Tuesday, November 25, 2014

A brief, and biased history of riots.






Paternalism, Parochialism, Pessimism (and maybe some racism) all in one #furgeson tweet


This advisory was released before the DA finished speaking (pessimism)(and maybe some racism). Notice it is directed at St. Louis Jews only (parochrialism), who live nowhere near Furgeson and, assumedly, are adults capable of looking after themselves (paternalism).


Text here Search for more information about ### at4torah.com

Monday, November 24, 2014

Further proof that anti-hasbrah bloggers are also reality challenged


Search for more information about ### at4torah.com

New poll destroys everyone's favorite myths about Israel


Results of a new poll have been released in Israel that totally demolish some of the most dearly beloved myths of both the pro and anti-Israel camps. In short, activists on both side are dead wrong about important points.

PRO ISRAEL MYTH #1:
ARABS WANT TO DESTROY ISRAEL

A poll published by Israel’s Channel 10 shows that the majority of Israeli Arabs oppose the use of terrorism against Israeli citizens.
A massive 68 percent of Israeli Arabs who were polled answered that they oppose the recent wave of terror.
PRO ISRAEL MYTH #2: 
PALESTINIAN ARABS SUPPORT TERRORISTS
The majority of the Arabs surveyed – 84% – stated that their representatives in the Knesset should condemn the terror attacks.
ANTI ISRAEL MYTH #1 
ISRAEL IS AN APARTHEID STATE
Israel sovereignty was preferred by a vast 77 percent of the respondents, whereas only 23 percent desired to live under Palestinian rule.
ANTI ISRAEL MYTH #2
JEWS WHO WISH TO PRAY ON THE TEMPLE MOUNT ARE INCITING THE POPULATION
A recent survey conducted by Tel Aviv University (TAU) reveals a most astonishing fact – close to 50 percent of Israel’s Arabs support the right of Jews to worship at the Temple Mount.

SOURCE: See it here 

Search for more information about the false things activists want you to believe  at4torah.com

Friday, November 21, 2014

#parshanotes: Toldos

Esav served his father roast dog?


Received as a comment:

For the "suggestion box": more Parasha, more Midrash. This leftist-rightist showdown is getting repetitive.

And these weeks, what a controversial discussion can come out! Does Esav have a legitimate complaint against Yaakov, is trying to kill him the right way to deal with it, (for the Open Orthodox: did these guys exist at all, and if not, what's the story about), all the fascinating midrashim on these stories (did Esav really serve his father roast dog? Ewwww...


Um, Roast Dog? Who can elaborate?

Further reading...

DOVBEAR: Pasha Notes: Toldos 2009

dovbear.blogspot.com/2009/11/pasha-notes-toldos-2009.html
Nov 20, 2009 - Pasha NotesToldos 2009. by DovBear at 9:00 AM. What everyone should know. Our midrashim lament Jacob's theft of the brochot, and ..


  1. DOVBEAR: Sforno and the mythical schoolhouse of Shem ...

    dovbear.blogspot.com/.../sforno-and-mythical-schoolhouse-of-shem.htm...
    Nov 23, 2011 - Sforno's interpretation Jacob had two different tents. One was his shepherd tent, where he lived while he was with the flocks; the other was a ...
  1. DOVBEAR: The Esav Enigma

    dovbear.blogspot.com/2007/11/esav-enigma.html
    Nov 28, 2007 - Elsewhere, my friend Chaim is attempting to tell us that Esav was the epitomy of evil, and he's using midrashic matrial to defend his point.
  2. DOVBEAR: Esav and Rome

    dovbear.blogspot.com/2009/07/esav-and-rome.html
    Jul 30, 2009 - A few years back, Bray, some others, and I, argued for months across multiple posts and comments about Esav and Rome. I don't remember ...
  3. DOVBEAR: Esav and the Salt and Straw: What the midrash ...

