Responding to Reckless and Inaccurate Palestinian Propaganda

Friends:

 **First -- my apologies for my absence... my real job and real life have kept me fairly busy this fall, and I have been shifting my preaching style to more interactive, less texted forms.**

 **Second -- what follows is VERY long... I know. And I am sorry. But when people who should know better just pass along crap about the Middle East without checking it, or concern for the impact of the lies and inaccuracies, the "Big Lie" must be shot down... and then usually cannot be done quick and easy...**

 **Third -- I am NOT sure what is happening with the formatting here... I hope this last edit has fixed the paragraphs, but just in case, I am setting off MY paragraphs (as opposed to those from the article being critiqued) with beginning and ending "**" **

   **I have copied the “article” below, without consent, off a site called “AlterNet.org.” I have done this so that MY readers can see the bs that is being claimed as fact by this a$$clown. A note to Mr. Cole and the owner/operator(s) of AlterNet.org -- PLEASE come and try to attack me legally for this unauthorized copying, because, I promise, if you do, you will find yourself on the receiving end of multiple suits for libel and reckless endangerment, as well as wire fraud. Not a threat, an iron clad promise.**

 **To my chagrin, this "article" was posted to facebook by my friend, John Rouse, once a respected journalist, but these days, seemingly reduced to using the internet as I suspect that Henry Fonda’s character in “On Golden Pond” would have – to generate enough discussion that the alerts that someone has commented on something he posted would give him constant feedback that he is, in fact, still alive, and in John’s case, still relevant.**

 **John Rouse the newspaper editor would NEVER have allowed an article like this to run in his newspaper – the number of factual errors and examples where unsubstantiated opinion is presented as fact is egregiously large. Yet, in his new internet ambassador role, John simply comments after posting “I just found the piece interesting. Readers can make up their own minds. There was stuff in there I never knrw. [sic]” [note: He DID ix that typo later on.]**

 **The comment shows how far John has fallen – not only could he not be bothered to correct his obvious typo, but his lack of responsibility is painfully typical of how too many REPORT the “news” on facebook – simply passing along, not bothering to fact check. A side note to John: did it ever occur to you that the reason you "learned" so much stuff from this article that you had never heard before was because most of this article was pure, opinionated b.s., with little or no basis in fact or reality???**

 **So here, as a public service to John, and to others who might easily be taken in by this a$$clown, Juan Cole, and his lies, is a BRIEF, seriatum, fact check. [yes, I KNOW it is long... trust me, if I had the time or energy to waste on schooling this moron, it would have been MUCH longer!] Please note – the wide margins are from the original, the brown represent hyper-links to Mr. Cole’s alleged sources (which sadly did not translate over to this forum), many of which are, to a trained eye, on first blush, even more spurious than his own conclusions… my insertions will be obvious, marked with ** and indented.**

Informed Comment / By Juan Cole
Top 10 Myths About Israel's Attack on Gaza

     **The classic propagandist’s trick… accuse the other side of exactly the sin you know yourself to be committing. In this case, passing off myths as truth.**

These misconceptions are spread by the American media.

     **An even more outrageous and ironic twist of the knife, as the reason many people will be taken in by this crap is because exactly the opposite of what is being claimed here is true – the Western media (American included) has been guilty of under-reporting, especially when it comes to the real origins of the current (or any) fighting from the terrorists’ side.**

November 19, 2012 |

1. Israeli hawks represent themselves as engaged in a ‘peace process’ with the Palestinians in which Hamas refuses to join. In fact, Israel has refused to cease colonizing and stealing Palestinian land long enough to engage in fruitful negotiations with them.

     **It is true that SOME Israeli governments, have, historically, been guilty of allowing settlers to squat on land that is not legally theirs, or even, in earlier days, allowed the building of new settlements on unowned land in the West Bank. It is also true that THIS current Israeli government, has approved similar development of unowned land, which has been, and continues to be a deterrent to getting new peace talks started with Abbas, not Hamas. In fact, no Israeli, hawk or dove, will allow Hamas, identified by most Western nations that still have any sense of a moral compass, as a terrorist organization, to come to the table, until they denounce terror, cease rocket attacks, and clearly and unequivocally accept Israel’s right to exist as a free country in peace. The stalled peace process is with Fatah, over the West Bank – Israel unilaterally pulled out of Gaza in 2009. Gaza is where Hamas forces its will on the native Palestinian population. Having pulled out in 2009, Israel cannot possible be colonizing or stealing land – she is not a physical presence in Gaza until the unending rocket assaults from Gaza force her to send in troops to protect her citizens. Tel Aviv routinely announces new, unilateral house-building on the Palestinian West Bank.**
        **Routinely? See above. House-building? ROUTINELY, when settlers unilaterally ignore Israeli laws designed to prevent such actions, the Israeli Supreme Court rules against them, and requires them to stop and retreat. That the government is ROUTINELY incapable of forcing the settlers to abide by Israeli law simply is sad proof that ALL cultural and religious groups have their extremists who believe the law does not apply to them, usually because they claim to be doing “God’s work.” All such extremists are an impediment to peace. And, please don’t get me started on the quality of this “source,” although Reuters, unlike Mr. Cole, at least accurately limits the areas of such claims to areas completely divorced from what is happening in Gaza.**

There is no peace process. It is an Israeli and American sham. Talking about a peace process is giving cover to Israeli nationalists who are determined to grab everything the Palestinians have and reduce them to penniless refugees (again).

        **I almost don’t know where to start on this one. The first sentence is correct. While even I will admit that both sides bear the responsibility for this truth, there is no way that it is a 50-50 split. When virtually every third party who has attempted to bring peace agrees that “the Palestinians never miss an opportunity to miss an opportunity,” the breakdown starts to become clear. While it would help if the Netanyahu government would make a better overture, and take fewer actions that can be interpreted negatively by Palestinians (again, all almost exclusively in the West Bank, not Gaza), it is also clear that the situation on the Israeli side is a direct result of the previous failures to achieve peace, which are virtually all at the feet of Palestinian intransigence, and the lack of desire to settle for a 2-state solution.**
       **“Talking about a peace process” is an attempt by the world to push the parties towards the table. It is NOT, nor can it be, a cover to anyone, unless the admission here is that one party has no use for peace… and let’s be clear which party is holding out for a ONE-state solution (hint – NOT Israel!).**
       **And again, can we talk about the rhetorical inconsistency and stupidity inherent in the claim that Israeli nationalists “are determined to grab everything the Palestinians have…” after a) unilaterally leaving Gaza, and b) constantly making overtures to Fatah to come to the table…**
       **And again the propaganda tricks in “reducing them (the Palestinians) to penniless refugees (again)”… who made them refugees in the first place? NOT the Israelis (at least not for MOST of them… see below). Who KEPT them in refugee camps rather than resettling them from 1948 – 1967. Not the Israelis – these people were living in Jordan and Egypt! When did the standard of living RISE for Palestinians? After 1967, when Israel’s pre-emptive and defensive war succeeded beyond anyone’s wildest dreams! Who abdicated responsibility for return of these people to the PLO, even as they made plans to fight for the return of the lands they were on? The Arabs, not Israel – in fact, in 1970, both Jordan, and to a lesser degree, Syria, forced Palestinians OUT of their countries out of fear that they would destabilize things, which is how Arafat came to be based in Tunisia! And where has the world’s significant aid to the Palestinians disappeared since Arafat shook hands with Israel on the White House lawn? Too much of it was deflected into the pockets of Arafat and other Palestinian leaders, leaving the people Palestinian people in need. If you want to claim they are victims, I am fine with that… just blame the real villains for victimizing them…**

2. Actions such as the assault on Gaza can achieve no genuine long-term strategic purpose.

       **Sorry -- where is the "myth" here?! Mr. Cole jumps right into his Pallywood inspired propaganda shrieking on this one!**
       **Opinion, and inaccurate at that, because it precludes any possibility of military success. That is NOT the position of an unbiased reporter, but of a Hamas sympathizer, who KNOWS that weapons caches are routinely stored in the basements of hospitals and schools, launchers placed in the middle of densely populated neighborhoods, and children used as human shields by armed Hamas soldiers and their proxies… all of which make the likelihood of a total Israeli military success in completely wiping out the installation that routinely launch rockets indiscriminately into sovereign Israeli territory slim at best. But such a total success WOULD BE a “genuine long-term strategic” victory.**
       **12000 rockets from Gaza into Israel over the last decade. Indiscriminately. But Israel drops one bomb, more carefully targeted than is required (or achieved) by ANY other military, and how quick Hamas is to cry foul… **

They are being launched to ensure that Jewish-Israelis are the first to exploit key resources.**

      **Again – what resources? This is Gaza, which has virtually no natural resources to speak of, besides 1.7 potential victims for Hamas to use and exploit. And an interesting rhetorical flourish here, that links Israel and Jewish… and in the process, exposes the REAL animus and bias of the “reporter.”**

Rattling sabers at the Palestinians creates a pretext for further land-grabs and colonies on Palestinian land. That is, the military action against the people of Gaza is a diversion tactic; the real goal is Greater Israel, an assertion of Israeli sovereignty over all the territory once held by the British Mandate of Palestine.

