Fate and Destiny

I saw this as a comment on the Drybones blog and thought it was rather phenomenal, and deserved better exposure for people to see.

All due credit goes to Daniel Feiglin (dilogsys@inter.net.il), and I sincerely thank him for allowing me to publish it.

I'd like to know what everyone thinks about it...

"The quotation below is from an old Midrash, Psikta Rabati, Parshat Kumi Ori.The Psikta is a Midrash of uncertain date, but from the style and language, was written somewhere between 1800 and 1000 years ago. It is quoted in the Yalkut Shimoni of about the 13th century. There are those who hold that the Psikta is late Tana'itic document of the same period of the Midrash Rabba.

In the middle of an almost surrealistic vision of the redemption process, we find a hard-headed geopolitical analysis by an anonymous Rabbi Yitzchak, which if written 1800 years ago or "only" 1000 years ago shows a profound understanding of the major players in our region. In essence neither they nor their mentalities have changed. The only change over the last 1000-1800 years in the Middle East is the availability of cheap means of mass murder. The reasons for conflict whether water, territory, oil or religious fanaticism do not make any difference. Rabbi Yitzchak tells us that the outcome will be the same one way or another.

Let's take a look at it in more detail: (I have chosen a variant that is tense-consistent.)

אמר רבי יצחק שנה שמלך המשיח נגלה בו כל מלכי האומות העולם מתגרים זה בזה מלך פרס מתגרה במלך ערבי והולך מלך ערבי לאדום ליטול עצה מהם. וחוזר מלך פרס ומחריב את כל העולם כולו וכל אומות העולם מתרעשים ומתבהלים ונופלים על פניהם ויאחוז אותם צירים כצירי יולדה. וישראל מתרעשים ומתבהלים ואומרים להיכן נלך ולהיכן נבוא. ואומר להם בניי אל תתייראו כל מה שעשיתי לא עשיתי אלא בשבילכם מפני מה אתם מתייראים אלתיראו! הגיע זמן גאולתכם ולא כגאולה ראשונה כך גאולה אחרונה כי גאולה ראשונה היה לכם צער ושיעבוד מלכיותאחריה אבל גאולה אחרונה אין לכם צער ושיעבוד מלכיות

אחריה

For Israeli Hebrew speaking correspondents, the item speaks for itself needing little comment from me.

-----------------------------------------------------

I have translated the piece for English speaking corespondents. The translation is intended to be readable rather than literally accurate. My comments are in [square brackets].

Rabbi Yitchak said: In the year that the King-Mashiach is revealed, all of the kings of the nations of the world will be provoking one another. The king of Persia provokes the king of the Arabs, and the king of the Arabs goes to take counsel with the king of Edom. The king of Persia responds by laying waste the whole world. All of the nation of the world shake and panic and fall upon their faces and they are gripped in pains [as if] of childbirth. And Israel shakes and panics saying, "Where can we come, we can we go?" And I [G-d] say to them, "My children, do not fear; all that I have done I have done only for you sake. Of what are you afraid? Do not be afraid! The time of your redemption [Geula] has come. The final redemption will not be like the first redemption [from Egypt] for the first redemption was followed by suffering and subjugation to [foreign] kings, but the final redemption will not be followed by suffering and subjugation to [foreign] kings.

The wording is somewhat clumsy but otherwise quite clear.

Let's look at it In modern terminology:

The coming of the Mashiach, or our redemption (in whatever political system of leadership we have) is presaged by a state of mutual conflict and provocation between the nations of the world - they cannot agree about anything. The king of Persia is now the ruler of Iran (the modern day successor of the Persians, territorially, in language and probably in race). The ruler of Persia "provokes" the Arabs by trying to "Iranize" the Islamic Jihad against the non-Islamic world. The largely dictatorial reactionary Arab leaders feel directly threatened by the advance of Iranian Shiite fanaticism. Starting with the Saudis, probably the Emirates and very soon Jordan and Egypt (if they do not fall first) are or will be seeking agreements and alliance with the king of Edom i.e. the leaders of the Western world dominated by a European (Edom) based culture. They are currently the Quartet, dominated by the Americans lead by President Bush. The ruler of Iran tries to counter this by "laying waste" the world. This includes both military adventures (perhaps nuclear) and steps to collapse the world economy such as preventing oil production or transportation. Oil production can be curtailed by encouraging civil war in Iraq, blockading the straights of Hormuz and a variety of other mischief in Egypt, Jordan, Chechnya, the Kashmir and anywhere else that a strong Islamic presence can be "hijacked" for the purpose. The Arabs have plenty to worry about: Recall the Iraq-Iranian war of the 80's.

