The Rebbe, The Messiah, and the Scandal of Journalistic Ineptitude. By Steven I Weiss.

Andrew Silow-Carroll writes: Dear Luke,

On further reflection, there was one thing I wanted to add concerning your first question: What are the obstacles to good Jewish journalism?

Maybe the primary obstacle is that there may not be a constituency for tough, iconoclastic reporting. I suspect that most of our subscribers, and subscribers to Jewish weeklies, do not want a newspaper that makes them feel uncomfortable about aspects of Jewish life. They feel we have a role to play as advocates, as comforters, as entertainers, and bulletin boards, but not as gadflies or the "afflicters of the comfortable." When we were publishing good investigative stuff at the Washington Jewish Week in the early 1990s, I felt there was a small elite of readers who appreciated what we were doing (the kinds of readers who gravitate to Protocols and the woefully under-subscribed Forward), a similarly-sized clique that felt we were bad for the Jews, but a remaining majority that didn't care much for that kind of reporting and flipped quickly to the recipes, synagogue announcements and wedding notices.

I don't blame them, necessarily. It's a divide within religious life as well -- there are many folks, and I'd guess they are the majority, who take part in religious life as if they were slipping into a warm bath, looking for comfort, solace, and reaffirmation of their basic beliefs and prejudices. Only an elite takes part to be intellectually challenged and spiritually discomfitted. (I think this is true in all the movements, by the way.) That's not to say that the complacent crowd is neither intellectual nor up for a challenge -- only that they seek those challenges outside of affiliated Jewish life.

The question for me as an editor is, do I lead or follow? I think I try to split the difference -- gently and responsibly lead them to uncomfortable places, but also provide the kind of stuff that affirms their basic commitment to their Jewishness. Does that sound wiggly? Perhaps. But I don't think there is an editor in the country, at any newspaper or media outlet, who doesn't weigh the platonic ideals of the journalist's profession against what he sees as the appettites of his community of readers.

There's one other factor that must be said, and that's the talent pool in Jewish journalism. Journalism and the media are already "Jewish" professions and serve as magnets for the best and brightest of our community. Papers like mine are small, alternative, fairly low-paying -- and unable to provide the prestige and opportunities available in the mainstream. That doesn't mean that I haven't worked with really talented people -- and still do. But the reality is that we're less able to compete for the "major league" talent, and on the whole the product sufers as a result.

The Rebbe’s Army: Inside the World of Chabad-Lubavitch
by Sue Fishkoff
Shocken Books

Reviewed by Stephen Fried for the Washington Post


It’s always good news for journalists--and readers--when the tools of investigative reporting and narrative non-fiction writing start being used on a subject previously dominated by party-line, press release coverage. Over the past decades, we’ve seen this happen to the journalism of crime, sports, politics, the high and low arts, business, law and medicine. And it finally appears to be happening in the coverage of religion. In December, Publishers Weekly noted the rise of narrative non-fiction writing on religion (which could explain why religion book sales held steady during a year when nearly every other category was hammered.) And the recent Pulitzer Prize for public service reporting on the Catholic Church scandal is certain to signal to the next generation of journalists that there are rich veins worth mining in religion reporting.
Some will do strip mining. Others will be more mindful of environmental impact; sometimes too mindful. In many cases, the approach will depend on whether the work was inspired by their own growing affection or disaffection with religion.
In “The Rebbe’s Army” (Schocken), Sue Fishkoff, a freelancer for Jewish publications and an editor at a California alternative weekly, tells us right up front how she has been personally affected by covering the Chabad-Lubavitch. She was especially touched by the main subjects of her book, the shlichim—the bearded emissaries of the controversial Jewish right-wing movement, known for buttonholing people, inquiring about their semitism, and trying to convince them to engage, right then and there, in a meaningful Jewish ritual.
The Lubavitchers have, she admits, “activated within me what they would call my Jewish soul.” And her book does an admirable job of showing just how this unique army of guerilla proselytizers, who aim to “convert” non-observant American Jews back to some version of their own religion, have succeeded in reactivating souls in many creative and ambitious ways.
Two paragraphs below, however, she tells us something that pretty well describes where her considerable efforts come up short. She says that she and many other Jews she interviewed “have been touched by how Lubavitchers incorporate into their daily lives the Jewish values most of us give little more than lip service.” She notes that the Lubavitch “visit the sick” and “comfort the grieving” and “take care to avoid embarrassing others” and whenever she visits one of their homes she is “urged to stay for dinner.” The implication is that the rest of organized (and disorganized) Judaism has given up on all that, which is what her Lubavitch sources seem to believe. Having just spent the better part of the last five years covering synagogues and rabbis, mostly in the more centrist Conservative movement, I can assure Fishkoff that there are plenty of non-Lubavitch Jews all over America who would visit her, comfort her and feed her--and then try to feed her again. (My mom, for example.)

"Madonna is just the latest in a great tradition of stars who have been beguiled by Judaism. For Elizabeth Taylor and Marilyn Monroe, marriage may have been the motive, to Eddie Fisher and Arthur Miller, respectively. But for Sammy Davis Jr. it was not. In the case of Madonna, who was born Roman Catholic, her fascination with Jewish images flows mostly out of her attraction to something that she calls cabala but that many dismiss as a distillation of New Age notions about the genuine cabala.

Surfer writes: I had a hunch that the love letter - editorial to Lubavitch this week was written by Jonathan Mark - who is in love with such things - and not Gary.

Aaron writes: The problem with Jewish newspapers, as I see it, is simply that they've never really outgrown thinking of themselves as essentially community newsletters. A newspaper has an obligation to be somewhat contrary in its approach, if only to maintain a readership that thrives on controversy. A newsletter, on the other hand, prints things that are nice, so that people can get nachas out of the stories. If a newsletter does print negative stories, it's only doing so to mirror what its general readership believes, the better to maintain that readership. It's foolish to hope for real journalistic integrity coming from a Jewish "newspaper." The best I ever hope for is some really good gossip.