        **OMG – if this wasn’t so damned slanderous, it would be amusing for its stupidity, its inaccuracy, and its creative selection of the LEAST reputable source available to back his point. Further land grabs? Again – Israel LEFT Gaza… the OPPOSITE of land grab. Israel built (lamentably, but understandably) a separating wall between herself and the West Bank Palestinian population, to make terroristic incursions from that territory far more difficult. “Diversion tactic”? One side of the conflict has, consistently, over the last decade, used negotiations and cease-fires as a diversion… to give themselves time to re-arm, recoup, and make new plans for attack. And again, that side has been Hamas, NOT Israel. Trust me, if the goal was a “land grab” to create a “Greater Israel,” Israel would have done so long ago, and no Hamas or Palestinian effort would have stopped them. Who gave back the Sinai in return for peace? Israel. Who unilaterally left Gaza? Israel. Who has tried repeatedly to return most of the West Bank in return for a meaningful and sustainable peace? Israel. “Land grab”? Get real! And Israel has NEVER established “colonies” – in territory won in 1967 or anywhere else – since her independence was declared.**

3. Israeli hawks represent their war of aggression as in ‘self-defense.’ But the UK Israeli [note: in Mr Cole's original, Israeli is struck thru] chief rabbi admitted on camera that that the Gaza attack actually ‘had something to do with Iran.’

       **It was launched after yet another escalation in rocket fire from Gaza. That is not only self-defense, but it is LEGITIMATE self-defense. Clever use of the cross-thru to imply a cabal between Britain and Israel… except virtually every spurious article this clown brings to support his absurd arguments has a British source, which is far closer to the current political reality, at least as applies to the British media.**
       **And it is clear that the Israeli response DOES have “something to do with Iran,” since Iran is the source of the rockets currently being fired from Gaza that have now brought Tel Aviv and the outskirts of Jerusalem into range, increasing the number of Israeli citizens in target range from 1 million to almost 3 million.**

4. Israeli hawks demonize the Palestinians of Gaza as “bad neighbors” who don’t accept Israel. But 40% of the people in Gaza are refugees, mostly living in refugee camps, from families in pre-1948 Palestine that had lived there for millennia.

        **Again, the skillful and deliberate blurring of history… many families have roots in what was originally called Philistia by the Romans, to punish the Jews for their rebellion in 135 CE, but was not again called Palestine, even informally, until modernity, and not formally defined until the League of Nations broke Palestine out from the former Ottoman Empire and awarded Great Britain the Mandate for its oversight in 1920. Some of the families that can make that claim are even Jewish! However, there is no indigenous people who can claim an ethnic or cultural identity called “Palestinian.” It simply did not exist as an entity, at least not until the Arab countries exacerbated the refugee problem created during Israel’s War of Independence (the ONLY such war in modern history, btw, in which the country declaring independence was attacked by neighbors intent on making her disappear), when the majority of refugees CHOSE to leave their homes at the request of the attacking Arab armies, who wanted them out of the way so they would not be impeded in their presumed march to “push Israel into the sea.” When that did not happen, the refugee “problem” was created, and the failure of the surrounding Arab countries to normalize and settle the refugees amongst their own population created what is today referred to as the “Palestinian people.”**
       **Amongst those whose families voluntarily vacated and became refugees was Mahmoud Abbas himself. In recent days, he has publicly and clearly expressed that he would like to visit Safed, the city his ancestors vacated, but he has no claim on returning there to live.**
       **Bottom line, however, whatever the origins of the people currently living in Gaza, that does not excuse their inability to elect leaders who will recognize Israel’s legitimacy, or work to bring a peace that would help citizens on both sides. Neighbors who allow rockets to be launched from their territory into the country next door can hardly be seen, credibly, as anything but poor neighbors!**

They were expelled from what is now Israel in the 1948 Zionist ethnic cleansing campaign. Israelis are now living in their homes and farming their land, and they were never paid any reparations for the crimes done to them.[pdf] “Israel’s failure to provide reparations to Palestinian refugees over the past six decades is in blatant violation of international law.” Israel does not accept Palestine’s right to exist, even though it is constantly demanding that everyone, including the displaced and occupied Palestinians, recognize Israel’s right to exist.

      **On top of the clear evidence above, the opinions sited in these articles are, at best, minority opinions. Every framework towards a permanent peace agreement has made clear that the final resolution to the return question must be negotiated by the parties. Any serious attempt at reaching a negotiated agreement will require compromise and creativity from both sides – for the Palestinians to expect Israel to accept a stipulation that would, on demographic grounds, obliterate her character as a “Jewish state” is the logical equivalent of admitting that they really don’t seek a meaningful peace agreement. And again, see Abbas’ statement about his own personal “claim” to return as evidence that those who refuse to compromise on this issue are creating an invented excuse, designed to be used as a tool against Israel rather than a negotiating position.**

5. Israeli hawks and their American clones depict Gaza as a foreign, hostile state with which Israel is at war. In fact, the Gaza strip is a small territory of 1.7 million people militarily occupied by Israel (something in which the UN and other international bodies concur). Israelis do not allow it to have a port or airport, nor to export most of what it produces. Palestinians cannot work about a third of its land, which is reserved by Israel as a security buffer. As an occupied territory, it is covered by the Hague Regulations of 1907 and the Fourth Geneva Convention of 1949 on the treatment of occupied populations by their military occupier. Indiscriminate bombing of occupied territories by the occupier is clearly illegal in international law.

     **Now Mr. Cole has gone off the deep end, and is REALLY becoming offensive to anyone. “Israeli hawks and their American clones”?? Seriously? In fact, the US, and much of Europe, define Gaza as a disputed territory, whose ultimate resolution is still to be defined in negotiations, currently being ruled by Hamas, a recognized terrorist organization, with a clearly stated agenda to utterly destroy her neighbor, Israel. It is certainly foreign to Israel. It is clearly in a continuing state of belligerence towards Israel, defined by over 12000 rockets sent from Gaza into Israel at civilian targets – a clear violation of international law and every meaningful morality of western civilization.**
       **Whatever its size or population is irrelevant to the state of belligerence its government continues to foster, whether the UN and other international bodies concur or not.**
       **Militarily occupied? Again, do I have to repeat the argument? Israel unilaterally withdrew all forces. THERE IS NO MILITARY OCCUPATION!! Bring as many “witnesses” as you want - water will still be wet, the sky will still be up, and the sun will still “rise” in the east no matter what witnesses may claim to the contrary. Israel has NOT prevented the current elected leadership of Gaza from creating port or airport. I WOULD expect that, if Hamas had attempted such an effort, Israel would have done everything legally possible to blockade the effort, as there is already a steady stream of weapons entering the territory illegally, and to allow more would be a legitimate threat to her security. There is no credible evidence for the claim about preventing exports. Exporting products would add to Gaza’s economy, increasing her stability, which would be to Israel’s benefit, which is why, despite the continued state of belligerence a) Israel has encouraged foreign economic help for Gaza, and b) Israel is the leading conduit for humanitarian aid entering Gaza (NOT Egypt, as would be otherwise expected. In fact, when Israel pulled out, significant amounts of agricultural equipment were left behind, to assist the Gazan economy. That equipment has all been destroyed and repurposed to military usage by the Hamas regime.**
       **The claims about Israel’s incursion into “a third of [Gaza’s] land” for a “security buffer” are pure fabrication and antilogical, given that final borders of Gaza remain to be negotiated, if a legitimate leadership ever fulfills the necessary prerequisites to negotiations listed above (beginning with recognition of Israel’s right to exist, and cessation of rocket fire).**
       **And, since Israel has withdrawn troops from the area, the claims of Geneva convention violations must no longer be relevant, but that doesn’t stop Mr. Cole and other propagandists from repeating them as part of their “Big Lie.” As has been demonstrated, here, and elsewhere, multiple times, Israel's carefully targeted, multi-fail-safed targeting of strictly military targets in Gaza is hardly “Indiscriminate,” as Mr. Cole claims in raising his false Geneva Conventions claim. This moves from farcical propaganda to offensive irony in light of the completely indiscriminate and premeditated rocket fire that provoked Israel’s response.**

6. Israeli hawks see themselves as innocent victims of bewildering Palestinian rage from Gaza. But Israel not only has kept Palestinians of Gaza in the world’s largest outdoor penitentiary, they have them under an illegal blockade that for some years aimed at limiting their nutrition without altogether starving them to death. I wrote earlier: “The food blockade had real effects. About ten percent of Palestinian children in Gaza under 5 have had their growth stunted by malnutrition. A recent report [pdf] by Save the Children and Medical Aid for Palestinians found that, in addition, anemia is widespread, affecting over two-thirds of infants, 58.6 percent of schoolchildren, and over a third of pregnant mothers. “ If any foreign power surrounded Israel, destroyed Haifa port and Tel Aviv airport, and prevented Israeli exports from being exported, what do you think Israelis would do? Oh, that’s right, it is rude to see both Palestinians and Israelis as equal human beings.

     **Most of the blame for any accuracy in these claims (which is suspect at best), must go far more to the Hamas oppressors in Gaza than to any perceived continued oppression at the hands of a withdrawn Israel. The fact that the (fiction) author here quotes something he himself wrote earlier as “evidence” can hardly inspire confidence in either factuality or accuracy to his claims.**
       **Despite the totally gratuitous closing statement of this point, which, to any rhetoretician or anyone seeking truth about this subject, would disqualify the entire content as the biased opinion it is, allow me to answer his rhetorical question which precedes it… when that actual scenario DID play out in spring of 1967, Israel first appealed, through proper diplomacy, to the United Nations, to end the blockade peacefully. When that failed, Israel took the legal and moral step of launching a defensive and pre-emptive strike, which became the victory of the 6 Day War. In other words, instead of launching immediately into attack, or whining and claiming victim status, Israel, at all stages, acted responsibly, and took military action only as a last resort. So, thanks for asking!