In the throes of a worldwide economic failure (like the Great Depression), escalating military strife dominated by Shiite terrorism all sponsored by (a possibly nuclear armed) Iran in Hitler-like bid for empire, the nations of the world descend into a frenzy of panic probably starting with economic protectionism and then political isolationism followed by shortages leading even to famine in otherwise prosperous (G8) countries.

Israel is no exception, being lead by a timid immoral incompetent government devoid of faith, vision or courage.

The section of the text commencing, "ואומר" ("And I say ...") is the key to the let out:

Our anonymous Rabbi Yitzchak takes a deep breath and dares to speak for G-d in first person. In essence he says to Israel, "Don't worry, I'm in charge of this one! This time it is not going to finish up like the old Egyptian experience."

The foregoing Midrash leaves open two serious questions:

The first one, is how does Israel get the message to calm down and take it easy. The last prophet of stature in Israel was Malachi who lived about 2,500 years ago. Since then, pretenders to prophetic powers have generally proved to be fakes, or "proved right after the event" like a certain well known not long deceased Chassidic Rabbi. Is there another Rabbi Yitzchak around, and if there is, would anybody listen to him? Or maybe something totally unexpected will happen that will make Israel (if nobody else) sit up and take notice.

The second question is to my mind far more serious: When all this is over and done with, what do we, Israel, do next? Let no one think that we will be left to rest in our laurels, each under his grape-vine and each under his fig-tree."

NOTE: The cartoon is by http://www.coxandforkum.com/ and all rights to it belong to them.

הללויה

בעולם הזה יש הרבה בעיות ועוד יותר שאלות.
נראה שכלעם נורא מבולבלים אבל כנראה שאפילו זה בסדר.
אז איפו המסכנה? יש לאנו מציות שאלות בלי תשובות ויש ויש לאנו תקווה שבתוך כל שניע מצומצמת עד שלא יוותר באנו יותר.
מוכנים לוותר? אנו אף פעם לא אהיה מוכנה.
סתכלו:
יש לאנו עולם אחד, נכון? כן
ויש לאנו תמוד בררות ומחליטות שאותם בא לאנו לקחת. יש לאנו תמוד בררה על איך לתגוב לכל דבר שקורא לאנו.
בכל החלתה הזות יש לאנו עוד היזדמנות לשנות את העולם. בכל דבר שאנו מחליטים לעשות אנוחנו מחליטים את העתיד של עולם.
לעט לעט יש בענו כוח לעשות את זה.
אז מה שצועם אותנו זו בדיוק האבדת התקווה. אם אף אחד לא מעמין שמשהוא עושה שמשפיע את כל העולם ואם הוא לא מעמין שהוא יכול לעשות טוב לעולם אז שום דבר לא ישתנה.

גם לי אין תשובןת אבל משגבקה גן ברור זה שאסור לאבד את ההקווה ואסור לוותר. זה בידנו לעשות
שנוי

פרודיה

Welcome to the era of revolution! It is the era of breaking through all barriers, and finally reaching a sense of 'good' for all humanity. It is the era of 'all good' and the era of revival for the trash we humans have succumbed to being. Welcome! Welcome!

You there! Yes, you; Peasant! You've been subjected and subdued to such tremors by the apathetic. You've been so exploited and exposed!

Do you remember? Think of how they made you run by the horse, then wash it and care for it too. Think of how annoyed you were, next to the horse, but rarely mounting it. And think, friend! No one put you on that horse! There were only straddles and saddles. No one lifted you up on them!

Well friend, it's all over now. There will be no more grief construed upon you. No more. No more.

Because today, friend...

Today's the day of revolution.

Today friend; today's the day we'll shoot the horse.

Now you can walk on your own.

Guess what's not making the NYT front page?

