Unfortunately Braverman is an example of how fanaticism can override rational thought and distorts even supposedly "rational" scientific discourse. Although I don't agree with you on everything, I believe in the sincerity of your efforts to be fair and rational in all your posts.
And there it is. These people don't just hate Israel, and Jews, and Judaism, and the West, and civilization. They hate humanity. And that is all connected.
Mohammed apparently really didn't like dogs, and really liked cats. No knock on him, we each have our tastes, but unfortunately his attitude became a religious imperative in Islam, to the detriment of dogs. (One can also say that domestication of dogs is a major aspect of the civilizing of man as well, for all that may imply about Islamic civilization.)
In any event: Well done.
For those who are in Jerusalem, there's a deer reserve right in the center of the city, on Herzog Street between Givat Mordechai and Katamonim.
"Mohammed apparently really didn't like dogs, and really liked cats. No knock on him, we each have our tastes, but unfortunately his attitude became a religious imperative in Islam, to the detriment of dogs."
Not that I have a dog in this fight but you sound like how the atheists talk about our version of God and how He has a personal vendetta against homosexuals and we turned into a religious thing. Point is, Mohammed's anti-dog stance most probably *was* a religious thing, something we find in our sources as well. But anyways...
And of course if you're correct, I have np with that, is just not the impression I got, that's all.
The are more than a few midrashim about it. Personally, I think dogs are adorable. And I'm not sure the chareidi distaste for dogs has anything to do with anything except the fact that they are raising so many kids and don't have room or need another mouth to feed and being to care for and love in their limited time.
The claim has been made that Jews, and especially charedim, carry bad memories of Cossacks and Nazis and their dogs. Obviously there are other factors, such as those you mentioned- lots of kids, midrashim that go both ways.
Granted you can find anything in Jewish tradition, including statements somewhat the opposite, but for starters there's the fact that the Torah says to throw non-kosher meat to the dogs, and the Midrash that says that that is a reward for them not giving the Jewish people trouble when they left Egypt. Of course Jewish tradition, like others, note the loyalty of dogs.
After I graduated college in 1987, I visited the Queens Zoo in NYC. I distinctly remember seeing Fallow Deer there. It was my first experience witnessing an animal chew its cud! If my memory serves me right, the deer would just be standing there, and I saw a mass of something ascend into its mouth, which it would start chewing.
Just like the chick who resigned yesterday from her (low-level) post in the Biden administration in protest of Biden’s “disastrous” support for Israel made sure to play up her (likely nominal) Jewish heritage as her reason for doing so.
You can "like" what you will, to be sure, but I gather your implication is that you disagree with these comments.
Unfortunately, however, it is no secret that some of the most strident anti-Israel voices on the Left are those of "self-loathing" (or, perhaps, "white guilt"-ridden) Jews who nevertheless delight in flaunting their "Jewish" principles to justify their opposition to our Jewish State.
Yeah, Israel suffers from a lack of small mammals thanks in part to the prevalence of cats.
(Contrary to popular myth, the cats have always been local; they were not introduced by the British. Ironically, cats are not mentioned even once in Tanach.)
Well, small breeds. The word "חתול" never appears in Tanach. We know they had them from archaeology, and of course Egyptians had them, but Tanach never mentions them. Of course Tanach talks about lions. At the time- it was colder then- there were Asiatic lions in Israel. The species only survives in the wild in one small preserve in India, but there are a few in the Jerusalem Zoo. Tanach also refers to some other species of large cats. That is of course R' Slifkin's department.
Tanach mentions dogs several times, and the context in several of those cases is clearly domestic. Plus, again, we know they had domesticated dogs from archaeology. Of course, "domestic" then meant working, not pets.
Cats are really native species to Israel? I have never heard that before. I was always under the impression that the British brought them in the '20s, '30s. I'm referring to the feral cats that we see all around us. Of course there have been "cats" in Israel, lions, leopards, etc., i.e., big cats.
How do we know that these feral cats are really African wildcats and not British imports? Has someone done the DNA research?
Yes, exactly, DNA research. The cats are local and apparently have always been here, and most have always been wild. At the very least the population is much older than the 1920's.
Well, I certainly learned something. I've always blamed the British (not that they are not easy to blame; they've caused enough trouble for Israel over the years).
I dunno, the cats that roam the streets of Israel don't seem very domesticated. Maybe they were at some point in their ancestry, but I can't tell. The municipalities round them up, spay them, and then release them again. (You can tell if they have a little notch in their ear.) There are of course real wildcats down in the Negev.
And if they bring you a dead animal and you scream and throw it out, they assume you're an idiot kitten (they are bringing it to you to train you to hunt, and what crazy person would throw out a perfectly good dead bird instead of eating it?) and just bring you more.