7. Israeli hawks demonize the Palestinian residents of Gaza as followers of Hamas, a party-militia of the Muslim religious right. But half of Palestinians in Gaza are minors, who never voted for Hamas and cannot be held collectively responsible for that party.

     **A big, ironic LOL!! Again with the meaningless phrase “Israel (sic) hawks.” Clearly, the intent of the repeated, undefined refrain is to cast Israelis as hawks, or at least a portion of them.  However, the propaganda effect is a) to keep undefined what portion of Israelis are being blamed -- is it just hawks, the government, the entire population?  and b) to blur the lines.  Compare this to my VERY deliberate distinction between Hamas actions and impact on Palestinians in Gaza.  THIS is the difference between spouting propaganda and hiding behind rhetorical tricks to avoid acknowledging a lack of factual evidence, and reporting facts and data.**
     **Some in Israel do, in fact, demonize. Most, however simply call what they see. In the last elections, more Palestinians living in Gaza voted for Hamas leadership. No demonizing, simple and accurate reporting. Some even recognize the possibility that most Palestinians are every bit Hamas’ victims as Hamas hopes to make Israelis. NO Israeli defines Hamas as above – that is actually closer to Hamas' fatuous self-definition. Recognizing that he has failed to make any of his preceding 6 points effectively, the author now seeks to exempt the majority of the population from responsibility from Hamas – not by accurately blaming Hamas and distancing themselves, but rather, by spurious legal technicalities. Unlike Hamas, Israelis would never seek to blame minors for anything to begin with. Collective responsibility is a Hamas tactic, not an Israeli one.**

8. Israeli hawks justify their aggression on the Palestinians on grounds of self-defense. But Israel is a country of 7.5 million people with tanks, armored vehicles, artillery, helicopter gunships and F-16s and F-18s, plus 400 nuclear warheads. Gaza is a small occupied territory of 1.7 million which has no heavy weaponry, just some old guns and some largely ineffectual rockets. (Israelis cite hundreds of rockets fired into Israel from Gaza in 2012; but until Israel’s recent attack they had killed not a single Israeli, though they did wound a few last March when fighting between Palestinians and Israelis escalated.) Gaza is a threat to Israel the way the Transkei Bantustan was a threat to Apartheid South Africa. As for genuine asymmetrical threats from Gaza to Israel, they could be dealt with by giving the Palestinians a state and ceasing the blockade imposed on them, or in the worst case scenario counter-terrorism targeted at terrorists rather than indiscriminate bombing campaigns.

     **Aww – once again the world’s smallest, and most hypocritical, violin plays the martyr song for Palestinians in the absence of legitimate debate. The idea that the rockets fired on Israel are inaccurate enough to have killed anyone in Israel until the recent escalation is here used as PROOF that Hamas innocent of any provocation? What have they done to prevent their towns and cities and homes from being used as military sites to target (however ineffectually) Israeli civilians? Nothing – either because they themselves have been bullied by Hamas, or because they support the actions. At this point, no matter how much I WISH the former to be the case, the evidence does not support a firm conclusion either way.**
      **And then the truly offensive slander begins. The comparison to apartheid era South Africa, no matter how attractive to some, or how useful as propaganda, simply fails the test of accuracy and fact. 12000 rockets killed that analogy! The claim of asymmetrical threats is another deliberate inversion of reality – admittedly indiscriminate targeting of Israeli civilians responded to by carefully limited and targeted singling out of military personnel and installations is truly asymmetry. The Israeli withdrawal was designed to allow Gaza to demonstrate its readiness and willingness to achieve peace and statehood – her failure to do so must lie 100% at the feet of Hamas exclusively. To claim that what is Israel is ACTUALLY DOING would be sufficient if only Israel did it is the height of sophistry.**

9. Israeli hawks maintain that they were provoked into the attack. But actually Ahmad Jabari, the Hamas leader the Israelis assassinated earlier this week, had been engaged in talks with the Israelis about a truce. Assassinations achieved by the ruse of openness to peace talks are guarantees of no further peace talks.

     **The world is still waiting for the definitive evidence on this claim about Jabari. Mr. Cole cites the ONLY article making this claim that has been published to date. The Ha’aretz author had ample reason to self-promote and fabricate his claims in the article for his own advancement and self-aggrandisement. In addition, if such negotiations WERE going on, Israel’s military censor almost assuredly would have shut the story down, at least until after the cessation of hostilities. The overwhelming body of multiply proven and confirmed facts on the man is that he was responsible for Gilad Shalit’s abduction, he was the leader of Hamas’ military arm, and he was the architect of the rocket strategy. The fact that he was targeted and killed in his car makes unlikely that the Israelis used a “pretext” of negotiation as a ruse to expose him to the attack.**

10. Although most American media is a cheering section for the Likud Party,in fact the world is increasingly done out with Israel’s aggressiveness. Boycotts and sanctions will likely grow over time, leaving Israeli hawks with a deficit…

       **Again, where is the myth here? The only one that I see is the one HE has invented about the leanings of the American media, one which flies in the face of the empirical evidence.**
       **Huh? Has this moron actually read American media coverage of Israel, before and during this conflict? And what myth is he exposing here (or for that matter, in most of his screed?)?**

       **Bottom line, refuting the “Big Lie” takes far more effort and ink than making it, and this case is no exception to that truth. If the author has any sincere desire to bring peace, he would do better to shut up, or at least learn the difference between fact and fiction.**

Juan Cole is a professor of history at the University of Michigan and maintains the blog Informed Comment.

        **If this is accurate, it is truly a blot on academia. I certainly hope his efforts in areas he has actually studied or knows anything about are presented to students more professionally and without bias than is demonstrated here.**

        **Please -- do NOT give this idiot any more credibility that he does not deserve on his own. I have written this blog SOLELY for the purpose of being to post the link on Mr. Rouse's wall, to serve as an antidote to the real damage such reckless reposting of such foolish propaganda spouting can create. Please do NOT send your friends her to "learn the truth." We who support Israel, peace, and the truth are far better served by simply continuing to get the real facts out there, not by reposting crap like this and risking giving it traction by our attention.