Looking back on the legal case against Sharon, I see one important element of the story that has not been sufficiently addressed, if at all. And that is, the complete apathy the great majority of Israelis have shown to the case against Sharon as it developed over the past few months. While the papers had a field day with the accusations, it stirred no passions whatsoever in the general population. I never heard anyone talking about it; there were no demonstrations on the street. And it wasn’t that most Israelis thought Sharon was innocent; they simply did not care whether the man leading them was a criminal or not.
To some extent, of course, that was a result of the complex and technical nature of the accusations against him. No one really understood exactly what he was accused of and so it was hard to feel strongly.
It was also, however, a reflection of just how accepted political corruption has become in Israel, to the extent where it is sometimes even celebrated (eg. Deri). As one friend said to me, “all politicians are corrupt, it’s just a question of how much.” Unfortunately, financial ‘irregularities’ come right at the bottom of that scale – particularly with sums that are not deemed to be huge, although I would warrant they were very large indeed to a military man like Sharon.
Another factor was Sharon’s personal popularity as ‘wartime’ leader, and the fact there’s no obvious replacement in sight. Many Israelis, I think, asked themselves whether it was really worth risking his leadership, and perhaps suffering strategically in the struggle against the Palestinians, over, again, what was perceived as a few ‘minor financial irregularities.' They concluded it wasn’t.
The truth is, of course, that not all politicians are corrupt, and that it makes no difference whether we’re talking about $250,000 or $25m. The crimes Sharon was accused of involved abuse of his governmental position, and thus, betrayal of the people.
Our leaders, like Caesar’s wife, must be above suspicion. If anything, this is more important that ever in times of ‘war,’ when you need to be sure your leaders are basing their decisions on relevant considerations only, and cannot be swayed through their pocketbooks. To be willing to overlook or tolerate corruption, for whatever reason, is to sacrifice the high standards of morality on which Israel was founded and on which it prides itself. If Israelis have lost sight of this, there is something rotten in the state of Israel.

(Cross-posted to Bloghead)

Amalek writes Luke: This problem you've identified within jewish journalism isn't limited to the Jews - pick up any Negro newspaper (e.g. The New Amsterdam News in NY) or any other publication catering to a minority that thinks it's embattled, and you will see the same problems.

Part of the problem is that most journalists are heterosexual, and most hetersexuals (apart from yourself, of course) marry and have kids, which cost a lot (as another of your correspondents has noted). This suggests a solution that has been working, within limits, for the Roman Catholic Church for almost 2,000 years: hire gays! With rare exception, gays don't worry about tuition payments for young Peter or Paul, and as they are more apt to be hostile to the established order to begin with, they don't suck up as much on the job. (Jews tend to be more hostile than their better looking WASP competitors as well, but
that's another story.)

You are neither a homosexual nor (really) hetersexual. And while you caption yourself a Jew, you don't have the burden of Jewish genes to make you angry at the world at large. You then, are the ideal man for taking on the role of watchdog over the Jewish Press and the Jewish Kehila in general. Just don't expect to make a lot of money doing this.

If you are really researching Jewish journalism, you should look up Larry Cohler, who now writes for the NY Daily News, I believe. He was the great "stir the pot" investigative Jewish journalist in the 1980's and '90's -- Washington Jewish Week, then NY Jewish Week, and some other places -- who pissed off the establishment on a regular basis. Federation types used to turn green at the mention of his name.

The basic problem in Jewish journalism, aside from Federation control -- is needing to make a living. People hit their 30's and need to support families. Therefore, they have to join the establishment papers -- as editors if they want to make any kind of money, or move into better-paying work.

Or, if they are excellent journalists, like Larry, they break out of the Jewish ghetto. Or like the late Robert Friedman, they write about Jewish issues for the Village Voice, etc. I'm sure that someone like Steven is eventually going to stop being young and hungry and move on to the mainstream. He's already gotten stuff in New York Magazine. Before him, Jeff Goldberg climbed from the Jerusalem Post to the Forward, to NY Magazine, to NY Times Magazine to the New Yorker (where he just wrote about...Israel)

So you are left with few to no smart and talented people who, once they get the contacts and have the experience, are willing to work indefinitely in the trenches of being a reporter for a Jewish paper long-term. No Seymour Hershes. Hey, if you are willing to live in your hovel indefinitely, you're the man.

What's interesting is that there is occasionally some good critical journalism about the American Jewish community going on -- by Israelis. In Hebrew, of course, though some of it is now translated into English by Ha'aretz and other places with web sites. The advantage is that they are outsiders and not part of the community so they don't mind being critical. The downside is that they often aren't inside enough to get the stories, or to care deeply about them.

Also, once upon a time, there was a really good investigative journalist named Charles Hoffman at the Jerusalem Post, who got fired along with the rest of the crew in 1990. He really took the lid off of the Jewish Agency at one point, and if you can ever see his book "The Smoke Screen" I recommend it. Again, he needed to earn a living, so after he left the Post he went to work for the Joint in the former Soviet Union.

Sadly, he died at an early age -- here's his obit.

The Messiah Wars.

More questions for the editor of The Jewish Week, Gary Rosenblatt:

Stephen M. Tolany writes: Ask Rosenblatt why fringe left groups are presented as if they were mainstream Orthodoxy. Ask him why so much coverage is given to completely marginal figures like Chaviva Ner-David (the woman who wanted to be an Orthodox rabbi). Ask him why Yeshiva University is constantly and repeatedly portrayed as an extremist right insitution when it is in fact, somewhat to the left of the mainstream.

Ask him why there is almost no coverage whatsoever of the yeshivish/traditional Orthodox community, and why the little coverage there is tends to be negative. Ask him why nearly every article The Jewish Week has run about Chareidi/"yeshivish" Orthodoxy in America is about scandals and financial corruption. One example: When Rav Avrohom Pam, late Rosh Yeshiva of Torah Vodaath, passed away, The Jewish Week ran a story about the man. The headline was something like "rabbi who spoke out against financial impropriety mourned". The one-page article focused mainly on a few statements Rav Pam made on the subject, and neglected any description of the man's life and long career as a Jewish educator.

Reading the pages of The Jewish Week, an outsider would think that all of Orthodox Judaism--save for fringe left groups--is mired in fanaticism and financial impropriety. Is presenting the majority of the most religiously committed segment of the Jewish population this way really advancing Jewish unity? Ask Gary Rosenblatt why his paper is on a crusade against Orthodox Judaism.

And ask him why so many of the articles and op-eds about the Lanner debacle used Lanner as a springboard for criticisms of the whole concept of kiruv.

Tell him that many in the Orthodox community feel that The Jewish Week took advantage of the Lanner scandal to GENERALLY discredit--even defame--Yeshiva University roshei yeshiva, the OU, NCSY, and kiruv in general. Ask him what he would respond to such allegations.

ME writes: Even the former President of the OU, Dr. by Mandell I. Ganchrow acknowledges that there were serious problems at the OU/NCSY in his book "Journey Through the Minefields: From Vietnam to Washington, an Orthodox Surgeon's Odyssey". He has a whole chapter on Lanner.

Rosenblatt did good with the Lanner story. He was one of the very few who stood for principle in this situation.

Lanner would still be working with children and women if not for Gary's stand.

Excerpt from Ganchrow's book:

"The Executive Board meeting, which lasted nearly five hours, was not an easy affair. Rabbi Butler made an emotional speech. Afterwards, several members of the Executive Board invoked halacha in order to condemn lashon ha'ra (speaking ill of people) and rechilut (gossip). Others said we should ignore the press and simply hunker down in support of our staff. I noticed that not a single person discussed the implications of the gross violation of halacha involved in protecting those who abuse children."

