March 23, 2016 Multi-Culti Requires A Police State Luke Ford No sacred cows.

Multi-Culti Requires A Police State

Posted on March 23, 2016 by Luke Ford

* You’ve hit it: multikulti requires a police state. And the more multi it gets, the more strict the state.

Iraq, very multi with Sunnis, Shiites, Christians, and Kurds and Arabs required extreme policing, which they got with Sadam Hussein.

Libya, all Sunni, with a few minority non-Arabs, survived with the more moderate Gaddhafi.

Syria is also very multi, and Assad Sr. ran a tight ship. He likely would have stamped out the revolt that has turned into a civil war.

The percentage of Muslims in the US is still pretty low. Just give it time. They tend to have big families too. They easily outbreed the natives in Europe.

* What measure does Max Boot use to claim that the US does a better job assimilating our Muslims than other countries? How about by death toll per capita? 3,000 people were killed on September 11 alone. Then there was Boston, Chattanooga, San Bernardino, and several others.

The US has about 30 times as many people as Belgium (pop. 11.2 million), but has lost about 90 times as many people due to terrorism (3000 vs. 34). We have ~5 times as many people as France, but I doubt France has lost anywhere close to 600 people due to Islamic terrorism. Etc, etc.

As a share of our population the US has far fewer Muslims, but our death toll per capita is higher than every other Western country. It may seem like cheating since 9/11 was one very large event, but given all the other terrorist acts that have occurred here there’s no reason to take comfort in the idea that we do a better job assimilating Muslims.

My guess is that there are two things holding down Muslim extremism in the US. First, the fact that Muslims comprise a much smaller share of the population than in most Western European countries. That gives them no chance to “own” neighborhoods and oppress their neighbors the way they do in so many parts of Europe.

The second reason is the Second Amendment. Muslims wouldn’t dare try a lot of the shit they’ve tried in Europe because Americans are armed. Lose the Second Amendment and quintuple our Muslim population and our problems would be every bit as bad as in Europe, if not worse.

There are effectively two kinds of Islamic terrorism. The first is the overt terrorism as exemplified by 9/11, Bataclan, Boston, and the Brussels bombing. The second, more insidious kind, is the kind where Muslims criminal networks that drive non-Muslims out of entire cities and oppress the non-Muslim majority – think Rotherham. This is the kind that needs a critical mass that America does not yet have, but there’s every indication that Muslims would be happy to do it here, if they could.

* Our terrorism problem would be far worse if our share of Muslims were higher, but there’s definitely something to be said for employment holding extremism in check. I’ve noticed in life that the more free time people have on their hands the more inclined they are to bitch and obsess about how badly they have it, no matter how well off they actually are. College students, the unemployed, and the elderly. A rough equation for fanaticism may be:

Fanaticism = F * T^2

Where F = free time, T = testosterone levels, with overt fanaticism declining somewhat with both age and lack of free time. Passive aggressive fanaticism is more constant with age. Elderly Muslims are probably more than happy to bitch about non-Muslims – where do you think the younger Muslims get their attitudes about Westerners? – but they’re less inclined to go blow themselves up over it.

* A better comparison would be with America’s black population – in terms of numbers, social pathology and ‘lack of integration’ – and, oh, the fact that America’s black population hasn’t ‘integrated’ in 400 years, and is, in fact, only diverging and isolating more from mainstream America.

Posted in Diversity, Islam | Comments Off

The jihadis’ master plan to break us

Posted on March 23, 2016 by Luke Ford

Amir Tehiri writes after the Paris attacks: This is how Sheikh Abu-Bakr Naji, the late theoretician of the Sunni version of the Islamo-apocalyptic movement, put it: “No one should feel safe without submitting, and those who refuse to submit must pay a high price. The aim of our movement is to turn the world into a series of wildernesses in which only those under our rule enjoy security.”

According to the sheikh, in a world dominated by “Crusaders,” it is not possible to create a proper Islamic state in a single country. He cites as example the Taliban government in Afghanistan. Although a proper Islamic regime, it did not survive “infidel” attacks and opposition by Afghan elements. The Islamic movement must become global, fighting everywhere, all the time, and on all fronts. He wants neo-jihadis to create an archipelago of “wildernesses” in non-Muslim countries, especially in the West, turning them into parallel societies alongside existing ones. They do not set up formal governments that could be vulnerable to economic pressure or even military attack.

But they could also exist within cities, under the noses of the authorities, operating as secret societies with their own rules, values and enforcement mechanisms.

The “wilderness” will provide cover for operational bases. Jihad would be everywhere rather than in just one or two countries that the “infidel” could hit with superior firepower.

The sheikh recommends “countless small operations” that render daily life unbearable rather than a few spectacular attacks such as 9/11. The idea is that the “infidel,” leaving his home every morning, should not be sure whether he would be alive in the evening.

The sheikh believed that, if subjected to constant intimidation and fear of death, most non-Muslims, especially in the West, would submit to Islam in exchange for a minimum of tranquility.

Posted in Islam | Comments Off

Why Is Central Europe Free From The Islamic Terror Threat?

Posted on March 23, 2016 by Luke Ford

Because that part of Europe has few Muslims.