"Pakistan to fence part of Afghan border
Fri Feb 2, 6:39 AM ET
Pakistan is to fence 35 kilometres (22 miles) of its northwestern border with Afghanistan to restrict the movement of Taliban militants, President Pervez Musharraf has said.
Musharraf said he had ordered the action after western allies had failed to offer solutions to the problem, but added that Pakistan had deferred a plan to mine the frontier due to international concerns.
"We are doing it (fencing), we have decided, the movement of logistics has taken place," Musharraf told a press conference at Camp House Friday, his official military residence in the garrison city of Rawalpindi.
The president said the erection of the fence "will take a few months to execute."
"The area we are fencing at the moment is about 35.2 kilometres in all, they are in seven or eight different pieces," Musharraf said.
Pakistan also planned to fence 250 kilometres (155 miles) of the frontier in the southwestern province of Baluchistan at a later date, he added.
Mining the border -- as Pakistan has threatened to do -- was still under consideration, Musharraf said.
"A minefield is easier, fencing is more difficult," he said. "But we are conscious of the sensitivity of the international community, therefore we thought in phase one let's only fence it."
The NATO-led force in Afghanistan said last month that it had "strong reservations" about the plan to mine and fence parts of the frontier.
Musharraf said "this is my solution" and accused NATO and US-led forces in Afghanistan of failing to come up with any other ideas.
He said Canadian Foreign Minister Peter MacKay, who visited Pakistan last month, had promised to bring up the matter with the Canadian military "but he didn't offer anything. We are waiting but nothing has come."
Afghanistan says it has written to the new United Nations chief to express "deep concern" over the plan as it disputes the current border with Pakistan, known as the Durand Line, saying it cuts off part of its territory.
The Durand Line was drawn up in 1893 by British India, which once included Pakistan, to divide the powerful Pashtun tribes.
Musharraf rejected Afghanistan's complaints.
"If we get involved in these petty differences there will be no action (against militants), we will never succeed," he said.
"Having said that, the border of Pakistan and Afghanistan is very very clear and let no one doubt that.
"Pakistan will never, never allow any change of that border."
http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20070202/wl_asia_afp/pakistanafghanistanunrestfence_070202113912;_ylt=AmgdT_UBFgb0os2arpbgsBrOVooA;_ylu=X3oDMTBiMW04NW9mBHNlYwMlJVRPUCUl

And guess what Jimmy Carter isn't going to write about...
HM.

I absolutely love the apartheid claim. I love how people apply totally irrelevant diagonals and analogies to dramatize their pleas.
I've read a lot of critiques about Carter's book - and many defenses (and when I say a lot/many, I mean so many I don't want to hear about it anymore).
What I haven't heard being disputed much, however, was the term apartheid in itself.
Here are some parallels I just don't get:
1) When using the term 'apartheid' the common association is that of the South African apartheid, this is undisputed. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I do believe the the black Africans who were discriminated against and poverty-stricken in their isolation were actually part of South Africa.
Palestinians have not, are not, and will not be part of Israel so long as it exists. Israel has no desire for this (neither do they according to popular consensus and maybe the fact that they continuously cry for the destruction of Israel), therefore making a border between Palestinian territories and Israel is not in any way isolating and excluding a part of the nation.
RATHER, since the Palestinians are so keen on building their nation, the wall serves as a separation of what ideally would be two separate nations.
Obviously, there are problems with this, because having a solid border provides a feeling of permanence, and a separation from the land of Israel itself. That is to say, it means that the Palestinians must suck it up and create their state on the land they have, rather than keep crying that Israel stole their land (not that the wall has caused a reduction in either this or aggression and violence against Israel). More so, a substantial separation implies that Israel is not theirs, which as both the Fatah and Hamas charters both state (ask me for sources if interested).

According to all internationally acclaimed documents, Israel is a real existent state. If it is wrong for Israel to put up a wall at its borders, it is just so for Pakistan to put up a wall at its borders, no?

Arguments can fly in a million directions. You can say that the problem isn't as much in the wall as it is in the borders, which are 'illegitimate'. I'm not going to waste my time arguing this claim. If you're interested, I can recommend dozens of written responses.