There's Got to be a Morning After -- my response to Paul Ryan

I know, it happened again, despite my promises and my best efforts... I slacked off... But the Holy Days are coming, time to gear up again... and after last night, I just needed to work some things through, and get clear on what was really concerning me. On the off chance you just might actually read this AND agree, I share with you now... The “Truthiness” Problem A Moderate Rabbi’s Response to Paul Ryan Those of you who know me, (I hope) know that, while I can (over)react when provoked, as a rule, I try really hard to be measured and careful in my responses and in my use of language. We live in a time in which too many are too careless with their words, and in the process, remove meaning, or cause harm, and make it harder for us to effectively communicate with each other. I also try to be sensitive to the use of hyperbole, to make sure that my choices -- of words and examples -- are not only accurate in content, but do not inadvertently raise the argument to a level that it could not attain on its own, and does not deserve. Such careless rhetoric not only fails to effectively make the case the (mis)user is attempting to make, it weakens the status of the example for future usage. Babe Ruth was a unique phenomenon of a physical specimen and athlete; every misguided attempt to call the new phenom “the next Babe Ruth” weakened his historical standing. But what I try to be most careful about is telling the truth. Call me old-fashioned. Call me a fuddy-duddy. I don’t care. As a Rabbi, a Jew, and a human being, I see what the Nazis were able to do in their propaganda war, with what they themselves referred to as “The Big Lie,” and I am not allowed to forget. The sacredness of the memory and lesson of the Holocaust is profound. It is not something to be taken lightly, or for granted. So when political campaigns become so separated from the truth as to take one’s thoughts in the direction of comparison to the Nazi propaganda machine, by even the smallest baby-step, it is clear that we have an issue. One which can no longer be allowed to continue to slide by, unacknowledged. And it is nothing new. In the very first episode of his “news show,” Stephen Colbert felt the need to coin a new word to describe the phenomenon. But don’t take my word for it… here is the beginning of the entry on that word from Wikipedia (I know, I know, but note the refreshingly less-than-positive self-reference in the piece!): “Truthiness is a quality characterizing a "truth" that a person claims to know intuitively "from the gut" or because it "feels right" without regard to evidence, logic, intellectual examination, or facts.[1] “American television comedian Stephen Colbert coined the word in this meaning[2] as the subject of a segment called "The Wørd" during the pilot episode of his political satire program The Colbert Report on October 17, 2005. By using this as part of his routine, Colbert satirized the misuse of appeal to emotion and "gut feeling" as a rhetorical device in contemporaneous socio-political discourse.[3] He particularly applied it to U.S. President George W. Bush's nomination of Harriet Miers to the Supreme Court and the decision to invade Iraq in 2003.[4] Colbert later ascribed truthiness to other institutions and organizations, including Wikipedia.[5] Colbert has sometimes used a Dog Latin version of the term, "Veritasiness".[6] For example, in Colbert's "Operation Iraqi Stephen: Going Commando" the word "Veritasiness" can be seen on the banner above the eagle on the operation's seal. “Truthiness, although a "stunt word", was named Word of the Year for 2005 by the American Dialect Society and for 2006 by Merriam-Webster.[7][8] Linguist and OED consultant Benjamin Zimmer[2][9] pointed out that the word truthiness[10] already had a history in literature and appears in the Oxford English Dictionary (OED), as a derivation of truthy, and The Century Dictionary, both of which indicate it as rare or dialectal, and to be defined more straightforwardly as "truthfulness, faithfulness".[2] Responding to claims, Colbert explained the origin of his word as, "Truthiness is a word I pulled right out of my keister …." The fact that both the American Dialect Society AND Merriam Webster BOTH recognized it as “Word of the Year” speaks volumes to me. What it says is that, no matter how much the coinage may have been meant to be satirical, it struck a chord of truth and accuracy in the ears of the listening public in a way that no other effort had previously succeeded in doing. Fast forward to Paul Ryan’s acceptance speech last night. In the interest of full disclosure, I am a registered Democrat. I registered, so that I could vote in primary elections. A more honest evaluation of my political philosophy is that I am, and strive to be, a true moderate. I have voted for candidates of both parties, because I believed in them. I have no problem calling either side out when I believe they have crossed the line. I voted for Obama in 2012, and proudly announced that it was the first time I was voting FOR a presidential candidate in my life, and not against his opponent. Although I have not been impressed by what he has been able to achieve in his first term of office, I am not blind to the fact that he has done far more than he is generally given credit for, nor to the truth that a deliberate effort by a totally ineffectual Congress bears the bulk of the blame for the failures. As a moderate, I honestly believe he has been neither as good or successful as his campaign is claiming, nor as bad as his opponents would have us believe him to be. He will most likely receive my vote again in this election (although I do not make public endorsements as a rule, and reserve my right up until the moment I pull the computer card out of the machine to change my mind). But this time, it will be as much or more a vote against his opponent as it will be a vote of confidence in him. And, in large part, that inability to consider supporting the Romney/ Ryan ticket is rooted in the severe truthiness problem that appears almost every time someone from that campaign opens their mouth. Sure, the Republican platform is loaded with extremist stances that turn my stomach. I respect the right of any citizen to disagree with my opinion – THAT is democracy. I also respect their right to make their opinion known, to work for it, and to act upon it. They are doing so. What I cannot, and will not abide, however, are words spoken with a deliberate attempt to convey one message, while either their actions, or the historical record clearly say something different. I am not concerned that Mitt Romney has flip-flopped on issues throughout his political career. So has every other good politician. Times change. So do circumstances. Therefore, I question someone who stays tied to a position that has already grown obsolete. I AM concerned that in this election cycle, neither party has shied away from making statements that they either do or should know to be factually untrue. And I am particularly concerned about one party’s seemingly clear choice to choose truthiness over truth, without much, if any, subtlety. I share the following from a reposting by a friend of mine, Abbie Banks, on Facebook earlier today: “Audrey O'Dea said --->>> "Normally I wouldn't be posting Fox News' take on anything. But this time I am, as a display of how badly Paul Ryan lied in his speech. The fact that Fox is calling out the GOP VP pick for his untruths, shows how bad it must be. "Greatest number of blatant lies slipped into a single speech.””” That pretty much sums up my disgust by midday the morning after. And here is the ironic part – it didn’t need to be this way. As this post from my friend, Julie Silver, also on Facebook earlier today so eloquently makes clear: “"Late last night, after the speeches were finished, David Axelrod went into his bedroom closet, closed the door and to a bunch of clothes on hangers, delivered the perfect GOP keynote that could topple President Obama. His speech hit all the incumbent's weaknesses, all the stress points with jujitsu accuracy. He offered tough criticisms and thoughtful solutions. And it was all based on the President's record. He did it without a single lie. Then when he concluded, he breathed a sigh of relief that wasn't the speech that Ryan gave. Not even close. Then he stepped out of the closet, leaving behind a rack of pressed suits who could turn the tide of history if only they could speak." -- Nell Scovell” The bottom line is that Paul Ryan, like so many others on the Tea Party, right-extreme of the Republican Party have foolishly done before him, took his eyes off the prize. They are so busy attacking Obama, demonizing him, vilifying him, attempting to drive him from office, that they forgot to look at what might be the best strategy to actually get their candidate elected!! Stretching the truth, at times outright breaking it, in the era of the Internet and instantaneous fact-checking, is a losing strategy. By the end of Ryan’s speech, all the television pundits and the cyber community were buzzing, astonished at the number of demonstrably false statements Ryan gave in a single speech. At best, it was an example of lazy hubris which ought to render the man and his support staff ineligible, in the eyes of a thinking electorate, of surviving as a serious candidate. At worst, it was the Big Lie. There. I said it. Didn’t claim for sure that this was the intent, because I do not know that for sure. But I am willing to go there today, because I have no better way of expressing how outrageous this speech was. Quibble if you want over whether $716 billion dollars that Ryan lists as savings in his own Medicare Reform Plan are or aren’t “raiding” of Medicare when Obama does it (to pay for “Obamacare,” which is not yet a 4-letter word, despite far too much venom and effort spent to make it so). I am not sure whether that rises to the level of outright lie, or is just a hideous, if all-too-familiar, shading of language. Accuse your opponent, the incumbent, of walking away from the findings of a congressional committee trying to resolve budget issues. That makes good sense as a campaign strategy if you want to label him as weak in this area. However, when you were a member of that very same committee, and voted against its findings, you kind of lose the moral high ground when the rest of the story comes out, and you should. So maybe you should have picked a different argument. Again, not sure this reaches a level of deliberate truth avoidance, any more than the last example. Which, if nothing else, demonstrates how far we have already sunk away from honest debate. However, when you accuse the President of being responsible for the closing of an auto plant in the Midwest, and make a personal statement to attach yourself to that community, you really need to make sure that the President was in office at the time the plant closed. And last night, Paul Ryan gave us a flat out lie on this one. The plant he was describing closed in 2008. Obama took office in 2009! Honest mistake? Possibly, but if it is, it is a huge and bad one. The type for which multiple heads should roll. The type which makes you look foolish enough that reasonable people might reconsider their support for you. However, given the context of the man and the campaign, it stretches disbelief to see it as anything but a deliberate lie. This is all highly troubling on its own. Coming as it does in the midst of a moment in history in which the richest 1% in our country are both being demonized as never before, but also appear to be making the most blatant power grab in American history, coming from the party whose platform makes clear their support for and from that 1% at the expense of the middle class, it becomes far more troubling. I will not go into how I come to the rather paranoid sounding conclusion I am about to draw in this blog (if I continue to see it happening, I will in a subsequent one, I promise), but, if allowed to continue unchecked, this growing outright class warfare will eventually force an American confrontation between democracy on the one hand and capitalism on the other. Reread that statement as many times as you need to for its significance to sink in. And then try to refute it. Please! I want to be wrong about this. I just don’t believe any longer that I am. And there is one more troubling element in all of this. There appears to be a deliberately growing “information gap” being displayed and expoited here as it is in many other elements of our daily life. Sure, the talking heads on television, during and immediately after Ryan’s speech, were falling all over each other trying to come up with the greatest volume of truthiness gaffes. They were talking to the same remarkably small, self-selecting portion of the population that chose to watch the speech themselves, and heard the same lies and half-truths with their own ears. And yes, the internet has been abuzz last night and all day today with new and old tidbits (and isn’t it eerily silent from the camp that one would expect should be supporting Mr. Ryan’s words?). But again, this is material that all but the same political junkies are generally ignoring. However, in the “mainstream” commercial media – the morning television news shows, the all-news radio formats, most of the nation’s newspapers, the places where most of America still get their "news," there was a glaring omission in much of the coverage. Many talked about how the speech “energized” the convention. Precious few talked about the problems of honesty the speech had. And therefore, those who blissfully ignored the speech itself, who won’t bother to read a transcript or follow on-line discussions about it, may never know that a candidate for Vice President outright LIED to the American public in a brazen attempt to make his opponent look bad, and to get himself elected. And therefore, some of these folks, who, if they did know, might be moved to change their mind about his fitness as their candidate, may never be given the opportunity to do so. THAT failing of the mainstream media is just as dangerous, just as glaring as the either unwillingness or inability of Paul Ryan to give a speech last night that was honest and truthful. In the words of the folk song from the 60’s, “There’s battle lines being drawn… nobody’s right if everybody’s wrong…” If we cannot rely on candidates to care about the truth, cannot count on the mainstream media to raise the red flag and report such breeches clearly to us, then we have little choice but to see them as on a side not our own. We cannot afford to all be wrong, especially in a battle in which there will be no winners....

A "Social Experiment"

The founding premise of this blog was that, while it would primarily serve as a posting outlet for my sermons and other written materials, it would also, from time to time, be a source for other material that I found thought provoking or significant.

Today, I ask you, my friends and readers, to join me in a "social experiment." And, I admit, up front, this is not up to the laboratory standards for such an undertaking, and in many ways it is contrary to Jewish teachings that I hold dear. But, in the afterglow of yet another powerful MLK celebration yesterday (thank you County Executive Baker and my fabulous clergy colleagues), and in the middle of an even more rhetorically divisive presidential campaign, I think I need the reality check I am seeking with this effort.

