews live there. There are so many Jews in hi tech, you would think that more religious Jews would move to Silicon Valley to work there. For some reason it hasn't happened and there is only a very small Jewish community.
I was also in Kansas City. I was amazed to find out that in Kansas City there is a Glatt Kosher Subway. Kansas City has a relatively small Jewish community and therefore I am very surprised that they can support a restaurant like that.
The religion of America is sports. It is amazing how much sports there is on TV. In fact, it is the only thing that there is to watch. In my hotel I had ESPN, ESPN 2, ESPN News, and ESPN Classic.
I was in Palo Alto for Shabbos and had a very interesting Shabbos. There is an outreach kollel (http://www.jsn.info/) in Palo Alto as well as 1 Orthodox shul. It is very interesting to see the mix of people in the shul, you have the black hat kollel guys side by side with the students from Stanford, the single guys with long hair etc. It is amazing how well everyone gets along. In Israel many of us live in basically homogeneous communities and this is the complete opposite where you have a very heterogeneous community.
I am always surprised when I visit Northern California how few religious Jews live there. There are so many Jews in hi tech, you would think that more religious Jews would move to Silicon Valley to work there. For some reason it hasn't happened and there is only a very small Jewish community.
I was also in Kansas City. I was amazed to find out that in Kansas City there is a Glatt Kosher Subway. Kansas City has a relatively small Jewish community and therefore I am very surprised that they can support a restaurant like that.
The religion of America is sports. It is amazing how much sports there is on TV. In fact, it is the only thing that there is to watch. In my hotel I had ESPN, ESPN 2, ESPN News, and ESPN Classic.
Thursday, June 05, 2008
Hamodia: The yeshivos are on the verge of collapse: 'Only a miracle can save us'
The article explains that the crisis comes mostly from the cuts in government funding. One of the biggest issues relates to the core curriculum. The government is refusing to fund any school that does not adhere to a core curriculum (e.g. English, math, science, etc.). The Charedi schools absolutely refuse. The Charedi schools also have a much longer school day then regular schools and again the government does not want to pay.
Basically the Charedim want to have their cake and eat it. On one hand, they want to have complete freedom to do whatever they want, including curriculum, hours, etc. and on the other hand they want the government to fully fund them. They should have seen this coming. I for one, am surprised at how long the government funded Charedi schools that teach no secular studies.
In every other country in the world the Charedi schools teach the core government curriculum in addition to whatever they want and no one complains and the students don't seem to be affected negatively.
The question now is how will the Charedi world react.
With new elections coming soon, the Charedi parties are going to try to get all this money back in return for joining the government. Depending on the election results this may or may not work.
Basically the Charedim want to have their cake and eat it. On one hand, they want to have complete freedom to do whatever they want, including curriculum, hours, etc. and on the other hand they want the government to fully fund them. They should have seen this coming. I for one, am surprised at how long the government funded Charedi schools that teach no secular studies.
In every other country in the world the Charedi schools teach the core government curriculum in addition to whatever they want and no one complains and the students don't seem to be affected negatively.
The question now is how will the Charedi world react.
With new elections coming soon, the Charedi parties are going to try to get all this money back in return for joining the government. Depending on the election results this may or may not work.
Wednesday, June 04, 2008
The latest סגולה
Can anyone explain to me what the connection to 104 shekel is?
In any case this is not the only סגולה in yesterday's Yated Neeman. Here some more סגולה ads:
I think this is a very unfortunate and damaging phenomenon. It makes Judaism into magic and promotes a quick fix. You have a problem do this סגולה and your problem will be solved. That is not how it is supposed to work. You are supposed to be מפשפש במעשיו do teshuva, etc. not some quick fix.
Thursday, May 29, 2008
Finally the press wakes up ...
and realizes that the main charge against Olmert is not bribery, that is just the icing on the cake. The main charge is money laundering and tax evasion.
Money laundering the key charge in Olmert case
Money laundering appears to be the key charge the police fraud squad is looking at in the corruption investigation against Prime Minister Ehud Olmert, sources close to the investigation say.
...
"In the coming days we'll hear a lot of spins about Talansky's testimony and attempts by the various lawyers to discover cracks in it," a law-enforcement source told Haaretz.
"It is important to understand that these claims have almost no importance: Olmert admitted taking the cash, the money was never reported or documented. That in itself is enough to make an indictment stick."
...
Section 3b of the anti-money-laundering law is intended to make it easier for investigators to collect evidence to prove this offense: The clause does not relate to offenses for which the money was used.