    dovbear.blogspot.com/2010/.../esav-and-salt-and-straw-what-midrash.ht...
    Nov 5, 2010 - When school teachers wish to prove that Esav was a dishonest sneak, they usually reference the famous Rashi (based on an older midrash) ...
  4. DOVBEAR: In which I provide additional evidence that Esav ...

    dovbear.blogspot.com/2008/.../in-which-i-provide-additional-evidence.h...
    Nov 3, 2008 - Long time readers know, that its my belief that Esau, first son of Issac, was the victim of a rabininc smear job. [In previous posts I have argued ...
    1. DOVBEAR: Parsha Vocabulary

      dovbear.blogspot.com/2007/11/parsha-vocabulary.html
      Nov 13, 2007 - Analysis of Ya'akov's deal with Esav (lentils for birthright) has to include consideration of Esav's physical state at the time of the deal.
    2. DOVBEAR: Misunderstanding the Midrash

      dovbear.blogspot.com/2006/11/misunderstanding-midrash.html
      Nov 26, 2006 - Gen 25:28 reads: "And Issac loved Esav because of the game in his mouth." (tzayid b'fiv) This is a hebrew idiom, which suggests Esav as either a kind of lion bringing home food in his mouth, or as a mother bird dropping worms into her chick's gapping beak. In either case, it's a material and, therefore,  .
      1. DOVBEAR: Why was Isaac blind?

        dovbear.blogspot.com/2007/11/why-was-isaac-blind.html
        Nov 15, 2007 - The answer to this question is a wonderful illustration of Rashi's way with midrashim, and also an indictment of how our children are taught in the typical Yeshiva. ... Explaining this midrash is beyond the scope of this post (also, ...We're told Issac was blind immediately before the blessing story begins. Why?
      2. DOVBEAR: IN WHICH I EXPLAIN A MIDRASH (The ...

        dovbear.blogspot.com/.../in-which-i-explain-midrash-blindness-of.html
        Nov 1, 2013 - Five reasons are given for Isaac's blindnessPerhaps the best known one is cited by Rashi on Gen 27:1 "Another explanation: When Isaac was ..
Search for more information about ### at4torah.com

Thursday, November 20, 2014

Here's what terrible media criticism looks like


Over at the NYT they ran a story about the synagogue massacre that seemed reasonably well done.  It contained no obvious mistakes, the crimes of the Palestinians were duly itemized and even the tone seemed gentle enough to satisfy even the most sensitive Zionist soul.

Unfortunately when you suffer from a pre-existing condition of Times hatred, there's always something. Here's some of the nutty complaints I saw.

They called Yehuda Glick an agitator
Now, agitator happens to be a perfectly good English word with no especially sinister connotations but if you were raised by wolves or educated in a Jewish Madrassa it may sound like the Times is saying something nasty about Mr. Glick. They are not, A quick dictionary check will reveal that the word simply seems someone who wants the government to change a policy, and urges others to resist that policy.  In other words, agitator is perfectly appropriate one word summary of Yehuda Glck's public activities over the last several years.

They said Har Nof is in West Jerusalem
As with the previous example this is a case of the Times being criticized for telling the truth rather than engaging in politically correct euphemisms. Where is Har Nof? West Jerusalem, right? And if you're mad because you hold Jerusalem is a unified city, and dislike the suggestion that it still has two  divided parts, that's fine, only the New York Times lives in a world where not a single government recognizes this, including the US - even when Republicans were captaining the ship of state. Is the Times supposed to embrace an editorial policy that  humors your view of the world, to the exclusion of how every political entity in the universe views it?  Come on.

They engaged in moral relativism
Most people know that moral relativism has nothing to do with identifying two acts as having equal moral significance. The first problem is the nutty media critics don't realize this. The second problem is they think that any time a writer lists two acts in the same paragraph he's saying they are morally identical. So when the Times recounts the violent events of the last few months, the nutty media critic thinks the Times is really saying all those events are exactly the same. And because he's as bad at vocabulary as he is at reading, he calls that moral relativism. Two mistakes for the price of one,


 Search for more information about ### at4torah.com

Comment of the day: Share with all racists

>how do you defend against the fact that the guy you've known for years can turn deadly in a minute?