The experiment seeks to do two things, simultaneously. First, I am seeking to get as bias-neutral a response as possible to the quote below. Secondarily, I am trying to judge how pervasive the bias of labels, names, and organizations can be in a world in which we are still far from the dream of judging "by the content of character" and merit. It is for these reasons that I am NOT sharing either the original source of the comment, or the source from which I received it -- yet.

Here are the rules:

1. Read the quote below. If you recognize either the speaker, or any organization that has been spreading the quote on-line, please disqualify yourself from public comment either here or on my facebook page, but feel free to send me your private reaction to AskRabbiSteve@verizon.net .
2. Without doing any research at all, simply decide whether you agree or disagree, and post a response either here or on my facebook page (since I have over 1000 contacts there, and probably under 50 here directly, I am running this through both places to increase traffic -- I will coordinate the response from both places), that simply says "agree" or "disagree."
3. Please do NOT (yet) broaden the responses on either discussion stream beyond a simple "agree" or "disagree."
4. If you cannot wait until next week for me to post both the results, and the sources, feel free, only after responding as above, to search out the speaker and the spreader of the quote. If you do, and are willing to share honestly how, if at all, that additional knowledge changes your opinion of the quote, I would be most curious to receive your thoughts -- again, for the sake of the experiment, privately, via e-mail.
5. After I post the results of the experiment, we can then have the fully contextualized debate on the merits.

Thanking you in advance, and hoping for a fascinating response :) Here is the quote:


“Democracy demands that the religiously motivated translate their concerns into universal, rather than religion-specific, values… it requires that their proposals be subject to argument and amenable to reason.

“Now, I may be opposed to abortion for religious reasons., to take one example, but if I seek to pass a law banning the practice, I cannot simply point to the teachings of my church, or invoke God’s will. I have to explain why abortion violates some principle that is accessible to people of all faiths, including those with no faith at all.”

A Look at the World in the New Year Thru the Eyes of Torah

This past Friday night's sermon was more of a magnum opus than a mere preaching. As some of the side notes suggest, rather than taking on the usual intro the Torah portion, read the text, preach model, this Torah service acted as a single item, with intro and sermon intertwined amongst multiple aliyot to the Torah, which were presented in different modalities. As the text indicates, this allowed a couple of seemingly unrelated "sermonettes" to be offered on different sections of the text, and then, in the end, to have all the material come together to reinforce powerfully a single message. What follows is the spoken text, including the breaks where the Torah text was read...


Vayechi – (Chazak)
Tying Up Loose Ends, Celebrating Life With Joy and Blessing
An Experimental Torah Reading and Explication
Rabbi Steve Weisman – Temple Solel, Bowie MD – January 6, 2012

Tonight, I want to shake things up a little. After all, it is the start of a new year, what better time to try some changes out. But more than that, I want us to embrace one of the many powerful teachings from the Mishnah that even we, as Reform Jews, should and do take to heart. Rabbi Eliezer taught, in B’rachot 4:4 – If a man makes his prayers a fixed task, it is not (genuine) prayer. If we let our worship become too familiar, too stale, we lose its energy, its vibrancy. It ceases to be joyful – so why should we do it?! We need to maintain comfort… but every now and then, we also need to shake things up, if for no other reason than to keep ourselves honest, and, as we shall see, to allow ourselves to be joyful.

So tonight, I want to try out a new model for Torah reading – ironically, with a Torah portion with which we have experimented before. And the model is based on the classic tale from Eastern Europe of Rabbi Judah Loew of Prague and the Golem. Rabbi Loew, a 17th century scholar and religious leader, originally created the Golem, a mud man, as a helper and a guard. According to legend, Rabbi Loew animated the Golem by inscribing the Hebrew word “emet” on its forehead. When secular authorities attempted to destroy the Jewish community, the Golem became their defender, and staved off the anti-Semitic attacks. Eventually, Rabbi Loew was convinced by the authorities that there was no further need for the Golem, in return for which, as a sign of goodwill, he de-animated the Golem, by erasing the silent aleph from its forehead, leaving the word “met” – which means death.

A powerful story, and one which lives on still – some see it as the basis for Shelley’s Frankenstein. Others, including some Nazi occultists, searched for the body of the Golem during World War II, in vain (think Indiana Jones!). But a story whose wisdom lives on as well. In a commentary to the classic story, the power of the word emet – usually translated as “truth,” a pretty good animating key itself – was explained by pointing out that the word is made up of the first letter of the aleph-bet, the middle letter, and the last letter.

It is THAT wisdom that animates tonight’s experiment for me. Rather than a long introduction of the portion, a reading from the sefer Torah, and a long sermon after that, I want to combine the reading and the explaining. And, since I want to read from the beginning, middle, AND end of the portion tonight, for different reasons, it seemed like a good night to try this. If nothing else, we are giving ourselves an excuse to call extra participants to the Torah, and an opportunity to hear different pieces of Torah presented in different ways – each of which is always, by itself, a good thing!

And so, to begin… our portion is Vayechi… the last portion of Genesis, the conclusion to the Joseph saga. When we are finished, as is the tradition, we will join together and say “Chazak, chazak v’nitchazeik,” the words by which we acknowledge the completion of another book of Torah for another year. But this is more than mere formula, more than mere mantra. These are words with an actual, albeit difficult to translate, meaning. They acknowledge that we are blessed to be the recipients of words of Torah, of Divine Instruction, which bring meaning and understanding into our lives. But they also acknowledge that we strengthen ourselves and each other when we come together, as congregation and extended family, to the Torah, and make a place for these Divine Instructions in our lives. And they further acknowledge that we need to leave a little behind, and return a bit to the Torah, so that next year, and 100 years from now, those who come to these words will equally find strength in them.

In that tripartite understanding of the meaning of these three repetitive sounding words, we also have a synopsis of what this portion, Vayechi, is about. Taken as a whole, it is about endings. We begin with Jacob making plans for his own end, and getting everything in order for the future. And we end with Joseph’s death in Egypt, leading to the transition to Moses and the Exodus story.

And in the process, we not only learn powerful lessons about what matters in the big picture, or at least what should, but we also get a framework for looking at ourselves and evaluating what matters.

And so we begin, at the beginning. Genesis 47:28 - 31. And we call…

Traditional Torah chanting. Fitting for the message of these verses, as we value the beauty of Jewish tradition. Jacob is looking death square in the eyes. He sees that he is not where he needs to be. He is in diaspora, not safely at home. So he calls upon Joseph, his beloved son, the one he entrusted years ago with checking on his brothers’ well-being, the one who had risen in position to ruling over all of Egypt, with Pharaoh, and the one who was responsible for Jacob being in Egypt in the first place.

He puts the responsibility on Joseph to make sure that when he dies, Joseph will take him and bury him in the familial burial cave at Machpelah, back home. Joseph, loving and responsible son, promises. But that is not enough, and Jacob makes him swear a vow, in the same traditional manner that Abraham made his servant swear not to take Isaac from the land when finding him a proper life partner.

Ironically, it was Jacob who, when his most beloved wife, Rachel, died in childbirth on the journey home, FAILED to do exactly this for her, and buried her instead along the road where she died. Maybe the guilt from this is the motivation that leads him to insist that Joseph take an oath.

For us, tonight, I compare this to a litmus test for whether we are what we think we are. This was Jacob’s way of making sure that what he thought he had taught and stressed in his life would be respected in his death, and remain as his legacy. For us, are we really that welcoming community that is safe and available and open to all… truly, in the words of Micah, a “people’s house.” Are we doing all that we can to welcome the stranger, the newcomer, and make them one of us? Is our welcoming embrace as strong for those who may be a little different from us in any one of a number of ways – skin color, approach to Judaism, marital status, religion, age, physical condition, personal gender or sexual identity, financial status, and so many more – as it is for those who we know immediately are “just like us”?

I watched two remarkable videos go viral on You Tube this week. The first was the story, spoken in notes on index cards, rather than with her voice, of a young Jewish teenage girl, who had just “come out” to 200 of her peers at a NFTY Winter Kallah that she was gay. She found unconditional love and support at a regional Reform Jewish youth event that, in her own words, she has yet to find with her own parents (although I have to suspect that if they did not already know, they may have seen her video by now!).

The second video, in exactly the same medium of index cards, and starting with exactly the same language as the first, was no less remarkable. It was a response to the first video, from the young woman who had been this girl’s “big sister” at this event, who honestly admitted that before the event, she usually felt uncomfortable around gay women. When her “little” came out, however, she felt nothing but pride, and the same unconditional love for her, and made the second video to ask others to help her create a world where all of those like her little would feel loved and valued.

Friends, on this night of checking ourselves through the prism of Torah, theses two videos filled me with a strength and a pride that I do not often get to feel. Our young people get it – we do not need to make them swear an oath to keep our values alive. In fact, they have much to teach us about how we put our values into actions. Chazak, indeed. May they continue to have and show that strength, and share it with us!

For our second aliyah, beginning at Genesis 48:13 (and continuing thru verse 20), we call…

Our more familiar “read and translate” model here. Again, befitting a portion in which the clear message of the text is making sure that proper understanding is transmitted. Jacob having taken care of the details of his own burial, now seeks to make sure his worldly possessions and values are preserved after his death. He begins by having Joseph bring his two sons, Manasseh and Ephraim, to be blessed, and adopted by Jacob, their grandfather, so he can pass the double portion of his inheritance to Joseph by giving a portion to each of them. Knowing his father is old and frail, Joseph brings the boys before his father, and positions them so Jacob can easily place his right hand on Manasseh, the first born.