Instead, it says a person has broken the law if he or she "takes action in terms of property, or provides false information with the intent that no report be made ... or of causing an incorrect report to be made."
This is what I have been saying all along. He has no defense. He admitted that he took the cash and he didn't report it, end of story. That in and of itself is a violation of the law.
Money laundering the key charge in Olmert case
Money laundering appears to be the key charge the police fraud squad is looking at in the corruption investigation against Prime Minister Ehud Olmert, sources close to the investigation say.
...
"In the coming days we'll hear a lot of spins about Talansky's testimony and attempts by the various lawyers to discover cracks in it," a law-enforcement source told Haaretz.
"It is important to understand that these claims have almost no importance: Olmert admitted taking the cash, the money was never reported or documented. That in itself is enough to make an indictment stick."
...
Section 3b of the anti-money-laundering law is intended to make it easier for investigators to collect evidence to prove this offense: The clause does not relate to offenses for which the money was used.
Instead, it says a person has broken the law if he or she "takes action in terms of property, or provides false information with the intent that no report be made ... or of causing an incorrect report to be made."
This is what I have been saying all along. He has no defense. He admitted that he took the cash and he didn't report it, end of story. That in and of itself is a violation of the law.
Why Olmert's lawyers didn't cross examine Talansky
After all, this has caused tremendous damage to the PM to allow Talansky's testimony to go unrefuted. Olmert's attorneys could have cross examined Talansky yesterday. Their excuse that they needed more time to prepare is a joke, these are some of the best lawyers in Israel, I am sure that they could have managed in the timeframe given them
I believe that Olmert did this for a number of reasons:
1. Olmert is trying to buy time. By delaying Talansky's cross-examination for almost 2 months he thought he would buy that time. His line of defense is now, give me time to defend myself. This has also pushed out any indictment and in Israel's legalized society what the Attorney General and the courts say goes.
2. It allows them to easily negate Talansky's testimony. All you hear from Olmert's camp is "just wait until we cross examine him" and "we have an answer for everything he said". They can say that now because they don't have to back it up for another month and a half. I am sure that his lawyers on cross examination will be able to refute some minor points and score some points. However, I am quite sure that the overall thrust of Talansky's testimony will not be impugned. Therefore, if they had cross examined him yesterday, they would have no defense. Everyone would realize that the Emperorer has no clothes. By delaying for a month and a half they hope that things die down and people forget what exactly Talansky said.
Luckily, it seems that Olmert miscalculated. The fallout from Talansky's testimony has been overwhelming and will most likely not allow Olmert the time he so desperately wants.
I believe that Olmert did this for a number of reasons:
1. Olmert is trying to buy time. By delaying Talansky's cross-examination for almost 2 months he thought he would buy that time. His line of defense is now, give me time to defend myself. This has also pushed out any indictment and in Israel's legalized society what the Attorney General and the courts say goes.
2. It allows them to easily negate Talansky's testimony. All you hear from Olmert's camp is "just wait until we cross examine him" and "we have an answer for everything he said". They can say that now because they don't have to back it up for another month and a half. I am sure that his lawyers on cross examination will be able to refute some minor points and score some points. However, I am quite sure that the overall thrust of Talansky's testimony will not be impugned. Therefore, if they had cross examined him yesterday, they would have no defense. Everyone would realize that the Emperorer has no clothes. By delaying for a month and a half they hope that things die down and people forget what exactly Talansky said.
Luckily, it seems that Olmert miscalculated. The fallout from Talansky's testimony has been overwhelming and will most likely not allow Olmert the time he so desperately wants.
Wednesday, May 28, 2008
The legalization of politics
With regards to Olmert, all everyone is talking about is the legal process. Olmert doesn't deny that he took envelopes of cash, he just says it was legal. This is a byproduct of the judicial dictatorship that rules Israel. The judges have the final word on everything, they decide whether government decisions are reasonable. Therefore, everyone has come to think that if something is legal there is no problem, it is ethical and moral. Because of this everyone is saying let's wait and see if he is indicted.
Unfortunately, this is completely false, Something can be perfectly legal but unethical and immoral. As the Ramban famously says at the beginning of Parshas קדושים, one can be a נבל ברשות התורה. I am waiting for someone, anyone, to get up and say I don't care whether he is indicted, I don't care if it was legal, the PM of Israel should not be taking cash in envelopes from rich Americans. It is unethical and he needs to go. If any President of the US was in the same situation, he would be out the door in a few days. Everyone in America would understand that the legality of his actions is irrelevant, a leader can't do that. Unfortunately, this kind of accountability and ethical sense is completely missing from Israeli politics.