I used to hate cats due to the mess they made by the trash (yes I know it was really the fault of the humans that didn't put the trash away propberly). Once upon a time, many years ago, when I was living in Telz Stone, I had to do periodic shmira from midnight to 4am by the entrance. One night I saw movement out of the corner of my eye. Turned to look and saw a big rat (not a mouse) running by the gan ha'ir. A second or so later I saw a cat chasing after it. From that point on I appreciated their presence.
(Still not overly keen on cats; I'm a dog person.)
I have no doubt that this Braverman suffers no less “white guilt” and self-hatred towards her adopted settler-colonial country than she does towards her native one.
The far right in the US has a favorite complaint that American Jews who are less than keen on the US, national sovereignty, and closed borders would never favor that for Israel. They can never be convinced- because you can't reason with an anti-Semite- that those type of Jews feel the *same exact way* about Israel. I remember Brett Stephens- who is of course an open-borders-for-the-US type- once writing a whole piece defending Bibi in which he had to point out that the one area he disagrees with him on is that Bibi doesn't admit illegals wholesale. And of course there are such types in Israel as well.
Hm, I’ve never heard that complaint (maybe I don’t hang out with enough far-right folks…), but I think current events have revealed the true nature of the American Left and those (nominal) Jews who support it.
As the old saying goes, when someone shows you who they really are… believe them.
The problem is that a lot of the people demonstrating in favor of Hamas- the Muslims themselves, of course, but even their useful idiots- *approve* of what Hamas did. Telling them of the atrocities just makes them happier.
The Nazis at least tried to cover up their crimes.
All true, but there is a distinction. There is real concern that the democrats are being pulled in the direction of the radicals. Some confirmation of that can be seen in Schumer's speech.
We can dismiss Owens and Fuentes because they're not politicians. They've also been condemned by many Republicans. The same goes with MTG. Neither Rand Paul, nor his father have had much success into pulling Republican's into the libertarian sphere. They are not particularly anti-Israel, but they are isolationists.
Bravo, Ephraim. You said exactly what I came here to say.
For pols like Torres and Fetterman to support Israel is no great moral victory (nor any great surprise) since their constituencies include large proportions of pro-Israel Jews.
As for the Right, hatemongers like Fuentes are universally by recognized as fringe crackpots who have no place in mainstream political discourse (like David Duke, in his day). Owens, too, is generally regarded as little more than a self-promoting conspiracy theorist. "MTG" is known even by her Republican confreres to be a lunatic. "America first" folks like Paul and Massie are not anti-Israel (and certainly not anti-Semitic), just anti-foreign aid in general (which is really not an unreasonable position, even if it doesn't benefit our "pet" cause).
The anti-Zionism and anti-Semitism of the Left, on the other hand, are far more insidious (than that of the discredited, ultra-fringe Right) in that they fit hand-in-glove with the Left's currently fashionable “progressive” ideologies of intersectionality, oppression, colonialism, etc, which have infiltrated not only politics but also academia and even big business, giving them a veneer of respectability and legitimacy that rightwing hate could never hope to enjoy.
I don't think it is a stretch to argue that, perhaps for the first time in history, leftist anti-Judaism has become more dangerous than that of the Right.
Come on, you know better than that. The 1965 law *opened* the borders that had been closed twenty years earlier. And it's bizarre to claim that a law closing borders (which, again, it did not( *caused* the problem.
For that first century or two, the US did not have mass migration from the third world, and did not have a welfare state. The 1965 law took care of the first half, and the Great Society took care of the second. Milton Friedman famously said that a country can have any two of three things- mass immigration, a welfare state, or multiculturalism- but having all three is a disaster. The US has had all three for sixty years.
English speakers can have a hard time with "Newark" and "New York" of course.
By all means, the US should admit *everyone* living under a bad regime. Six billion? Seven billion? Why not?
Saying that someone is not "illegal" because the government has papered things over is a fantasy as well.
Unfortunately Braverman is an example of how fanaticism can override rational thought and distorts even supposedly "rational" scientific discourse. Although I don't agree with you on everything, I believe in the sincerity of your efforts to be fair and rational in all your posts.
Thank you for exposing such nonsense.
"more-than-humans"
And there it is. These people don't just hate Israel, and Jews, and Judaism, and the West, and civilization. They hate humanity. And that is all connected.
Mohammed apparently really didn't like dogs, and really liked cats. No knock on him, we each have our tastes, but unfortunately his attitude became a religious imperative in Islam, to the detriment of dogs. (One can also say that domestication of dogs is a major aspect of the civilizing of man as well, for all that may imply about Islamic civilization.)
In any event: Well done.