Ed West writes:

Central Europe, chiefly Poland, Hungary and the Czech Republic, remain largely safe from the terror threat, despite the former in particular being a Nato player in the Middle East. It is precisely because the reasons for this are so obvious that they cannot be mentioned. Poland is 0.1 percent Muslim, most of whom are from a long-settled Tartar community, Britain is 5 percent, France 9 percent and Brussels 25 percent, and those numbers are growing.
For all the goodwill shown by the vast majority of people in Europe, Muslim and non-Muslim, and for all those things that shouldn’t have to be said – that most Muslims hate this monstrosity – these statistics correlate to terrorism risk. That’s not something people want to hear when they have a desperate urge to feel solidarity, but it is true nonetheless. …
Central Europeans have become the new target for liberal snobbery in the past couple of years, their antediluvian attitudes to Islamic migration making them the new hillbillies; low-status whites it’s okay to mock on account of their views. But looking at what is happening in Brussels, London and Paris, is it not rather rational for them to look at Merkel’s open-borders policy and the whole multicultural thing with some scepticism? I suspect those flags will be back at half mast soon enough.

Comments to Steve Sailer:

* Eastern Europeans’ cohesiveness, resistance to immigration, skepticism about homosex, etc. are legacies of the Soviet-Warsaw Pact period. These are exactly the things that the neocons fought the Cold War to eliminate. As those older generations are replaced by newer, more Westernized (in a bad way) generations, those countries will get on board the multi-culti train.

* If I were to judge Islamic terrorism by the results, I’d say it works very well. There’s an avalanche of Muslims that have been invited into Europe and put on welfare by liberal Europeans. If your goal is being able to put your feet up, relax, and watch the grass grow while someone else supports you, and that someone enables you never having to put up with your own crappy rulers in your own countries again while nice, civilized, educated Europeans run thing things the smart, proper, and ethical way, then Muslims have achieved it.

Therefore, it makes sense to set off more bombs, if this is how Europeans buckle in the face of militant Islamic terrorism both at home and abroad.

Soon, the modern Islamic mega-state (ahem, Europe), is going to resemble the Ottoman Empire back in the days in which the cowed white Europeans (kidnapped Mamluks) did all the civil service work and kept the economy going to support their brutal Islamic overlords in the style to which they had become accustomed.

* Listening to CNN today, still hearing the usual palaver. “We need to get moderate Muslims to cooperate with us, etc.” Hard to believe that some “moderate” Muslims weren’t aware that the wanted terrorist, Salah Abdeslam, was hiding in plain sight in their enclave for several months. Maybe someday the moderate Muslims will throw us a bone. We probably need to beg them more pathetically. The danger, as one CNN commentator noted, is Trump. “His rhetoric will push Muslims in the opposite direction.”

If the opposite direction is back to the lands from whence they came, who’s complaining?

* Here’s an alternate plan: How about we prevent Muslims from coming to the West and expel as many as we can. Then it won’t matter what they do or think, because they won’t be here.

As has been pointed out so many times around these parts, terrorism is merely the most visible aspect of Muslim dysfunction. They are parasites feeding off of the West. Disturbingly, terrorism may be what saves Europe. If Muslims were identical to how they are now minus the terrorism the European frog would probably be well and truly boiled. But maybe terrorism will some day wake them up.

* I think Eastern and Western Europe are so different today because of policies taken in the West in the late 1960s and into the 1970s. That was the era of Enoch Powell’s famous series of speeches on immigration, then the OPEC oil shock, going off the Bretton Woods agreement and France and Germany changing their immigration policies to allow “family reunification” for foreign guest workers. This may seem like a jumble but they do form a greater whole. This was the time the leaders of Western Europe decided to follow the American “nation of immigrants” model in order to artificially maintain the postwar trend of growth that would otherwise have come to an even sharper end than it did.

Enoch Powell was the first of many politicians who were ganged up on because he didn’t get it; he didn’t get the enforced consensus on this. Once this course of action had been chosen by the G7, Davos, Bilderberg consensus then a whole culture of bullying, peer pressure and happy talk had to develop to maintain and promote it. Policies quickly became self-fulfilling facts on the ground. These policies weren’t carried out in the East Bloc and so they don’t have several generations of consensus thought saying it’s all a wonderful thing that the West has. Again, it was the early 1970s when the two parts of Europe diverged when it comes to multiculturalism, immigration and all that comes with them.

* Ask a friend if they have an upper limit on how large they want the Muslim population to become. Will America still be America if it is 60% Yemeni-American. Most will say no. Everyone I’ve tried this on has some upper limit in mind.

Once they’ve arrived at their own personal upper limit, ask them to explain how they will cap the Muslim population at that proportion. No one has a good answer.

Next ask them if it will be easier to cap Muslim population growth when Muslims are 1% of the population or when they’re 40% of the population?

Next ask them if taking a hands off policy and allowing the Muslim population to grow will make America better for their children and grandchildren or maybe we should nip the problem while it’s still small and manageable.

The problem, of course, is that people are rationalizers rather than reasoners. Only a few were comfortable with the reasoning, the others didn’t like the conclusions and got agitated. Now though they have a little burr under their saddle and hopefully it will irritate them over time.

* A tweet by a Dutch yoga teacher. Translation according to r/the_donald:

“How are you supposed to continue teaching in your class if muslim children are applauding [the attacks]? #attacks #Zaventem”
“3 [Dutch] police officers on my front door because of my tweet this morning. Asking to not do it again. #Brussels #attacks #Zaventem”

* I have used that upper limit trick with people about immigration overall.

I start by noting that America currently has about 330 million people here now. And point out that there are over 3 billion people worldwide living in extreme poverty. I ask if all 3 billion should be allowed to come here? If America would be improved by that?