But Jacob deliberately crosses his arms, to place his right hand on the younger, Ephraim, where it stays throughout the blessing. Only AFTER Jacob completes the blessing, does the text tell us that Joseph tries to correct his father. Jacob, in turn, makes clear that he knew what he was doing, and makes clear to Joseph that for eternity, all Jewish sons shall be blessed through Ephraim and Manasseh – the very same blessing we still use to this day to bless our sons on Shabbat and other Jewish holidays!

Powerful messages for us here as well. Many of us participated live in Shabbat worship at the Biennial. Many others participated on Shabbat evening by coming here, and praying along as the service was streamed live and projected on our walls in this sanctuary. Still others participated over the computer in their own homes. Many have commented to me already about how powerful and meaningful they found the worship. I am happy to hear it, but like Jacob, who had to be glad to hear Joseph vow to bury him back home, we know that there is still more we must do.

What was it that made the experience so powerful and meaningful? Each of us may have a different answer to that question. For me, it was the sound of so many voices, joining together in word and melody, reaching out for God and towards each other. It was the ru’ach, the spirit of the melodies, as much as the words (maybe even moreso). It was the willingness of people to respond to that ru’ach not only with their voices, but with their whole selves, as many, at several moments, got up to dance spontaneously around the room while praying.

And even as I say this, I know that there are likely to be some of us in this room tonight for whom each of those items felt strange or out of place. To be sure, a big part of any such feelings of discomfort was assuredly a lack of familiarity with such behavior, a sense that it was different from what we expected, or needed, or are accustomed to seeing. But a sense of propriety can also explain the reticence of some to dancing during worship, every bit as much as a new melody for the Hashkiveinu can be off-putting to those hearing it for the first time, every bit as much as the wall of sound created by 5000 worshippers might not resonate so positively for someone used to worshipping in a group of 35 – 50 souls, particularly after a long, loud, difficult week.

But here is my bottom line, and it is another of the lines coming out of Biennial and playing out in my e-mail, and in the postings on-line of my colleagues across the country. We need to make ourselves comfortable reclaiming joy, and insisting on finding joy in our worship experiences. Yes, we all come into the sanctuary, in the words of the prayer, with different needs. But the truth is, the vast majority do not come into the sanctuary at all! And they do not because they find it dreary, they find it unattainable, they find it unappealing. So why make the effort?

While there are many good answers to these concerns that we could give them on an academic and theoretical level, because their hearts are not engaged, our words will fall on deaf ears. If we learn anything from the lessons of the Hasidic masters, up to and including the amazing Rabbi Shlomo Carlebach z”l in our own day, let it be the value of prayer experience that is first and foremost joyous! Let us embrace the desire to participate, in the words of V’Ahavta, with all our hearts, our souls AND our might. Like Joseph responding to Jacob crossing his arms, let us find the value in something different – in finding joy for ourselves, and allowing those around us to find it as well – that might lead more of us to greater appreciation and involvement in the prayer life of our community. In that way, like Jacob’s blessing, we will truly be passing a blessing onto the generations that will follow us, and bring peace to our own souls! This, too, will be a source of chazak – now and in the future.

Third aliyah… Genesis 50:22 thru the end, after which we will join in “chazak.” We call…

The end, but not really. A point of transition, of changing books and direction. Presented in a new form, one that combines the best elements of the other two presentation models – and does so in a way that should be comfortable and familiar, because we have heard this English chanted here before!

Joseph grows old, and is blessed. His time nears to die, and like his father before him, he asks that his kin remember to treat his body with honor and respect. Unlike his own ability to leave and come back to bury his father, he has no guarantee that his family will be treated with the same respect, so he does not demand of them, as his father did of him, instant burial back home. Instead, he promises them that God will take note of them, and eventually allow them to return home, and asks them, at that time, to take care to bury him at home. A new model for a new time. The portion even ends with him being embalmed and placed in a sarcophagus in Egypt – about as non-traditional as we can get!

Not to beat a dead horse here, or repeat last week’s message, but I see here a POWERFUL affirmation of who we are and seek to be as Reform Jews. Those who find value in Torah, and Jewish law, and tradition, but not by following blindly the letter of the law, at the expense of losing its intent, not by ignoring the reality that we live in a larger world that changes often, and can also provide value and meaning for our lives.

Those who are not afraid to embrace new ideas, and different ways, to achieve the same desired ends, particularly when we can anchor those innovations in the tradition we have received from those who came before us. Joseph waited until his father completed the blessing to correct his crossed arms, out of respect. But he also saw that his reality was not the same as his father’s. He valued what Jacob valued, since he learned from his father. But his circumstances required a different response to reach the same end. He was willing to risk, trusting his family, his fellow Jews, and in God, that his end would be met appropriately, eventually. In the words of Pirkei Avot, “We are not required to complete the task; neither are we free to walk away from it.”

The foundation triangle of Judaism, from the time of Jacob and Joseph to today, has been defined by belief in God, embrace of Torah, and connection to the children of Israel. Even today, when some Jews question God, it is still the Jewish God we question. When we ignore Jewish law in our daily life, we know those laws still exist and are Jewish. But when we disconnect from our fellow Jews, we do not still have a safety net of connection in this way. The haredim who see us as treif, and we who see their actions harming Torah and not upholding it, are just one example of the difference at this corner of the triangle.

On this night when we have experimented with form, in the end, we have come around in the most traditional of ways, to a place where not only the words of Torah, but also their unorthodox presentation, have reinforced both the message of the text itself, anda w the message we take from it into our own lives. If the first two parts of Torah tonight can serve as chazak for us, then our goal should be to be able to say at the end of this experiment, “V’nitchazeik.” In the reflexive – where we provide for ourselves, or in partnership, for our partners.

May our Jewishness continue to reinforce all three corners of the triangle – bringing us closer to God, closer to the teachings of our Torah, and especially, closer to each other. May we find the solution to the Jewish familial lament “Why do we only get together for funerals – for better things next time.” May the choices we make as innovative modern Jews be based in the traditions we have received from our ancestors, strengthening rather than changing our Judaism. In that way, at the end of the day, we can honestly say, for ourselves and all Israel, “v’nitchazeik!” KYR

Responding to the Situation in Beit Shemesh

Note: My apologies for the sparsity of posts in 2011 -- a very productive but busy year in other parts of my life. I WILL be working to add in the missing sermons over the course of the next few weeks (so check the internal dates on those posts, and NOT the posting dates!), as well as making a better effort in 2012 to be timely in adding new material...


I Tawt I Taw a Torah Text!
Sermon for Parshat Vayiggash – December 30, 2011
Rabbi Steve Weisman – Temple Solel, Bowie MD

Tonight presents us with opportunities and challenges. It is rare that I would be absent from this pulpit for successive Shabbatot, except in summer. And in fact, events conspired to make sure that did not happen as planned, although not in a good way, and not in a way that allowed, or even obligated me to preach last Shabbat. So it has been 3 weeks since I had to prepare a sermon – actually 4, since that last service before Biennial was a family service, at which I tell a story rather than preach a sermon.

So, tonight was already going to be an evening with too many choices, too many opportunities for preaching. That during the hiatus, we celebrated both Chanukkah and Christmas, attended an amazing URJ Biennial, and more just adds to the possibilities. That tonight marks the last Shabbat of 2011 could easily spark a look back at the year in review.

But among the many remarkable and powerful lessons that I learned and affirmations I received at the Biennial, there was one that I wish to share with you tonight. It is the wisdom of a very wise young woman, shared with participants by her very proud father. This young woman, now becoming expert in the ways of various Rabbis as she attends the Bat Mitzvah services of many of her private school classmates (and, no doubt, a few Bar Mitzvah services as well!) across the area, gave her father, President Obama, the following advice before he addressed the Biennial: When in doubt, start with the Torah portion!

I have certainly tried to do that whenever possible over the last 23 years. Otherwise, I might have to question the Jewish validity of the message that I ultimately preach, no matter how central to my world view it feels or how obvious it seems. Rabbi Yoffie was correct when he taught us, early in his tenure, to keep Torah at the center.

And tonight we have a remarkable piece of Torah to focus our thoughts upon, perhaps one of the 5 most dramatic of the entire Torah. We read of the moment at which, overcome by his brother Judah’s plea to spare the life of Benjamin for his/their father’s sake, Joseph finally ends the charade and reveals his true identity to his brothers. His poignant words: It is me, Joseph; is my father really still alive?

Sometimes, as Jews, we focus so much on the obscure and the difficult passages, that we fail to learn the lessons of the obvious ones. I had the chance to study with Rabbi Marc Rosenstein at Biennial. Marc was my Confirmation teacher, the leader, along with Rabbi Yoffie’s younger brother, of my first trip to Israel. Now he directs HUC’s Israel Rabbinic program, teaching Israelis to be Reform Rabbis.

Over Shabbat lunch, he pointed out what happens AFTER the dramatic reveal. According to the text, Joseph sends his brothers home to tell Jacob/Israel that he, Joseph, is still alive; to let him know that the famine will continue for several years, but he, Joseph, can provide for the family, and they should come down to Egypt; and that all will be okay.

What Rabbi Rosenstein pointed out to us is what Joseph didn’t say and do. Namely “I need to see my father’s face with my own eyes, so I will come back with you, so he believes you.” 17 years later, when Jacob died, Joseph was allowed to do exactly this – leave to bury his father back home. If he could do it in death, why not in life? He could have gone back with his brothers, to make sure Jacob believed their report, to supervise the move to Egypt, and then returned to his responsibilities and position in Egypt with his family. He didn’t. He remained in diaspora, and brought the family to him.

