מחאת ארגון ‘בצלמו’: גם חסימת יהודים וגם הרס העתיקות

דרישה מרשות העתיקות יש לעצור את הרס העתיקות שמתחולל בימים אלו בהר הבית: “חייבים למנוע את הרס העתיקות וההיסטוריה היהודית בהר הבית זו המורשת שלנו כעם”

רועי שושה |י”ז ניסן ה’תשפ”ב (18/04/22) | 18:06
ארגון בצלמו בפניה למנהל רשות העתיקות מר אלי אסקוזידו: פעלו בדחיפות על מנת לעצור את הרס העתיקות המתחולל בהר הבית.

עולי הר הבית ביממה האחרונה נתקלו בדרכם באבנים רבות אשר הינם כותרות ומהווים ממצאים ארכיאלוגים עתיקים. אבנים אלו חוללו על ידי פורעים ערבים ביממה האחרונה. בעקבות כך פנה מנכ”ל בצלמו שי גליק למנהל רשות העתיקות מר אלי אסקוזידו ודרש ממנו לפעול מיידית לעצירת מסע הרס ההיסטוריה המתחולל בהר הבית.

במכתב שנשלח היום נכתב בין היתר, ש”הר הבית הינו המקום הקדוש והחשוב בעולם ליהדות ולשלושת הדתות. לא ייתכן שבעוד כל בניין שאולי ישנם עתיקות מתחתיו מעוכבים הליכי בנייה זמן רב, ואילו בהר הבית נשמעת דממת אלחוט מצד רשות העתיקות ואין כל התערבות ופניה בנושא למדינת ישראל למניעת הרס העתיקות”.

שי גליק מנכ”ל בצלמו אמר: “הר הבית הינו חלק בלתי נפרד ממדינת ישראל. חוקי המדינה חלים בכל מקום ובוודאי בהר הבית. לא ייתכן שרשות העתיקות שאחראית מטעם מדינת ישראל על העתיקות לא תתערב בחילול עתיקות הר הבית של הרס מאסיבי, שמזכיר את דעא”ש”.

Travelling Late Erev Shabbos Means Forcing the Driver to Desecrate Shabbos!

Slabodka Rosh Yeshiva Blasts Those Who Travel Late On Friday, Forcing Drivers To Desecrate Shabbos

JERUSALEM (VINnews) — Rabbi Dov Landau, the head of the Slabodka yeshiva in Bnei Brak, criticized those who travel on public transport late on Fridays and before holidays, since they are causing the secular drivers to desecrate the Shabbos.

In a talk given this week, Rabbi Landau said that it is better even to stay home without Shabbos meals rather than cause a driver to desecrate the Shabbos due to his arriving at his destination just before Shabbos.

.”If people find that they are late for the trip – they should stay at home even though they will miss a Shabbos ‘Sheva Brachos’ or other family event, ” Rabbi Landau stressed. “Indeed, they have challah and wine at home and that is enough, so long as they do not leave late and cause, G-d forbid, a Shabbos desecration for the driver,” he said.

Rabbi Lando related: “One of the bus drivers recently told me that he wants to keep Shabbos and wanted to drop people off at an early stop so that he could get home on time. But the passengers insisted on driving to the end of the route.

“The driver begged in tears that he wants to keep Shabbos and that he would not be able to return home on time, but was sadly ignored. The driver told me in tears that ‘the haredim did not allow me to keep Shabbat.’

“Some people know how to shout ‘Shabbos’ ‘Shabbos’ on the streets for those who desecrate Shabbat, but those who drive late on Friday and cause the desecration of Shabbos for a driver, ‘Shabbos’ needs to be shouted at them.

“Taking in Shabbos early is a big deal, and if people are early in bringing in Shabbos, then all this will be avoided. Just as it is forbidden to desecrate Shabbos, it is forbidden to cause someone else to desecrate Shabbos.

“Do not shout ‘Shabbos’ only when the mayor institutes public transportation on Shabbat, for when people travel late [on Friday] they are themselves instituting public transportation on Shabbos, and they are not being ‘haredim’ (fearful) towards the word of G-d,” Rabbi Lando concluded.

From VIN News, here.

This Looks Like a Great Chol Hamo’ed Book for Teens (Mom??)

My Mother-in-Law: Jewish Heroine and Nazi Killer

POSTED ON  UPDATED ON 

This was published on Aish.com

It was a daunting assignment: speaking to 120 eighth grade girls about the Holocaust in the last hour of the last day of their school year. Compounding my challenge, it was gloriously sunny outside. The girls would be anxious to take leave for their summer vacation.

