LarDog's Blog

noreply@blogger.com (lar) — Thu, 17 Oct 2002 15:12:00 +0000

How Bad is Maureen Dowd?

Dowd's columns during Clinton's impeachment opened my eyes to the corruption by power and the sneering contempt for the rest of society that the Clintons had. Unfortunately, Dowd herself has now come to share this contempt and display from her perch as a columnist, as explained in this article in today's NRO:

[I]t is symptomatic of the intellectual state of the Left — and Dowd is its great exemplar in this respect — that rhetorical disdain has come to substitute for rational criticism...The problem with this sort of writing is that it's free-floating sarcasm. There's no substance underneath except for Dowd's conviction that she can peer into the souls of her political adversaries in order to discern their true motivations. In this respect, she is simply Al Franken with a bigger vocabulary or Michael Moore with table manners. (Quick aside on Moore: Flip through his book next time you pass it on a shelf. Note the SENTENCES IN CAPITAL LETTERS. Note the preponderance of exclamation points! In the current climate, Moore is a wobbling monument to the false impression that mouthing egalitarian clichés from the Sixties constitutes a reasoned worldview; in a more literate time, Moore would pass for a JERRY SPRINGER GUEST!) Dowd, Franken, and Moore, taken together, represent the evolutionary spectrum of a new species of elitists. Elitism, to be sure, is as old as human society. But never in recorded history has a less cerebrally, morally, or spiritually elite Elite looked down their noses at the majority of their countrymen. The minimum requirement for membership in the intelligentsia used to be, well, intelligence. This is no longer the case. Rather, what is now required is the mere sense of your own superiority, the smirky confidence that flows from an undergraduate grasp of history, philosophy, and literature, and which can only be sustained by a maniacal deafness to counterarguments. Listening to your political opponents is deadly under such circumstances; they must therefore be dismissed, a priori, as stupid.

This is the reason that so many Leftist critics of the coming war in Iraq don't even bother arguing against it on rational grounds. They just say that it's about oil, or a distraction from the economy, or intended to cover up corporate greed. It drives them nuts that someone they think is stupider than they are is a popular president.

noreply@blogger.com (lar) — Thu, 10 Oct 2002 18:27:00 +0000

Mrs. Kabila Needs My Help

I got one of those Nigerian scam e-mails:

STRICTLY CONFIDENTIAL

FROM: MRS. JUSTINA KABILA
TEL: +31-613-865-048
E-MAIL: justina49@netscape.net

ATTN:

AN APPEAL FOR YOUR PERSONAL ASSISTANCE TO INVEST IN YOUR COUNTRY

I AM FORTY-NINE YEARS OLD WIDOW (THE THIRD WIFE) OF THE LATE PRESIDENT
LAURENT KABILA OF THE DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC OF CONGO. MY HUSBAND
WAS ASSASINATED BY ONE OF HIS BODYGUARD ON THE 16th OF JANUARY 2001.

AT THE MID OF THE REBELLION WHICH IS STILL ON IN MY COUNTRY,MY SON
AND I WENT OUT OF CONGO ACCORDING TO MY HUSBAND INSTRUCTION BEFORE
HIS DEATH BECAUSE THE FAITH OF OUR COUNTRY WAS YET TO BE DECIDED.
WE CAME TO AMSTERDAM WITH THREE SEALED BAGGAGE CONTAINING THE SUM
OF TWENTY-TWO MILLION UNITED STATES DOLLARS (US$22,000,000.00).

ON ARRIVAL IN AMSTERDAM THE NETHERLANDS, WE SOUGHT FOR POLITICAL
ASYLUM. WE WERE NOT ALLOWED TO OPERATE A BANK ACCOUNT AND DECIDED
TO DEPOSIT THE SEALED BAGGAGES CONTAINING THE FUNDS WITH A PRIVATE
SECURITY COMPANY.(UCL DIPLOMATIC SERVICES) FOR SECURITY REASONS,
I DECLARED THE CONTENT AS PHOTOGRAHPIC MATERIALS of high security
value BELONGING TO MY FOREIGN AFFILIATED BUSINESS PARTNER. SINCE
THEN WE HAVE BEEN LOOKING FOR A RELIABLE AND TRUSTWORTHY PERSON
TO HELP ME FOR SAFE KEEPING OF THE MONEY PRIOR TO INVESTING IN ANY
CONDUCIVE COUNTRY IN OVERSEA.

I GOT IN CONTACT WITH SOMEBODY IN AUSTRALIA,HE BECAME GREEDY
CONSIDERING
HIS SHARE IN THE TRANSACTION, HE ASKED FOR 40%. LUCKILY, I RAN
INTO YOUR PERSONAL INFORMATION AND DETAILS, AND DECIDE TO CONTACT
YOU AND SEE IF YOU COULD BE OF ANY HELP TO ME AND THE TERMS OF
THE TRANSACTION IS AS FOLLOWS:

1) 25% OF THE TOTAL SUM TO YOU FOR YOUR ASSISTANCE IN PROVIDING
ACCOUNT AND SAFE KEEPING OF THE FUNDS.

2) 5% OF THE TOTAL SUM WILL BE SET ASIDE FOR ANY EXPENSES THAT MAY
BE INCURRED IN THE PROCESS OF THIS TRANSACTION.

3) 70% OF THE TOTAL SUM WILL BE FOR ME AND MY FAMILY INVESTMENT
IN YOUR COUNTRY OF WHICH YOU WILL BE A GUIDE TO US.

