Rav Kook on Dressing for Prayer

How should we dress when praying? The Talmud (Shabbat 10a) records two contradictory opinions as to what is appropriate attire for prayer:
“Rava bar Rav Huna would put on fine shoes when he prayed. As the verse says “Prepare yourself to meet your God, O Israel” (Amos 4:12).

Rava, on the other hand, would remove his cloak, clasp his hands together, and pray like a servant before his master.”

Which approach is correct? Should we wear fine, formal attire when praying? Or should we adopt the humble demeanor of a lowly servant entreating his Master?

Reverence and Love

The different approaches of these two scholars correspond to two types of prayers. Some prayers are Bakashot - petitions and requests. Other prayers are Shevach, songs and praises of God. Each type of prayer projects a certain image of our relationship with God, and they impact the soul accordingly.

When we pray for God’s assistance, we are keenly aware of our deficiencies and limitations. God is our pillar, supplying our needs and sustaining life. We rely on His constant kindness and mercy. When we present our requests in prayer, we are like a servant petitioning his master.

Rava would emphasize this humble demeanor by removing his cloak - an expensive article of clothing, conveying pride and respect - before praying. We have no reason to be proud of our inadequate material state. In addition, Rava would clasp his arms together. This gesture indicated his helplessness and dependence on God’s kindness.

In short, Rava emphasized the aspect of prayer that corresponds to yirah, the awe and reverence of a lowly servant before his Master.

Rava bar Rav Huna, on the other hand, viewed prayer as an expression of ahavat Hashem, our love for God. He approached prayer like a loving and favorite child, donning his finest clothing before meeting with his beloved father.

The soul is uplifted as we sing God’s praises and acknowledge His greatness. We gain greater awareness of the soul’s lofty potential, and the soul is more receptive to inquire into the truth of its Maker. As we plumb the depths of wisdom and knowledge, pondering God’s infinity and greatness, our service of God is based on the attribute of ahavah. This in turn refines our desires in life and elevates our deeds.

Infinite Potential

The approach of ahavah, however, requires caution with regard to one particular pitfall. An individual might mistakenly believe that he has already reached such a high spiritual level that he no longer needs to be careful regarding his day-to-day conduct and behavior. In his mind, minor acts only serve to inculcate proper traits and correct beliefs - which he has already acquired.

Therefore, Rava bar Rav Huna quoted the verse, “Prepare yourself to meet your God, O Israel.” Why did the prophet exhort us to constantly prepare? The verse’s underlining message is the soul’s infinite potential for spiritual growth. No matter what level a person has attained, one should prepare to attain an even higher level. And a person must always guard against the increasing danger of falling from his spiritual state. As the Sages cautioned, “The greater the person, the greater his evil inclination” (Sukkah 52a).

Rava bar Rav Huna would take care to dress in fine clothing when praying. Wearing special clothes raises our awareness of the nobility of the soul as it sings God’s praise.

The scholar in particular emphasized his footwear. He wanted to show that even the lowest, most trivial act requires thought and consideration. All of our deeds should match the elevated level of the soul.

A Time For Each

Given these two opposing approaches, each based on a different type of prayer and Divine service, what should we do? Pray in simple and humble dress, or in fine clothing?

The Talmud concludes with testimony of how Rav Kehanah would dress for prayer:
“When there was trouble in the world, Rav Kehanah would remove his coat, clasp his arms together, and pray like a servant before his master.
But in times of peace, he would dress honorably, cover himself with a talit and pray, as it says, “Prepare yourself to meet your God, O Israel.””

In the end, we need to both awe and love in our service of God. Sometimes we need to restrain ourselves and carefully watch that we do not descend into materialism and improper conduct. Other times, we need to deepen our love for God by increasing our positive actions.

When should we choose the reverent approach of yirah, and when the devotional path of ahavah?

The best advice is to consider the state of society and the world at large. We should see ourselves as part of the greater reality, at least that which is close to us. Rav Kehanah taught that when there is suffering and misery in the world, this is a sign that the world is lacking those moral qualities that come from yirah, guarding against destructive traits and deeds. In troubled times, Rav Kehanah would clasp his arms together and remove his cloak before praying. In this fashion, he would emphasize the outlook of reverence and awe, like a lowly servant standing before his Master.

But when the world is at peace, it is time to promote positive traits and deeds. Rav Kehanah would then dress in fine clothing, to open the heart and bolster good inclinations. With this preparation, he indicated that he sought higher awareness of God’s infinite light and greater love for God, like the joyful service of a loving son. Donning formal attire, he fulfilled the prophet’s injunction for continual spiritual growth - “Prepare yourself to meet your God, O Israel.”

(Adapted from Ein Eyah vol. III, pp. 2-3.)

The Torah Writes: “To me”

by HaRav Shaul Yisraeli, zt"l
based on Siach Shaul, p. 65-66

Chazal tell us that Eliezer, the servant of Avraham was a respected Torah scholar within the circle of Avraham’s disciples (Yoma 28b). The Torah (Bereisheet 24:2) calls him "the venerable one of his home, who ruled over all that was his," which the gemara says refers to all of Avraham’s Torah. Chazal also say that the name Damesek Eliezer (ibid. 15:2) hints that he was doleh u’mashkeh (drew and gave to drink) his master’s Torah to others. The midrash (Bereisheet Rabba 59:8) says that his mastery extended to his control over his evil inclination. Indeed, it is no surprise that the Rabbis said in the context of this great man: "The speech of the servants of the forefathers’ house is nicer than the teachings of the children" (ibid. 60:8).

Yet, we find a starkly different teaching about Eliezer in regard to the pasuk, "In the hands of C’na’an are scales of trickery, to deny his dear friend" (Hoshea 12:8). The midrash (Bereisheet Rabba 59:9) says that Eliezer was "weighing" his daughter as being fitting for Yitzchak. Avraham told him: "You are cursed (as you come from Cham), and my son is blessed, and it is not fitting for a cursed person to cling to a blessed one." The question needs to be asked: after seeing all the wonderful things said about Eliezer, how could he be considered cursed, and why was his daughter not fit to marry the blessed Yitzchak?

If we look at the difference in behavior of master and servant during this episode, we can find a hint of the difference in their character and thinking. Eliezer asked Avraham: "Maybe she [the appointed girl] will not want to follow me" (Bereisheet 24:5). In contrast, Avraham said that Hashem "will send His angel before you" (ibid. 7). Avraham had no doubts; he had a clear path and firm belief. He had no questions and needed no answers. He knew that the local population of girls did not include an appropriate wife and that the search had to be taken up at a distance. He knew the correct person was there, and so he was ready to wait for the sign of who she was.

Eliezer was different. While he was dedicated to his master, he was uncertain and felt a need to consider other options. The plan had to be "realistic" and calculated. At first glance, Eliezer seems correct. We are not usually supposed to rely on miracles. However, in practice, the entire process of finding a mate for Yitzchak worked miraculously, and it became clear that a "miraculous reality" is a totally different one. Avraham and his confidence in Hashem was correct; Eliezer’s suspicion was not.

In order to put the differences of approaches in perspective, the Torah hints with unusual spelling and Chazal (Yalkut Shimoni, Heshea 12) deciphered as follows: "To me - if the woman will not follow me." Whereas Avraham was able to elevate himself over his own personal calculations, Eliezer had a mixture of considerations. He indeed was an expert student and exponent of his master’s teachings, but he still allowed his own personal agendas to creep in. From there stemmed his doubt and his shortcoming.