Unfortunately, this is completely false, Something can be perfectly legal but unethical and immoral. As the Ramban famously says at the beginning of Parshas קדושים, one can be a נבל ברשות התורה. I am waiting for someone, anyone, to get up and say I don't care whether he is indicted, I don't care if it was legal, the PM of Israel should not be taking cash in envelopes from rich Americans. It is unethical and he needs to go. If any President of the US was in the same situation, he would be out the door in a few days. Everyone in America would understand that the legality of his actions is irrelevant, a leader can't do that. Unfortunately, this kind of accountability and ethical sense is completely missing from Israeli politics.
Tuesday, May 27, 2008
Something I really don't understand about the Olmert - Talansky case
Forget about bribery. Olmert admitted to getting envelopes of cash, he claims for election purposes. Aren't there laws in Israel regarding campaign contributions? I am 99% sure that the simple fact of hiding them and not recording them is a violation of the law. In addition, Talansky is claiming that he gave Olmert money for personal expenses like business class seats, hotel rooms, expensive cigars etc. Again forget about bribery, what about taxes? All of these things are taxable and Olmert "forgot" to report them. Again I am sure that Olmert violated a number of tax laws by accepting the money and not reporting it.
How can anyone think that Olmert will not be indicted? What am I missing?
I understand that bribery sounds a lot better and makes a much sexier case, but remember, Al Capone went to jail for income tax fraud.
How can anyone think that Olmert will not be indicted? What am I missing?
I understand that bribery sounds a lot better and makes a much sexier case, but remember, Al Capone went to jail for income tax fraud.
Thursday, May 22, 2008
The so called "negotiations" with Syria
In an interview to the London-based daily Al Hayat, Syrian Foreign Minister Walid Moallem reiterated on Thursday Syria's demand that Israel fully withdraw from the Golan Heights. Moallem said, "Syria cannot progress even one step forward in negotiations before it receives assurances that Israel will fully withdraw from the Golan Heights. This is not a precondition, it's Syria's right."
What a joke. So what exactly are we negotiating? Withdrawal from the Golan Heights is a fait accompli. Where did Olmert and company learn to negotiate? Why say we are going to need to make painful concessions? I don't hear the Syrians saying that. What exactly are we going to get from this? Who wants a cold peace with a Syria which has practically melded its foreign and military policies with Iran? The Golan has been peaceful for 40 years what exactly is a peace treaty with Syria going to change? Does anyone really believe that Syria will abandon Hamas and Hizbullah and stop trying to take over Lebanon?
It is just amazing that anyone with half a brain can support this.
What a joke. So what exactly are we negotiating? Withdrawal from the Golan Heights is a fait accompli. Where did Olmert and company learn to negotiate? Why say we are going to need to make painful concessions? I don't hear the Syrians saying that. What exactly are we going to get from this? Who wants a cold peace with a Syria which has practically melded its foreign and military policies with Iran? The Golan has been peaceful for 40 years what exactly is a peace treaty with Syria going to change? Does anyone really believe that Syria will abandon Hamas and Hizbullah and stop trying to take over Lebanon?
It is just amazing that anyone with half a brain can support this.
Some things never change, Shas is staying in the government
This is amazing. Eli Yishai the head of Shas said the following:
"It is forbidden to negotiate with the axis of evil and certainly to abandon the Golan to the axis of evil," Yishai told reporters.
How exactly does this fit in with yesterday's dramatic announcement of peace talks with Syria? It is Shas and only Shas that is keeping the government alive. Olmert right now has a coalition of 64 MK's, if Shas leaves he only has 53 and the government falls.
Of course Eli Yishai made the following statement as well:
"At the moment when we see that there is real danger of giving the Golan to the axis of evil, Shas, of course, won't be in the government. We are constantly evaluating whether we should remain in the government."
When is that going to be? 5 minutes before they actually sign the peace treaty? The damage is already done, every minute that Shas stays in the government is just allowing Olmert to cause more and more harm.
So why is Shas staying in the government? Very simple, Olmert is bribing them. This time is is 286 new settlement homes in Beitar Illit, a Haredi "settlement" in the West Bank.
"It is forbidden to negotiate with the axis of evil and certainly to abandon the Golan to the axis of evil," Yishai told reporters.