ETNACH: Do you really think like this? Do the math. If there was any real possibility that all or even most of the Arabs you've "known for years" (In what capacity, I'm dying to know -- years of washing your car or selling you oranges?) could or even wanted to spontaneously carry out terror attacks Israel would be a parking lot. It's a tired, old racist discourse: you can't trust THEM because they're not like US. Our exterior always matches our interior, and we can be counted on not to betray you and to exercise principled moral choice, but the black guy, he's just waiting for a chance to rape your sister, the Latino'll steal from you first chance he gets, the queer wants to touch your children and the Arab wants to blow you up or stab you. Hell, they can't even help themselves, it's just a defect they have. They're so far beneath choice and morality that the best you can hope for is to manage them not, God forbid, engage them like humans.

 Search for more information about ### at4torah.com

Jews banned from banking industry!


No wait, got that wrong. That should say:

Hasidic men banned from entering preschools!

Whoops. Sorry, sorry still wrong. Here's the actual headline that describes a case of predicting someone's future behavior based on his race or religion:





Search for more information about ### at4torah.com

Wednesday, November 19, 2014

Must read: Politics Can't Explain the Israeli Synagogue Attack. Only Hatred Can.

DovBear agrees with every word of this article

Politics Can't Explain the Israeli Synagogue Attack. Only Hatred Can.

By Yishai Schwartz in TNR

They came with meat cleavers and pistols. A little after 7 a.m. on Tuesday, as Jewish worshippers were completing the silentAmidah prayer in a Jerusalem synagogue, two men began shooting and hacking at those trapped inside. Four of the worshippersall rabbis, three of whom were American and one Englishare dead. One of the police respondents, a member of Israel’s Arab Druze community, is in critical condition. Images of the immediate aftermath show sacred books, prayers shawls, and the straps of tefillin strewn among bodies and blood.

How to do Hasbrah properly

Here are examples of CRAP hasbarah

Denouncing newspapers and other publications for petty, nit-picky, irrelevant things. Most everything you see from Honest Reporting and the other self-appointed media watchdogs falls into this category. They moan about word choice. (usually because the watchdog, himself, doesn't know what the word in question actually means) They scream Kristelnacht because a fact or detail was left out, or gripe about "moral equivalence" when two things are mentioned in the same paragraph. (Did I just create an equivalence between Kristenacht and moral? I did use both words in the same sentence.)

Now occasionally media outlets do make serious errors, and I don't include the response to those types of errors in this category, but let's be honest: those types of errors are very far and few between, and usually corrections are issued immediately.

Offering a knee-jerk denial to every Palestinian claim of injustice. Can we be honest, please, here among ourselves? Sometimes the IDF and the police and other authorities make mistakes. Sometimes they commit outright crimes. I don't say any of this happens frequently,  but it does happen. The abject denial of this reality by hasbrahniks makes all of us look stupid.

Also, the claim that every child shot by the IDF was a dangerous "terrorist" is not helpful. Better to just tell the truth, and admit the facts. This is how you win credibility.

Tin-foil hat interpretations of CCTV videos Occasionally, IDF crimes or mistakes are captured on video. Now, I agree that a video doesn't tell the whole story, and that occasionally important information is missing. I also agree that the difference between a "mistake" and a "crime" is not easily spotted. Making both of these points is legitimate and are NOT examples of crap hasbarah.

What is unacceptable, however, is the practice of denying what the video clearly shows, after subjecting it to the full-on Zapruder film analysis. For example, CNN published a video that clearly showed an Israeli in uniform firing the bullet that hit Nadeem Nawara. One self-appointed hasbrahnik preposterously argued that the video actually showed a soldier firing a rubber bullet, and concluded that Nawara had to have been killed in the ambulance by other Palestinians. Don't do that. You look like an idiot, and no one with any sense is convinced.