Judaism without Jews?

by Rabbi Dov Berl Wein

Dedicated to the memory of Asher ben Chaim

One of the more amazing predictions regarding the Jewish people that appears in the Torah is that numerically speaking we will always be a small nation. That certainly has been the case over our long history. At the time of the destruction of the Second Temple the Chinese were twice our numbers. Almost two millennia later the Chinese are approximately one hundred times our numbers.

In 1939 on the eve of World War II there were nineteen million Jews in the world. Today, seventy years later, we are at least four million under that number. There should be, simply by natural growth, sixty million Jews in the world but there is not nearly that number extant. This has been the price of what the modern world has inflicted upon us - from the Holocaust and its attendant generational impact, assimilation, intermarriage, the reduction of marriage and family which are viewed as subservient to other so-called life values, a very diminished birth rate outside of the Orthodox community, a general tendency to avoid marriage or to marry later in life, and the accepted practices and lifestyles of homosexuality.

All of this means that there are less Jews and less Jews means a weakening of Judaism and Judaic values. Tragically many Jews are more interested in saving the planet (whatever that may mean) than in creating a family themselves and insuring Jewish survival for the future.

Karl Marx, the apostate self-hating Jew, wrote a vicious anti-Semitic pamphlet entitled "A World Without Jews." He predicted that such a world would be utopia incarnate. Unfortunately much of the world, including a significant number of Jews as well, took him seriously.

We read in the Torah and Midrash that immediately after the near death of Isaac, Abraham immediately concentrates on finding a proper mate for Isaac – to marry him off and thus produce the continuity of Abraham’s great ideals and message for humanity. Ideals and ideas are wonderful but in the abstract they eventually lose sway. Only people, real live human beings, can propagate and translate noble thoughts into practical human behavior.

Without Isaac marrying and having children, Abraham fears that the time and events will bury his hopes and accomplishments. There will be no one who will continue to raise his banner and proclaim monotheism and morality in a world that is always on the brink of depraved and violent behavior, paganism, and distorted ideals and values.

I thought that after the Holocaust the Jewish world would also think in that fashion. The greatest tribute to the memory of our martyrs and the ultimate revenge upon those that murdered them is a Jewish people risen from the ashes and numerically and spiritually and physically stronger than before.

The State of Israel has accomplished some of these goals but in terms of our numbers we are woefully deficient. Modern society scoffs at those who have large families and our superior intellectuals look down at them from their self-proclaimed lofty perches with disdain and contempt. This attitude is self-destructive to all true Jewish interests and to our future survival.

When I was a rabbi in Miami Beach forty years ago the great sainted Rabbi Yosef Shlomo Kaheneman, the Ponivezher Rav, visited our community for a few months in the winter to raise funds for his yeshiva, orphan homes and other projects. I had the great privilege of becoming close to him.

One day he called me and asked me to arrange a meeting in my home with all of the younger couples affiliated with my congregation. I told him that I would do so but I cautioned him that I did not think that he would raise much money from them, what with their tuition and household expense struggles. He gently told me that he was not going to speak to them about money or donations at all.

At that meeting which was very well attended, since I assured everyone that no requests for donations would take place, he arose and said to them: "My beloved children, the souls of a million and a half Jewish children under the age of twelve who were murdered in the Holocaust, are floating in the air above us. Our task is to give those souls bodies to live within. You are the only ones that can provide those bodies." As he sat down after his few words, the shock in the room was palpable.

But that year twenty children were born into our community. Many of those children are even grandparents today. Without Jews there is no Judaism. That is the message of Abraham and Isaac, Sarah and Rebecca to us as well today.

Of Conversations and Commandments

by HaRav Zalman Baruch Melamed
Rosh HaYeshiva, Yeshivat Beit-El

Dedicated to the memory of R. Avraham ben-tziyon ben shabtai

ELIEZER'S MISSION
In this week's Torah portion, "Chayei Sarah," we are treated to a lengthy version of the story of Eliezer, Avraham's servant, and his choice of Rivka as a wife for Yitzchak. Our sages noted the unusually long nature of the Torah's account of the events, and penned the following midrash:

"Rabbi Acha said: More significant is the simple conversation of the servants of our forefathers than the Torah of their children. The portion dealing with Eliezer's choice of Rivka goes on for pages and pages, while details of the impurity of rodents and bugs, for instance - a basic law of the Torah - are learned only via one extra word in the text..."

We can learn some crucial moral lessons from the manner in which Eliezer recounts his choice of Rivka as Yitzchak's bride; he seeks a woman whose personality is consistent with the atmosphere of Avraham's home. The bride-to-be must be a woman for whom extending kindness to others is a given; for Eliezer, it's not enough that Yitzchak's future wife be someone who responds kindly when asked to do so - she must also be someone who actively seeks to perform "chesed" for others. Why? Such an approach is characteristic of someone for whom kindness has become an integral part of his or her personality. From the Torah's account of Avraham's hospitality and his concern for even the wicked people of Sodom, there is no doubt that Eliezer learned of the fundamental importance of this quality from Avraham himself. Furthermore, Eliezer's great belief that God would help him find the right match for Yitzchak - who would fit the necessary criteria - is also an approach to life he learned from Avraham Avinu; the Torah teaches us on several occasions that Avraham is a firm believer in Divine Providence.

A DEEPER LOOK
That said, it is still incumbent upon us to try to clarify why it is that the "conversation of the servants" is more significant than the Torah given to the Jewish people.

It seems that the one quality that typified Avraham’s service of God more than anything else - is that he acted voluntarily. Avraham does not perform acts of loving-kindness because he is asked to do so, but because of the natural goodness embedded deep within his personality. The same goes for all other aspects of his service of God; he behaves not because he has been commanded to so, but because of his complete love of, and dedication to, his Creator. It is in reference to Avraham’s descendants that the prophet Isaiah says, "the seed of Avraham my beloved..."

Avraham also has a very well-cultivated fear of Heaven, as he himself is told by God at the climax of the Binding of Yitzchak, the Akeida: "Now I know that you truly fear God..." This prophetic revelation comes in response to the Akeida - as a natural response to Avraham's intense internal drive to serve God.

BLIND FAITH?
The Talmud (Kiddushin 31a) tells of Rav Yosef, who was blind, and who was famous for saying that if anyone ever proved to him that a blind man was exempt from performing Torah commandments, that he - Rav Yosef - would sponsor a festive meal for his rabbinic colleagues. "Why did Rav Yosef make this offer?" asks the Gemara. He was of the opinion that someone who performs mitzvot voluntarily is serving God more fully than someone who acts in response to a Divine command. As such, would it have been proven to him that a blind person is exempt from mitzvot, Rav Yosef would have celebrated the fact that he, a blind man, has the opportunity to serve God more completely than other Jews. Later in that same Talmudic passage, we are taught the opposite principle: namely, that one who acts in response to a Divine command is serving God more fully than one who acts voluntarily. This information prompts Rav Yosef to remark that he is now prepared to sponsor a festive meal if it is proven to him that blind people are in fact obligated to perform the Torah's mitzvot!

At first blush, the above halacha - that acting out of obligation is greater than acting voluntarily - is rather surprising. Human reason dictates that the opposite should be true!