L’havdil, tonight, I feel like I am doing a similar disservice to the text – dragging it to the level of my message, rather than paying full homage to its intrinsic messages for us by raising myself up to meet it. I am confident Joseph meant no disrespect to his father by not going up to see him personally to invite him to Egypt in order to survive the famine. Similarly, I mean no disrespect to a remarkable text in using it to lead into my real message tonight – even moreso, ironically, on the night when I have, for the first time, had the privilege of publicly asking birthday blessings for my father in his presence, having helped him to move here earlier in the year!

But what it appears we have here is a temporary myopia on Joseph’s part, an almost involuntary, if momentary paralysis. Yes, we know Jacob and his sons must come to Joseph in Egypt… both the dreams of Joseph’s youth and the future needs of the Biblical narrative – that we find ourselves in Egypt to be enslaved before we can be redeemed – require it. But he could have brought them down himself, rather than by sending a message with his brothers, and done no damage to the story.
I share that analysis because, I believe, it is essential to understanding a truly difficult and disturbing story that has jumped to the forefront of our awareness in recent days. I speak, tonight, about the abuse, at the hands of some haredi (Ultra-Orthodox) Jews in Beit Shemesh, of a 7- or 8- year old Modern Orthodox school girl for dressing and behaving “immodestly,” and the response to this abomination in Israel and here in America. And assuredly, to get from Torah to the depths of this story requires us to drag the Torah down to this level.

However, if we are honest, our gut-level revulsion at this story stems from exactly that truth… we see the behavior of this small group of fundamentalist, extremist religious thugs as dragging Torah, and all of Jewish law and life, down into the gutter. We see it as an utter perversion of the values of love and respect and tolerance that we claim to learn from OUR reading of Torah.

However, there is a deeper truth that we have also already acknowledged tonight that we learn from our Torah portion. For us, as liberal American Jews, to understand the behavior and motivation of a group of Ultra-Orthodox Jews living in Beit Shemesh, twice requires us to acknowledge that we live in a different world and therefore have a different world view than they do – first in our religious approach, and second in the larger cultural influence of America vs. Israel. In order for us to fully understand, or understand as fully as our sensibilities will allow, their behavior, which ought to be a necessary prerequisite to any effort on our part to speak out against it, we need to do what Joseph did not… make the journey to their world, in order to help them find their way to ours.

And this is extremely difficult, both because of the enormity of the differences between us and them, between here and there, but also because most of us are so turned off by such a story, that we have no desire to make the effort to try to understand those who would behave in such a way. We, many of us who mark our Jewishness first and foremost with the yardstick of social action, prophetic Judaism, the desire to bring tiqqun olam, cannot imagine any way that our religious tradition could possibly justify such inhumanity, such exclusion, such abuse. OUR tradition welcomes and honors; it does not degrade or render others powerless of second rate.

Yet, no matter how difficult it is for us to accept, those who are guilty of the inexcusable behavior in Beit Shemesh honestly believe that they are acting to UPHOLD that same Torah and tradition that we see them throwing in the gutter and trampling upon, acting to save Judaism, rather than subject it, and themselves, and us, to ridicule. It is the exact equivalent feeling experienced by peace-loving Muslims like our friends Khalil and Imam Dawud when they are forced to explain the abuses perpetrated in the name of Islam by al-Qaeda and other fundamentalist, extremist, terrorist Muslims, who practice an Islam totally different from their own. I get this, but I do not like it. And that is okay… sometimes in life, this is the best we can hope to achieve!

It seems clear to me, to us, that we need to stand up and say and do something. We need to make clear that THEIR Judaism is NOT our Judaism, for it is not. But honestly, we need to do more… because if all we do is make the distinction between them and us, then we are merely protecting ourselves from the claim of guilt by association. What we fail to do is improve an intolerable situation.

And the truth is that what is happening in Beit Shemesh is NOT an isolated incident. Ultra-Orthodox Jews across Israel are insisting on segregated buses, even after the Israeli Supreme Court has said they have no right to them, to the point of verbally abusing and assaulting a young Israeli soldier when she refused to move to the back of a bus in Jerusalem. They are refusing to participate in public ceremonies in which women are singing. They have been implicated in attacks on Arabs and on Israeli military installations in the territories. All in the name of Torah.

And their political leaders continue to hold seats in the Knesset and in Prime Minister Netanyahu’s Cabinet that protect them from investigation and punishment in many of these cases. This, despite many of their religious leaders’ refusal in part or in whole to recognize the legitimacy of the State of Israel, for the failure of Messiah to bring it into being. Yet these same leaders are more than willing to play the political system, extorting millions of dollars and major concessions about their lifestyle through coalition agreements calculated to allow the main parties to have their way in the areas they find most important.
In other words, the government of Benjamin Netanyahu has no real reason to resolve these issues with the Ultra-Orthodox, save the possibility that they might recognize the weakening effect they are having on Israeli society as a whole. In fact, they have strong motive not to act at all, letting these hooligans continue to subvert Israeli law, attack Israeli citizens, attempting to create a fundamentalist religious state, ruled by THEIR reading of Torah, and reinstituting a caste system in which we are all second class citizens compared to these haredim.

For several years, many of us have been preaching that there was already a cultural war being waged for Israel’s societal soul. And for those years, we have been subjected to responses that we sounded like Henny Penny, running around and proclaiming that the sky was falling. Tonight, I take absolutely no pride that events are proving that I, and we, have been correct all along. The revelation, not of Joseph’s true identity, but that of the Ultra-Orthodox in Israel, rather than creating unanticipated joy, brings continued and growing heartache.

It casts a larger shadow over other troubling issues as well. It now seems more likely that the recent effort at using the Internet to reach Israelis abroad and guilt them into coming home to Israel with a series of slick commercials may indeed have had a secondary goal – to delegitimize the Diaspora Jewish community’s voice in general. But where, not even a month ago, we would have been tempted to accuse Netanyahu himself of seeking that goal, as the American Jewish community in particular has become more questioning of government efforts (or lack thereof) toward a lasting peace, now it is clear that his haredi partners had as much or more to gain from delegitimizing the vast majority of Diaspora Jewry whose basis they reject completely.

This is why, during the Biennial, I had a rather remarkable conversation with our good friend, Doug Cotler. Remarkable, in that it had almost nothing to do with music, as most of our discussion naturally do. This one was about his growing frustration and concern that we cannot even talk about what is happening in Israel anymore, because the subject no longer unites us, but divides us. Without knowing he was doing so, he echoed language that I have used from this pulpit, comparing the situation in Israel today to what was happening here in the 1960s.

So, what can we do? It is complicated, but anything worth doing is worth doing right. First and foremost, we must continue to support the State of Israel, now more than ever. For those who say, again echoing the 60s, that the government must be supported unquestioningly, I remind us all that there was a legitimate counter-point to that approach, that believed that criticizing the government out of love and respect, with the hope of correcting the perceived mistakes, was equally valid, and in many quarters, seen as being more necessary.

With the outside world, we need to retain our vigilance, and continue to make positive statements in support of Israel. We need to object appropriately if and when the media use too broad a brush to paint the picture of what is happening in Israel, or compare the behavior of some Ultra-Orthodox Jews to attempts to impose Sharia law, even if we recognize the legitimacy of the comparisons. We need to continue to speak publicly of the values upon which the modern State of Israel was created, those enshrined in her Declaration of Independence, as well as those taught by our understanding of Torah, even as we work privately to insist that the government live up to those documents. We need to work to help her once again become “a light to the nations,” so that once again Torah may go forth from Zion, the word of God from Jerusalem.

But, we also need to learn from Joseph. We need to get up from the comfort of Diaspora, and go to see for ourselves what is happening in Israel. We need to deliver in person -- loudly, clearly, and positively – the message of American liberal Judaism, to an Israeli society that now more than ever, needs to hear that such a view of Judaism has equal or greater legitimacy and vibrancy than the only form with which they are familiar. We need to help them to see that the emperor is, in fact, morally naked, and in need of their help to become clothed.

That message cannot be preached effectively from overseas, or sent by messengers. It needs to be demonstrated by our example, delivered face-to-face in words that we will all understand, through relationships that will continue to feed the currently unresolved need in Israel for an alternative voice to the Ultra-Orthodox – one that is not purely secular. We are the ones who can best provide that message in this way. It is up to us to do so.

And with that, I wish you all a happy Sylvester. If you aren’t sure what that is, or why I do so, please ask me at the Oneg Shabbat! ☺ KYR

A New, Dangerous Behavior

The following is the text of a column I was asked to write for this week's Bowie Blade-News... I am NOT including the link to the video, deliberately, as it becomes a "how-to" guide for the curious... A must read for parents and grandparents with Halloween approaching...


Halloween is Coming – Parents (and Kids) Beware

As I watched the television news story that had been sent to me by a professional youth worker within our Reform Movement, my mouth hung open in disbelief. How could something like this be going on without my having the slightest inkling? After all, I have a college freshman and a high school freshman of my own. I spend most of my time off during the summer at two different summer camps, work with our own youth groups, teach our B’nai Mitzvah and Confirmation students. If teenagers are doing it, watching it, talking about, I am usually aware of it.