There was an interesting article in the NYT the other day http://www.nytimes.com/2007/01/31/arts/31jews.html?ref=arts) about an essay by Alvin H. Rosenfeld of Indiana University upon the topic of how in castigating Israel, liberal "Progressive" Jews are in fact aiding and progressing what is a neo-anti-semitism. This is articulated in not only criticism but denouncing of Israel in its very existence.
The article itself, offered by the American Jewish Committee (ajc.org), is quite intriguing. The beginning of it goes to address the perception of Jews by the Muslim world.
Apparently, Hitler's Mein Kamp is a best seller in Istanbul (and other places in Turkey), as well as Lebanon and Saudi Arabia. Needless to say that the infamous Protocols of the Elders of Zion has been rather popular across a "wide circulation today in Arabic-speaking countries." Of course, that isn't to disclude Iran, in which, "the Protocols was prominently displayed next to a Torah scroll as one of Judaism's "sacred texts."' (2)

There is mention of television series based on this, and on scenarios of Israelis/Jews are mutilating and abusing Muslim children. This may sound farfetched, but it mentions a video that I, myself have seen, in which a Palestinian girl had her eyes taken out ("stolen") by Israeli doctors, who were to use them for Israeli sick. I'll try to find the video itself, but I'm fairly certain it was offered by the Memri foundation (http://memri.org/)

Anyway, that's not even touching upon the main point of the article (which can be accessed at:http://www.ajc.org/site/c.ijITI2PHKoG/b.2463005/k.FBCD/Progressive_Jewish_Thought_and_the_New_AntiSemitism/apps/ka/ct/contactus.asp?c=ijITI2PHKoG&b=2463005&en=5dKHLMNgHaLHIHNfEaKNJMMhHbLOLSMkG7KILSNuEmJTI4J)
What the article mainly does is target left-wing Jews who have the irrevocable notion that Israel does not have a right to exist.
Any pro-Israel advocate will tell you that there is a blunt distinction between being critical of Israel's (individual) policies and being critical of Israel itself, as a being.
Quite frankly, though I won't go into an in-depth analysis of the particular anti-zionists mentioned, including Judt, Rose, Farber, Chomsky, etc. I must say that I find some of the things they said rather appalling.
In fact, the most optomistic words mentioned in the entire article were probably Chomsky's (aginst whom I have a moral stance), which accepted the right of Jews to have an Israel, but as a binary state with Arabs.
Let's be practical here - that means no Israel.
I showed in a previous post the attitude of Arabs in Israel now - and they make up about 20% of the country now. Palestinians are known to have birth rates that dramatically overtake those of Israelis (ultra-orthodox excluded), and within a (fairly short) period of time, the Judaism of the country would disappear. So much for Israel.
Chomsky would rather have Palestine anyway. A binational state would just be the quiet way to get rid of the Jews, as opposed to damanding they simply evacuate.

I understand that there are a lot of questions and accusations and logistics and whatever, but there are a few elementary things that I still can't get.
There are 22 Islamic countries in the world. Many of them are enormous, many of them are affluent to hell. Not one of these 22 countries is willing to take the Palestinian people in.
Not one. It is more profitable and beneficial for them to upkeep a regime of anti-western, anti-israeli terror and hate. It is safer politically.
Yet the world doesn't say a word to Syria, a part of whom the Palestinians claimed to be in 1947, though rejected. It is easier to blame Israel for all the problems that exist; blame Israel for Palestinian suffering, for the civil war on Iraq. According to Rosenfeld's article, Israel/Jews are even blamed for the Tsunami in Asia last year by the Islamic prapogandist media.
If it is a matter of land, there is so much land elsewhere. It's not as if these people would return to their old houses anyway - those probably don't exist anymore. Moreso, Jews (many Israelis) were driven from their homes as well, and I'm not just talking about Europe. Jews in Muslim countries all over north Africa and the Middle East were succombed to abandoning their homes just as much as the Palestinians, and left with nothing but their lives. We don't hear a word about wanting that back, do we? Part of it is certainly that people simply wouldn't want to return. I wouldn't want to go and live in Iraq now, that's for sure. But note also that most of Israel was empty and grazen land leased by abandonee landowners before Israel.
In fact, in a brief argument upon this term with my history teacher, I mentioned that when in the 70's Israel had approximately the same financial position as the Palestinians, Israel had a good deal of international support. He agreed without question.

It's just like a fictional drama.
People like victims.

Even with all this set aside, there have certainly been grievences towards Native Americans. We sympathize, but are we really going to give New York back?