Here are examples of LEGITIMATE hasbarah

Setting the record straight. When you see people on Facebook or Twitter saying things that are clearly untrue, a clear, direct, polite response (with sources) is the right way to go. Some people (like Hasbrah bloggers) aren't interested in facts, and of course people like that exist on the Arab side. But you also have people like me who just want to know what really happened, and like me they are happy to recalibrate their thinking in the light of new information. A polite correction works.

Pointing out fallacies You'll also see people drawing unjustified conclusion or making claims that aren't supported by evidence. You should point this out, too. For example, in the hours after the death of the bus driver, the Arab Twitterverse was positive that he had been "lynched by settlers" The right thing to do in that case, is simply to ask each of them: How do you know that? Most brushed off the question or responded in anger, but some realized they were jumping to baseless conclusions.

Bring barbarism to the light of day When you spot something outrageous, retweet it, facebook it or send it to me for posting. It's important for people to know what some Arabs are actually saying and actually doing. But don't do this if dozens of people have already beaten you to it.


 Search for more information about ### at4torah.com

CNN is stupid, but...


  

Clearly, whoever typed the headline was not paying attention and deserves a swift reprimand.

But the rest of CNN - including the anchors and the people on the scene - knew they were reporting about an attack on a synagogue. So yes, CNN employs idiots, but no they did not "report that the attack happened in a mosque" as many are claiming. #truth



earch for more information about ### at4torah.com

Of course, some Rabbis took magical drashot literally.

In certain communities, it's become fashionable to claim that our Rabbis did not mean what they said, when they provided supernatural or magical interpretations of Bible verses. Drawing on the Ramchal and others they insist that these interpretations are really meant to convey lessons and ideas, and tat the sages always spoke in parables.

Though, I fully agree that this is true in some cases, the claim fails as a general rule for several reasons: 1) At times, the statement is clearly based on a reading of the verse, rather than an interpretation. I've provided many examples of this. 2) At times halachot are established based on these statements.  3) At times, ethical principles are based on those statements.

Here's a case study of #3

THE VERSE
 וְהַנַּעֲרָ, טֹבַת מַרְאֶה מְאֹד--בְּתוּלָה, וְאִישׁ לֹא יְדָעָהּ; וַתֵּרֶד הָעַיְנָה, וַתְּמַלֵּא כַדָּהּ וַתָּעַל.16 And the damsel was very fair to look upon, a virgin, neither had any man known her; and she went down to the fountain, and filled her pitcher, and came up.
יז  וַיָּרָץ הָעֶבֶד, לִקְרָאתָהּ; וַיֹּאמֶר, הַגְמִיאִינִי נָא מְעַט-מַיִם מִכַּדֵּךְ.17 And the servant ran to meet her, and said: 'Give me to drink, I pray thee, a little water of thy pitcher.'

THE PROBLEM

1) In Verse 16 we're missing a verb that appears later when the Torah described how the damsel [Rebekka] gave water to the camils.

  וַתְּמַהֵר, וַתְּעַר כַּדָּהּ אֶל-הַשֹּׁקֶת, וַתָּרָץ עוֹד אֶל-הַבְּאֵר, לִשְׁאֹב; וַתִּשְׁאַב, לְכָל-גְּמַלָּיו.20 And she hastened, and emptied her pitcher into the trough, and ran again unto the well to draw, and drew for all his camels.

As you can see, we're told in verse 20 that she "drew" the water, while in verse 16 she merely went down to the well and filled her pitcher, without "drawing" the water.

2) The servant runs to her (verse 17) but no explanation for his hurry is provided.

THE SOLUTION

Here's Rashi drawing on Beraishis Raba

And the servant ran toward her: Because he saw that the water had risen toward her. — [Gen. Rabbah ad loc.]