1 Who Knows posts: Does anyone know what's up with Matis Weinberg?

He appears to have gotten away with everything.

I'm interviewing Gary Rosenblatt, editor of The Jewish Week, in the next few days, and I welcome your suggested questions.
Steven I. Weiss writes:

Ask Gary:

1) How many rabbinic abuse stories he's confirmed but hasn't written about, due to pressure or whatever reason.

2) What does he think have been his most important journalistic accomplishments other than the rabbinic abuse stuff?

3) How has being a Federation paper affected his paper and its coverage?

4) What does he think of the Federation papers he hasn't worked for?

5) When and how does he want to end his journalistic career?

6) What are his Web stats?

7) How important is the Web page to his operation?

8) What blogs does he read?

9) What else does he read, daily, weekly and monthly?

Me writes:

I'd like to ask a similar question but in a slightly different form and in several parts:

1) How many victims of rabbinical abuse approached you before and how many approached you after the Lanner story?

2) How many did you determine were false or accurate?

3) How many did you choose not to pursue or write about and why?

4) Did you recommend to victims or people contacting you to take any course of action or contact anyone to address their allegations? By my count there are at least 6 substantial cases that Rosenblatt was approached on that went unreported. There are 4 cases mentioned in this article.

"Perhaps most disturbing has been the number of people urging me to investigate specific rabbis and Jewish educators in the Orthodox community, naming names and offering me details. One is said to be a pedophile with a history of arrests who is a principal in a Brooklyn yeshiva; another pedophile reportedly now works with Jewish youth in Florida; a womanizing rabbi has changed his name and moved to Israel, I was told; and a local rabbi is said to have an unhealthy interest in teenage boys." 5th case mentioned here (although Gary knew that case 5's father-in-law and former Vice-President of the Rabbinical Aliance of America was also a convicted pedophile, so that would bring the count to 6 unamed cases):

"...and concerns about another member of the rabbinic group who is alleged to have abused children in previous posts."

Shmarya writes: Ask him why his newspaper is whitewashing Chabad. (See my letter to his assistant editor below.) Ask him why Chabad's duplicitous policy toward Ethiopian Jews is not worth covering. Ask him if the Federation or donors or advertisers have influenced his paper's coverage of Chabad. Ask him why there was no coverage of Chabad's role (financed in part with tax-exempt donations) in blocking Gaza withdrawal. . . .

Here's the new Jewish Week Chabad piece.

Here's my letter:

I just read your piece on Chabad and I'm sorry to say that I'm very disappointed. Messianism is more well-hidden than it was ten years ago, but it has by no means decreased. Further, I would have expected some mention of Chabad's role (supported in part by tax-exempt donations) in agitating against the Gaza withdrawal and Chabad's discrimination against Ethiopian Jews (whose rescue, one may recall, was featured featured prominently in Chabad's messianist campaigns in 1991 - 94. And what of the harassment of Rabbi Shaul Shimon Deutsch? What about the smearing and harassment of David Berger? Is not the need to live behind bullet-proof glass worthy of mention? I myself was threatened when I publicized the Rebbe's duplicity (yes, duplicity) in dealing with Ethiopian Jews.

I would also like to add that the "basement shul," as you well know but your readership does not, is the main shul of the movement. You do a disservice to your readers to let them believe otherwise.

Gene Mutation Can Make Wandering Animals True to Mates. Perhaps this is the solution to my sinful urges.

The Live Journal of Anne Frank

A Man in His Mid-20s Goes Back to the Prom.
What is it about Australians and kids?
Lvnv writes: Memo to Boston Archdiocese:
Have you tried the "but the alter boy was my reincarnated lover" defense?
Better yet, any future pedophilia must happen in public view. That way: it's not buggery. It's performance art!
Listen to me and you'd have saved a couple mill.

From my no-holds-barred throwdown with Steven I. Weiss:

"Have you ever dated a black girl?"

"No."

"Why not?"

"I haven't really dated much."

"Do you think girls are icky?"

"No. I've known icky girls."

"Would you prefer to marry a male or female?"

"I'd prefer to marry a female. I'm not a homosexual."

"Do you think you could get used to it?"

"If it was just me and another guy on a deserted island for the rest of our lives, yeah. I'm sure I could get used to it. I don't know. Maybe I wouldn't want to. What if he was ugly? What if he was you?"

I could fit three of your relatives, if they are skinny, into my hovel and two can stay in my van.

I did a two hour interview with Steven I. Weiss Tuesday night. Read it here.

Sellout wrote:

Ask him:

"How do you feel about abandoning the blog you worked hard to build?

also, ask him-- "do you feel a sense of loyalty and/or gratitude towards the readership that caused the Forward to notice you as a Jewish journalist?

If so, how does the way in which you treated said readership after getting your Forward position reflect this?"

Also, ask him if he is gay.

Luke replies: I asked him all of the above.
I don't think Steven Weiss owes you anything. You don't have to pay to read Protocols. I think he got his Forward gig on his own, not because of anything his Protocols readership did for him.
Do I feel like I owe the Protocols reader anything? Nope. You don't pay me. You don't do me any favors (not that I solicit them). I write what I like.
I'm working on a new book -- The New Jewish Journalism. I'm setting up an interview with Gary Rosenblatt of The Jewish Week. Anything you want me to ask him? My book will be a compilation of interviews with various Jewish journalists, including Weiss.

Bush suspends embassy move to Jerusalem

Haaretz reports that Kofi Annan will attend Monday’s UN Seminar on anti-Semitism.

Anyone know what he is going to say?

I'm going to my first unveiling Friday morning. What should I expect? I bought a new outfit for the occasion. Am I hot or not?

How girls can determine it they are really hot.

Religion, reality and the Rambam.

Anyone else suprised to read the following about Rabbi Moshe Taragin in yesterday's NYT?

Rabbi Taragin is a member of a movement that sees all the settler colonies as part of a divine plan leading to the coming of the Messiah. For them, it is forbidden to uproot Jews from what they see as part of the land of Israel. They speak of expansive Israeli borders from the Mediterranean Sea to the Jordan River.

But Rabbi Taragin said the possibility that an exchange of land would "serve a peaceful environment" deserved attention. "We're willing to allow pragmatism to temper our messianism," he said.

Why do people worship Rabbi Soloveitchik?

A book about Rav Dovid Zvi Hoffman

I'm interviewing Steven Weiss right now. What should I ask him?