If so, why does the Jewish view on this matter seem to fly in the face of reason? The classic Talmudic commentators - the Rishonim - offer two approaches to solve the mystery.

The school of the Tosfot bases its explanation on the psychological assumption that a sense of obligation creates a resistance within a person to perform that which he is commanded to do. When you know that you absolutely must do something, your evil inclination pushes you to resist. In contrast, someone who is not obligated to perform a given action knows that at any point in time, he can choose to abandon the task at hand; this calms his "evil inclination," thus enabling his positive human qualities to take hold. Therefore, a person who acts in response to a command is greater, since he needs to draw on greater spiritual resources to successfully battle his negative inclinations, and ultimately complete the required task.

Other Rishonim, however, explain that one who acts out of obligation is greater - since he is fulfilling, by his actions - the order of the King; the absolute, compelling nature of his mitzvah is that which invests it with its significance. This second approach jibes with that of the Maharal, who explains the reason why the Torah was forcibly given on Mount Sinai; our sages tell us that God threatened the Children of Israel at Sinai, that if they did not accept the Torah, He would drop the mountain on all of them, and crush them on the spot! Maharal notes that what the rabbis mean to say is that the giving of the Torah was an absolute necessity - a virtual "law of nature," stemming from the Divine truth that God, Israel, and His Torah are all part of one organic entity. The three cannot be separated. In fact, the very continued existence of the world is contingent upon the giving of the Torah to the Jewish people...

LONG-STANDING DEBATE
Throughout the generations, Torah scholars have debated the following question: Must an understanding of the fundamentals of Jewish faith stem from the individual Jew, after personal intellectual investigation leads him to the conclusion of the clear necessity of the truth of Jewish belief? Or, perhaps, belief should be born out of a prophetic, Divine revelation?

The main difficulty with the former view lies in the self-evident limits of human intellect, and of man’s ultimate inability to attain a level of complete faith in God, to embrace all the nuances of Jewish belief and fundamentals of faith through reason alone.

On the other hand, it is clear that belief obtained through a form of private "Divine revelation" must remain external to the believer to a great extent, since such an overwhelming prophetic experience would effectively force him to believe in Torah. Such a faith would not sprout forth from some sort of natural, internal understanding of the truth of the belief in question.

In light of the above, it is clear that the ideal - the healthiest type of faith - is that which synthesizes both faith that is a product of an external, "forced," Divine inspiration (along the lines of what we referred to as "Greater is the one who acts out in response to a command") but which nevertheless does not preclude the striving of the believer to intellectually identify with the fundamentals of our faith (parallel to the concept of "One who does not act in respond to a command").

COMING FULL CIRCLE
The service of God exhibited by our forefathers prior to the giving of the Torah which is a code of obligatory, systemized behavior - may be viewed as a service "that was not commanded." It stemmed from an internal awareness of the value of moral behavior. The term "Torah" has at its root the word "teaching," or "guidance." With Torah, the danger exists that the believer will perform mitzvot by rote, without any personal, internal identification with the mitzvah he is performing.

In contrast, "conversation" is natural, free-flowing. The "conversation of the servants of our forefathers" represents the healthy, natural lifestyle that the servants learned from the forefathers. This natural behavior would eventually be forged into an obligatory Divine command - the Torah. Despite this later historical development, we have much to learn from the natural, healthy service of God by our forefathers; it was a type of spirituality that apparently had to precede the giving of the Torah, along the lines of the concept of "Derech Eretz Kadma L’Torah" - "Moral behavior precedes Torah." Thus, even though the rule is that one who acts in response to the Divine mandate is more praiseworthy, still - "more significant is the conversation of the forefather’s servants than the Torah of the children..."

OF LATE...
In many of the rabbinic sources, mention is made of the "Yeridat Hadorot," or the "progressive deterioration of the generations;" from the time of our forefathers to the present, the spirituality of successive generations of Jews has been spiraling downwards.

Paradoxically, we are also witness to another phenomenon: in recent years, the later rabbis have, more than ever before, been stressing meticulous adherence to mitzvot and even stringencies, over and above what had been viewed as obligatory in previous generations. It seems, then, that the recent generations of Jews, who are of a lower spiritual level, have been more stringent than their ancestors! How can this paradox be explained?

Perhaps it is the very "downward spiritual spiral" that can explain this phenomenon. In earlier days, service of God flowed more naturally, and people intuitively strove to establish a connection with their Creator. In recent times, though, "holiness" is harder to attain - it’s less natural; in response, our rabbis sought ways to re-awaken us, to inspire us to strive for spiritual heights...

The generation of the Mashiach, is however, different. So says Rabbi Avraham Yitzchak Kook in his work, "Orot." This generation is one of lofty souls striving to return to the natural spiritual state of their forefathers, to the level of the "conversation of the father’s servants." This is the reason, explains Rav Kook, That numerous Jews resist that which they perceive to be the external means by which our teachers have tried to bring them closer to God. This, says Rav Kook, is the source of the rejection by some of many of the rabbinic stringencies of recent generations; although the attitude is superficially apostasy - a denial of the authority of Torah - it really represents a striving for a return to the classic, natural holy way of life typified by the "conversations of the servants of our forefathers".

Abu Dhabi is Just the Beginning

by Moshe Feiglin

Abu Dhabi, where Israel’s judo team was forced to compete under the International Judo Federation flag and not under the Israeli flag, is just the beginning.

Our national anchor in reality is the Temple Mount. Without it, we have no history, purpose or justification. Without the Mount, we really do not have a home.

When the Jews forgo prayer and sovereignty on the Temple Mount, they morph from a sovereign nation to a virtual nation. When we gave up on Israel’s flag and sovereignty on the Temple Mount, we were left without a flag and national anthem in Abu Dhabi.

If we continue to deny our connection to the Temple Mount, we will be faced with giving up our flag and national anthem in Tel Aviv.

Wake up America, Islamic terrorism targets you!

by Ambassador (ret.) Yoram Ettinger

The claim that the perpetrator of the November 1, 2017 NYC bicycle-path-terror is a "lone wolf" ignores the wider context of Islamic terrorism, oversimplifies and underestimates the threat, alleviates the pressure off anti-US Islamic rogue regimes, and derails counter-terrorism.

The NYC bicycle-path-terror was carried out by a member of the Islamic "pack of wolves" - not by a "lone wolf" – which has been systematically brainwashed and molded by the most effective production-line of Muslim terrorists: hate-education and incitement conducted by Islamic leaders, educators, social media and imams in mosques (and in US prisons!) in Muslim countries as well as in the US.

According to FBI testimony at a Senate Homeland Security Hearing: "Prison radicalization primarily occurs through anti-US sermons provided by contract, volunteer, or staff imams, radicalizing inmates who gain religious influence and extremist media… similar to that of Iran and Hezbollah…. These radicalization efforts expand beyond prison walls, resulting in potential threats to society at-large…."

Furthermore, Senators Schumer (D-NY) and Feinstein (D-CA) are concerned that the vetting of prison imams relies heavily on the Islamic Society of North America and the Graduate School of Islamic and Social Sciences, which according to Schumer, "are connected to terrorism and promote Wahhabism, which some consider to be an exclusionary and extreme form of Islam…. Pat Dunleavy, a former Deputy Inspector General for the NY State Department of Corrections says… the organizations were also sending [to inmates] tapes and CDs of speeches by Osama bin Laden, Muslim Brotherhood leaders and Al Qaeda's Anwar Awlaki…."