Rebekka didn't need to draw the water, because it rose up from the well to meet her. Seeing this obvious miracle, the servant ran to her.


THE LESSON

The midrash ends here, but later interpreters asked further questions on it, and from their questions we can see they did not think the miracle of the rising water was meant to be understood figuratively.

R. Chaim Shmulevitz asks (paraphrase) If the servant saw that Rebekka was worthy enough to experience a miracle, why did he subject her to the test he had conceived in an earlier verse?

הָיָה הַנַּעֲרָ, אֲשֶׁר אֹמַר אֵלֶיהָ הַטִּי-נָא כַדֵּךְ וְאֶשְׁתֶּה, וְאָמְרָה שְׁתֵה, וְגַם-גְּמַלֶּיךָ אַשְׁקֶה--אֹתָהּ הֹכַחְתָּ, לְעַבְדְּךָ לְיִצְחָק, וּבָהּ אֵדַע, כִּי-עָשִׂיתָ חֶסֶד עִם-אֲדֹנִי.14 So let it come to pass, that the damsel to whom I shall say: Let down thy pitcher, I pray thee, that I may drink; and she shall say: Drink, and I will give thy camels drink also; let the same be she that Thou hast appointed for Thy servant, even for Isaac; and thereby shall I know that Thou hast shown kindness unto my master.'

Why go through with this trial? Why ask her to water the camels? Why wasn't the water miracle taken as an indication that this was the right woman for Isaac?

Because, R. Shmulevitch continues (paraphrase) the house of Abraham is a house of chesed (charity and good deeds) not a house of miracles.  The servant knew Abraham didn't want a miracle-worker for his daughter in law. He wanted someone who cared about others and was willing to make sacrifices on their behalf. That's why the servant proposed the test in the first place, and that's why he went through with it even after witnessing the miracle.

THE BOTTOM LINE

I, personally, don't think that the water rose up to meet Rebekka, but I do acknowledge that this interpretation is a very clever way to solve the perceived problem in the narrative. I also admire the very clever supercommentary provided by R. Shmulevitch even if I don't agree with him about the historicity of the miracle upon which his teaching is based. What can't be denied, however, is that R. Shmulevitch's lesson only makes in-context sense if he [R. Shmulevitch] accepted the historicity of the miracle.

DO US A FAVOR

Once upon a time, we'd argue for hours about stuff like this on Facebook. If you have access to the people I fought with, and the groups where the arguments occurred (God Save us From Your Opinion and others) please pass on the word that here, in exile, a new post has been published. Thanks.

Search for more information about ### at4torah.com

Tuesday, November 18, 2014

Tragedy tweets: The Har Nof Massacre


Horrifying news this morning, of course, and kol hakovod to those who responded quickly and prevented the carnage from being much worse. Thoughts and prayers are with the victims, and their families.

Some unrelated thoughts, connected to posts I put on Twitter earlier:
Of course, the news out of Har Nof was immediately met by complaints about moderate Arabs, and their alleged unwillingness to confront and condemn the extremists in their midst. I happen to know that plenty of moderate Arabs did denounce the crimes committed today in Har Nof, but that 's really not the point. Yelling about the other side is useless. If you want to do something that matters focus on your own circles of influence. Instead of yelling into the void about what Arabs should be doing, speak to your own friends and neighbors about what we can do together to break the cycle of violence. Jerusalem is on the brink. The situation has to be defused - and fast.
Along with yelling about Arabs, lots of people rhetorically demanded to know what the world, or the media, would say and do had Jews marched into a mosque and murdered people at prayer. Of course, these all the same people who seem programmed to ignore all the negative things leaders and journalists say about Arabs. If you want to have some fun on Facebook tonight (sigh) keep your eye out for people complaining that the president "still hasn't" said anything about Har Nof. You'll find scores of them, despite the fact that the president issued a powerful condemnation almost immediately.
So there were two noteworthy things about this article (which has already been retitled " Four Rabbis Killed..." First, the Times broke the universal journalistic convention of putting the most recent event (ie the Israeli response)  in the headline. Second, some of the comments were written by people who are dead certain that the Times is a pro-Zionist and Israeli-controlled - or at least Israeli-sympathetic. Now of course, I think that's as funny as the idea that the Times hates Israel, but its important for our extremists friends to be aware that their ideological opponents are reading the exact same articles in the exact same paper and coming to the exact opposite conclusions.