Like I said, I really just don't get it. It seems to me people get so sucked into a detail or an idea that all reason leaves

I don't know. There's been a lot in the news lately. A few things I found interesting:
http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3361369,00.html
http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3361228,00.html
http://kristof.blogs.nytimes.com/2007/01/30/the-readers-respond-with-a-library-of-ideas/
http://www.terrorismawareness.org/islamic-mein-kampf/

Eh. I promise I'll write a good post soon. Iran seems to be newsbreaking lately...at least in their claims.
-שוש

SEX

On my way to school today I managed to come by three front-page news stories regarding sexual misconduct. There was an article about Minister Ramon in the ידעיות אחרונות of that Israeli guy on the subway. (english coverage articles at: http://www.ynetnews.com/home/1,7340,L-3341,00.html?SearchType=TopNav&criteria=&sog=&keyword=&txtSearchString=ramon&txtChanID=3083&select1=Site)

There was an absolutely ridiculous article in the NYT, about some 27 year old creep who has been using razors and make up to forge the appearance of a seventh grader who is enrolled in a local public school. Apparently this guy lives in a house with a bunch of other prison-record rapists in some town in Arizona, and according to video,has raped at least one little boy...at least. (http://www.nytimes.com/2007/02/01/us/01predator.html?_r=1&ref=todayspaper&oref=slogin)

Finally, there was some sex scandal on the front page of Metro or New York or some newspaper of that sort, regarding something with video, internet, and rape...I was rushing, so I didn't quite grasp the headline.

That's just for this morning. If you've been paying the slightest attention to the news lately, you know that sex scandals are anything but scarce these days. There's the big rape scandal that Moshe Katsav is infamous for. In America, there was that whole ridiculous thing with Mark Foley and his page friend. The list goes on and on, and if Americans are feeling too up and proud of themselves, let's just remember that the record has been repeatedly scratched by those even as popular as Clinton and JFK. But that's not the point, the point is what's happening right now, right?

I'm not quite sure, but let's have a look anyway.

In the case of Katsav and Ramon, criticism has been incredibly vast, and the popular consensus is: "Leave, you're embarrassing the country."

So my question is, is it the politicians, who are embarrassing the country with this obscure, repremendable behavior?

Is it Katsav having sex, and Ramon kissing some girl; is it Mark Foley sending some teenager a flirty text message, that represent the corruption in society?

If it is, why does it keep happening? Why aren't we seemingly able to rid ourselves of this disgusting social decay?

You know, despite whatever these anti-government tykes say, I hold firmly to the belief that government electives are really quite representative of the general public. What I'm trying to say with this, is that the problem isn't in a few guys caught in misconduct, and thus misrepresenting the innocent people.

They are representing the people quite exactly, and what they're showing isn't some personal moral decay, but a large-scale moral and cultural corruption that is increasingly precedent all around the techno-fied world.

It is a culture of materialism; it is a culture of substance dependence. It is a culture of casual and permiscuous sex that is thrown around like a plaything. You wonder about sexual misconduct...

Enraged parents, hold on a second. Is it Mark Foley, is it Haim Ramon who is teaching and encouraging your children to act loosly upon their sexual desires, regardless who is 'victimized' by it?

Femenists in Israel, is it Ramon who is putting down female equality?

Or is it that rap video they just saw, in which the half-naked woman bends down all the way and shakes her ass vigorously, rubbing against some buffed up guy's pants as he sings about how much the girls like him and how much sex he gets from the ones worthy enough to be liked by him?

Is it those great songs that find themselves on popular American radio stations like z100, and that somehow make their way into the ears and succeedingly, the mouths of the 10 year old campers in the JCH I work in? The songs that these kids listen to uncensored, so that phrases like "Lick my ----" can be fulfilled?

When I went online hours after noting to myself the riduculous abundance of sex-related stories in the media, I found a most suiting article by ידיעות אחרונות in English (ynetnews.com). This article (http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3359744,00.html) tells of how unsafe children internet use is; how incredible numbers of kids give away their information, and even go to meet random people they meet on the internet. This brings me back to a story that happened years ago, in which some israeli kid got trapped by a gang of Palestinians (or maybe just Arabs) who pretended to be a woman online, lured him to come to meet them, and then murdered the kid. Anyway, what is more to point is in the very headline of this article:

"Do children surf to porn sites? 'Absolutely not' say 84 percent of parents. 'Of course' say 60 percent of their kids."

According to a study done by the Tel Aviv Department of Communication and Haifa University, about 60% of Israeli children have been customers of internet porn.

Is it really Ramon's fault? I'll bet half of those interviewed don't have a clue about who he is.

They'll surely tell you who Subliminal is though (as much as I do love him).

The funnier thing, is that when I showed this article to a friend of mine (in NY), he commented that the percentage in America is probaby closer to 95%. I don't think it's quite that much of an embellishment, too.