When they say no, I have some fun calling them bigots, xenophobic, pointing out that those 3 billion only want to make a better life for themselves, to do the jobs American’s won’t do, etc…

I then confirm that they agree that there should be a limit to how many people we allow in, and establish some set of standards. So ask them what that limit should be. Very few can do so, and most people get so agitated that I drop the conversation.

But hopefully I at least plant the seed in their mind that immigration should have some theoretical limit, and create a negative mental image of themselves surrounded by foreign hordes.

Once people break through the propaganda & stop seeing immigration as a sacred good there is hope for them.

* I really do not see how civic nationalism and white nationalism can coexist, since both are philosophically incompatible, and one must be destroyed for the other one to survive, in fact you could think of Islam and the United States as competing schools of civic nationalism. Of course it is best if the liberals and civic nationalists destroy each other. The fact that the United States was founded on civic nationalism makes its very existence incompatible with the aims of WN. A propositional nation and a ethnonationalist nation based on blood ties are polar opposites of each other ideologically, and one must be destroyed for the other one to be able to survive.

* ‘…to ourselves and our posterity…”

The United States was founded on blood & soil. It’s right there in the Declaration.

By the 1770’s the American ethny was well established. Many colonists were three generations removed from the Old Country. Some were five removed and some more. And they were almost all from England.

* I brought up the Brussels attack with my eye doctor this morning during a check up. I said something about this being a big issue for Europe. He said not all Europe, that he just got back from Poland. I nodded and said it certainly makes Trump’s message resonate. He said absolutely. For New Yorkers who take the packed subway twice a day, there’s a knowing nod. For all the talk of Trump and Hitler, you know who the real fascists are.

Then cooking dinner there was a Georgetown professor on the radio. She’d been to Brussels and lamented that this might make Belgians even more anti-Islamic. Even more? They seem tolerant enough to me. She said she was shocked by the attitude of cab drivers there. Oh sure. Cabbies, at least where they take licensing seriously enough to keep employment up for local map-reading proles, always an affront to university professors on tour.

* Eastern Europe is never going to get on the diversity train. Only Western countries that are too wealthy for their own good get on this train. Eastern Europeans know how hard life can really be and how diversity just makes things more difficult.

* It is almost as if the more Muslims a country has, the more Islamic terrorism it is likely to experience. But surely that can’t be true. After all, the media keeps telling us that Islam is the religion of peace and the media never lies.

Posted in Europe, Immigration, Islam | Comments Off

The Sadistic But Charismatic Archetype

Posted on March 23, 2016 by Luke Ford

From the Chateau: In Japan, a burgeoning “fake anime boyfriend” market is capturing the hearts of Japanese women and overseas American women.

Since the 90s, Japanese women have been playing otome (“maiden”) games, which allow the player to pursue virtual relationships with several virtual hunks. In the interest of journalism, I spent over $60 flirting with emotionally manipulative anime characters, and it fucking ruled.

So what kind of virtual boyfriends do nipply Nipponese and sassy statesiders prefer? Take one guess.

When I asked Gray which character types tend to perform best, she told me that the “sadistic but charismatic” archetype is beloved in both Japan and the US.

Chicks dig those charismatic jerkboys.

She pointed to Eisuke Ichinomiya, which she says is the most popular character in Kissed by the Baddest Bidder, Voltage’s top-grossing game in the US. […] On Eisuke’s character profile, he is billed in glittering pink and purple script as a “cold-hearted narcissist.” His quote is “I’m going to make you mine. And you don’t get to say no.”

What’s revealing about this dating simulation (aka female pornhub) is that it is essentially the female version of sex dolls for men. Women aren’t aroused as much by the visual and tactile inspection of men’s bodies as they are by the emotional and psychological inspection of men’s personalities. And when choosing male archetypes, the jerkboy narcissist is number one pulse amplifier in the arterial transverse between a woman’s heart and vagina. This is why real world feedback continually proves the efficacy of Game to the goal of seducing women: Game is the creation of sexier male personalities.

“Usually [this character is] sadistic and mean to you, but sometimes, when you and him are alone, he becomes so sweet and very kind to you,” Gray explained.

Vulnerability Game. A girl wants a challenging man (i.e., a man with a lot of poosy options) who can’t help but occasionally, and reluctantly, succumb to her erotic charms.

Also like Voltage’s millions of other customers worldwide, I was really only interested in the mean and sadistic gentlemen—which is weird, because I actively avoid mean and sadistic men in real life.

Fantasy is inward projection of outward sexual desire. We know this because no woman in the history of the world has ever fantasized about a reliable beta male in pleated khakis. Hence, the reason there’s a maxim stating “watch what women do and ignore what they say”. The details of female desire are quite disturbing to idealistic minds when seen up close, so much so that even women recoil from a cogent awareness of their own sexual urges. Which is why women are gifted with an ability to flim flam themselves whenever they are asked about what they want romantically.

This woman quoted above, when alone with her virtual tingle generator, chooses a badboy for her stimulus. “In real life”, she claims otherwise. But that’s the source of the fantasy’s power; in real life, most women don’t have the goods to attract and tame the badboys who turn them on, so in moments of introspection they fall back on sour grape-isms to rationalize the parade of dependable boring betas that is their lot in life. Or, oppositely, they have been burned by badboys so often in the past that avoiding them must be an “active” process rather than the more natural, unplanned pursuit that doesn’t require active effort typical of women who don’t have a dating history littered with alluring assholes.