Anti-US Islamic terrorists, such as the bicycle-path-terrorist, have been adrenalized by three dramatic developments, which have been highlighted by rogue Islamic policy, educational and media organs, suggesting global Islamic domination in-progress: (1) the gradual Islamic penetration of Europe, which is losing its will to flex muscles; (2) the retreat-in-process of the US from Afghanistan and Iraq, and its recent accommodation of the Ayatollahs; (3) the Soviet retreat from Afghanistan, which was followed by the collapse of the Soviet Union.

The NYC bicycle-path-terror was consistent with the definition of terrorism - a systematic and deliberate targeting of civilians - aiming to erode the confidence of Americans in their country's homeland security forces, while bolstering the Islamic offensive in the US' own "end zone."

In fact, Islamic terrorists have already broken through the gates of the US!
The NYC terror was carried out within the geo-strategic context of the historical offensive of Islam against Christendom, in order to achieve global domination.

The "packs of Sunni and Shia wolves" has been unleashed against the USA, which is rightly perceived by Islamic rogue regimes to be the most critical obstacle on their way to dominate the Persian Gulf, the Arabian Peninsula, the Middle East at-large, Africa, Europe, South America and the rest of the globe.

It was carried out in an attempt to emulate a litany of prior acts of Islamic terrorism against Western democracies, and especially the US, which is rightly regarded by Islam as the pillar of Western democracy, economy, science and military.

It was carried out in the footsteps of the September 11, 2001 Twin Towers, Pentagon and Pennsylvania massacre; the November 28, 2016 Ohio State University attack by a Somali student/refugee; the June 12, 2016 Orlando nightclub massacre of 49 people; the December 2, 2015 San Bernardino massacre of 14 people by a Muslim couple; the April 15, 2013 Boston Marathon bombing by two Muslim brothers; and many more acts of terror perpetrated by members of the Islamic "packs of wolves."

The NYC bicycle-path-terrorism was not an aberration, but an integral episode of 1,400 years of the intra-Islamic tectonic reality (e.g., the raging Arab Tsunami since 2010); the systematic use of terrorism against fellow-Muslims (e.g., the Muslim Brotherhood terrorism in Egypt); the terror tactics employed by Muslim regimes against their own peoples (e.g., civil liberties have not landed yet in Arab lands); and the 14 centuries of Quran-sanctioned terrorism against the abode of the "infidel." In fact, terrorism has dominated Islam from the 7th century, when three of the first four Caliphs (Umar, Uthman and Ali), who succeeded Muhammad, were assassinated by fellow Muslims.

The NYC bicycle-path-terrorist - like most Muslims - reveres history as a relevant tool to face contemporary challenges. Hence, this act of terrorism was intensely integrated with – not isolated from – a fundamental pillar of Islam, the Jihad (the Strive, the Holy War), which commands Muslims to emulate previous struggles against the enemies of Islam, within the context of the eternal battle between the Abode of Islam and the Abode of the "infidel." The latter is defined as "the Abode of the Sword," faced with the choice of embracing – or submitting to – Islam, or be consumed by the sword.

In order to defeat Islamic terrorism, Western societies – led by the US - must rid counter-terrorism of the "lone wolf" mentality; acknowledge the inherently non-compromising nature of Islamic terrorism and confront Islamic rogue regimes (just like rogue gangs at home) militarily, not diplomatically; recognize the centrality – and obliterate the infrastructure – of hate-education and incitement in the US and other Western democracies, as well as in Muslim countries; preempt, rather than react.

The architects of counter-terrorism may want to consider the implementation of the American football ("Jim Schoff") principle: The closer you get to the "end zone" of your opponent, the closer you are to score a touchdown; the closer you get to your own "end zone," the closer your opponent is to score a touchdown.

Interview with Moshe Feiglin in the Yisrael Hayom Newspaper: Part 1

This is excerpted from an interview conducted with Moshe Feiglin by Na’amah Lansky, Yisrael Hayom newspaper. http://www.israelhayom.co.il/article/510461

Moshe Feiglin sits alone his his back yard in Karnei Shomron. Just he and his pc. The view of the hills of the Shomron is spread out before him.

“I am motivated by the power of the idea,” he explains slowly and calmly. “I did not seek a political career. I like being alone, not being in the public eye. The complete opposite of the requirements of politics. I like to ride my bicycle alone every morning. I like to sit with myself, alone. I like the fact that my house is at the very edge of our community, open to the view. That way I do not feel that I am surrounded by people who are invading my privacy.”

But don’t let the inner and outer peace that envelope Feiglin (55) mislead you. Over the last years, even when he was still a Knesset Member in the Likud, he worked on the establishment of a political party under his leadership, “Zehut” (“Identity”). Last month the party held primaries and its close to 3000 members elected the 15 representatives for its Knesset list, which will run in the next general elections.

In the next stage, after elections for the Knesset will be announced, Zehut will hold open primaries, in which any Israeli citizen who wishes to do so will be able to rank the candidates in a simple internet procedure. Following that, Feiglin will be able to insert a number of candidates into the Zehut list in pre-determined slots.

“There are a number of Likud MKs who have expressed great interest in the party,” he claims. “But my real competition is not with the Likud or the Jewish Home party, but with Yair Lapid and his Yesh Atid party.”

Yair Lapid?

“What is the secret of the meteoric success of Yesh Atid? That Yair Lapid sold the idea of Israeli identity and it caught on. He models Israeli-ness just like Bar Refaeli models glasses. Her face gives the glasses identity. Without her, they are nothing more than pieces of plastic.

The identity that Lapid models is also plastic. It is an illusion, it has no content and no meaning. Yair Lapid is like a catalog for Ikea. I stand against his attempt to outsmart the public, to sell us fake identity that has nothing behind it other than what goes over well on the screen. Yesterday it was hatred of the Ultra-Orthodox, today it is love for the Ultra-Orthodox. A bit of back-slapping and a smattering of ethnic rituals. Any way the wind blows.”

How is the identity that you propose supposed to appeal to the Yesh Atid voters?

It reaches out to everyone. Because I propose Jewish identity, not Israeli identity. We do away with definitions and the modern separations and return to the source. Religious, secular, Right and Left are no longer relevant. Truly not. In our headquarters you can see everything. Ultra-Orthodox dressed in black from head to toe and young Tel Aviv women with tattoos.

Who is the Enemy?

Who is the enemy? The generals cannot answer that simple question.

For English subtitles click on cc icon at the bottom of the screen.

Moshe Feiglin's Response to IDF 'Apology' for Death of Senior Terrorists

For English subtitles click on cc icon at the bottom of the screen.

Along with the destroyed terror tunnel, the IDF Spokesman’s announcement that Israel did not intend to kill the senior terrorists in the tunnel destroys its deterrence.

Just as in the Marmara episode, or the metal detector episode on the Temple Mount, the destruction of this terror tunnel is quickly developing into another reason for Israel to apologize for daring to defend its sovereignty.

All that is left is for us to apologize for our existence and like with the Marmara, to pay damages to the families of the senior terrorists.

Arms Sales to Murderous Regimes is Wrong

by Moshe Feiglin

This is a photo from the demonstration in front of the Knesset to protest the sale of Israeli arms to murderous regimes. This is not an issue of Right or Left.