From my experience alone, and I don't generally stray too much into mainstream pop media, modern culture is a continuous drilling of everything a moral person would go against. There are the personalities, the TV shows, etc. that show that everything can be good if only you have that ipod, those brand new 200$ NIKE sneakers, that gold chain, etc. Their message is that 'it's all good as long as you look fresh'

There's the prominent sex. Turn on the all-too-popular show, Desperate Housewives, for example. Now once again, I think it's a great show, I do, but think about it. The plot involves a married woman sleeping with a high school boy, a man who suffers for his murdered mistress, though his ex-wife is trying to empregnate herself by him against his will (by drugging him, nonetheless), and the fun just grows from there.

These are the values the society handles; this is what is being passed on generation to generation. Is it really Mark Foley's fault?

I'll take it a step farther. Our society is so corrupt; our culture so sex-obsessed, substance-dependent, and out of control, that it's spun totally out of control.

Approximately 1/4 of American teenagers are said to have been infected by a Sexually Transmitted Disease already (http://www.cbn.com/700club/guests/bios/Hayley_DiMarco072006.aspx)

Over half of teenagers 15-19 have had oral sex (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/09/15/AR2005091500915.html?nav=hcmodule)

and 73% teen girls, 55% boys have already had the chance to regret beginning sexual activity at an early age. (CBN).

It is a situation that is clearly chaotic, and out of control.

But to go as far as to blame politicaians?

No, it's far beyond all of them, as ridiculous and deservingly scrutinized for their actions as they are. My point is, our culture is poisoned, and we must not let the details for scandals blind us to that. If we are all really so embarrassed by these corruptees that are said to represent us, won't we go and try to make it all not apply to us? Otherwise, what's the point?

Blame Israel!

That picture on the sidebar is from a terrific facebook group I joined earlier called "Blame Israel" (http://hs.facebook.com/group.php?gid=2223538689). On it's wall it has all kinds of lunacies like "I fell and broke my arm today. Blame Israel!" and, "I failed my biology test today. Damn Israel!"

Today on the wall, I was going to post something like "I've had to stare into this screen for two days straight trying to import this slower-than-snails (sorry for the cliche) data. Damn you Israel!" but then this comment was at the bottom of the page, and I just couldn't bring myself to remove it from site:

"Blame Israel for global warming!!- their nuclear weapons are making the temperature increase and the Canadian polar bears' life expectancy to decrease by 0.3% over the last decade! Act now before it's too late! savecutebearsfromzionists.com"

For the sake of your sanity, I hope you're laughing - because that was good.

ANYWAY.

So here's the cliffnotes version of what happened in Eilat yesterday. I won't include my references because I must have read from twenty or so different sources, but in case you are interested, ask me and I'll be happy to provide you with some.

So here goes:

a) I won't dignify the bomber by posting its name. According to its family, it had just recently turned religious (Muslim as opposed to secular) and apparently, fanatically religious at that.

b)Something like three-five months after 'becoming religious' it wound up on an Israeli road (I understand, having crossed the barely protected Egypt/Israel border) dressed in red, with a backpack.

c) The now infamous Yossi Voltinsky picked the hitch-hiker on, assuming that it is a hotel worker, as many people he helped drive around (of his good will) were

d) Growing suspicious as the character was very uncomfortable, kept its hands in its pockets, and always kept the red jacket and backpack tightly strapped on, Yossi drove away from the city, preparing to flip the car over, or take some kind of similar measure. He wanted to stop the terrorist, of whom he was almost positive, but wanted to avoid 1) the slight, sliver of a chance that this wasn't a terrorist and 2) the bomber to just blow up

e) Yossi repeadetly asked the terrorist about his destination. After many silences, the response: "Haifa"

f) Yossi kicked it out about a km from Eilat, and informd the police, trying to also keep track, unsuccessfuly

g) Three people inside a bakery in Eilat were killed, and five injured by an explosion by the suicide bomber within a short period of time.

h) There is a plan to build a wall along the extensive Egypt/Israel border. Finally.

What were some reactions to the attack? Officals say, "DUH!"

The Egypt/Israel border remains an incredibly vulnerable, a tremendous territory, with minimal protection. Obviously, leave a spot, add a bunch of people who are screaming "why are we fighting each other, we're being distracted from attacking Israel!", and some funding from Iran and Hizbulla...molotov cocktails are less deadly.

Look, we can talk all we like, but throughout, the country is in danger. We are in danger.

