An Arab writes: Arabs are the enemy - not Israel

Arab News I decided to write this article after I saw photos and reports about a starving child in Yemen, a burned ancient Aleppo souk in Syria, the under developed Sinai in Egypt, car bombs in Iraq and the destroyed buildings in Libya. The photos and the reports were shown on the Al-Arabiya network, which is the most watched and respected news outlet in the Middle East.

The common thing among all what I saw is that the destruction and the atrocities are not done by an outside enemy. The starvation, the killings and the destruction in these Arab countries are done by the same hands that are supposed to protect and build the unity of these countries and safeguard the people of these countries. So, the question now is that who is the real enemy of the Arab world?

The Arab world wasted hundreds of billions of dollars and lost tens of thousands of innocent lives fighting Israel, which they considered is their sworn enemy, an enemy whose existence they never recognized. The Arab world has many enemies and Israel should have been at the bottom of the list. The real enemies of the Arab world are corruption, lack of good education, lack of good health care, lack of freedom, lack of respect for the human lives and finally, the Arab world had many dictators who used the Arab-Israeli conflict to suppress their own people.

These dictators’ atrocities against their own people are far worse than all the full-scale Arab-Israeli wars.

In the past, we have talked about why some Israeli soldiers attack and mistreat Palestinians. Also, we saw Israeli planes and tanks attack various Arab countries. But, do these attacks match the current atrocities being committed by some Arab states against their own people. [...]

Finally, if many of the Arab states are in such disarray, then what happened to the Arabs’ sworn enemy (Israel)? Israel now has the most advanced research facilities, top universities and advanced infrastructure. Many Arabs don’t know that the life expectancy of the Palestinians living in Israel is far longer than many Arab states and they enjoy far better political and social freedom than many of their Arab brothers. Even the Palestinians living under Israeli occupation in the West Bank and Gaza Strip enjoy more political and social rights than some places in the Arab World. Wasn’t one of the judges who sent a former Israeli president to jail is an Israeli-Palestinian?[...]

Rabbi Y. Pinto arrested on bribe charges

Haaretz  The influential rabbi Yoshiyahu Pinto and his wife were arrested and investigated on Thursday. They were charged with attempting to bribe a police officer and money laundering. They were released under restrictive conditions once the investigation was completed.

The investigation into the conduct of rabbi Pinto and his wife was led a special investigation team headed by Yoav Segalovich, head of the police investigations unit. The police believe the rabbi contacted a high-ranking police officer and offered him a bribe in exchange for information concerning an investigation. The investigation took several weeks during which rabbi Pinto gave the police officer the bribe.[...]

Yaron Lipshos, Pinto's attorney issued a statement: "Rabbi Pinto answered all the police's questions, and divulged all that he knew in order to further the investigation so that it may be concluded as soon as possible and disprove all the baseless allegations raised against him."[...]   See Wikipeda for additional information