For those who are in Jerusalem, there's a deer reserve right in the center of the city, on Herzog Street between Givat Mordechai and Katamonim.
"Mohammed apparently really didn't like dogs, and really liked cats. No knock on him, we each have our tastes, but unfortunately his attitude became a religious imperative in Islam, to the detriment of dogs."
Not that I have a dog in this fight but you sound like how the atheists talk about our version of God and how He has a personal vendetta against homosexuals and we turned into a religious thing. Point is, Mohammed's anti-dog stance most probably *was* a religious thing, something we find in our sources as well. But anyways...
And of course if you're correct, I have np with that, is just not the impression I got, that's all.
Well, for starters, Mohammed isn't God, and I don't think he ever claimed that Allah had a problem with dogs.
Our tradition is rather pro-dog. That charedim have a problem with them is a whole other issue.
The are more than a few midrashim about it. Personally, I think dogs are adorable. And I'm not sure the chareidi distaste for dogs has anything to do with anything except the fact that they are raising so many kids and don't have room or need another mouth to feed and being to care for and love in their limited time.
The claim has been made that Jews, and especially charedim, carry bad memories of Cossacks and Nazis and their dogs. Obviously there are other factors, such as those you mentioned- lots of kids, midrashim that go both ways.
How is Jewish tradition pro-dog? (not being snarky, genuinely asking);
Granted you can find anything in Jewish tradition, including statements somewhat the opposite, but for starters there's the fact that the Torah says to throw non-kosher meat to the dogs, and the Midrash that says that that is a reward for them not giving the Jewish people trouble when they left Egypt. Of course Jewish tradition, like others, note the loyalty of dogs.
"They have often refused to leave the safe facility for the much riskier life outside...the appealing narrative of liberation”
Sound like a totalitarian narrative.
Also consider that people of her ilk would use similar formulas if Gazans were offered liberation to other places.
“more-than-humans” 😂
These are not serious people.
After I graduated college in 1987, I visited the Queens Zoo in NYC. I distinctly remember seeing Fallow Deer there. It was my first experience witnessing an animal chew its cud! If my memory serves me right, the deer would just be standing there, and I saw a mass of something ascend into its mouth, which it would start chewing.
Braverman is just another mentally ill self-hating Jew. Academia is full of them . . .
Of course she's Israeli and Jewish.
Just like the chick who resigned yesterday from her (low-level) post in the Biden administration in protest of Biden’s “disastrous” support for Israel made sure to play up her (likely nominal) Jewish heritage as her reason for doing so.
You can "like" what you will, to be sure, but I gather your implication is that you disagree with these comments.
Unfortunately, however, it is no secret that some of the most strident anti-Israel voices on the Left are those of "self-loathing" (or, perhaps, "white guilt"-ridden) Jews who nevertheless delight in flaunting their "Jewish" principles to justify their opposition to our Jewish State.
To wit: https://truah.org/press/an-open-letter-from-750-north-american-rabbis-and-cantors-responding-to-the-crisis-in-israel-and-gaza/
Ahhh, I see. It is indeed a shanda.
Well, "Israeli".
I wonder why she hasn't renounced her Israeli citizenship.
I'll be discussing that.
Charles, what do you mean?
substack needs to work on their reply diversity
Yeah, Israel suffers from a lack of small mammals thanks in part to the prevalence of cats.
(Contrary to popular myth, the cats have always been local; they were not introduced by the British. Ironically, cats are not mentioned even once in Tanach.)
When you say “cats” are not mentioned in Tanach, I assume you are referring to domestic/house cats specifically, not cat species in general, correct?
Are domestic dogs mentioned in Tanach, incidentally?
Well, small breeds. The word "חתול" never appears in Tanach. We know they had them from archaeology, and of course Egyptians had them, but Tanach never mentions them. Of course Tanach talks about lions. At the time- it was colder then- there were Asiatic lions in Israel. The species only survives in the wild in one small preserve in India, but there are a few in the Jerusalem Zoo. Tanach also refers to some other species of large cats. That is of course R' Slifkin's department.
Tanach mentions dogs several times, and the context in several of those cases is clearly domestic. Plus, again, we know they had domesticated dogs from archaeology. Of course, "domestic" then meant working, not pets.
Fascinating points.
Cats are really native species to Israel? I have never heard that before. I was always under the impression that the British brought them in the '20s, '30s. I'm referring to the feral cats that we see all around us. Of course there have been "cats" in Israel, lions, leopards, etc., i.e., big cats.
How do we know that these feral cats are really African wildcats and not British imports? Has someone done the DNA research?
Yes, exactly, DNA research. The cats are local and apparently have always been here, and most have always been wild. At the very least the population is much older than the 1920's.