"Here is a list of some other things that offend me: the BBC, the CBC, CBS, NBC, ABC, CNN, PBS, NPR, Air America, the NY Times, the LA Times, the Boston Globe, the Seattle Times, the Vancouver Sun, the Guardian, the Independent (which is even worse than the Guardian), Slate, Salon, Noam Chomsky (America's oldest teenager), Michael Moore, Amy-Jill Levine (an Orthodox Jew who teaches New Testament Studies at Vanderbilt University Divinity School [!]), and every university in the English-speaking world, save for Hillsdale College and maybe BYU."

The fan mail is pouring in so fast, I can barely keep up with it.

Sane teenage girl Cecile du Bois writes: With your irate tone lately on your main blog--'lukeford.net', you seem actually offended by the protocols comments. Whenever you log onto Protocols, don't you notice that it is supposed to be evenly shared with plural amount of Jews--not just one self-absorbed one? Sure, you occasionally produce interesting links and snarky commentary, but for the things about you--please post on your main blogsite. For this once, I have to agree with your whiny commenters--you do more posts than Wonkette does in a week but daily! Let others post too--its not 'lukeford.blogspot.com' now is it?
Like the Arabs taking over Europe, you're taking over this website. Chill out dude.
Or else your rash commenters will have a 'puke in' and start their own blog--'Luke Ford Foes Blog'. You wouldn't want that now, would you?

The kindly Joseph Mailander writes: Luke, if your transition to Judaism doesn't work out to your satisfaction, and reform tribesters want you to be a less-Jewish kind of Jew, while Orthodox Jews want you to be a more Jewish kind of Jew, know that there is always room for you in life as a Roman Catholic.

In Catholicism, you can't bugger any boys anymore in any kind of high-profile way, but given your unshakeable view on sodomy, that shouldn't be much of a sacrifice. Also, the Catholic religion features lots of Jews at its core, to facilitate your transition. The tradition of wisdom works in the same way as the commentaries do: you make it up as you go along in life, bending the text to agree with whatever political views you wish to maintain at any time. In fact, somewhat similarly to Reform Judaism, there is no truly "holy" text at all, as Jesuits these days even routinely refer to the Easter "apparition stories"!

You can have sex with all the women you want, walk into a little booth, tell the man that your sorry for insulting Cathy Seipp "and any other sins of my past life since my last confession" and presto! the love of God is yours again in abundance. You can then play the bingo or its modern surrogate the State Lottery with complete confidence. Overall, it is a pretty good team, with lots of depth--the starting five may suck, but globally there are a billion substitutes ready to take their place. In fact, it is the world's best men's club. Every day is a festival day, so you won't have to work much. Think about it Luke. Life, and even afterlife, could be a lot easier. And your van would look great with a rosary dangling from the rearview mirror.

LYT writes: There already are talking dolls of the Crocodile Hunter out there -- paint a black yarmulke on one, and presto, Luke Ford. I would also suggest altering the sound chip slightly, replacing the word "crocodile" with "shiksa," like so:
"Crikey, that shiksa's a beauty!"
"Cor blimey, that shiksa wants to take a bite out of me bum!"
"That's a bloody pretty mouth on that shiksa!"

Jewish book blog

There have been sincere questions raised on this blog about my moral fitness to sit at the Orthodox table. I'd like to present the testimony of Christian Donald. He knew me for years at Aish HaTorah. He'd like to tell you something:
He converted to a religion that he has since leached for weekly meals, preyed sexually on their women, regularly disrupted discussion groups, and behaved in social situations so inappropriately that he is on blacklists in his chosen Jewish neighborhood. Can you imagine joining a religious group, only to become their most continually inappropriate and biggest butt-pain?
His behavior came up at Shabbat dinner this week. My host was re-telling a “Shabbat Disasters of the Past” story. It was a tale of the most inappropriate, obnoxious behavior by a guest you can imagine. Overtly sexual and homosexual innuendo and dialogue the entire night. The host was so shocked and upset, he ended up going into his kitchen to do dishes to get away from this “guest.” No other guests that were at his home that night have since returned. You can imagine why. My host was not using anything in his description that would ordinarily be deemed identifiable about the subject. It was just a story. Yet the fact that he was describing Luke Ford was painfully obvious.

An Orthodox friend of mine said that if Starbucks were run as a kosher establishment, it would go down market and become schlumpy. I guess many Jews perceive that when the black hats take over, things go down market.
Now, Cofee Bean chain is owned by traditional Jews and I believe it is kosher. It's a nice establishment. I want you to know that I am even more appalled by my friend's anti-Semitism than you are.
Certainly the quality of English writing in Jewish publications is inferior to those of the goyim (Sports Illustrated, Playboy, Rolling Stone, etc). Jewish newspapers (with the exception of the Forward) are dull.
Double Espresso writes: "I have heard through the grapevine that most baked goods at Starbucks are actually kosher certified in their original shipping containers, however, Starbucks for whatever reason doesn't want to go kosher..."

Steven I. Weiss writes:

Ask and ye shall receive. The New Standard's publisher, Daniel Newman, has posted the article mentioned earlier, as well as one set to print today, about the Conservadox/Orthotive synagogue in Columbus.

::Agudas Achim could join United Synagogue, from the June issue.

::Congregation Agudas Achim votes to become Conservative synagogue, from the July issue.

Ari writes: I kinda get the feeling that this whole "religion vs. reality" issue is less a rigorous intellectual examination than a feeling you have, and let me say, in a non-ad hominem kinda way, this feeling is at best vaugely defined. I'll try to explain by adressing your points:

Religion made the guy rude: completely unsupported supposition on your part, a religious person may express stronger feelings when religious issues are brought up but that applies to anyone with a vested interest in a particular subject. Tell a "secular" person who is into rap that you think it sucks and see what language they use or visit an "indymedia" site to see the corteous language used by the mostly secular community.

Transcendant God:OK, nice word, but does that mean G-d transcends reality? is the spiritual realm real? Try the idea that orthodox Judaism beleives God transcends the physical univers and all of its dimensions of space and time (which is also a physical dimension), but unless you are claiming the spiritual realm does noit exist as part of "reality" your statement makes no sense. It is also probable that I am not fully understanding what you mean by "reality" but my reading as just presented is not implausable so the burden falls on you to clarify.

Religion vs. Reason: Biblical criticism is hardly a hard scientific venture that therefore pits "reason against belief. Considering its history of wildly fluctuating theories and considering that THEY HAVE YET TO UNEARTH ONE VERSION of the pentatauch with passages from a later author "missing", they have not one piece of hard evidence to support their theories. In fact, there are demands, miztvoth that would make most "reasonable" people reject a human who presents them with these rules especially the rules calling for societal suicide (as opposed to individual sacrifice like burning of babies which existed at some point in the history of religions) I mean in an agricultural society asking every farmer to not plant or cultivate? what reasonable people would agree to a rule like "shmitta" if they did not experinece themselves a revelation from God. Or rules requiring every able bodied male to travel to Jerusalem three times a year and thus leave the borders unguarded, the arabs figured out about yom kippur, certainly their enemies could have exploited the three pilgramige holidays, who would accept such a book if they did not see God was giving it to them. Look at what other religions promise, the kingdom of heaven, 72 virgins, all things dont require intervention in this world.