Gray insisted that most of Voltage’s users “think that their real life and romance in our apps are totally different.” However, in the same response, she acknowledged that an elision between fantasy and reality does often take place. “The user who has a boyfriend plays our app to fill in the unsatisfied part of her boyfriend. Playing the app makes her happy and it helps to prevent fights with her boyfriend,” Gray told me.

Virtual alpha widows. Literally cucked by an anime lothario.

There is no bottom to the romantic humiliations that beta male boyfriends can suffer.

Posted in Sex | Comments Off

The Science Of Slurs

Posted on March 23, 2016 by Luke Ford

From the Chateau: There’s nothing quite like a sharp semantic shiv that hits a vital. But did you know slurs evolved to serve a social purpose? And that there are sex-based differences in the perception of slurs?

We investigated the influence of the sex of the target and the sex of the sender on the judgment of slurs (verbal derogation). From previous research, we selected and clustered slurs into seven categories and respondents rated their degree of perceived insult in two consecutive questionnaire surveys (N = 281 and N = 224, respectively). Results confirm that slurs are generally judged as being more insulting when directed towards females than towards males.

The fundamental premise: Women are the reproductively more valuable sex, and this biological reality has downstream effects on human psychology. This is why Trump (PBUH) catches so much flak for insulting fat, caustic pig Rosie O’Donnell or slimy gotcha “reporter” Megyn Kelly, yet no one cares when he levels worse insults against the hundreds or even thousands of men who have landed in his target designation cross-hairs.

In comparison, differences in sex of sender were small. When directed towards females, slurs referring to “being loose” were rated as the most insulting.

That’s because it undermines the female prime directive to attract and keep a high value man with promises of fidelity (aka paternity assurance).

For both target sexes, remarks referring to homosexuality and physical unattractiveness were among those rated as the most insulting.

I guarantee you the homo slur was rated more insulting by men.

Least insulting were slurs referring to unethical acts, lack of intelligence and cowardliness.

This is why I usually favor a rhetorical attack on shitlibs that hits them where it hurts: their sexual androgyny and circus freak physiognomy. Although I don’t buy the finding that “stupid” isn’t an effective insult, especially when aimed subversively at the pencilnecks whose only source of pride is their MENSA membership.

A sex of respondent effect was found, suggesting that women rated slurs generally more insulting than men. The pattern of results showed considerable stability across surveys attesting for the reliability of the method for measuring the social evaluation of slurs.

Rank of slur effectiveness, least to most shivvy:

Character
->
Economic status (more effective against men)
->
Social status
->
Smarts
->
Looks (for women, less so for men)
->
Sexual worth (“slut”, “nerd”, “creep”)

The most vicious slurs circumvent the superego and ego, striking at the pith of the id, where the rawest measure of a man is contained: his (or her) worth as a mate.

Posted in Sex | Comments Off

Rabbi Shmuel Herzfeld: ‘Donald Trump is wicked. As a rabbi, I had to protest his AIPAC speech.’

Posted on March 23, 2016 by Luke Ford

From his op/ed in the Washington Post:

This Purim, we Jews must not bow down and kneel to a man who inspires hatred.
As a rabbi of an Orthodox congregation in Washington, I am a strong supporter of Israel and of the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, which lobbies on its behalf here. For more than a decade, I’ve traveled to Israel at least once a year, and I’ve been to many AIPAC events over my 17 years as a rabbi.
So when Donald Trump addressed the group’s annual policy conference at the Verizon Center on Monday, I was sitting six rows away from the stage. And as Trump began his speech, I rose from my seat. I spread my tallit over my shoulders, raised my hands up high and declared: “This man is wicked. He inspires racists and bigots. He encourages violence. Do not listen to him.” With every cell in my body, I felt the obligation to declare his wickedness to the world.
Since 2004, I’ve been a rabbi here in Washington. I try very hard to stay away from commenting on partisan politics. (I don’t remember ever publicly criticizing either George W. Bush or Barack Obama.) I believe that the job of a rabbi is to be a rabbi for all congregants — no matter who they vote for. Our congregation has passionate Republicans and Democrats, and we all get along. This ability to worship together despite strong political differences is essential to a faith community.
But besides being the spiritual adviser to my congregation, I am also a father of seven children. As a father, I teach my children that when there is wickedness in our midst, we must stand up and recognize it. Sometimes we will just be another voice in the wind, but even so, we have a religious imperative to call out that wickedness and declare that it is wrong.
And the laws and teachings of Judaism make it clear that Trump qualifies as wicked. He has equivocated about whether he would disavow support from David Duke and the Ku Klux Klan. He has called for a ban on all Muslims entering the United States. He has suggested that torture be made legal and that the U.S. military kill the families of terrorism suspects (a war crime in international law as surely as it would be an ethical crime in religious law). Sure, he walked back some of those comments, but there is no question that his campaign is inspiring and nourishing the bigots and racists of the world. Lately, he has openly encouraged violence at his rallies. This combination of providing sustenance to racists and encouraging violence is a deadly one that represents an existential threat to our country. That certainly qualifies as wicked.
As a rabbi of an Orthodox congregation in Washington, I am a strong supporter of Israel and of the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, which lobbies on its behalf here. For more than a decade, I’ve traveled to Israel at least once a year, and I’ve been to many AIPAC events over my 17 years as a rabbi.
So when Donald Trump addressed the group’s annual policy conference at the Verizon Center on Monday, I was sitting six rows away from the stage. And as Trump began his speech, I rose from my seat. I spread my tallit over my shoulders, raised my hands up high and declared: “This man is wicked. He inspires racists and bigots. He encourages violence. Do not listen to him.” With every cell in my body, I felt the obligation to declare his wickedness to the world.
Since 2004, I’ve been a rabbi here in Washington. I try very hard to stay away from commenting on partisan politics. (I don’t remember ever publicly criticizing either George W. Bush or Barack Obama.) I believe that the job of a rabbi is to be a rabbi for all congregants — no matter who they vote for. Our congregation has passionate Republicans and Democrats, and we all get along. This ability to worship together despite strong political differences is essential to a faith community.
But besides being the spiritual adviser to my congregation, I am also a father of seven children. As a father, I teach my children that when there is wickedness in our midst, we must stand up and recognize it. Sometimes we will just be another voice in the wind, but even so, we have a religious imperative to call out that wickedness and declare that it is wrong.
And the laws and teachings of Judaism make it clear that Trump qualifies as wicked. He has equivocated about whether he would disavow support from David Duke and the Ku Klux Klan. He has called for a ban on all Muslims entering the United States. He has suggested that torture be made legal and that the U.S. military kill the families of terrorism suspects (a war crime in international law as surely as it would be an ethical crime in religious law). Sure, he walked back some of those comments, but there is no question that his campaign is inspiring and nourishing the bigots and racists of the world. Lately, he has openly encouraged violence at his rallies. This combination of providing sustenance to racists and encouraging violence is a deadly one that represents an existential threat to our country. That certainly qualifies as wicked.
Before Trump’s speech, I asked other attendees at the AIPAC conference whether they would walk out to protest. Some small groups did leave, to study Torah elsewhere during his address. But most stayed, and many applauded. People told me that they wanted to hear what he had to say. They wanted to hear whether he would be supportive of Israel.
Whether he supports Israel is irrelevant to me. If a person inspires bigotry and racism, we should not overlook those character traits just because he says something with which we agree. Just the opposite: that he does agree with us on some issues makes his message even more dangerous, as it can make his bigotry and racism more palatable.
On Wednesday evening, we Jews will read the Book of Esther as part of our celebration of the holiday of Purim. In this story, King Ahasuerus first seduces the people of his kingdom with lavish parties. The people are impressed and grateful for the king’s ostentatious hospitality, so they all rush to support him. At that moment, Ahasuerus elevates the wicked Haman to a position of great power. Haman eventually manufacturers an edict to kill all of the kingdom’s Jews, but even before that, Mordechai, a Jew who lives in the kingdom’s capital, senses Haman’s true nature. All the visitors to the king’s palace bow down to Haman, but Mordechai alone “refused to bow and refused to kneel” (Esther 3:2).
At that critical moment, Mordechai spoke truth to power.
As I sat in the Verizon Center and watched Trump ascend to speak, I thought of my children, and I drew inspiration from the Purim story. Like Mordechai, we Jews must not bow down and kneel to a man who inspires hatred. We will not overlook his calls for violence.
After AIPAC security escorted me out of the arena, I was approached by members of the media. They asked me why I did what I did. I had no illusions that I might affect Trump’s rise in any way, nor did I expect to convince people of the correctness of my positions. I also knew that many in my congregation would support me and others who call me their rabbi would be deeply upset with me. But at that moment, none of it mattered. I felt a strong religious imperative to act even if it achieved nothing. As the Megillah says about Mordechai, when he heard the news of Haman’s decree: “He went out into the city and let out a loud and bitter cry” (Esther 4:1).
So I told the media, as I broke down in tears: I did it for my children.

So I hope the rabbi has a freiliche Purim and a great chuckle over those 75,000 Hamanites who met their doom at the hands of the Jews. I hope it puts him in the mood for Passover, and the termination of all the first born sons of Egypt. Hilarious!

Shmuel Herzfeld is a gay-friendly rabbi.

Joe emails me in 2008:

I think that you should run a piece on Rabbi Shmuel Hertzfeld. His time has come, since he is a quasi-celeb.
Without any previous knowledge, you might think Hertzfeld is some kind of activist, a modern day Heschel — but Orthodox.
That is not the case. Let me give you some background. You can verify the assessment that I am giving you with anyone who was at YU with Hertzfeld.
Hertzfeld was in YU before Yeshivat Chovevei Torah opened up. Today, a person like him would probably wind up at YCT, but that wasn’t an option then.
He was always a maverick, or, if you will a trouble maker. He would make controversial statements in public, just to attract attention.
His most famous line — which he would repeat and repeat and repeat was, "The only reason guys in YU get married early, is because they don’t have premarital sex." Of course, everyone knew that he and his girlfriend were dating a long time, by YU standards, and only got married after three years of dating.
So, Hertzfeld was some kind of cynical YU guy, doing graduate work at Revel (YU’s graduate program in Judaic studes) — until he met Avi Weiss. When Hertzfeld took the job at Weiss’s shul (Hebrew Institute), he got into the whole "Avi Weiss/Hug everyone/isn’t it a wonderful world/so open-minded your brain falls out" thing. Luke, since you live on the West coast, you are used to such people; in New York, they are a rare commodity. Hertzfeld realized that, instead of making provocative comments that enraged people in YU, you could say the same things, and become the darling of your congregants, because that is exactly what they wanted to hear, a message contra YU.
Then Hertzfeld saw his opportunity. He took a dying shul in the DC area and renamed it "The National Synagogue." What a move! It’s like, there’s a National Cathedral — and a National Synagogue. He got a ton of money from Jonas (of IDT fame) and was soon in business running tons of programing. In a place like Washington, he taped into a niche market for "Open Orthodoxy."
Here’s Hertzfeld, doing his Open Orthodoxy thing, and getting the other rabbis, who belong to the "Vaad of Greater Washington," more and more upset at him. In a sense, he infuriated Rabbi Barry Freundel more than the more right-leaning rabbis. Freundel is a major YU person, very into YU as an institution. Hertzfeld represents a challenge to that.
Rubashkin was Hertzfeld’s coup de grace. He gained two things: first, he presented himself as a social activist, which is exactly the kind of PR that he needs. Second, he "assered," or forbade the meat, which is supervised by establishment groups like the OU. This is a classic trick of rabbis, to forbid something to show your political muscles. Even better, Hertzfeld comes out "frummer" than the other DC rabbis, who are far to his right.
The Times op-ed was a classic Hertzfeld. It brings him back to the days of being a cynical YU smicha guy.
The problem is, that he is nearly untouchable. If YU crucifies him, then he’ll become a martyr for Open Orthodoxy. If they tried to assassinate his character, by bringing out his dirty laundry from his YU days, then Hertzfeld will only gain, since he will become known as "the cool rabbi who allows pre-marital sex." Only time will tell what lies in wait for Shmuel Hertzfeld.

Comments at the Washington Post:

* I see, it’s not the very real hurt perpetrated by Obama on Israel and the world by funding Iranian terror or the disgusting disrespect shown to the Israeli Prime Minister and Ambassador Derner by this administration and their spokespeople but Trump saying “yay” to Obama’s final days in office. Pinkus should indeed be deeply sorry but only for humiliating the rest of the proud American Jewish community with this mewling apology.

* There are few things more disgusting than a clergyman cloaking his partisan political views and prejudices in religion. Just say that you hate Trump, Rabbi, and leave Judaism out of it.

* I did some reading on this “Rabbi.” He is a nobody that represents a fringe 3rd rate Synagogue. The WAPO makes this guy out to be the Pope of the Jewish faith. He is a nobody.

* AIPAC and the Israeli lobby have too much influence over US foreign policy and the mechanisms of our federal government, especially, but not exclusively, in the Republican dominated House of Representatives. It is about time U.S. politicians started putting U.S. national interests ahead of those of Israel. I don’t agree with Trump on many issues, but he called it right to put U.S. interests first, to ask our allies to spend more for their own defense, especially Europe, and to recognize that Bush jr. was a disaster when it came to foreign and national security policy, not to mention economic policy.

* As a Jew, I must express my deep unease and heavy embarrassment that I felt upon reading this article. Your invocation of the story of Purim is highly inappropriate because it bears no relation to what is going on in the race; specifically, Trump is no Haman. The implausibility of your claim beggars belief.

You may not necessarily agree with Trump’s policy proposals, or his abrasive manner at times. But to paint him with the same brush as Haman is painted? We compare Haman to Hitler; are you sincerely making the claim that there is equivalence between Trump and Hitler??

Your article is lazy. You come across as sanctimonious. You misrepresent the megilla story. You cast Jews in a very awkward light. Shame on you.

* This clown Herzfeld is a well-known left-oriented attention-seeker. Anything for attention. Absolutely anything — with the emphasis on attacking someone else, because attacking prompts controversy, which assures publicity somewhere. He walked out of Donald Trump’s AIPAC address, but virtually no one noticed — so now he tries to grab attention with this little post. Identically, he resigned from the Rabbinical Council of America to get attention. When he walked out of the Rabbinical Council, no one noticed . . . until he published a silly attack later. Same here. When he and two others walked out of AIPAC, the remaining 19,997 remained, heard Trump, and many even gave Mr. Trump rousing standing ovations. It was Trump’s finest moment in the campaign, speaking from prepared thoughts, laying out policies, speaking in measured and respectful tones. That kind of presentation is the kind that is to be encouraged for a candidate who long has needed encouragement to rein in the distractions. Herzfeld is a joke outside his small little fan club.

— Rabbi Dov Fischer
Young Israel of Orange County, CA

* Let’s cut to the chase here. Exactly what does Israel want? Who is Haman in this modern day story? Collectively it appears to be the right wing Netanyahu government that is perpetrating what many believe to be a lie, that Israel will ever enter into a two state solution regarding Palestine.

Ted Cruz early on in his speech, to much applause, stated there has been no Palestine since 1948. The implication is there never will be. Naftali Bennet a member of the current government and leader of Jewish Home party is on record stating Israel will never surrender Judea and Samaria. Is it not Israel leading the lie? And AIPAC is perpetrating the same lie?

So Rabbi, in your celebration of Purim, search your conscience and decide if Israel is being truthful with the world. It is time to either annex the West Bank and Gaza and declare they are Israel or stop the settlements, return the settlers to present day Israel and enter negotiations for the two state solution? Just do not perpetrate the lie. President Carter, Anwar Sadat of Egypt and Menachem Begin, concluded the Camp David Accords which has brought a degree of peace to Israel. It is time for Israel to be honest with the world. Either halt settlement and withdraw all settlers from the West Bank or annex the West Bank and deal with the consequences.