Well, I certainly learned something. I've always blamed the British (not that they are not easy to blame; they've caused enough trouble for Israel over the years).
I dunno, the cats that roam the streets of Israel don't seem very domesticated. Maybe they were at some point in their ancestry, but I can't tell. The municipalities round them up, spay them, and then release them again. (You can tell if they have a little notch in their ear.) There are of course real wildcats down in the Negev.
And if they bring you a dead animal and you scream and throw it out, they assume you're an idiot kitten (they are bringing it to you to train you to hunt, and what crazy person would throw out a perfectly good dead bird instead of eating it?) and just bring you more.
This is precisely why I take care to lavish praise on our outdoor cats when they bring us their “trophies”.
My wife, of course, is horrified.
I used to hate cats due to the mess they made by the trash (yes I know it was really the fault of the humans that didn't put the trash away propberly). Once upon a time, many years ago, when I was living in Telz Stone, I had to do periodic shmira from midnight to 4am by the entrance. One night I saw movement out of the corner of my eye. Turned to look and saw a big rat (not a mouse) running by the gan ha'ir. A second or so later I saw a cat chasing after it. From that point on I appreciated their presence.
(Still not overly keen on cats; I'm a dog person.)
I have no doubt that this Braverman suffers no less “white guilt” and self-hatred towards her adopted settler-colonial country than she does towards her native one.
Goes without saying.
The far right in the US has a favorite complaint that American Jews who are less than keen on the US, national sovereignty, and closed borders would never favor that for Israel. They can never be convinced- because you can't reason with an anti-Semite- that those type of Jews feel the *same exact way* about Israel. I remember Brett Stephens- who is of course an open-borders-for-the-US type- once writing a whole piece defending Bibi in which he had to point out that the one area he disagrees with him on is that Bibi doesn't admit illegals wholesale. And of course there are such types in Israel as well.
Hm, I’ve never heard that complaint (maybe I don’t hang out with enough far-right folks…), but I think current events have revealed the true nature of the American Left and those (nominal) Jews who support it.
As the old saying goes, when someone shows you who they really are… believe them.
The problem is that a lot of the people demonstrating in favor of Hamas- the Muslims themselves, of course, but even their useful idiots- *approve* of what Hamas did. Telling them of the atrocities just makes them happier.
The Nazis at least tried to cover up their crimes.
All true, but there is a distinction. There is real concern that the democrats are being pulled in the direction of the radicals. Some confirmation of that can be seen in Schumer's speech.
We can dismiss Owens and Fuentes because they're not politicians. They've also been condemned by many Republicans. The same goes with MTG. Neither Rand Paul, nor his father have had much success into pulling Republican's into the libertarian sphere. They are not particularly anti-Israel, but they are isolationists.
Bravo, Ephraim. You said exactly what I came here to say.
For pols like Torres and Fetterman to support Israel is no great moral victory (nor any great surprise) since their constituencies include large proportions of pro-Israel Jews.
As for the Right, hatemongers like Fuentes are universally by recognized as fringe crackpots who have no place in mainstream political discourse (like David Duke, in his day). Owens, too, is generally regarded as little more than a self-promoting conspiracy theorist. "MTG" is known even by her Republican confreres to be a lunatic. "America first" folks like Paul and Massie are not anti-Israel (and certainly not anti-Semitic), just anti-foreign aid in general (which is really not an unreasonable position, even if it doesn't benefit our "pet" cause).
The anti-Zionism and anti-Semitism of the Left, on the other hand, are far more insidious (than that of the discredited, ultra-fringe Right) in that they fit hand-in-glove with the Left's currently fashionable “progressive” ideologies of intersectionality, oppression, colonialism, etc, which have infiltrated not only politics but also academia and even big business, giving them a veneer of respectability and legitimacy that rightwing hate could never hope to enjoy.
I don't think it is a stretch to argue that, perhaps for the first time in history, leftist anti-Judaism has become more dangerous than that of the Right.
Come on, you know better than that. The 1965 law *opened* the borders that had been closed twenty years earlier. And it's bizarre to claim that a law closing borders (which, again, it did not( *caused* the problem.
For that first century or two, the US did not have mass migration from the third world, and did not have a welfare state. The 1965 law took care of the first half, and the Great Society took care of the second. Milton Friedman famously said that a country can have any two of three things- mass immigration, a welfare state, or multiculturalism- but having all three is a disaster. The US has had all three for sixty years.
English speakers can have a hard time with "Newark" and "New York" of course.
By all means, the US should admit *everyone* living under a bad regime. Six billion? Seven billion? Why not?
Saying that someone is not "illegal" because the government has papered things over is a fantasy as well.