Reacting after attacks is ok, but you know what is really needed is the action that's going to prevent the next attempt. We already know there will be many more attempts.

I must accredit the following to having been posted by the much admired Boker Tov, Boulder! blog, whose link can be found on the sidebar:

DEBKAfile’s counter-terror sources report that the next wave of suicide attacks is expected to be mounted from Gaza and Sinai by the Palestinian Jihad Islami in conjunction with local al Qaeda cells with funding from Tehran and Damascus.
Although two Palestinian groups – Jihad Islami and Fatah-al Aqsa Martyrs’ Brigades claimed the attack, DEBKAfile’s counter-terror sources disclosed it was in fact the first joint operation of the third group, the Army of Believers – an al Qaeda cover name – and Jihad Islami of the new anti-Israel terror offensive.
A senior Israeli officer familiar with the Israeli-Egyptian Sinai border region told DEBKAfile after the Eilat attack: “Olmert and Peretz have missed the train. Their policy of military restraint in the face of Qassam missile attacks and a terrorist build-up has given the most violent elements free rein to get set for a fresh, well-organized assault.” Some attacks may also come from the sea.
He stressed: “It’s no use expecting the Egyptians to secure the Sinai border. Since Israel pulled out of the Gaza Strip 15 months ago, the Egyptian-Gazan-Israeli borders are a highway for smugglers of terrorists, missiles, explosives and traffickers of every kind. The IDF is the only force capable of putting a stop to this traffic and suppressing the collaboration between Hamas, Jihad Islami, Fatah-al Aqsa Brigades and al Qaeda. Unfortunately, its hands are tied by the government.”

P.S. About the picture - EEEEK.

Why does the world insist on being deaf and blind?

I'm not even going to say anything about the suicide bombing that just took place in Eilat, most likely because of weak border control along the border with Egypt, and claimed by two Palestinian org's although it is thought to be the partly work of 'The Army of Believer's aka Al Queda. There's a lot to say, but suicide bombings - פגועים -are just an effect. Just like that extra lightning or real-looking blood in a good movie. They are the heads cut off in a dramatic scene, but they are not the murder.

The thing with פגועים is that even though people condemn terrorism, they find ways to justify it or to deny it, or resent it, or put it on perspective scales and all kinds of bullshit. Anything to avoid dealing with it, and to interfere with the people who do want to deal with it.

What all these 'deniers' are still missing in their vast humanitarian speeches is the real and conspicuous spectrum of perspesctives, motivations, and plans that refute all of their beautiful, heart-warming arguments. OOPS.

Here's what our wonderful peace-loving liberal friends aren't putting on the front page (unlike stories of how the Israeli gov't built infrastructure on illegal land, and much more importantly, how the President had affairs with a bunch of women [because at least Clinton stuck to one]) :

a) In regard to Israeli arabs:
"We went to the Galilee to meet with representatives of three of the largest, most mainstream Arab Israeli political parties. Despite minor differences among them, they all shared the following: (a) they do not acknowledge any difference between themselves and the Palestinians and now want to be called Israeli Palestinians, not Israeli Arabs; (b) they insist that their ''brothers'' be given a state with East Jerusalem as its capital; (c) they insist on the right of return for the refugees (a huge political issue here that gets little play in the West, probably because everyone knows that it will never happen); (d) they insist that if the state genuinely wants to respect them as citizens, then the national anthem and its references to 2,000 years of Jewish yearning for Zion has to go. So far, no real surprises.
...
'The most articulate of the three speakers, the leader of a major Arab party represented in the Knesset, responded more or less as follows: ''Your question shows that you don't really understand the Middle East. The Middle East is a Muslim part of the world, and this country will ultimately be Muslim, too. It may happen next year, or in 50 years, or in a hundred years. But it's going to happen. The sooner you accept the inevitable, the sooner the region will know peace, and then we can all get on with life.'"

-Dispatches of David Gordis Dec '00
Gordis, David. "E-Mail From An Anxious State". NYT. (published) 09.30.01
http://select.nytimes.com/search/restricted/article?res=F7091EFB3F5E0C738FDDA0

Europe and its future:
"A British television documentary, 'Dispatches: Undercover Mosque,' broadcast on Sunday evening on the UK's Channel 4 has uncovered hate-filled speeches and rhetoric delivered in a number of British mosques, and directed against 'unbelievers,' Jews, Christians, and gays, among others, as well as religious justifications of marriages between prepubescent girls and adult men.