In my favor, I was going to tell them a remarkable story: that of my mother-in-law, Rachel Blum, may her soul rest in peace – a story I have told to spell-bound audiences and have recently published in book form under the title Nothing Bad Ever Happens.

I told these teenage girls that my mother-in-law was roughly their age during the war years, beginning in June 1941 when the Nazis invaded her town, until July 1944 when the Russians liberated Lublin where she had been hiding with a non-Jewish family.

Then I dove into the story, which is truly incredible and gripping – including a Hollywood-worthy climax as Rachel rides in the caboose of a speeding train transporting a thousand SS soldiers to Germany. Fearful an SS officer is about to discover she is Jewish, she convinces the conductor – Ivan Roluk, husband of the non-Jewish couple who took her in – to overturn the train by speeding up around a sharp bend and blowing the horn just beforehand to allow her and his family to jump. (It worked, the family survived and many Nazis were killed; 15-year-old Rachel was responsible for the death of more SS Nazis in one shot than the combined efforts of all the legendary fighters of the Warsaw Ghetto Uprising!)

Despite the dramatic nature of that story, I will save the details for the book and instead share another story, one which is in some ways even more incredible.

Rachel’s childhood town, Ludmir, was home to about 22,000 Jews before the war. On Rosh Hashanah 1942, the Nazis, with the help of local collaborators, began marching columns of bedraggled Jews to a spot outside town and machine-gunned them to death into open pits. Between 15,000 and 18,000 Jews lost their lives that way. And Ludmir was just one of countless Jewish towns in Eastern Europe; all told, some million-and-a-half Jews suffered a similar fate under Nazi domination (even before the gas chambers started operating).

Continue reading…

From Yaakov Astor’s Blog, here.

The Elites Present Themselves as the REAL Victims…

Your Top Priority is The Emotional Comfort of the Most Powerful Elites, Which You Fulfill by Never Criticizing Them.

Corporate journalists have license to use their huge platforms to malign, expose and destroy anyone they want. Your moral duty: sit in respectful silence and never object.

The front-page reporter, Taylor Lorenz, recently of The New York Times and now The Washington Post, uses the skills she learned growing up in Old Greenwich, Connecticut and while being educated at Greenwich High School and absolutely lovely boarding schools in the Swiss Alps to express, on NBC News’ Meet the Press Daily, the trauma and victimization she endures from critics of her journalism: journalism which she has often weaponized to destroy the lives of many powerless people including teenagers, on April 1, 2022 (credit: MSNBC)

When Hillary Clinton’s divine entitlement to the U.S. presidency began to look imperiled in 2016 — first due to the irreverent and unkempt (but surprisingly formidable) Democratic Party primary challenge from Bernie Sanders, the independent socialist Senator from Vermont — her campaign and its media allies invented and unveiled a deeply moving morality tale. A faceless horde of unnamed, uncredentialed, unmannered, violent, abusive and deeply misogynistic online Sanders supporters — dubbed with the gender-emphasizing name “Bernie Bros” even though many were women — were berating, insulting and brutalizing Hillary, her top campaign surrogates (U.S. Senators, former cabinet members, corporate executives), and especially pro-Hillary corporate journalists with a vast artillery of traumatizing words and violent tweets.

This storyline — and especially the way it cleverly inverted the David v. Goliath framework of the 2016 campaign so that it was now Hillary and her band of monied and Ivy-League-educated political and media elites who were the real victims — was irresistible to Harvard-and-Yale-trained journalists at NBC, CNN, The New York Times and Washington Post op-ed pages who really believe they are the truly marginalized peoples. This narrative scheme enabled them — the most powerful and influential media and political elites in the world, with access to the most potent platforms and megaphones — to somehow credibly lay claim to that most valued of all currencies in American political life: victimhood.

With this power matrix in place, what mattered was no longer the pain and anger of people whose towns had their industries stripped by the Clintons’ NAFTA robbery, or who worked at low-wage jobs with no benefits due to the 2008 financial crisis caused by Clintonite finance geniuses, or who were drowning in student debt with no job prospects after that crisis, or who suffered from PTSD, drug and alcohol addiction and shabby to no health care after fighting in the Clintons’ wars. Now, such ordinary people were not the victims but the perpetrators. Their anger toward elites was not valid or righteous but dangerous, abusive and toxic. The real victims were multi-millionaire hosts of MSNBC programs and U.S. Senators and New York Times columnists who were abused and brutalized by those people’s angry tweets for the crime of supporting a pioneer and avatar for marginalized people: the Wellesley-and-Yale-Law-graduate, former First Lady, Senator from New York, and U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.