Many Israelis do not like the criticism of Israeli sales of weapons to Africa, where those weapons are used against innocent civilians. The Africans are killing each other anyway, they claim. Somebody is going to sell them weapons, so why shouldn’t it be us? These sales help to fund and develop Israel’s weapons industry to provide for our own security.

Those who make those claims have already begun the slide down a slippery ethical slope. Murder is murder and fostering murder is fostering murder. Israel should not compromise its moral standards for financial gain. It is not and cannot ever be worth it.

Trials -- At the Akeidah and Today

by HaRav Dov Begon
Rosh HaYeshiva, Machon Meir

“After these events, G-d tested Abraham” (Genesis 22:1).

Abraham had just forged a covenant with Avimelech in which he temporarily gave up parts of Eretz Yisrael. He thought that through dialogue and agreements with Avimelech he would be able to alter the unsavory traits of Avimelech and his people: “Abraham complained to Avimelech about the well that Avimelech’s servants had taken by force” (21:25). Yet Avimelech “played dumb,” answering, “I don’t know who could have done such a thing. You never told me! I heard nothing about it until today” (21:26). Even so, Abraham forged a covenant with him, and that covenant brought upon Abraham the severest trial he had ever faced, the Akeidah [the binding of Isaac]. As a result of that trial, the Jewish People have suffered throughout the generations, and they continue to suffer. As Rashbam teaches (Genesis 22:1), G-d grew angry at Abraham, so “He troubled and vexed him... He said to him, ‘You were so bold as to take the son I gave you and to forge a covenant that will apply between him and Avimelech’s children? Take Isaac and bring him as an offering. We shall see what comes of your covenant.” That miserable accord led to our being defeated in wars, to the destruction of the First and Second Temples, and to other things...

Today as well, we are facing an exceedingly difficult trial and paying a heavy price for the miserable agreement with the Arabs. Those who signed that agreement hoped it would bring about dialogue and peace and a change in the Arabs’ relationship and behavior towards the Jewish People and State.

An agreement that includes giving up parts of Eretz Yisrael, even a single millimeter of our holy land, is null and void. It has no moral force and will not bring our enemies to change their hostile relationship to the State of Israel, as we are clearly seeing now.

Only G-d’s covenant and oath are in force: “On that day, the L-rd made a covenant with Abram, saying, ‘To your descendants I have given this land’” (Genesis 15:18); “I have sworn by My own Essence.... that Your offspring shall inherit their enemies’ gate” (22:16- 17). The result of this will be that “all the nations of the world shall be blessed through your descendants” (verse 18).

Likewise, it says, “The L-rd gives strength to His people” (Psalm 29:11). Only through that strength will G-d “bless them with peace” (Ibid.)

Looking forward to complete salvation,
Shabbat Shalom.

Rabbi Ari Kahn: The Chosen (video)

The Yishai Fleisher Show: Abraham's Chutzpah

The Shamrak Report: A Self-hating Jew and more....

A Self-hating Jew

by Barry Kanel (FaceBook post)

If a person can’t be loyal to his tribe and the tribe of his parents and grandparents and great grandparents, and all the way back from the slavery in Egypt to the Romans to the Spanish Inquisition, to Jewish diaspora persecutions, to the Russian pogroms, to the Holocaust, to the every day endless anti-Israel and anti-Semitic acts and propaganda of the modern day, then who is he – nothing! 

They are less than nothing! It’s not about whether you believe in God, Isaac or Abraham. It’s not about parting of the Red Sea or stories that may or may not be true. What members of any other nation deny their own heritage and ignore the incredible accomplishments of their people? It is about the millennia of awful suffering, as well as the survival against all odds of the Jewish people.

It is also about miracle of re-creation of Israel! Any so-called progressive lefty person of Jewish background, who hates his own people and country, is beyond pathetic! How can you look at yourself in the mirror?

There is almost nothing worse than a self hating Jew who refuses to recognize Israel’s legitimacy and the miracle Jews have created in the desert after the holocaust. They are embracing the fake Palestinians, whose only reason for existence is to kill Jews and destroy Israel! They are willingly buying into the BS propaganda that Israel is an apartheid state or a human rights abuser and eagerly support BDS of Jewish State!

The worst kind of self-hating are those Jews who abdicated their own heritage and religion, and surrendered to anti-Semitic dogmas!

They might as well be an Inquisitor, Nazi or Muslim. Seventy years ago they were kapos in ghettoes and Nazi death camp, delusionally thinking that they are safe!

Jordan-Palestine Option is Delusion!

1. Trans-Jordan is part of Eretz-Israel

2. Peaceful transfer of so-called Palestinians to Jordan is an absurd fantasy. It is not welcomed and will never be by Jordan, Arab states and by PA/Hamas!

3. All existence of the fake Palestinians is dedicated to destruction of Israel, not achieving statehood!

Only by a deliberate and well-executed plan Israel will be able to remove the enemy population from Jewish land! Please read tentatively and between the lines the Sinai Option: Road to Permanent Peace!

FOOD for THOUGHT by Steven Shamrak

Most of the countries of the world, the European Union and the UN, as well as human rights NGOs do vigorously support the creation of an independent state of the fake people, Palestinians! Currently, their anti-Semitic hypocrisy has been exposed by their unanimous refusal to support independence of Catalonia and Kurdistan! They are totally indifferent and have long forgotten about the occupation of Tibet by China, Western Papua by Indonesia, Western Sahara by Morocco and the struggle for independence by the Basque people from Spain and France!

Enemies United in the War Against Israel

UN is launching a $5 billion plan to ‘End Occupation’ and blame of Israel. The United Nations and the Palestinian Authority have formulated a comprehensive plan for a joint struggle against Israel and for “a transition to Palestinian independence.” The plan includes, for the first time, an active and visible participation of the UN in the PA’s diplomatic struggle against Israel. The UN offered financial support to the tune of $1.3 billion over the years 2018-2022, with the goal of “ending the occupation, mobilizing international support, blaming Israel, strengthening Palestinian ties around the world..." (The ‘Ugly Nazi’ has been trying to correct the failure of 1947-48, when it was pro-actively assisting seven Arab/Muslim states to kill Jews and prevent the re-establishment of Israel!)

The Wimp Must Leave!

Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu requested that the "Greater Jerusalem Law" not be brought for a vote on Sunday, and the discussion on it delayed. The law, if passed, would expand the municipal borders of Jerusalem to include the city of Maaleh Adumim to the east, which is currently home to nearly 38,000 Israelis. In addition, the town of Givat Zeev to the northwest, the city of Beitar Illit to the south, the town of Efrat, and other communities in Gush Etzion would all be incorporated into Jerusalem. (Just two days earlier the Trump administration stated that it would not oppose 'Greater Jerusalem' bill!)

New Low for France

The father of Baha Alyan, killer of three Israelis in Jerusalem’s Armon Hanatziv neighborhood in October 2015, has won the prize for best international human rights attorney, presented by the French International Institute for Human Rights and Peace.

New Plan to Deport Infiltrators

Netanyahu signs agreements with African leaders allowing Israel to deport illegal immigrants, circumventing a Supreme Court ruling. African countries have agreed to receive the recalcitrant illegal immigrants in exchange for benefits from Israel. In 2014, the Netanyahu government implemented a “carrot and stick” policy to reduce Israel’s illegal immigrant population, estimated at around 50,000. Some 15,000 illegal immigrants have left Israel since.

