Monday, May 30, 2005

Betrayal!!!!!

The emotions are still raw. To think someone as morally directed like the President to assert that anything past the 1949 armistice lines between Israel and Jordan needs Arab approval shocks the senses. To sweep away Jewish claims to the Old City of Jerusalem, the graves on the Mount of Olives, Rachel's Tomb and the Cave of the Machpaleh with a wave of the hand redefines callousness.

The failure to recognize that throughout the generations, nearly two millennia Jewry has looked to the Land of Israel. The emotionally charged worship on Yom Kippur and the Passover Seder is punctuated by the declaration NEXT YEAR IN JERUSALEM! For President Bush and by extension the American government to ignore this belies at best ignorance or worst an anti-Semitism worthy of Ambassador Kennedy.

To think there are no Jewish voices speaking in the President's hear is unlikely the support Mr. Bush enjoyed within the Orthodox community was nearly unanimous. Mr. Bush's loyalty to friends is the stuff of legend, what happened?

The change in Arab leadership? Could Abbas" suit and proper grooming pass for civility? Or an embrace of the Western attitude toward compromise? Unlikely.

The question the administration must answer why the animus to Judaism? Why does there HAVE to be a 23rd Arab state and the Jews cannot have even one full place on the globe to call their own?
What

Monday, May 23, 2005

APained Cry

As this is being written interesting things are going on. Prime Minister Sharon is in the US to speak before AIPAC but has no political meetings planned. The Arab leader Abbas is visiting the White House. Yet it is the subtle actions of the First Lady that gives me pause.Ms. Bush is visiting Israel and made it her business to visit but Jewish and Arab institutions. Additionally, the First Lady wished to honor Islam, Christianity and Judaism by visiting various holy sites in Jerusalem. To honor Islam Ms. Bush visited the Temple Mount /Al-Aksa mosque area. In effect this would have the effect of recognizing Muslim dominion over the Temple Mount's surface. Ms. Bush in her capacity as First Lady is arguably expressing the United States' policy that it rejects Jewish historical connection to the Temple Mount and accept Islamic claim to judging holiest site.To be sure it is a leap to assert someone as decent as Ms. Bush could be cast as Anti Semitic nor could that be said about the present American administration. It stands to reason that the First Lady's itinerary was approved by the Israelis and they were apparently insensitive to what amounts to a denial of judging belief in the return to the Temple Mount with the Third Temple and MASHIACH that is the unbearable shame. As Hillel taught " If I am not for myself who will act on my behalf? "

Tuesday, May 03, 2005

Which Way?

It has been awhile so here is a new point to ponder. There is considerable debate about the nature of the US Constitution. There are those who argue that the document is living and breathing and so would be subject to each generation's reexamination and interpretation. The thought that the document which serves as the law of the land would be subject to zeitgeist would render the constitutional authority meaningless. After all with no baseline of standards how would the system of government and laws contemplated by the framers retain authority?

On the other hand to claim the language of the document means what it says and the text adequately blies the framers' intent is equally misguided. As anyone who watches an old movie or television program can attest, words do not always retain their meaning. Nor do attitudes, certainly the framers of the Bill of Rights who denied women the vote and at the very least tolerated slavery at the rate of 3/5 a human per person. Changed their perspective in subsequent amendments.
The Constitution is not a D-vine law with an eternal quality nor is it a malleable mass without shape or contour.
.