It is blatantly obvious that the view of Naftali Bennet represents the long term goal of making Judea and Samaria part of Israel proper. And AIPAC is part of the charade. That is why AIPAC will cheer a bigot. Where is morality if lies are being perpetrated?

* Why would a jew turn on a man who actually admits to favoring Israel and the jewish religion? Look what happened when y’all voted for barrack Hussein Obama. Not a brilliant move on your part. Maybe jews just like to play the victims, and view themselves as poor humble downtrodden friends of the weak, and scorned. It doesn’t work for you! Most American jews are well educated, successful in careers, and upper middle class and wealthy. I’m not jewish, and I support Trump. I’m not anti jewish, I support Israel as a top friend of America. If you don’t like Trump because of his colorful speech, vote for Bernie sanders. But don’t expect him to make much difference. He is part of the liberal establishment. They don’t favor jews. They support Palestinians. People are already blaming jews for the Belgium terrorist attacks, because Israel won’t give back disputed territory, to the palestinians. Muslims have a sworn duty to destroy Israel. That won’t change, and they won’t stop, until they do. The world will stand back and watch. Democrats won’t do anything to make the Palestinians accountable for their violence. They will just tell Israel to role over and give disputed lands back, on a silver platter.

* This Rabbi is a farce. THERE IS NO NATIONAL SYNAGOGUE. I was duped when visiting DC. Saw the name National Synagogue and thought it would be worthy of a visit. Thought it would have years of history (like the rest of the city). Bottom line, its the name that a Rabbi selected the name a half-dozen years ago to attract tourists to an empty building that would have otherwise closed down. It was not a National Landmark. Everyone walking in was like…WTF!?? He speaks for no one. And he certainly doesn’t speak for me. And by the way, Washington Post knows all of this. However, the name sounds large (as if he represents a large group), therefore, the Post was willing to allow the title of the synagogue to mischaracterize the circumstances. When I saw the place, I was insulted. Empty, neglected, and clearly taking advantage of having seized a name to feed off the tourist draw. To me, was not even a house of worship at all. If he thinks Trump is evil, what would you call him? After all, he did not convey the status of the synagogue honestly to prospective guests or the newspaper? The name of the REAL synagogue in the center of DC with decades of history is on the corner of Sixth and I. Nothing to do with level of observance here. And as if being in DC makes him a political expert?

* What is your stance on the right to return for Palestinians, Mr Herzfeld? If Mr. Trump is a racist for calling for a Muslim immigration moratorium and you are an ardent Israel supporter, are you saying Israel is a racist state? How many Muslim refugees has Israel taken in? If Israel does not take in Muslim immigrants and refugees, why should we?

* My understanding is that a Jewish prayer shawl is normally worn only at prayer services. (“Prayer” shawl get it?) Why was Rabbi Herzfeld wearing his in a convention center? Perhaps the Rabbi was disoriented and thought that the wicked Trump was visiting his temple. (God forbid).
Anyway, Rabbi Herzfeld is obviously a brilliant man. Whereas the Bible usually associates terms like “evil” and “wicked” with those who murder , rape and pillage, the good rabbi has apparently used his acumen to enlarge the definitions: The terms now describe any politician who opposes an open door immigration policy. Rabbi Herzfeld, of course, is not alone in doing so: http://wp.me/p5Ep2A-49.
I’m left wondering what terms Rabbi Herzfeld would use to describe, say, those who blew up 30+ people yesterday in Belgium?
Now, I’m no preacher or rabbi, but do I know of one biblical verse, not in the book of Esther, that maybe the rabbi should consult: “Woe to those who call evil good and good evil, who substitute darkness for light and light for darkness, who substitute bitter for sweet and sweet for bitter.” (Isaiah 5:20)

* Shmuel, you are not speaking as a rabbi. You are speaking as a man.

Numbers 31 in the Torah describes a war between Israel and the Midianites. “So, they made war against Midian, just as the Lord had commanded Moses, and they killed every male.” Moses then goes on to demand, “Now therefore kill every male among the little ones, and kill every woman who has known man intimately…But all the girls who have not known man intimately, spare for yourselves.” Pretty gruesome stuff. The point is according to the reasoning of Rabbi Herzfeld, God must be wicked also.

Certainly what Trump has proposed is a lot milder than the above bloody description.

18,000 attended Donald Trump’s AIPAC speech. Only a few hundred walked out. Trump received many standing ovations. I have to wonder why the the WP selected one of the very few dissenters to write this piece instead of the many thousands who enthusiastically applauded Trump’s message.

* Looks like the Washington Post is now scraping them off the streets to write anti-Trump articles. Some nobody rabbi is on the front page of this national news paper. What’s his qualification? He hates Trump. Next we’ll get a couple of drug dealers, maybe El Chapo if we’re lucky, to write op-eds here.

* But Trump’s “kill the families” has roots in the Torah. Read what happened at Jericho after the Israelis took down the wall:
“They devoted the city to the Lord and destroyed with the sword every living thing in it—men and women, young and old, cattle, sheep and donkeys.”

Wicked?

* Funny what a double standard this idiot rabbi has, Israel lives in a state of apartheid, and they accuse Trump of being Islamophobic. Well the only way Israel maintains its own security is by being Islamophobic. So stop lecturing us and get real, this is not Disneyland, this is the real world.

* Yes, you schmuck, you taught your seven children to disrupt and interfere with the First Amendment of anyone whose views don’t agree with yours. Yeah, I bet you are proud of that and your kids are kosher with it, too.