Religious Jews Absent themselves from most of Reality: Again I dont know what you mean, how you can absent yourself from "reality." Yes there are certain constraints on the actions of religious Jews, but there are restraints on the actions of everyone at leat through societal norms and laws. Have you ever felt what its like to kill someone Luke? to look into their eyes as their life ebbs away, to feel their warm blood cascade over your hands with the slicing of the knife? No? Well you dont know what you are missing you, you, self denier of reality.

Success of religious people in certain spheres: I guess success should be judged by what you make a priority, how many orthodox Jews were national spelling bee champions? None, well they are failures at spelling. Or, they would rather their kids memorized mishnayos or biblical verses that ancient greek root words. Ask a religious Jew how important is it for him to study light and shadow in oils on canvas and he'll tell you he has more important things to worry about. Whose the person so accomplished in the arts that can break down a complex legal or moral argument in the way most true Torah scholars can? There have been great religious Jewish artist in religious silver artifacts and religious poets that can put together God's praises in ways we can only envy, or express our laments in kinnot that will cause any feeling heart to cry, but have they made a great movie? concerto? Priorities my friend.

Religious Jews at the forefront of policy: Well list me a country where there is any significant percentage of the population that are Orthodox Jews. 10% of US's 2%? We are .2% here, virtually nothing evberywhere else, welcome to democracy in action, but we do have our share of influence in government local and federal and an occaisional politician as well, Also again think "priorities" why waste time setting policy for so many other people who have no connection to our priorities and way of life.

Generally opposed creation of Israel/died in holocuast: Two different points to make, they opposed zionism as a substitution for othodox Jewish Identity knowing it means nothing witout a religious basis, Two major "religious groups actively acted agianst the formation of Israel and one does today the N'turei Karta but there are far more "secular" people arguing that Israel is racist and must give up its "jewish" identity to make a one state solution possible. And as far as the Holocaust you as always bring no supporting evidence, Religious Jews were more prevelant in Eastern Europe which bore the brunt of the Nazi assault and being from Eastern Europe were poorer with less ability to escape. I dont even understand the point you are trying to make, the 3 million religious Jews of poland did not have the years of warning that the more secular german/dutch Jews had to see Hitler in action, why they should have forseen Hitlers devastation of Poland, land never claimed by Germany, or White Russia after there was a signed treaty is explains what they saw by the reality they lived. Many more Secular German Jews kept pretending that all would be ok.

Catholic Church: I wont even try to explain what they do, they have a lot worse record than keep advocating birth control.

Religious Filter vs. "Reality": Umm well we all have "filters", right mr. White male American? Through in religion or sexual orientation or attractiveness or a million other chararcteristics that influence how, what, and why we see things. Pretty poor way to frame an argument that religion filters out reality more than being a white supremecist or a black male or anything. Try using persuasive proofs next time. They definately help an argument.

Shmarya writes: Ari, The anti-Zionism-don't-leave-Europe-for-America thing started in 1881, after the great pogroms in Russia. Rabbis -- fearing the loss of their communities and therefore their prestige -- forbade emmigration. Even during the Holocaust, major Romanian and Hungarian rabbis preached sermons in their synagogues against Zionism, against emmigration and, with a religious zeal that far outstripped the rabbis' piety or wisdom, those rabbis assured their flocks that the Germans would not take Romania or Hungary and that the Jews there would be safe. Why? Because the anti-Zionism that pervaded those Jewish communities would bring down Divinely ordained protection. (Read Em HaBanim Semaykha for a first-hand account.) This idea of Divine Protection because of anti-Zionism also seems to have motivated the then-Lubavitcher Rebbe, Y.Y. Schneershon, to tell families of American students that it was perfectly safe to send their children to POLAND to study. There would not be a war, he assured them. When did the Tzaddik of Lubavitch do that? The summer of 1939, about a month before the start of WWII and Hitler's invasion of Poland. The Jewish orphanage accross the street from the Chabad yeshiva was hit by a bomb in the early days of the war. Those American students watched in horror as body parts of Jewish orphans flew through the air.

As for the general argument of the rational view of reality vrs. the religious view of reality, I would say this: Orthodox Judaism is very rational, but only within its closed system, a system that has largely suspended the laws of nature and physical science from its world.

Further, I would posit that most Rishonim would be appalled by what we today call Orthodox Judaism, with its added (and often unnecessary) strictures, with its petty rivalries and often silly clothes and 'minhagim,' of which most resemble those of non-Jewish Eastern European pesantry two centuries past, not anything truly Jewish.

Lastly, Orthodox Jews are not at the forefront of policymaking in the US not because of demographics, but because of bigotry. Bigotry and not antisemitism. In general, Orthodox Jews do not care about the 'other.' Non-Jews (or non-Orthodox Jews) do not enter in to the Orthodox worldview. Let's face it. If one views non-Jews as cattle (Lakewood, etc.), does one care about their customs or their lives? The only Orthodox concern in this area is how the 'other' impacts Orthodox life. A light onto the nations? Let's get real.

Ari writes: Luke-
Points you added after my first response:

Prohibited topics-The pentatauch does not go through a whole moral balancing act considering whether killing, stealing, kidnapping or eating shellfish can be acceptable. Its not a major focus of the oral law in the mishna or Talmud either, but there are discussions in the medrash, illustrations of consequences, and explanations ventured as well as to why these particular things are prohibited in a torah society. There are medrashim and other talmudic passages that talk about the value of life, potential life, and wasting it outside the context of specifically holy acts. If you have the artscroll yom kippur machzor, read tefillah zakah to see what we focus on just as we are about to enter the day of atonement, read R' Kaplan's translation of Meam Loez about Onan. I'd be interested in your reactions to both.
Humor and sacred texts: quick how many jokes in the constitution? the magna carta? the Internal revenue code? what? none? those stiff humorless secularists!

I guess there's a time and place for humor as well.

But btw,m you can find it is some of tanach if you are looking: Nothing demonstrates Gods sense of humor and irony like the concept of Midah K'negged midah: drowning the egyptians like they drowned the jews etc.
Its in other books as well: Megillas Esther: the verse says that the king called queen vashti to appear before his party wearing the royal crown, the implication spelled out by the commentaries is: the royal crown and nothing else. There is even a hint at the end of the megillah about one of the oldest jewish jokes about our famous difference of opinion (10 Jews, 11 opinions; stranded on the island:"that the shul I go to, that the shul I wouldnt be caught dead in.")