Nitei Gavriel:Not speaking to women

Hebrew Books   Nitei Gavriel (Chapter 50 Yichud page 325): Avos (1:5) says, “A man should not have excessive idle conversation (sicha) with a woman. That is said in regards to one’s wife so even more so it applies to the wife of another.” Therefore when a man has no choice but to speak to a woman he should minimize it as much as possible. That is what the Derech Pekudecha (Mahartza Mudinov - Lo Saaseh 35:8) concluded. He said, “It is surprising that accomplished Torah scholars and G‑d fearing men are not careful of this prohibition which requires them to weigh precisely each word that they speak with a woman in order not to add even one unnecessary word. I personally could not find a legitimate justification for this behavior. However I provided some sort of rationale for it based on the Sefer Chasidim which is cited by the Beis Shmuel (E.H. 62:11). He says that at a wedding meal – if there a men and women together in a single room then the beracha of hasimcha b'miono should not be recited. That is because there is no true rejoicing in a place where the evil inclination operates freely. In fact I have not seen anyone who has acts in accord with this ruling. I did find an explanation for this in the Levush who writes, ‘And now we are not careful with to observe this ruling because it is normal for women to be frequently found together with men (e.g., business, professions, and stores). As a consequence of this reality, sinful thoughts when seeing women are not so prevalent as when the sexes were kept separate because they are viewed neutrally as one would view geese due to the constant habituation. Therefore since it has become normal to violate this concern – it is ignored .’ One must conclude according this analysis that when a Jewish community is operating properly and livelihood is readily obtained you will not see a single woman outside the home because they are not involved in commerce. Consequently a man living in that community if he happens to see a woman – it is something extremely rare experience and therefore it will generate erotic thoughts and feelings. In contrast when the weight of exile is heavy and livlihood is difficult to obtain the women are involved in commerce and there is no novelty for a man to see women. Therefore he becomes habituated to the sight of a woman and doesn’t become sexual aroused so much when he see one. Therefore if we see that habituation removes the problem of men having erotic thoughts from being with women, it should also apply to our case of excessive talking [and therefore when the norm is that men interact  with women there should be no restriction on conversation.]  We can answer this assertion by noting that it is clear that a man does not in fact get sexually aroused by excessive chatter because of habituation. Nevertheless despite the existence of habituation in conversation, it is clear that this leniency for habituation can not be applied in the case of conversation. That is because excessive conversation is prohibited even with his wife with whom he is obviously habituated. That is because speaking and voice are considered sexual because they are mentioned in the Shir haShirim (2:14), Your voice is sweet and Shir haShirim (4:3), Your speech is pleasant (This is astounding! Is the ordinary voice of a women considered sexually arousing – isn’t it in fact only the singing voice? N.G.). It is possible that at the time when ordinary conversations with a woman were presumed to prohibited because of sexual arousal that they made the decree to prohibit excessive talk even with one’s wife. [to be continued]

Nitei Gavriel Yichud Chapter 50

Alshech: Harm of Talking a lot with one's Wife

Alshech (Vayikra 9:24): There is concern that by welcoming guests – as proposed by Avos 1:5 - into your home that some of them might become too friendly with your wife and this will lead to sin.The solution proposed by this mishna is that the husband should not talk a lot with his wife. This is to convey the message that if a man needs to reduce the idle chatter [sicha] he has with his own wife then surely he should not be talking a lot with the wife of another or becoming overly friendly with her. This is what is meant by,“And this prohibition of not talking a lot is in regard to his own wife.” Thus when people come to your house and they see you minimizing talking to your wife they will make the deduction that surely they should minimize talking to her because she is the wife of another. However such a solution will reasonably cause the husband to be concerned by a probable serious side effect of minimizing conversations with his wife.. He will reason, "If the Sages said that in order to prevent guests from talking too much to my wife that I need to minimize what I say to her – then there is a better solution. It is better not to have guests rather than to minimize having a close relationship with my wife and in particular in speaking with her.” In fact he will reasonably conclude that the mitzva of domestic tranquility is very important and that love between a man and his wife is more important than love amongst others. However his reasoning is rejected as can be seen by the fact that Rav Yehuda HaNasi (the editor of the Mishna) states that we do in fact learn that one must minimize talking to wives of other men even more so then to one’s own wife. That is  because he saw that Yossi ben Yochanon was not concerned with the possibility that minimizing conversation with ones wife would harm the marriage. In fact we learn from this that talking a lot with one’s wife does not result in love and domestic tranquility. The opposite is true. It actually produces much harm. There are three different types of harm. Firstly it causes harm to oneself since it leads to increased sexual relations - that even though that is permitted – it causes physical weakness & deterioration. It is also possible that this will result in premature aging which are called the days of evil. Secondly by spending a great deal of time in conversation with his wife – he forsakes Torah study. Thirdly because he becomes accustomed to spend an excessive amount of time with her, he will come to have sexual intercourse with her even when she is a niddah and thus he will directly sin. This will result in that he will end up going to Gehinom and not returning. That is described by this mishna (Avos 1:5) as “inheriting Gehiniom” since Gehinom will be all that he has.

the key to understand the above is what does the term sicha mean and what is "a lot"

Meiri(Avos 1:5): Don’t have too much sicha (idle conversation) with a woman. The term sicha means speech which has no real purpose which is why people say sicha betalila (conversation with no purpose). For example Avoda Zara (19b) regarding Torah scholars their sicha requires close study. In other words even when they seem to be simply conversing without purpose, there is substance in their words which needs to be carefully studied. Some issue might be alluded to in their words or character or ethics can be gleaned from them.

BBC covered up abuse by legendary children's entertainer -

Time Magazine   For millions of British children, Jimmy Savile was the TV presenter who promised to make their dreams come true. Now it appears he has been haunting the memories of some of them — and could be turning into a nightmare for his former employer, the BBC.