The Washington Post, June 7, 2016; The Daily Beast, Jan. 20, 2020.

The genius of the Bernie Bro rhetorical scheme was two-fold. First, it prioritized and centered elite discomfort over the far more important and real anger and deprivation of ordinary people. Secondly, and even better from the perspective of elite interests, it implicitly imposed a ban on any meaningful critiques of powerful political and media elites by insisting that the online abuse and resultant trauma they endured was the fault of those who criticized them. According to this elite-protecting script, this crisis of online abuse and trauma did not materialize out of nowhere. It was triggered by, and was the fault of, anyone who voiced criticism of those elites. By speaking ill of these media and political figures, such critics were “targeting” them and signaling that they should be attacked.

Continue reading…

From Glenn Greenwald, here.

How the USG Got Parents to Torture Their Babies

Were You Boiled as a Baby?

In 1914, the Children’s Bureau warned mothers not bathe their babies on the stove. Modern parents might find some of their other advice dubious.

Raising a child is hard work. And for all our resources and technology, it’s not getting easier.

For centuries, mothers could turn to tradition and her own mother’s example of what to do. But by the early 20th Century, Americans were starting to rely less on tradition and more on science and technology. And one of the trendiest ideas at the time was efficiency.

Efficiency experts believed there was a single “best” way of doing everything. They sought to reduce wasted time and motion in manufacturing, but their methods could be applied to any process.

And in 1910, the care of infants was a process that desperately needed improving. In that year, 27 percent of all deaths were of children under five years old, and 19 percent were infants less than a year old.

Two years later, Congress created the Children’s Bureau to look into every aspect of children’s welfare.

In 1914, the Bureau published a book of advice for the expectant mother: Infant Care. It was available from the government printing office for a dime. For decades, it was considered the definitive guide to childrearing through the first years of life. Generations were guided by its advice.

Over the next 50 years, the Bureau sold 40 million copies of the book. It was still being published in 1959 when the Post article called “Were You Boiled as a Baby?” appeared in our August 29, 1959, issue. In it, Robert M. Yoder looked back at the advice that appeared in early editions of Infant Care.

“Far more recently than you might suppose, Infant Care was cautioning mothers to take the baby’s bathtub off the stove before putting baby into it. Sometimes the coal or wood fire blazed up, and ‘blistered bottoms were not uncommon,’ the Children’s Bureau says.”

While no one would argue with such advice, other instructions would raise eyebrows of most modern parents.

The Scheduled Life — One of the first thing new parents were instructed to do was set an inflexible schedule for their child. Sleeping, eating, bathing — any daily activity should have an appointed time. Following a strict schedule was essential to children’s happiness, the experts said. “The habit of regularity in feeding and sleeping can be begun on the third day of life; and, once established, it must not be interrupted or broken for any reason except a real emergency.”

Limited Play — “A few minutes of gentle play now and then” was good for the baby. However, all babies need a great deal of rest and quiet, and most play was considered too exciting. Tickling and tossing made him irritable and restless. Rocking the baby, dandling him on the parent’s knee, tossing him, and shaking his bed or carriage could form bad habits, as they made the baby dependent on attention.

 No Coddling — Parents were warned to not be swayed by their children’s tears. After all, infants cried to get their own way. “It is one of the worst habits he can learn — sufficient to make a spoiled, fussy baby and a household tyrant.

According to the 1919 version of Infant Care, “Parents must not start the habit of coaxing a baby to sleep by rocking, walking, or holding him, lying down with him, or holding his hand after he is put in bed…There is nothing to be gained by walking the floor with him.

“If the baby wakes between feedings and cries… do not hold him or rock him to stop his crying, and do not feed him until the exact hour for the feeding comes. It will not hurt the baby, even the tiny baby, to cry. Crying is the younger baby’s one means of expressing his needs and his dislikes Every baby can be trained to wait his full interval of three or four hours (whichever the doctor has ordered) before his hunger is satisfied. (There is no danger that crying will cause rupture.)”

The most important needs of a child, Yoder observed, seemed to be training, discipline, and a firm hand. “You were toeing the line long before you could walk a line.”

The Children’s Bureau had a change of heart, judging by its 1921 edition. A few minutes’ play with the child were permitted. And in 1939, parents — including the father, who’d had little notice in the pamphlet until now — were encouraged to play with their infant.

Continue reading…

From Saturday Evening Post, here.