Also, a common refrain in the Twitter activity among the Arabs I follow was the certainty that "the Times and CNN" were going to ignore what they, at the time, believed was the lynching of a Palestinian bus driver, Then, barely a day later, I saw Jews expressing the exact same fear following their own tragedy. By the way, whenever I saw an Arab announcing the bus driver had been "lynched by settlers" I tweeted this back:
Tweets such as that one, and the followups I sent after the coroner ruling are what I consider real Hasbrah.


   Search for more information about ### at4torah.com

Sunday, November 16, 2014

Rabbinic explanations from Glen Beck

Here's condescending moron Glen Beck attempting to explain why Jews keep kosher. Apparently death is bad. Who knew? Also, Glen hates snuff films most of all. Watch the video here




Search for more information about ### at4torah.com

Friday, November 14, 2014

One Mean Aramean

A guest post by Y. Bloch

Laban,who appears for the first time in this weekend's Torah portion, is an intriguing figure. Unlike Patriarchal antagonists Pharaoh, Abimelech and Esau, we never hear the refrain "He will kill me" concerning Laban. He seems nice. However, in the Haggadah, Laban is presented as our arch-nemesis. On Passover, we would expect Pharaoh to be the Big Bad, but apparently he plays second fiddle while Memphis burns. We read:
Come and learn what Laban the Aramean sought to do to our patriarch Jacob. For Pharaoh issued his edict against only the males, but Laban sought to uproot it all, as it is said (Deut. 26:5), "My father was lost to an Aramean, and he went down to Egypt and he became there a nation, great, mighty and populous."
This is stunning. Pharaoh murders thousands and enslaves millions, but Laban surpasses him for thought crimes?
However, we must bear in mind that the Haggadah is a Midrashic work. In the Midrash, Laban is merely one name for a nigh-immortal character who plagues the Jews repeatedly. You may know him by a different name.
Balaam is Laban, as it says (Deut. 26:5), "My father was lost to an Aramean;" because he sought to eradicate Israel, he is called an Aramean. (Midrash Tanhuma, Vayetze 13)
Now, at least, we enter the same ballpark. Balaam also has bad intentions, but he actually does some damage, as Moses states: (Num. 31:16): "Behold, these, on Balaam’s advice, caused the people of Israel to act treacherously against the LORD in the incident of Peor, and so the plague came among the congregation of the LORD." This plague kills 24,000.
balaam_2
Still, tragic as that event is, can it really compare to the centuries of slavery and genocide courtesy of the Pharaohs?
Interestingly, the Midrash does connect Pharaoh to Balaam's execratory consulting business.
Said R. Hiya b. Abba, quoting R. Simai: "There were part of that council, Balaam, Job and Jethro. Balaam, who counseled, was killed; Job, who was silent, was sentenced to suffering; Jethro, who fled, merited to have grandchildren sit on the Supreme Court." (Talmud, Sota 11a)