Savile, who died last year, hosted prime-time children’s shows in the U.K., including the wishes-come-true favorite, Jim’ll Fix It, and raised over £40 million ($64 million) for charity throughout his life. But in a documentary aired on British commercial television last week, five women claimed to have been raped, molested or forced to commit sexual acts on Savile when they were underage, often on the premises of the BBC, for whom Savile worked. Since the documentary aired, over 40 women have made similar allegations.

The BBC is now facing accusations of an institutional cover-up as it emerges that producers, press officers, executives and other presenters at the BBC were aware of Savile’s alleged behavior at the time. The publicly funded broadcaster buckled under pressure to acknowledge the “horrifying” allegations last week, vowing to support the police in any investigations, although it has insisted that there is “nothing to suggest any wrongdoing was ignored by management.” Prime Minister David Cameron has described the allegations as “deeply, deeply troubling” and hinted in a television interview that Savile could be posthumously stripped of his knighthood. [...]

Haredi parties - bitter internal struggles

Haaretz   Both ultra-Orthodox parties are heading for elections unwillingly, as both are embroiled in bitter internal struggles that could make it hard for them to preserve their current combined 16 Knesset seats. And fewer seats means less influence in whatever government is formed after the elections.

For Shas, the internal rift centers on former party chairman Aryeh Deri, who is now weighing a return to politics - either as part of Shas, which would entail an uneasy alliance with current chairman Eli Yishai, or in the framework of a new, rival party.

For United Torah Judaism - a joint list comprised of the Degel Hatorah and Agudath Israel parties - all is not sweetness and light between the various Hasidic sects that comprise the latter. But UTJ's biggest problem is with Degel Hatorah, which represents the "Lithuanian" (non-Hasidic ) Haredim: The Lithuanians' unchallenged spiritual leader, Rabbi Yosef Shalom Elyashiv, recently died, and the party is now riven between adherents of his two would-be successors, Rabbi Aharon Leib Shteinman and Rabbi Shmuel Auerbach.

כולם נגד כולם ב'עדה': הראב"ד נגד סאטמר ובריסק

bholהמלחמה הפנימית שפרצה בחוגי 'העדה החרדית' סביב מאבק הקברים -          ובראשם המאבק המתהל במתחם גולובנציץ בבית שמש - הולכת ומתרחבת, ובימים האחרונים נראה כי נוצר קרע של ממש בין החוגים המרכיבים את 'העדה החרדית'.

לטענת אנשי 'אתרא קדישא', קיימים במתחם גולובנציץ קברים, טענה אשר מהווה מבחינתם סיבה לעכב את הבנייה במקום, עד לבדיקה יסודית. אלא שיזמני הבניה והרוכשים, שקבלו על העיכוב, פנו אל ראשי בד"ץ 'העדה החרדית', והדיינים התבקשו להתערב ולמנוע מ'אתרא קדישא' את עיכוב הבניה. אלא שהגאב"ד עצר את הדיון, וההיתר לא הונפק.

אלא שבערב חג סוכות פורסם מכתב, עליו חתום ראב"ד 'העדה החרדית', הגר"מ שטרנבוך, הקובע באופן נחרץ כי ניתן לעלות עם דחפורים על השטח ולהתחיל בבנייה, ללא שום חשש לחילולי קברים. "ולמעשה אין לעכב את החפירות", נכתב. "ויש לחפור מיד ממש בטרקטור קטן בלי שיניים גדולות ולהעמיד משגיח מומחה מהבד"ץ לחפש ולעיין אם נמצא..." 

בתחילת המכתב פורש הגר"מ שטרנבוך בקצה את הסיבות ההלכתיות לדבריו ולהיתר הבניה, ובין היתר גם מזכיר כשיקול משמעותי את מצוקתן של 1000 משפחות הממתינות בכליון עיניים לביתם החדש, "ובפרט שהדבר נוגע לחיותן של אלף משפחות, ולחייב רבים מהם לחזור על הפתחים מחשש בעלמא שאינו מבוסס כלל".

NY sued for incompetence in false rape accusations

NYTimes   One of four men who had sex-crime charges against him in a case involving a young Orthodox Jewish woman dismissed last June has sued New York City and the Brooklyn district attorney’s office for malicious prosecution, defamation and false imprisonment.