How exactly does this fit in with yesterday's dramatic announcement of peace talks with Syria? It is Shas and only Shas that is keeping the government alive. Olmert right now has a coalition of 64 MK's, if Shas leaves he only has 53 and the government falls.
Of course Eli Yishai made the following statement as well:
"At the moment when we see that there is real danger of giving the Golan to the axis of evil, Shas, of course, won't be in the government. We are constantly evaluating whether we should remain in the government."
When is that going to be? 5 minutes before they actually sign the peace treaty? The damage is already done, every minute that Shas stays in the government is just allowing Olmert to cause more and more harm.
So why is Shas staying in the government? Very simple, Olmert is bribing them. This time is is 286 new settlement homes in Beitar Illit, a Haredi "settlement" in the West Bank.
Wednesday, May 21, 2008
Peace talks with Syria now?
Is anyone surprised by the timing? A day after the Supreme Court rules against him and allows Talansky to testify next week, the day when the court imposed gag order expires, Olmert makes a big announcement that Israel is negotiating with Syria using Turkey as a go-between.
Even a left winger like Shelly Yachimovitch sees this announcement by Olmert as desperation move to save his job:
MK Shelley Yachimovich (Labor) called the announcement a "meaningless spin," saying that Olmert was using the declaration of negotiations to try to steer public attention from the corruption scandal embroiling him.
"Olmert is cynically trying to fool decent, peace-advocating citizens to deflect attention from the cash envelope," she said.
We saw the disaster that happened when Sharon acted out of desperation to keep himself in office and out of jail, hopefully it won't happen again.
This statement sums it up best:
כעומק החקירות, כך עומק הנסיגות
Even a left winger like Shelly Yachimovitch sees this announcement by Olmert as desperation move to save his job:
MK Shelley Yachimovich (Labor) called the announcement a "meaningless spin," saying that Olmert was using the declaration of negotiations to try to steer public attention from the corruption scandal embroiling him.
"Olmert is cynically trying to fool decent, peace-advocating citizens to deflect attention from the cash envelope," she said.
We saw the disaster that happened when Sharon acted out of desperation to keep himself in office and out of jail, hopefully it won't happen again.
This statement sums it up best:
כעומק החקירות, כך עומק הנסיגות
Monday, May 19, 2008
Why does the Torah prohibit lending money with interest?
In last week's parsha (בהר) we have the prohibition of lending money to a Jew with interest. The question is why? At first glance we can ask why should money be any different then anything else? After all, I can rent out a house, car, tools, etc. Any possession I have I can rent out for money so why not my money? Interest is really rent for the usage of money.
There are a number of different approaches.
1. In בהר we have many mitzvos that are socio-economic, shemitta and yovel for example. These mitzvos come to teach us that ultimately everything belongs to Hashem and therefore for example, land goes back to it's original owners during Yovel. The prohibition of interest is coming to emphasize this point. You can't rent out your money because it is not really yours, rather it is Hashem's on loan to you. Hashem only gave it to you to use to serve him. Therefore the Torah prohibits interest.
2. R' Hirsch explains in Parshas Mishpatim that the prohibition of interest makes for a more fair society. When capital can only be used for investment or to pay for labor and cannot be used to just make more money, the gap between rich and poor becomes smaller. This also aligns the interest of the capitalist and his workers as money is used to pay the laborer. R' Hirsch is clearly coming to answer Marx's Communist Manifesto which was written in his lifetime.
3. Money is fundamentally different then other things. When I rent out my car, house, etc. the use of the object causes a loss in value. Even if the renter returns the object in perfect condition, the object devaluates simply because it was used. In addition, the price of commodities fluctuates. If I rent out my house for a year, at the end of the rental it may be worth less simply because prices dropped. Because you have the possibility of loss (the use devaluates the object and the value can go down), the Torah allows you to take payment in return to compensate.
Money however, is different. Money does not lose value through use. In fact, when you lend money the borrower generally pays you back with different money. In addition, the Torah views money as never changing it's value. Money doesn't fluctuate only commodities change values. Therefore, when I lend you money there is no risk of loss. At the end of the loan you will pay me back the same amount that I lent you. It is worth the same amount. Therefore the Torah does not allow you to charge rent for your money.
It is fascinating how due to the exigencies of life this prohibition has been basically wiped off the books. The Heter Iska although technically not interest but rather an investment, basically allows us to borrow and lend money with interest. The Heter Iska is clearly a circumvention of what the Torah wanted.
There are a number of different approaches.