After saving all the Jews in the kingdom with his organization and foresight it still says that Mordechai was "Ratzui L'rov E'chav" admired by "MOST" jews, theres always got to be someone complaining....
and this in the gemarah: two rabbis are partying so hard one purim that one of them kills the other, luckily that rabbi had the power to ressurect the dead and brought his friend back to life. The next year purim rolls around and the "killer" rabbi asks, "we getting together to party?" "Ummm, I dont think so..."

If you'd like to curse the Luke-induced darkness, why don't you instead light a candle and send me some good topical Jewish links?

Tick writes Luke: The hostility you might have experienced here, has nothing to do with you being a convert, and everything to do with you acting like a provocative idiot.

You came into others’ “sacred space,” and urinated in their face, exposing all the muck in your mind that you chose to expose. You could obviously have written differently, as you are now, but you chose to affront.

And people reacted accordingly. It made NO difference if you were a convert or a born Jew. The reaction would have been the same.

Don’t hide behind the excuse of being a convert. People are not reacting to the “convert.” They are reacting to YOU, Luke.

If you can’t take the heat, clean up your mess and get out of the kitchen.

Honey writes: I don't think that's quite true - there were plenty of responses to Luke's posts that exploited his conversion and status as a convert as means for insult. Had any other blogger here made the same comments as him, they may have been taken to task, but not in words that challenged their claims to membership in the Jewish community.

Depricating writes: Ezra's message is actually quite depricating and belittling of Luke.

I find it insulting to everyone. What is this, Aish Hatorah? Cut the crap Ezra.

On the conversion issue-- and listen up, Luke, because this is important-- people here felt that you, as a first generation Jew, should want to unconditionally love and embrace every aspect of frum Judaism. In our naivete, most Orthodox jews believe that converts will live in peace and tranquility for the rest of their days, in worship of the sovereign G-d.

Its important that you enrich their outlooks by intelligently portraying yourself as a valid Jew with fundamental problems with Judaism. Your problems don't make you less of a Jew. In some senses, they make you more of a Jew.

judaism is about the process, not the result, and you are clearly more engaged in the process of truth-seeking than most of the people who post here.

That being said, there are ways to intelligently and respectfully post, and ways to post items clearly designed to cause anger and foment. The choice, Luke Oh Master of Protocols, is yours.

Joe Schick writes: Luke, Is your cynicism related to Orthodox Jews or Orthodox Judaism?

Most of your complaints seem to relate to how you are treated on a personal level (i.e. not being invited to shabbat meals) or the fact that some Orthodox Jews, in your words, prefer religion to reality. With respect to the latter, while there are situations in which one must suspend rationalist belief, overall Judaism is by far more rationalist than the other religions. I suggest you review some of the Rambam's works.

Depricating replies: Joe, I think there shouldn't be much of a split between how Orthodox Jews act and Orthodox Judaism as an 'ism.'

Unfortunately, there is, as people derive truths from the pervasive secular morality of our society. If people truly lived halacha in a humble and non-pharisaic way, yes, by reading Rambam and other sources, we would be alot better off.

I wasn't saying that Aish Hatorah is crap in and of itself. But I think attempts to bring Aish-style lovey-dovey-ness to someone like Luke, who clearly has spent his fair share of time at Aish Hatorah and similar institutions is very insulting and belittling to him.

Aish does great work for those who choose to participate in its kiruv programs. I just resent the tone with which Ezra addressed Luke. It was patronizing and condescending, in a way that I have heard Aish hatorah employees and other kiruv professionals speaking.

My favorite prayer - Aleinu. It just gave me the chills because I quote it in English in my memoir. In the most weird places, I'd start singing it and Adon Olam. People thought I was weird. It gave me peace and energy. I also love that bit in the Amidah about Your miracles that are with us daily. And the stuff at the end about not replying to people who speak harshly of you. I've really worked on that and I think I've done pretty well.

A midah of mine that I'm pretty proud of is that I rarely defend myself. I just take criticism and say nothing back most of the time.
I'm also a good listener. I love kids. Genuinely. They identify with me because we're both rebellious.

I love arguing Torah with those who are knowledgeable. Most shabbatot after davening, you will find me sitting with several Orthodox rabbis discussing Torah and life and Air Supply. I find that rabbis love to gossip as much as any group, only they have fancier words to describe what they're doing. The rabbis like me because I'm well read, deferential to their learning, and unconventional.

I don't have much of a religious agenda. Whatever makes people finer. So I have friends who are right-wing Orthodox to Modern Orthodox to secular.

I love sitting around the Shabbos table with joy and talking and listening. Unfortunately, due to my behavior, most of the Shabbat tables I've loved most I am now exiled from. I spend most Friday nights alone reading. And Sabbath afternoons alone. And holy days alone. It gets lonely.

My limit with company, however, is about three hours. Then I get antsy.
I much prefer learning to davening. I'd be in Daf Yomi today if there were a Daf in town that would take me on.
I'm more effective at kiruv than most Orthodox Jews because I chose OJ and that makes me more intriguing. I also have tons of Dennis Prager tapes and other materials that I used to lend out. I used to burn with fervor.

Slo-Mo writes: Are you in some kind of a fugue state when you incite criticism in the first place by the ugly things you say, and so forget your own offensiveness? And the criticism is often more restrained than what you said to begin with.

“I don’t have much of a religious agenda”? Someone makes the mistake of inviting you to her daughter’s confirmation at a Reform temple out of some misplaced sense of regard for you. You have often written in disdain of non-Orthodox Jews, but you decide to go to this temple, allegedly “to support” the daughter. The service, predictably, offends you so much that you whip out a book you just happen to have, which you begin to read in obvious and self-righteous protest against your surroundings. Perhaps you preferred the drama of publicly embarassing/offending somebody who may have considered you a friend to the consideration of a privately declined invitation. You certainly got more material for the blog by choosing the first option.

Exactly what behavior got you exiled from those Shabbat tables? Was it your “joy,” “talking” or “listening”? I’ll lay odds it wasn’t the last. For a guy who writes at such great length about himself you show remarkably little self-awareness.

Luke replies: What got me exiled was all the offensive things I said and did.

I take a book with my everywhere I go - be if Reform or Orthodox circles or Christian or secular. And when I'm bored, I start reading. I always take a book to shul. I sometimes read two books in the course of three hours of davening Shabbos morning. Am I so wrong?

I don't need to be self-aware when I have friends like Slo-Mo to keep me on my toes.

An Orthodox rabbi tells me that "the spies and studying Torah in the desert... the shla hakadosh say that is the sin and the implication you cited is correct and accurate."
Read Rabbi Ari Kahn at Aish.com and then report back. We've got to talk about this.

Apology writes: Luke,

I was the 'puke' post from before.