But there, in front of me, was the latest method sweeping through our teenagers’ world – the latest way to get alcohol past unsuspecting adults. And if I was unaware, what were the odds that most of the rest of our area was as well?!

Turns out, the odds were pretty good, as a couple of quick phone calls confirmed. My phone call to Chief Nesky, at the Bowie Police, revealed that the police are not only aware of this new phenomenon, but planning their own efforts to alert the public to the danger. But calls to other community leaders, PTSO leaders, fellow clergy, other parents, even to a local newspaper editor demonstrated the need for us to bring this information into the public square.

So now, here I am, writing this column, at David Emanuel’s invitation and request, to catch us all up. With Halloween coming. Without creating an undue panic. And without allowing this warning to become a spur to our young people to experiment and learn how to make their own potentially toxic treats. Sure – no pressure there!

Especially since the newest receptacles are those cute, colorful, rubbery little snack animals and shapes. They started as Gummi Bears ™, and have morphed into 100s of shapes in dozens of colors – all designed to attract kids’ attention and interest. They are everywhere – and often sold loose in candy stores.

Turns out, they are pretty good at absorbing alcohol – they don’t melt or lose their shape. Unless you get suspicious and hold them up to your nose, you are unlikely to smell the alcohol. A couple of handfuls will get you pretty close to the legal limit for driving. And you, your child or grandchild might not even be aware that the candies they are scarfing down have been tampered with!

Fortunately, to spike them in bulk requires them to be repackaged afterwards or distributed individually and unwrapped, although I am sure we will hear eventually of truly malignant souls finding other ways to endanger us with these candies.

Best advice? Same as we give and get every Halloween. Only accept candy that is unopened, that comes from sources we know and trust. This year, be particularly careful of these gummis. If your child or a friend suddenly starts eating a lot more of them, ask them to share, and sniff before eating, to check for alcohol. And look for those telltale signs of substance abuse.

I could write more. But to do so would risk encouraging copy cats, or to make the danger seem greater than it probably is. But our community has lost too many of our young people already, some to deaths that could have been avoided. And therefore, keeping quiet was not an option either.

Sad to say – but necessary. Be safe and smart this Halloween season. And make sure that those you care about most are made aware of this latest behavioral trend.

--Rabbi Steve Weisman is the spiritual leader of Temple Solel, the Jewish congregation in Bowie. He serves on the faculty of the Union for Reform Judaism’s 6 Points Sports Academy and Camp Harlam, and has twice been awarded life membership for his work with the North American Federation of Temple Youth.

Rejoicing with the Torah, and Gilad Shalit

The following were my remarks during Simchat Torah services last night. They are a refinement and expansion on my blog from yesterday, and I am indebted to the many who shared their thoughts on all sides of this complicated and painful issue who helped me to define my own.


Comments for Simchat Torah (for the start of Yizkor)
Rabbi Steve Weisman – Temple Solel, Bowie MD October 19, 2011

On Sukkot, we talked about Gilad Shalit. I promised that, if events played out the way they were supposed to, tonight would be a special night. And now, they have.

Maybe it was a good thing that I forgot to pick up the lulav and etrog, so that we could not wave them last week. Maybe we needed to wait to have our z’man simchateinu – our season of rejoicing – fully celebrated, until Gilad Shalit was free to celebrate with us. Certainly, as we begin to read Torah anew this year on this Simchat Torah, Gilad and his family begin to live their lives again anew. And so, as Sukkot ends with our celebration of Simchat Torah tonight, we wave the lulav and etrog now. [recite blessing, wave lulav and etrog]

After more than 5 years of being held hostage by terrorist kidnappers, Gilad Shalit is now free and at home. He was taken captive on the very first day of our last congregational Israel trip. Because of that, his kidnapping became personal. When our Israel committee offered the chance to purchase dog tags for us to wear, so that he would not be forgotten, I, like many of you, bought one. For almost 5 years, I have dutifully worn mine, anxiously awaiting the day that I could take it off, after his, hopefully, safe return.

And so, tonight, with great joy, I bring the celebration of Gilad Shalit’s freedom home to us, as I remove his dog tag from my neck. [remove tag]

But tonight is not only about rejoicing with the Torah, and at Gilad’s return home. For on that dog tag, there were the names of THREE Israelis, all hostages, the other 2 taken by Hisbullah from the north of the country. Sadly, both Ehud Goldwasser and Eldad Regev have already returned home. Sadly, because they were not as fortunate as Gilad – they did not return alive. Even as we rejoice for Gilad and his family, we must remember that pain of these losses that is still felt by the Goldwasser and Regev families.

And, we must also remember the pain being felt by many other Israeli families on this otherwise joyous day. For Gilad’s release did not come easily, and it did not come cheap. Almost 500 Palestinians, each convicted in Israeli courts of crimes as serious as involvement in terrorist acts and murder, were released yesterday as well, to allow Gilad to come home. Another 500+ will be released in the coming days. The victims of their crimes, and those victims’ families, now are forced to relive their pain and loss, because those responsible for inflicting unimaginable pain upon them have now been set free.

Some say the price of Gilad’s freedom was too high. And there is some truth in that. 13,509 Palestinians have been released in 9 exchanges over the last 54 years in return for only 16 Israelis. That is roughly 800 to 1! On the other hand, what price is too high to pay in order to see a son return home alive to his country, his home, his parents?

I choose tonight to look at the responses to Gilad’s release. In Israel, these families of the victims were free to file appeals to the Supreme Court, free to ask to have the release of some of the detainees stopped, and in the process, free to risk Gilad’s safe return. Some appeals were filed, but many chose not to file, putting aside their personal pain to allow a neighbor, a brother, to come home alive. The country debated and agonized over a difficult decision. The courts ruled. The prisoners were pardoned and released. The democracy worked.

In Egypt, before he could be turned over to the Israelis, before he was allowed the joyous reunion with his family, Gilad was forced to endure an ugly television interview, with an armed Hamas guard noticeably standing right behind him; forced to say that he hoped ALL Palestinian prisoners held in Israelis jails would soon be freed. The man, held not by a sovereign state, but by terrorists, denied due process or even visitors throughout his captivity, humbly did what his captors demanded of him. His interviewer claimed she was doing a fair interview, and said she was unaware of any coercion. No Egyptian official apologized for this last indignity. Even in Gilad’s release, the differences were stark and clear.

In Israel, an excited nation rejoiced at the return of one innocent man, and then, after he hugged the Prime Minister and his father, and humbly made a few public comments, allowed him to walk away quietly, to try to return to a normal life. Because to Israelis, the value of life goes beyond simply continuing to breathe. In the West Bank, Mahmoud Abbas, the allegedly “moderate” head of a wannabe nation, led crowds in a raucous celebration of the return of their “heroic freedom fighters.” This is the man with whom Israel is expected to negotiate for peace, who seeks independence for his country not through negotiated compromise and agreement, but rather by fiat at the UN. And in Gaza, a female suicide bomber, alive only by the grace of Allah that her bomb failed to detonate when she pushed the trigger, who, to the way of thinking of those who celebrated her release, failed in her mission, was not only welcomed home a hero, but she encouraged the children who gathered to praise her to follow her example! Again, the contrast spoke volumes. Israel mourned the cost of a single life – Palestinians celebrated the taking of lives, and sought to up the ante.

Golda Meir once famously stated that “Until they start to love their own children more than they want to kill mine, there will never be peace in the Middle East.” Rarely, if ever, has the enduring truth of that assessment been more obvious. A democratic state, seeking peace with her neighbors still, welcomed home a single kidnapped son, whose ransom they willingly overpaid, all while grieving anew their previous losses, and thereby demonstrated the importance they place on a life. A totalitarian regime built on violence and hate celebrated the wholesale return of her failed terrorists, lawbreakers and murders, and vowed to take more Israeli prisoners until all the Palestinians were freed, and in the process, celebrated death, and showed how much their own people are merely pawns to be sacrificed to achieve some narrowly defined “victory,” achievable only through the annihilation of another.

Let me make clear – despite these comparisons and criticisms, I want peace for the Palestinian people as much as anyone, and not merely because it is essential if Israel is ever to enjoy peace herself. The Palestinian people have the right to self-determination every bit as much as every other person on this planet. And therefore I mourn for ALL the victims of the terror – not just those who died or lost loved ones, but those who are kept from achieving their self-determination by their leaders’ callous use of violence and terror against innocent targets. Only a true and lasting peace that allows all people to live free from fear and with the dignity that comes with independence will achieve the end that I, and so many others, dream of. Only such a peace will allow the families of 1402 Israeli terror victims in the last 11 years [flip the poster over to be visible] to ever have any sense of order in the chaos and doubt that came, uninvited, with their losses. Only such a peace can allow Palestinians and Israelis to live freely.

Our liturgy on this night changes from the joy of summer, in praying for the dew of the dry season, to the gloom of the rainy season, while acknowledging that in that gloom come life-giving rains. Our celebration of Simchat Torah moves from our joy of dancing with the Torah to the painful memories evoked by Yizkor. So must our focus on this night change from the joy of celebrating the safe return of Gilad Shalit, back to the hard work of comforting the victims of those released and their families, redoubling our efforts to bring about that peace which will make the suffering end.

On this night we remember, and begin the work to allow both the shark and the fish that Gilad wrote about at age 11 to live in peace and safety together, not just in a child’s story, but in real life. Amen.