Blacklisted by ‘Ugly Nazi’

In recent weeks, some 130 Israeli companies and another 60 international corporations have received letters from the current UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, Jordan’s Prince Zeid bin Ra’ad Zeid al-Hussein, warning them that they are being “blacklisted” for “acting contrary to international law and UN decisions." While the blacklist has no immediate operational or legal consequences, it can have the long-term effect of deterring investment in the companies in question, providing fuel for the BDS movement and damaging the State of Israel economically. (What international law? They never tell us. Iraq does business with ISIS – no problem!)

War with Hezbollah "a Matter of Time’

Former senior defense officials from Britain, France, Germany, Australia, Italy, Spain and the United States released a report warning of an exceptionally dangerous conflict between Israel and Lebanese Hezbollah. Hezbollah has stockpiled roughly 100,000 rockets and missiles since its last conflict with Israel in 2006; acquired anti-tank and unmanned aerial equipment; trained its men in combat alongside Bashar Assad in Syria. Hezbollah’s massively expanded military capabilities are embedded among the civilian population of Lebanon in what amounts to a war crime. Israeli officials have warned that the next war will escalate quickly because Israel will be forced to pre-emptively strike at Hezbollah’s massive rocket stockpiles before facing an overwhelming barrage.

Disgraceful anti-Israel Bigotry in Sport

When Israelis Tal Flicker and Gili Cohen had won Gold and Bronze medals respectively the first day of the Abu Dhabi Grand Slam 2017 judo tournament in the UAE. There was no Israeli flag, nor anthem! And the announcer mentioned that they were representing the International Judo Federation. (Has anybody heard of any country protesting? Will the International Judo Federation ban UAE? Shame! It is not the fault of Arabs. Hate for 'infidels' is in their nature! But anti-Semites in the UN, EU, UNESCO and in sport federations - they are real human garbage!)

Quote of the Week:

“You declare my friend that you do not hate the Jews, you are merely anti-Zionist. And I say, let the truth ring forth from the high mountain tops, let it echo through the valleys of God’s green earth. When people criticize Zionism, they mean Jews. This is God’s own truth... The hatred of the Jews remains a blot on the soul of mankind...” - Martin Luther King

Catalan Independence and World Hypocrisy!

The Catalan regional parliament on Friday voted to declare independence from Spain and proclaim a republic by a vote of 70-10 in a ballot boycotted by opposition MPs. The Spanish Senate responded by invoking Article 155 of the constitution for the first time ever annulling Catalan autonomy and imposing direct rule on the region after the step was condemned as illegal.

Catalan independence receded into the far distance, although both Madrid and Barcelona refrained from a violent confrontation.

Reacting to Catalonia’s moves towards independence, Spanish Prime Minister Mariano Rajoy on Friday night announced he had dissolved the Catalan parliament, sacked the police chief and interior minister, suspended cabinet ministers and called an election for Dec. 21.

Almost immediately the US State Department announced that Catalonia is part of Spain.

The president of the European Union Donald Tusk said in response to the Catalan parliament’s vote for independence that it changes nothing. This means that the EU does not recognize the new republic as a member separate from Spain.

The Catalans have a distinct history, culture and language. A defined region of Catalonia was first referenced in the 12th century, hundreds of years before the unification of Spain. (Unlike the fake, recently invented Palestinians whose independence on Jewish land has the international anti-Semites support!)

Catalonia is one of Spain's richest and most highly industrialised regions, and also one of the most independent-minded. 

Catalonia produces $314 billion worth of goods per annum and its economy ranks as the 34th strongest in the world, ahead of Hong Kong. Its GDP is $35,000, topping South Korea, Israel and Italy. The separatists see no reason to share their wealth with Spain. (Unlike the PA and Hamas – who are unable to support the population they claim to represent and only are able to exist due to ‘welfare’ support from ‘Israel/Jew lovers’!)

Great Eulogies

BS”D
Parashat Vayaira 5778
by HaRav Nachman Kahana

The Gemara (Megilla 3:a) discusses the important contribution of the illustrious Tana, Yonatan ben Uziel, the most outstanding student of Hillel (Sukkah 28:a) – his Targum (explanatory translation) on Tanach. As an example, the Gemara quotes the problematic verse in the Book of Zechariah 12:11:

ביום ההוא יגדל המספד בירושלם כמספד הדד רמון בבקעת מגדון:
“On that day there will be a great eulogy (and funeral) in Yerushalayim, as great as the eulogy of Haddadrimon, in the Valley of Megiddon”.

Because nowhere in the Tanach do we find a mention of a Haddadrimon who was eulogized in a place called Megiddon.

Yonatan ben Uziel explains: “On that day, there will be a eulogy as great as the one said over King Achav ben Om’ri (of the northern tribes) who was killed by Haddadrimon ben Tavrimon on the Gilad Heights, and as great as the eulogy for King Yoshi’yahu ben Amon (of the southern tribes, from the family of King David) who was killed by Pharaoh Necha in the valley of Megiddo.”

Now, why did these two people merit such impressive funerals and eulogies, which serve as the model for future eulogies of two great men in Yerushalayim?

The problem is especially acute with regard to Achav, who is mentioned in the Mishna (Sanhedrin 90a) as one of the three kings who lost their place in Olam Haba, (paradise)! (The other two being Yeravam ben Navat and Menashe ben Chizkiyahu.)

It would be an understatement to say that Achav did not follow the Torah. He and his Gentile (Phoenician) wife, E’zevel (Jezebel) murdered all of the religious leaders of the northern tribes, except for 100 who were hidden in caves by the righteous Ovadia (Melachim I 18:4). Achav introduced idolatry into every Jewish home by the sword, but when he died he was interred with an astonishingly large, emotional funeral, and with loving eulogies.

The answer is that Achav, by all accounts, was a beloved leader. He brought great wealth to the land and fought wars to protect the independence of the country.

The way he died is indicative of his greatness as a leader who lived for his people. When he fought his last battle against the Aramians (today’s Syria), while standing in his chariot, an enemy soldier, whose name was Na’aman (Yalkut Shimoni Melachim 1:22) shot an arrow aimlessly into the air, which struck Achav through a small aperture in his armor. Achav could have retreated from the battle in order to obtain medical treatment, or, at least descended from his strategic position in the command chariot in order to be treated. But since this would entail removing himself from view of his soldiers, and thereby possibly weakening their resolve to fight, he chose to remain in his lead chariot, and he died.

Achav was a highly respected and beloved leader, albeit a man devoid of Torah.

In total contrast, Yoshiyahu, King of Judah and Yerushalayim, was a tzaddik (righteous person.) In his lifetime, Yoshiyahu made extensive and costly repairs to the structure of the Bet Hamikdash. He almost completely eradicated the worship of avoda zara (idolatry) from the land and put to death the priests of idolatry; and he re-initiated the aliya la’regel (pilgrimage to Jerusalem). The Tanach relates that since the days of Yehoshua ben Nun, Pesach (Passover) had not been practiced in such a glorious manner as it was during his rule. Yoshiyahu was, like Achav, a staunch nationalist. He was killed in battle in Megiddo attempting to prevent the Egyptian army from using Eretz Yisrael as a land corridor to do battle with the army of Assyria.