The man, Darrell Dula, filed the lawsuit in State Supreme Court in Brooklyn on Oct. 2, more than a year after he was jailed on Rikers Island and held there for months without bail on the charges, which were dismissed amid troubling questions about the accuser’s credibility and whether prosecutors mishandled exculpatory evidence. [...]

The case began in June 2011 when Mr. Hynes, at a highly publicized news conference, announced the indictments of Mr. Dula and three co-defendants — Damien Crooks and two brothers, Jamali and Jawara Brockett — on charges of rape, sex trafficking and compelling prostitution over the course of a decade.

The four men were accused of using assaults and threats of violence to silence the woman, a member of the Chabad Lubavitch community in Crown Heights who was only 13 at the start of the events described in the indictment.

Women ran stores in Europe - but not in Israel

While there are many sources which explicitly state that women should remain home - the historical reality was something else. For example there are letters written by the students of the Vilna Gaon who came to Israel in the early 1800's. The letters were requests for financial assistance from their European brethren. One of the reasons given for the need for this help was that in Israel the accepted practice [of the Arab population] is that women don't work in stores as they did in Lithuania. In addition the men came to Israel to learn Torah - not to work.

אברהם יערי אגרות מארץ ישראל ע”מ 336.

מכתב מתלמידי הגר”א בשנת 1810

 

“טעם הב’ ראיתי חובה עלי להודיע כי הספרדים יש להם פרנסות בחנויות וס”ד  הכל בהיתר ולא באיסור ובמנוחה. אבל לא לאשכנזים מפני מניעת הלשון, וגם כאן המנהג שהנשים אינם יושבות בחנויות, ואנשינו הבאים

לאה״ק ע״פ רוב ביאתם לקנות שלימות ולהיות מתופשי ב ה מ ״ ד " לישב על התורה ועל העבודה ובאים בידים ריקניות.”

Jerry Sandusky sentenced to at least 30 years

CBS News   Jerry Sandusky was sentenced Tuesday to at least 30 years in prison -- effectively a life sentence -- in the child sexual abuse scandal that brought shame to Penn State and led to coach Joe Paterno's downfall.

Judge John Cleland sentenced the 68-year-old former assistant football coach to 30 years minimum to 60 years maximum in prison. Under Pennsylvania law, Sandusky cannot be released on parole before the minimum term is up.

A defiant Sandusky gave a long, rambling statement in which he denied the allegations and talked about his life in prison and the pain of being away from his family.[...]

Why banning anti-gay therapy is problematic

Time Magazine   On September 29, Jerry Brown signed into law a bill banning therapy that purportedly “cures” gays for minors in the state of California. Brown had previously Tweeted that these practices, known as conversion therapy, “have no basis in science of medicine and they will now be relegated to the dustbin of quackery.” Almost immediately after being signed into law, a Christian legal group called the Pacific Justice Institute sued the state, saying that the ban was a violation of free speech and private relationships between youth, families and their therapists. Is the law a helpful effort to protect minors or a nanny-state intrusion into a private and intimate issue?

Both, possibly. First, it should be clearly stated that the empirical research supporting the efficacy of this form of therapy is weak, at best.  A 2009 task force report    by the American Psychological Association concluded that efforts to therapeutically change sexual orientation do not work, and carry significant risk of harm.  Consenting homosexual behavior is no more harmful than consenting heterosexual behavior, but instilling or reinforcing in patients the view that their sexual orientation is wrong can do psychological damage. Outside of religious conservatives, few defenders of conversion therapy can be found.

Whether government banning of such procedures is the most appropriate response is worth debating, however. There are a number of therapies out there which have been empirically demonstrated to range from useless to outright harmful. Scott Lilienfeld, a professor of psychology at Emory University, discussed this in a 2007 issue of Perspectives on Psychological Science. Among the therapies he looked at were questionable ones such as facilitated communication, “rebirthing” therapies, and “recovered memory” therapy. But they also included relatively popular approaches such as “Scare Straight” for kids who are at risk for delinquency, boot camps kids who are anti-social, and DARE anti-drug programs. If we are going to start down the road of banning therapies, should we not ban these all, if the research evidence continues to bear out Dr. Lilienfeld’s concerns?  Why do we ban gay conversion therapy but leave DARE programs intact?