The Rabbis taught: "Pharaoh had three counselors, and when he contracted leprosy, he asked the physicians what would cure him. Balaam counseled him to take Jews, slaughter them, and shower in their blood, thereby curing himself." (Midrash Ha-gadol, Exod. 2:23)
These two legends describe the bookends of Egyptian slavery, from the initial "Come, let's deal wisely with them" (Exod. 1:10) to the gruesome finale (2:23), "But the Israelites continued to groan under their burden of slavery. They cried out for help, and their cry rose up to God." Immediately afterwards, God appears to Moses and sends him to Egypt to redeem his people.
Now let's look at that line from the Haggadah again. "For Pharaoh issued his edict against only the males, but Laban sought to uproot it all." Who are "only the males"? This may refer to the baby boys Pharaoh orders cast into the Nile, but those are mentioned later in the Haggadah as "the boys," not "the males." "The males" is usually a term applied to men, those who would be combatants in war (cf. Num. 31:7, Deut. 20:13). In fact, in the verse cited above (Exod. 1:10), Pharaoh identifies the threat in the following way: "Otherwise they will continue to multiply, and if a war breaks out, they will ally themselves with our enemies and fight against us and leave the country." In the previous verse, he explains why he is concerned: the Israelites are "atzum mimenu," "mightier than we." In Numbers 22, King Balak of Moab, Balaam's other royal client, expresses the exact same concern, "atzum hu mimeni," "it is mightier than I." He too speaks of the Israelite threat in military terms: "Perhaps I will be able to strike it and drive it out of the land... Perhaps I will be able to wage war against it and drive it out."
However, Balaam-Laban takes this national-security threat and recasts it as an existential, eschatological fight. After he fails to curse the Israelites and is fired by Balak, he says: "Now I am going back to my people, but come, let me counsel you of what this people will do to your people in the end of days" (ibid. 24:14). If Moab does not destroy Israel, they will be destroyed by them. It is the same approach he used with Pharaoh: Egypt can survive the Hebrew threat only if the Nile turns red with their blood. It is genocide or suicide.
In this light, Laban-Balaam is indeed worse than Pharaoh or Balak. He seeks "to uproot it all," "to eradicate Israel." The king is merely the tool, the means to carry out this plan. It is Laban-Balaam who recasts the military/ national-security threat as an existential clash of peoples, nations and faiths.
These are dangerous times in the Middle East. We have to be vigilant against the forces of Pharaoh. But the true threat is the counsel of Laban, inflaming and inciting all-out war.

Text here Search for more information about Laban at4torah.com

Thursday, November 13, 2014

Bad day for Pallywood Pushers


Opening disclaimer
  • I concede that some of the videos purporting to show Israeli crimes against Palestinians are doctored, stripped of context, or even staged. No need to remind me of this.

Some bloggers make a living pointing out alleged discrepancies and errors in videos that purport to show Israeli crimes against Palestinians. I tend to ignore them, like I generally ignore the videos themselves. But last June during the crises over the three missing boys, I saw some variation of this whiny complaint all over the social networks

"If Israelis kidnapped three Arabs it would be all over the news!!"

I replied by asking:

Ok, please identify Nadeem Nawara and Mohammad Salameh*

Instead of conceding the point, with a "Hmm, you're right. The media didn't say one word about the two Arab kids who were shot by Israeli forces" most double-downed and insisted the videos that showed them being shot had been staged and I was directed to various websites, that "proved" the videos were fake.

Well, yesterday an Israeli border police officer was arrested for killing Nadeem Nawara. In violation of the engagement rules he fired live ammunition at a teenager who was not behaving violently. And the video that depicted this was legit.

Questions:
  • How often does this kind of thing happen without it being caught on video tape?
  • How many of the other so-called Pallywood videos are also legit?
  • Pretty much every self-proclaimed pro-Israel blogger I know takes the automatic position that all of these videos are fake. Will they rethink that position? Will they realize that this position is false? Will they care?
  • Can we agree that the bloggers and others advocates who continue to scream Pallywood whenever one of these videos emerges are actually hurting Israel's reputation?
If you agree, that Israel and the Jewish people are stronger when we're honest and truthful, please do me the favor of sharing this on Facebook, as I am still unable to do it myself. 

(*They are Hebron residents, ages 17 and 16, who were shot and killed by Israeli soldiers as they walked home from school in May)

     Search for more information about ### at4torah.com