The Gemara in Bava Kama relates that when Yoshiyahu’s body was returned home to Yerushalayim, it was carried by 36,000 pallbearers on the way to his tomb! In the yeshiva, this was questioned, because Achav was treated in the same manner. The Gemara replies that in the case of King Yoshiyahu, they placed a sefer Torah on his bed and called out, “this man performed what is written in this Torah”.

The God-fearing Yoshiyahu and Achav the denier of Torah, both merited the love of their subjects, for in their own way they fought for the honor of the Jewish people and were protectors of Eretz Yisrael.

The prophet Zecharia, as stated above, predicted that in the future, Yerushalayim would be witness to two eulogies as great as those held for King Yoshiyahu and King Achav.

Since the destruction of the Temple and the exile of our people, the city of Yerushalayim has not seen funerals as large in attendance and as emotionally charged as were the funerals of my brother, Harav Meir zt”l, and that of Prime Minister Yitzchak Rabin z”l.

Rabin was no Achav and Harav Meir was no Yoshiyahu; but both, in their time, could be compared to those kings of the Tanach.

Rabin denied the Torah, but like Achav he was a soldier who defended the country since his youth. He was a beloved leader for many and they thronged to attend his funeral.

Harav Meir was a talmid chacham (Torah scholar) and a great leader and role model for many people. He brought the plight of the Jews in the Soviet Union from page 54 of the newspaper to page 1, which eventually opened the gates of freedom to all Jews who wished to leave. There were close to two hundred thousand people at his funeral, representing radically different outlooks but all with total respect for this martyr.

Interestingly, the time of their deaths testified to their contrasting beliefs.

Rabin was killed on Motzei Shabbat of parshat Lech Lecha, and Harav Meir was killed close to the following Shabbat, parshat Va’aira (in different years).

In Parshat Lech Lecha, upon being informed that Sarah would soon give birth to a son, Avraham replies to God, “lu Yishmael yich’ye le’fanecha”; “May Yishmael live before you”. Avraham comes to the defense of Yishmael, and requests equal rights for his son, born of Hagar, the Egyptian woman.

In Parshat Va’aira, Sarah demands of Avraham to send Yishmael away, saying, (B’reisheet 21:10):

גרש האמה הזאת ואת-בנה כי לא יירש בן-האמה הזאת עם-בני עם-יצחק
“Chase away this maidservant and her son, for this son of the maidservant will not inherit together with my son, with Yitzchak”

Sarah instinctively felt the evil and wildness in the soul of Yishmael (Ishmael), and knew that Yitzchak (Issac) and Yishmael would never be able to live together. HaShem tells Avraham to abide by the request of Sarah, for Yishmael and the future descendants of Yitzchak would never be able to live together.

Rabin, who was killed close to Parshat Lech Lecha, adopted Avraham’s position, believing that the two peoples could live together. To this end, Rabin permitted the return of PLO murderers living in Tunisia, and gave them forty thousand weapons. On the other hand, Harav Meir, whose holy neshama left the world close to Parshat Vayaira, adopted the position of Sarah, as was affirmed by HaShem, that the souls of the two are hewn from vastly different worlds. Yitzchak is the ben Torah, worthy of being a korban (sacrifice) for HaShem on Mount Moriah; while Yishmael is a perah adam (wild man) who prefers death over life.

HaShem tells Avraham that Sarah is correct in her assessment of the two sons of Avraham, and that Yishmael must be sent away.

Meir preached and pleaded that the people of Israel should see the future, and take steps to prevent the tragedies we are witnessing today; while Rabin wanted to give them half of Eretz Yisrael, despite the words of our mother, Sarah: “For the son of this maidservant will not inherit with my son, with Yitzchak”. History has played out in the manner told by G-d to Avraham, to abide by the wishes of Sarah.

May the souls of both these men be united with all of the living souls in Olam Haba.

Shabbat Shalom,
Nachman Kahana
Copyright © 5778/2017 Nachman Kahana

Rav Kook on Parashat VaYeira: Sanctity in Space

“Abraham rose early in the morning, to the place where he had [previously] stood before God.” (Gen. 19:27)

What does it mean that Abraham “stood before God"? The Talmud interpreted this phrase to refer to prayer. (The central prayer is called the Amidah, meaning ’standing', since it is recited while standing.)

A Set Place for Prayer

From the fact that Abraham returned to the place where he had prayed in the past, the Sages deduced that Abraham had designated a particular spot for prayer.

“Rabbi Helbo said: Anyone who has a set location for his prayers will be assisted by the God of Abraham. And when he dies, they will say about him, ‘What a pious individual! What a humble person! He was a disciple of our forefather Abraham.'” (Berachot 6b)

In what way is a person who sets aside a place for prayer a humble individual? What makes him a disciple of Abraham? Why is it so praiseworthy to always pray in the same location?

Spatial Holiness

We are accustomed to the idea that holiness is a function of space. Different places have different degrees of sanctity. The synagogue is holier than the Beit Midrash (house of study), the BeitMidrash is holier than an ordinary home, and an ordinary home is holier than the bathhouse. Levels of sanctity are also a geographic reality. The Land of Israel is holier than outside of Israel, Jerusalem is holier than other parts of Israel, the Temple Mount is holier than the rest of Jerusalem, and so on.

When examined by cold logic, however, our sense of holiness in space raises questions. Does not God’s glory fill the entire universe? Are not the limitations of space and location irrelevant to God? Why should it matter if I pray to him in the synagogue — or in the bathhouse? What difference is there to God between the inner sanctum of the holy Temple and a Los Vegas casino?

Elevating the Imagination

Rav Kook explained that a fundamental truth is at work here: whatever contributes to our ethical and spiritual improvement merits divine providence. Our moral perfection is dependent not only on the intellect, but on the refinement of all of our faculties, including our powers of imagination. Anything that elevates our emotions and imagination, directing them towards good deeds and refined character traits, merits divine providence.

A set location for prayer is a powerful mechanism for uplifting the imagination. Sanctity of place greatly enhances our sense of holiness. Because of its importance in developing this aspect of human nature, there is divine providence to help us succeed in this area.

Intellectual Humility

What makes this conduct humble?

The essence of religious humility is preventing the intellect from belittling matters of spiritual value, even though logically they appear to be baseless. We live not by the intellect alone. Good deeds are the ultimate measure of true living, and our actions are greatly influenced by our imagination and feelings.

Abraham exemplified this form of intellectual modesty. He arrived at belief in the Creator through his powers of logic and reasoning (see Maimonides, Mishneh Torah, Laws of Idolatry 1:9). But when he was tested in the Akeidah, the Binding of Isaac, Abraham relied solely on his faith in God. He chose to disregard all arguments of reason and logic. Anyone who follows in Abraham’s footsteps, and sets aside a special location for prayer, is elevating his imaginative and emotive powers. He is a disciple of Abraham, emulating his traits of humility and piety.

Jihad on the Bike Path

By Mark Steyn

Fourteen years ago, I wrote a column for The Wall Street Journal on "The Bike-Path Left":

There was a revealing moment on MSNBC the other night. Chris Matthews asked [Howard] Dean whether Osama bin Laden should be tried in an American court or at The Hague. "I don't think it makes a lot of difference," said the governor airily. Mr. Matthews pressed once more. "It doesn't make a lot of difference to me," he said again... So how about Saddam? The Hague "suits me fine," he said, the very model of ennui. Saddam? Osama? Whatever, dude.