1) I want to apologize for the tone of my post. After reading it just now I realize that it was disgusting, and wish to apologize.

2) I respectfully submit that your rationale for converting to Judaism is very very disturbing. If you went to a mainstream Rav and requested a conversion on the basis that you want 'color and excitement' and the contrast of the shiksa/nonshiksa distinction, ie-- that you want a sort of artificial (for YOU) moral backdrop against which you can sin, sort of like a white canvas on which to throw red paint, I would hope that that Rav would have scruples and intergrity enough to send you away.

Again, my apologies for crossing the lines of civility. I think my anger stems from the feeling many of us Orthodox protocols readers have that you are in some despicable way using Orthodox Judaism for your own personal twisted purposes. That is moraly reprehensible at best.

I'm sorry to be so harsh, but it seems that this blog has taken a turn towards honest discussion instead of inane posts about pornstar nazis.

Luke replies: Apology accepted.
Of course I wasn't as honest with my motives during my conversion. One, I was far more genuine and religious then. Two, do you have any idea how humiliating the conversion process is? It is horrible, even for far more genuine and fervent folks than me. Good converts frequently walk the other way whenever they see a member of their Beit Din.
About Protocols taking a turn for the worse. Well, where are all the frum contributors? Let them step up and post. I don't buy that I've frightened them off. If I have, they are a bunch of wimps. Nobody is forcing anyone to read. The traffic to Protocols is better than ever.
I post to Protocols because I love God, Torah, Judaism, satire, humor and reality. I post the most because I love posting the most. I've interviewed many of the authors of the best Jewish books of the past decade and I haven't made a penny from my labors. I do it because I love it.
Finally, my motivations for conversion. I do not know them. You certainly do not know them. A few off-hand comments on Protocols do not sum up my totality. You guys have no idea how many mitzvot I do. I sat through Daf Yomi for two years. It wasn't just for laughs. I've spent years davening seriously every day in shul. Not reading, davening.
You have no idea how many people I've influenced to take Orthodox Judaism seriously. I've played a significant role in at least dozen cases of persons who were secular becoming frum. Now, many of these same people despise me.
Weighing up the worth of someone is tricky. I can talk to secular people about Orthodox Judaism in an appealing way that almost none of you can. You can reach God and Torah through humor and satire and apparent hostility as well as through more traditional methods. OJ is strong enough to do battle with Luke Ford. You should be too. I thought Israel meant struggle. Let's struggle. Let's rock n'roll. Let's rumble.
Have you ever paused to consider why I may be caustic and cynical about OJ? I knew I'd only have to make a couple of provocative posts on Protocols, and all the hatred and suspicion of the convert that lurks in many, perhaps most, Orthodox Jews will come pouring out. It did. I sought your hatred and you gave it to me and we mutually fulfilled each other's prejudices.
Yet, I obviously believe enough in OJ to go to Daf Yomi and daven in minyan every day for years.
Any claims I have made to great religiosity, or even to being an Orthodox Jew, have clearly been ironic.

Israel Young of Young Israel writes: "Mister Ford, feeling as you do, why have you chosen to be Jewish, and why have you chosen to aspire to the very branch of Judaism you take to be the least rational?"
Because I believe God to be behind it. I believe it is good for me and for the world for me to struggle with Orthodox Judaism. I believe I would be more wicked without it. Without Orthodox Judaism, life seems drained of meaning. There would be no color and excitement. There are no shiksas if there is no Orthodox Torah. For me to get very excited, I have to feel like I am sinning. There's just no sense of sin in non-Orthodox Judaism.

The Last Kaddish.

Explain This One Luke writes: "What exactly, Luke, is the tension between REALITY and RELIGION?? Showing your true colors here, aren't you, puke? I mean Luke?"
Here's what I mean:
* As exemplified by you, religion often makes people behave uglier. I suspect that if you were secular, you would be more courteous. Religion has taught you to react to such sentiments as mine by being a schmuck. You met a part of reality you found disturbing, and you reacted, as you had been religious educated to react, by vomiting on someone who raised a thought you disliked.
* I don't give a damn that many of you are so nasty in the comments. It's water off my back but it certainly doesn't speak well for the supposed civilizing influence of religion. I would say that about a third of the posters on Protocols make religion and God stink. (Not that I claim any merit on this score.) I bet most of the nasty posters on Protocols would not be as nasty if they were not orthodox. You wouldn't get as worked up and needy to hurt someone who disagreed with you.
* I doubt that much of the readership of Protocols that is, judging by their comments, racist and bigoted, would be as racist and bigoted if they were not Orthodox Jews. Religiosity is frequently an excuse for bigotry, for despising those who are not similarly religious, and for denying their humanity. Hence all the religious wars. (Disclaimer -- I fear I enjoy practicing racism and bigotry more than the ordinary guy but never to the point where I do not recognize the humanity of those who are different from me.)
* Religion is grounded in belief in a transcendent God, Who, by definition, transcends reality.
* In the case of the topic of my first two books, religion prohibits discussion of the topic except to condemn it. The subject of my books is an active part of the lives of millions of men but religion forbids studying or discussing this except to condemn it (which is not a discussion or an honest examination). Thus religion and reality are at odds.
* A lot of religious people are so religious that they are stiff. They don't react in a human manner. They don't laugh. They don't frolic. They're not real.
* Jewish humor is overwhelmingly a secular creation. There's little humor in the sacred texts of the Jewish tradition. It wasn't until Jews became secular that Jews became funny. They weren't known for their humor when they were largely observant.
* Religion actively opposes reason in many areas. I ask for reader comments for examples but Biblical criticism is just one that comes to mind.
* Religion, particularly in the way Orthodox Judaism is practiced, calls for the believer to absent himself from much, if not most, of reality.
* Religious Jews rarely succeed in many spheres of reality, such as the arts.
* Religious Jews are not at the forefront of making social policy in any country but Israel.
* A rational secular person would react to THE PASSION by saying, let the Christians tell their story the way they want.
* Overwhelmingly, religious Jews actively opposed the creation of the modern Jewish state of Israel and opposed immigration to the United States from Europe in the early 20th Century. It was generally the religious Jews who died in the Holocaust. The secular ones, more rooted in reality, fled Europe.
* In spite of massive overcrowding and overpopulation in many Catholic parts of the world, the Catholic church actively opposes birth control.
* When you are religious, you can't just meet reality as it is. You meet it through the filters of your religious ideology. Thus a tension between reality and religion. Evidence for this lies in the fact that very few great journalists are religious, and religious groups rarely publish great journalism.

The wilting of NYT columnist David Brooks.

According to Ha'aretz, Israel's High Court of Justice ruled Monday that, at least for the present, pork may be sold in Tiberias, Karmiel and Beit Shemesh.