'Some of the mosques targeted by the program were previously considered to be centers of moderate Islam in Britain. One mosque featured in the video was associated with a Muslim leader working with the British government to strengthen ties between the Muslim and non-Muslim communities.

'The program's female narrator warned of "an ideology of intolerance and bigotry spreading throughout Britain, with its roots in Saudi Arabia," as images of the mosques and worshippers flashed across the screen.

'One preacher was seen saying: "We Muslims have been ordered to do brainwashing."

'The main English-language speaker of a Birmingham mosque, Abu Usama, who is an American convert to Islam, spread hatred of Christian and Jews in the footage.
...
'In the film, British Muslims at a mosque were told that that Islam will eventually gain "the uppermost strength" and form an Islamic state. They were instructed to "form a state within a state, until we take over."

'In the Islamic state, Abu Usama said if a Muslim tried to leave Islam, he would be killed. "If the imam wants to crucify him he should crucify him. The person is put up on the wood and he's left there to bleed to death for three days," he said."

Lappin, Yaakov. "UK TV uncovers 'Islamic supremacism':Documentary goes undercover in British mosques, finds 'ideology of bigotry' " . Y-net News. 01.16.07
http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3353122,00.html





"One senior German politician warned this week of an Islamic cell he called "fanatic," planning more attacks in hiding.
"In Germany there are 3,000-5,000 Islamist activists who are planning to use violence, possibly even suicide attacks," said Guenther Beckstein, a likely candidate to become Germany's next interior minister

...

[Ernst Orlau, a senior official in Germany's intelligence community] said the attacks in London and Madrid were local initiatives carried out by local activist cells, with no foreign planning aid or instruction"

Bodoni, Ronen. "Is Europe waking up to terrorism?: European Muslims who travel to Iraq to fight the infidel are returning 'home' experienced, determined, and evermore extreme " Y-net News. 09.16.05.
http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3143006,00.html

"40 percent of British Muslims surveyed in a Sunday Times poll after 9-11 believed Osama bin Laden was “justified” in his war against America. They even supported those of their coreligionists from Britain who volunteered to fight with the Taliban against the Western allies.

...

'Sheikh Bakri himself has warned Jews in Britain to avoid any support for Israel lest they “become targets for Muslims.”

...

'This highly inflammable cocktail embracing Palestine, jihad, the dream of a worldwide caliphate, Koranic indoctrination, and classical Judeophobia, was exposed by the Old Bailey trial of Sheikh Abdullah el-Faisal, in February 2003.
The cleric, a Jamaican convert to Islam educated in Saudi Arabia, was found guilty of inciting to murder and racial hatred on the basis of his lectures and videocassettes - some of them on sale at specialty bookshops in Britain - and sentenced to nine years in prison.
Overwhelming evidence was produced at the trial to demonstrate his encouragement for a violent jihad to kill non-believers. Particular venom was reserved for the “filthy Jews.” In a spine-chilling speech which seemed to anticipate the May 2003 suicide mission of Hanif to Tel Aviv, el-Faisal ranted:
People with British passports, if you fly into Israel it is easy…. Fly into Israel and do whatever you can. If you die, you are up in Paradise. How do you fight a Jew? You kill a Jew. "

Wistrich, Robert S., Azure. "Center of hatred: London increasingly emerging as radical Islamic, anti-Semitic hub". Y-net News. 07.07.05
http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3109589,00.html


There's really much, much more. I didn't really get into the foundation prapoganda, like the text books that teach about how Jews and Westerners are decendents of pigs, nor did I include stuff that has made it into mainstream newspaper headlines, like the infinite calls for the destruction of Israel by the likes of Ahmedinejad, Hezbolla, Islamic Jihad, blah blah blah.

It's not even the point that they hate us and want to kill us. We already knew that. It's that the very same youth that the West likes to defend as helpless and opressed; the youth that if simply exposed to the kindness, humanity, and good will of the West, as opposed to 'grievences', will abandon their desperate resistance movements and attacks - won't. It's really rather simple.
There is an overreaching group of people, who is taught everyday that they are superior to the West, and that they should triumph over it. It's not a quest for freedom, it's a quest for dominance.

Simple.

We're deeply into World War III, the 'Clash of Civilizations', the war for survival, near Apocalypse, whatever.
Point and case, grievences aren't the problem - our survival is getting there, though.