So what does get the Dean juices going? A few days later, the governor was on CNN and Judy Woodruff asked him about his admission that he'd left the Episcopal Church and become a Congregationalist because "I had a big fight with a local Episcopal church over the bike path." I hasten to add that, in contrast to current Anglican controversies over gay marriage in British Columbia and gay bishops in New Hampshire, this does not appear to have been a gay bike path: its orientation was not an issue; it would seem to be a rare example of a non-gay controversy in the Anglican Communion. But nevertheless it provoked Howard into "a big fight." "I was fighting to have public access to the waterfront, and we were fighting very hard in the citizens group," he told Judy Woodruff. Fighting, fighting, fighting.

And that's our pugnacious little Democrat. On Osama bin Laden, he's Mister Insouciant. But he gets mad about bike paths. Destroy the World Trade Center and he's languid and laconic and blasé. Obstruct plans to convert the ravaged site into a memorial bike path and he'll hunt you down wherever you are.

The Hudson River Greenway is not, formally, a 9/11 "memorial bike path". But it does run within 300 feet or so of the World Trade Center as it begins its progress up the West Side Highway toward the Bronx. So close enough. Yet on the central point I was wrong. The "bike-path left" will surrender the bike path as they surrender everything else.

As I write, eight are dead - all men, five Argentines, one Belgian, all in the path of an Uzbek Muslim who decided to take a Home Depot pick-up truck down the bike path for 20 blocks mowing down bicycle after bicycle after bicycle before exiting the vehicle and yelling - go on, take a wild guess - "Allahu Akbar!" Well, I never! You could knock me over with a feather duster - which the Mohammedans will no doubt find a way of weaponizing any day now.

So two hours after the attack, Governor Cuomo, Mayor de Blasio and other New York bigwigs assembled for the usual press conference to give the usual passive shrug - this is the way we live now, nothing to be done about it, etc, etc. Every so often in New York, as in London as in Stockholm as in Berlin as in Nice as in Brussels as in Paris as in Manchester as in Orlando, your loved one will leave the home and never return because he went to a pop concert or a gay club or a restaurant or an airport, or just strolled the sidewalk or bicycled the bike path. "Allahu Akbar"? That's Arabic for "Nothing can be done". So Andrew Cuomo ended with some generic boilerplate about how they'll never change us:

We go forward together. And we go forward stronger than ever. We're not going to let them win...We'll go about our business. Be New Yorkers. Live your life. Don't let them change us.

But they are changing us. I've written before about what I've called the Bollardization of the Western World: the open, public areas of free cities are being fenced in by bollards, as, for example, German downtowns were after the Berlin Christmas attack, and London Bridge and Westminster Bridge were after two recent outbreaks of vehicular jihad. This is a huge windfall for bollard manufacturers - Big Bollard - and doubtless it's a huge boost for the economy, if your town's nimble enough to approve the new bollard plant on the edge of town, or if your broker is savvy enough to divest your tech stocks and go big on the bollard sector. As I write, Geraldo is on Fox demanding to know why this bike path wasn't blocked off with concrete barriers.

Why? Why does every public place have to get uglified up just because Geraldo doesn't want to address the insanity of western immigration policies that day by day advance the interests of an ideology explicitly hostile to our civilization? Instead Geraldo wants to tighten up vehicle rental. Why? Why should you have to lose an extra 15 minutes at an already sclerotic check-in counter because Hertz and Avis and UHaul have to run your name through the No-Rent list? Why should open, free societies become closed, monitored, ugly, cramped and cowering?

And Bollardization doesn't even solve the problem, does it? Last week I was tootling through Williston, Vermont, which has just reconfigured its highway system to run green-painted bike paths down the center of the streets. And the thought occurred to me that, once you've bollarded off every sidewalk, what's to stop jihadists mowing down cyclists? After all, if the eco-crowd are installing them in the middle of the roadway, they're kind of hard to bollard off. And then a second thought occurred: As inviting a target as bike paths are in enviro-poseur communities, they're even more inviting in genuine bicycling cultures such as the Netherlands or Scandinavia.

And now eight people are dead and dozens more injured - at the hands of a guy who came here in 2010 because he won a Green Card in the so-called "diversity lottery". Why was that stupid program not suspended on September 12th 2001?

Because even 3,000 dead cannot be allowed to question the virtues of "diversity". The other day, the Australian government lost its majority because, thanks to the usual boneheaded jurists, an Aussie-born citizen who chances also to share, say, New Zealand citizenship is deemed to be ineligible to sit in Parliament. Er, okay, whatever. But at the same time we're assured that an Uzbek or a Somali or a Yemeni becomes a fully functioning citizen of a free, pluralist society simply by setting foot on western soil. That's not so. And the price of maintaining the delusion is blood on the pavement.

And so, on a buckled, broken bicycle on the Hudson River Greenway, the wheel comes full circle. America and every other major western nation thought the appropriate response to 9/11 was to show how nice we are by dramatically increasing the rate of mass Muslim immigration. Sayfullo Habibullaevic Saipov was among the many beneficiaries of the west's suicide by virtue-signaling. "Sayfullo" is a Central Asian rendering of "Saifallah" - or "Sword of Allah". Hmm, what a fascinating name! Do you think whichever brain-dead bureaucrat who gave Sword of Allah's online Green Card application the once-over (assuming anyone did) so much as gave the name a second glance? And so, because we did not take an act of war seriously in 2001, we are relentlessly harassed and diminished by unending micro-jihad - in Copenhagen, in Toulouse, in San Bernadino, in Calgary, Barcelona, Parsons Green ...and now on a bike path 300 feet from where we came in sixteen years ago. Three months ago, on the anniversary of 9/11, I wrote:

In any war, you have to be able to prioritize: You can't win everything, so where would you rather win? Raqqa or Rotterdam? Kandahar or Cannes? Yet, whenever some guy goes Allahu Akbar on the streets of a western city, the telly pundits generally fall into one of two groups: The left say it's no big deal, and the right say this is why we need more boots on the ground in Syria or Afghanistan. Yesterday President Trump said he was committed to ensuring that terrorists "never again have a safe haven to launch attacks against our country".

By that he means "safe havens" in Afghanistan. But the reason the west's enemies are able to pile up a continuous corpse count in Paris, Nice, Berlin, Brussels, London, Manchester, Copenhagen, Stockholm, Orlando, San Bernadino, Ottawa, Sydney, Barcelona, [Your Town Here] is because they have "safe havens" in France, Germany, Britain, Scandinavia, North America, etc. Which "safe havens" are likely to prove more consequential for the developed world in the years ahead..? In Afghanistan, we're fighting for something not worth winning, and we're losing. In Europe, Islam is fighting for something very much worth winning, and they're advancing. And, according to all the official strategists in Washington and elsewhere, these two things are nothing to do with each other.

So now eight grieving families and dozens more who'll be living with horrific injuries for the rest of their lives are told by Cuomo and De Blasio and the rest of the gutless political class behind their security details that there's nothing to do except to get used to it.

I don't want to get used to it - and I reiterate my minimum demand of western politicians that I last made after the London Bridge attacks: How many more corpses need to pile up on our streets before you guys decide to stop importing more of it?

If your congressman or senator says that's not on his agenda, what he means is he's willing to sacrifice you and your loved ones in the suicide lottery of diversity.