Sports fans, don't curse the darkness when you can light a candle. If you have something good to share, email it to Your Moral Leader and he will post it. Wouldn't Rebbe Nachman want you to? It's a great mitzva to be happy. Serve the HaKodesh Barchu with joy by emailing me.
Israel Young of Young Israel writes YML: "Now that you own this blog, isn't it time to make some much needed changes around here? For example, in the name of diversity, instead of describing this as "a group of jews endeavors..." etc., why not change "Jews" to "people who are aware of Jews"? It's lots more inclusive."
Chaim Amalek writes: "Luke, your successful presence on Protocols is disproving Gresham's Law."
The cover for XXX-Communicated: A Rebel Without A Shul.

In the spirit of publishing last posts for a long time, I've asked Steven I to remove my name from the Protocols list of current elders. For a while, back in the day, I truly loved this blog. It was conceived by Steve in a moment of brilliance, and set the pace for j-blogging for over 18 months. Over the time that I was active as a blogger (and I'll forestall all the nasty comments by admitting that those days are long past) on this site, I encountered a cadre of honest, compassionate and wise characters (of course, then there were the other type too...). When asked why I blogged, my usual response was that I found myself learning far more from my readers than I could ever hope they'd learn from me.
Likewise, my original co-elders were all individuals of integrity and sincerity, whatever their politics and ideologies, and I look back on our little group with pride.
I thank all the individuals who made this blog the fun and fascinating place it was, and I wish luck to those remaining elders and guest elders who still strive for that goal.
Thank you for reading.

Late notice, but Wednesday was "Official Launch Day" at Fiddish.
This will likely be my last post at Protocols for a very, very long time.

Shayne Shiksa writes: The spies who refused to go to the land of Israel were concerned about the spiritual effect of life in Israel. Their existence in the desert was very spiritual, their food was provided and they spent all their time studying torah with Moses.
The spies were concerned that if the Jews will leave this spirituality in the desert and will go Israel They will have to get a job, work the land, build kibbutzim , high tech industries etc, The “bad” spies preferred to stay in the desert and to study torah all day.
Just like ultra-orthodox of today.

Lost in Translation.
I abandoned the final minute of the Laker game to drive to Torah Ohr to hear the two spiritual leaders of Shas (Israeli Sephardic political party) -- Rav Ovadya Yosef (via teleconferencing) and Rabbi Reuven Elbaz.
I knew both men would speak solely in Hebrew. So why did I come? Because I told a yeshiva bocher who called me last week that I would. I had a moving meeting with R. Elbaz almost two years ago.
Tonight I shake his hand as he walks down the aisle. I understand about 1% of what he says to the crowd of 300.
There's a metaphor in my two hours at Torah Ohr tonight. The richness of the Hebrew tradition washes over me without wearing a groove in my soul.
There are four rows -- three for men and one for women. About half the women wear tight blue jeans, which you would not see in an Orthodox Ashkenazi shul.
I read my Consolation book. I talk to nobody and nobody talks to me. I do not feel like queing up to speak to R. Elbaz at the end. I don't stand in line. I just sit in the back and read until 11PM and then walk to my car.
On the way, I pass by a trafe restaurant. A shiksa in a blue strapless evening gown walks out and smiles at me. She's the first person all night who's smiled at me.
Shiksas and Torah. There's no torment in my soul that can not be cured by a generous serving of each.
Oh wicked man that I am! Why do I not long to understand the words of the rabbis with the same desire I have for this young woman?
As the Talmud says, the greater the man, the greater his lustful impulse.
I drive home cursing at the cars around me who do not move with sufficient briskness.
I can't remember the last time I prayed with fervor, studied Torah with fervor, proselytized Judaism with fervor. The thrill is gone.
Religious highs come and go but shiksa temptations are forever.

How a friend of mine became a Nazi.

Rabbi Gadol of West End Avenue writes: "Luke, Luke, and more Luke. Why is it that I seldom see an authentic Jew posting here (other than in the comments section)? I swear, the goyim are on the march. First they retook the medical schools (Indians are goyim, no?). Then they began muscling their way into television (FOX). Then one of those shkutzes had the temerity to make an antisemitic movie about a Jew who lived thousands of years ago, despite our pleadings to the contrary. They dominate the internet with their hate, and not they have come to dominate Protocols. The irony is too obvious to state."

'Association of Rabbis So Blinded by Ideology that they Wouldn't Know a Jewish Law if they Tripped Over One?'

Shmarya writes: If you're willing to read a novel, try Patty Friedmann's SECOND HAND SMOKE. Brilliant piece set for the most part in New Orleans. Some Jewish characters. Book has the flavor or John Kennedy Toole's A CONFEDERACY OF DUNCES, but still has a voice all its own. And the author's brother is a rabbi to boot.

Remember that great Monty Python bit about the philosophy department of the University of Woollamalloo? Everyone is named Bruce.

Australian Philosophy: Corrupting the Youth

The need for God and ethics down under.

ABC.net.au

Quadrant.org.au

Theage.com.au

This week.

Race matters. Commentary on the racial remarks by Bill Parcells and Larry Bird. Does the NBA need white superstars? Of course it does.

Shayne Shiksa writes: "We had a famous right wing rabbi from LA who spoke in shul about the Mel Gibson Movie and said that as far as he is concerned the did the right thing by killing Yishka, that the way they call the man who is known as the son of God."
Jews of Protocols, how do you vote on this man they call the Son of God? Do you vote to put him to death for blasphemy or do you vote not guilty?
(You don't have to convince me that the Gospels contain anti-Judaic sentiments, such as John 8:44 where Jews are called children of the devil. See the book, Why the Jews? The Reason For Anti-Semitism.)

Rabbi Shlomo Riskin Modern Orthodoxy.

Early in the Friday Night Live service, Rabbi Brian Schuldenfrei gave a brief talk. He said he didn't want to talk politics. He wanted to remember President Reagen's love affair with Nancy and his commitment to friendship. After he read a letter from Ron to Nancy, a young man in the audience of about 800 people, rose and started yelling something like this:

"I'm sorry. This is my first time here and I'm going to have to leave. Ronald Reagen refused to talk about AIDS for seven years. My friends are dead because of Ronald Reagen. He wouldn't fund health care. He wouldn't admit there was AIDS."

Dozens of people clapped in support. Nobody booed him. Two of his friends walked out in support of his tender feelings. The rabbi was all understanding of his hurt feelings.

If I had been the rabbi, I would've said to the fool that Ronald Reagen wasn't the bastardl backdoor bandit who buggered his friends. AIDS is the single most preventable disease and my heart doesn't bleed for those who engage in obviously self destructive behavior that shortens their lives.

I have never seen a conservative act out like this fool, even though Jewish conservatives, about 80% of the time, have to listen to rabbis who are to the political left of them.