1. In בהר we have many mitzvos that are socio-economic, shemitta and yovel for example. These mitzvos come to teach us that ultimately everything belongs to Hashem and therefore for example, land goes back to it's original owners during Yovel. The prohibition of interest is coming to emphasize this point. You can't rent out your money because it is not really yours, rather it is Hashem's on loan to you. Hashem only gave it to you to use to serve him. Therefore the Torah prohibits interest.
2. R' Hirsch explains in Parshas Mishpatim that the prohibition of interest makes for a more fair society. When capital can only be used for investment or to pay for labor and cannot be used to just make more money, the gap between rich and poor becomes smaller. This also aligns the interest of the capitalist and his workers as money is used to pay the laborer. R' Hirsch is clearly coming to answer Marx's Communist Manifesto which was written in his lifetime.
3. Money is fundamentally different then other things. When I rent out my car, house, etc. the use of the object causes a loss in value. Even if the renter returns the object in perfect condition, the object devaluates simply because it was used. In addition, the price of commodities fluctuates. If I rent out my house for a year, at the end of the rental it may be worth less simply because prices dropped. Because you have the possibility of loss (the use devaluates the object and the value can go down), the Torah allows you to take payment in return to compensate.
Money however, is different. Money does not lose value through use. In fact, when you lend money the borrower generally pays you back with different money. In addition, the Torah views money as never changing it's value. Money doesn't fluctuate only commodities change values. Therefore, when I lend you money there is no risk of loss. At the end of the loan you will pay me back the same amount that I lent you. It is worth the same amount. Therefore the Torah does not allow you to charge rent for your money.
It is fascinating how due to the exigencies of life this prohibition has been basically wiped off the books. The Heter Iska although technically not interest but rather an investment, basically allows us to borrow and lend money with interest. The Heter Iska is clearly a circumvention of what the Torah wanted.
Sunday, May 18, 2008
בה"ב and פסח שני
This year we have a relatively rare occurrence, the last day of בה"ב falls out on פסח שני. The question is what takes precedence? The Minhag in EY seems to be that פסח שני takes precedence and you simply skip the last day of בה"ב. Interestingly enough when בה"ב falls out on Yom Haaztmaut those who say Hallel say both Selichos and Hallel.
Thursday, May 15, 2008
Ashkelon Rocket Attack launched from what used to be Dugit
To all of those disengagement supporters what do you say now? The disengagement was supposed bring security and yet, now Ashkelon is under rocket fire from the very Jewish towns that were evacuated. Can anyone in their right mind still think that the disengagement was a success? Will any disengagement supporters apologize?
Why are you turning into a schnorrer?
This is the question the Jonathan Rosenblum asked a Charedi Yeshiva Bachur who was trying to hitch a ride for a few blocks. The answer was, מקובל, it is accepted practice.
In his latest column (in Hebrew) in the Mishpacha magazine, Jonathan Rosenblum talks about his encounter with a Yeshiva Bachur who was trying to hitch a ride a few blocks.
His point was that today's Yeshiva Bachur has no compunction and feels no shame to take things for free even if he could do it himself. He points out that the idea of נהמא דכיסופא (literally free bread), which means that Hashem put us on this world so that we could earn our עולם הבא so we wouldn't be embarrassed by being נהנה מזיו השכינה for free, is a completely foreign concept to today's Yeshiva Bachur.
The only point I disagree with him on is that he blames it on Israeli Socialism. IMHO this is just not true. The same attitude can be found in American Yeshiva Bachurim as well. When your whole lifestyle is predicated on you sitting and learning and someone else supporting you (in style), of course you can't understand נהמא דכיסופא, it is a contradiction to your whole lifestyle.
In his latest column (in Hebrew) in the Mishpacha magazine, Jonathan Rosenblum talks about his encounter with a Yeshiva Bachur who was trying to hitch a ride a few blocks.
His point was that today's Yeshiva Bachur has no compunction and feels no shame to take things for free even if he could do it himself. He points out that the idea of נהמא דכיסופא (literally free bread), which means that Hashem put us on this world so that we could earn our עולם הבא so we wouldn't be embarrassed by being נהנה מזיו השכינה for free, is a completely foreign concept to today's Yeshiva Bachur.
The only point I disagree with him on is that he blames it on Israeli Socialism. IMHO this is just not true. The same attitude can be found in American Yeshiva Bachurim as well. When your whole lifestyle is predicated on you sitting and learning and someone else supporting you (in style), of course you can't understand נהמא דכיסופא, it is a contradiction to your whole lifestyle.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)