* So when a religious person sees/identifies what he describes as wickedness, he should throw his hands in the air and walk out? Rabbi, I believe Barack Obama is wicked but he is our President, misguided, totally out of touch with what I would describe as American values, and self-serving to the point that no experience can change his mind. A lot of Americans feel as I do: disgusted, very angry with Obama, the media, the Republicans in Congress. Enter Trump, exit Rabbi Herzfeld. Just remember Rabbi, as we have to tolerate Obama, you may have to tolerate President Trump. You might want to try to devise a way to accommodate the conceivable.

* Arrogant cleric flapping his jaws. He should have been thrown out, butt over heels, and his ridiculous prayer shawl thrown after him. Amazing how these brazen clerics think they have the right to be tax exempt while involving themselves in politics. If this idiot has a congregation it should lose its tax-exempt status.

* Well, from the reactions I saw throughout the speech, you’re out there alone, Herzfeld, 19,997 attendees disagreeing, several standing ovations, laughter, 100% support for Netanyahu, unlike the present jerk. Get a grip and a tissue, and suck it up, buddy. Watch the speech again. The present WH occupant is in Cuba, and could give a crap about your country.

Posted in Donald Trump, R. Shmuel Herzfeld | Comments Off

Is It Lion Supremacy To Care About The Survival Of This Mountain Lion?

Posted on March 23, 2016 by Luke Ford

New York Times:

The problem, experts say, is that there is nowhere else for him to go. Male mountain lions fight to the death to protect their territory, and there is no suitable habitat left unclaimed in California. “It’s not like there is some mountain lion Shangri-La with no adult male lion,” said Seth Riley, a wildlife ecologist with the National Park Service, which has been tracking P-22 with a GPS collar since 2012. “Moving animals around generally results in their death.”

There are benefits to having an apex predator in Griffith Park, said David Ryu, the city councilman whose district includes the park. They eat coyotes, which are much more likely than a mountain lion to eat a pet dog.

“If we get rid of him, what next?” Mr. Ryu said. “Do we get rid of all the coyotes? They prey on raccoons. Then do we get rid of the raccoons? Where do you draw the line?”

Posted in Diversity | Comments Off

LAT: To save native island animals from extinction, eradicate the uninvited guests, study finds

Posted on March 23, 2016 by Luke Ford

Sounds like a powerful argument against immigration of incompatible sub-species.

Los Angeles Times: In 1894, a pregnant house cat escaped from a lighthouse on Stephens Island, New Zealand. She had her kittens in the wild, where they went feral. Within 13 months, a native bird species known as the Stephen Islands wren was nearly extinct.

It’s a story often cited as an extreme – and by some accounts exaggerated – example of the damage that invasive mammals can do to delicate island ecosystems.

But the plot is hardly unusual. On islands where native species evolved with no natural predators, intruders like rodents, feral cats and goats can quickly outcompete or even eat the locals.

Islands are home to 15% of the world’s terrestrial species, but they represent 61% of recorded extinctions, experts say. Invasive species usually were a factor.

Now a new study is making the case for a tried-and-true method of staving off this island extinction “crisis”: Get rid of the invasive mammals.

“We spend billions of dollars a year on conservation … but you can help a lot of the world’s biodiversity by removing” these invasive animals, said study leader Holly Jones, a conservation biologist at Northern Illinois University. “In terms of gain per dollar spent … it’s a pretty darn good return on investment.”

…The study looked back on eradication projects since the 1970s and ‘80s, when some of the first techniques were developed for removing invasive mammals. The study also included a 1925 effort to remove the feral descendants of the Stephens Island lighthouse keeper’s cat, which came too late for the wren but aided the recovery of the fairy prion bird and a nocturnal reptile called the tuatara.

…While the study highlights the importance of removing harmful invasive species from islands, it’s just as important to make sure the interlopers don’t come back after multi-million-dollar eradication efforts, Jones and Holmes said.

On the Channel Islands and those around New Zealand, for example, officials take strict biosecurity measures to prevent invasive species – especially rats – from hitching rides onto the islands. In New Zealand, visitors must unpack all their belongings in rodent-proof rooms and on some islands, including Anacapa, pass through tunnels lined with rat traps when they land.

Holmes said the results should encourage similar projects on other affected islands.

“There’s thousands of islands that we know have threatened species and continue to have invasive mammals,” he said. “If we want to prevent these species from going extinct, we have to do these interventions in pretty quick clip.”

NEW YORK TIMES:

Prime Suspect in Koala’s Murder: Los Angeles’s Mountain Lion

LOS ANGELES — The murder was grisly. A koala disappeared from the Los Angeles Zoo one night this month. Its body, mangled and bloody, was found the next morning on a nearby hillside.

Suspicion immediately fell on the area’s most famous resident: a wild mountain lion, known as P-22, who has made a home in the rugged hills near the zoo in this city’s Griffith Park since wandering from a nearby national recreation area in 2012.

The big cat had been caught on video roaming the zoo on the night of the attack. Besides, who else could have hopped the zoo’s nine-foot fence? Certainly not a coyote.

Posted in Immigration | Comments Off

How to sleep without crunching your shoulders

Posted on March 23, 2016 by Luke Ford

More.

Posted in Alexander Technique | Comments Off

The Trump Spring

Posted on March 23, 2016 by Luke Ford

Posted in America | Comments Off