PLEASE SHOULD THIS MEET YOUR ULTMOST CONSIDERATION,CONTACT MY SON
(PETER KABILA) THROUGH TELEPHONE:(+31-613-865-048)

PLEASE FEEL FREE TO ASK (PETER) ANY QUESTIONS YOU MAY
CONSIDER NECESSARY, HE IS FRONTING FOR ME ;AS I LOOK FOWARD TO HEAR
FROM YOU.

YOURS TRULY,

MRS. JUSTINA KABILA.

noreply@blogger.com (lar) — Wed, 09 Oct 2002 01:25:00 +0000

Appeasing Terrorists Never Works

This article on the IRA shows how the Good Friday Accord to end the troubles in Northern Ireland is coming apart as the IRA/Sinn Fein's continuing involvement in terrorism becomes so blatenly clear that even Tony Blair can't avoid it.

noreply@blogger.com (lar) — Fri, 04 Oct 2002 18:15:00 +0000

Other People's Rants

Sometimes I worry that some of my remarks on this site are somewhat, shall we say, intemperate. Then I read something as hilariously over-the-top and yet dead-on like this rant about Paul Wellstone, which includes such delicious lines as,

"[T]here are two parties nowadays: the US party, and the UN party. The former includes Republicans and Democrats who have an inordinate, romantic, and almost quaint attachment to the Constitution and the notion of national sovereignty. The latter regard nation-states as subsets of a global construct that values unanimous impotence over individual effort, and values procedure over results. The US party calls in mortar fire on the enemy positions. The UN party stands up, climbs over the lip of the trench, and recites Robert’s Rules of Order as it approaches the machine-gun positions. Yea, though I walk through the shadow of death I shall fear no evil, for evil is specifically prohibited under Article 4, subclause B."

noreply@blogger.com (lar) — Fri, 04 Oct 2002 17:25:00 +0000

Why the Internet Was Slow Yesterday

WorldCom Glitch Causes Internet Delays

noreply@blogger.com (lar) — Fri, 04 Oct 2002 16:31:00 +0000

NPR Series on History of Israel

Just posted on israpundit some links to an NPR series on the history of Israel.

noreply@blogger.com (lar) — Fri, 04 Oct 2002 16:06:00 +0000

So Should I See This Movie or Not, II

This is so much fun, it will now be a regular Friday feature. Last time, it was Salon vs. Slate, but as of 11:45, Salon hasn't reviewed this movie, so it's Salon vs. CNN today.

"Red Dragon," the prequel to "Silence of the Lambs" and "Hannibal," starring Anthony Hopkins as Hannibal Lecter, Edward Norton as The FBI Agent, and Ralph Feinnes as The Seriel Killer. The plot line was previously done in the movie "Manhunter" in 1996.

CNN: 'Dragon' worthy follower to 'Lambs'

Salon: "Red Dragon": Anthony Hopkins? Big deal! We've already seen the prequel to "The Silence of the Lambs" and "Hannibal" -- and it was better the first time.

Some comments:

CNN: In "Red Dragon," the prequel to 1991's "Silence Of The Lambs," Sir Anthony Hopkins -- who won an Academy Award for his earlier portrayal of Hannibal Lecter -- proves once again that Lecter is the most terrifying villain in cinematic history.

Salon: If you buy the overprocessed headcheese of the serial killer as refined genius, you'll love "Red Dragon." Or maybe not. Even Hannibal Lecter devotees may lose patience with this picture's grandiose, self-serious ponderousness -- that's Lecterese for, "It's kind of boring in patches, actually."

CNN: This film's remarkable effectiveness is also due to the fact that "Silence" screenwriter Ted Tally, who won an Academy Award for "Lambs," is back, along with a stellar cast including Emily Watson, Ralph Fiennes, Edward Norton, Mary-Louise Parker, Philip Seymour Hoffman and Harvey Keitel.

Salon: There's an aura of dread and menace about "Red Dragon," but it's almost as if it's been pumped into the movie by an ionizer. Neither Ratner nor his actors -- working from a script by Ted Tally, who also wrote the screenplay for "The Silence of the Lambs" -- are any good at charging the atmosphere with true creepiness.

CNN: [W]e actually get to know the killer, whose real name is Francis Dolarhyde, simply known as D. [The movie], in fact, has given D a compelling back story not included in [the original] book.

Salon: We know who the killer is long before [The FBI Agent] does, of course: It's Francis Dolarhyde (Ralph Fiennes), your friendly neighborhood mild-mannered impotent psychotic with a harelip..A hokey voiceover flashback tells us that Francis suffered severe emotional and physical abuse at the hands of the crazed granny who raised him. For those who have difficulty decoding such fine-grained psychoanalysis, [The FBI Agent] puts it this way: "He wasn't born a monster. He was made one through years and years of abuse."

CNN: "...a stellar cast including Emily Watson, Ralph Fiennes, Edward Norton, Mary-Louise Parker, Philip Seymour Hoffman and Harvey Keitel."

Salon: [Fiennes] paces through the movie like a silent-film ham, making his eyes look really shiny and crazy whenever it's called for, which is basically every time he's on-screen. Did someone forget to tell him "Red Dragon" is a talkie?...Norton plods along dutifully for the ride...He delivers his lines like a guy who sure knows how to deliver lines -- he hits them like a tennis pro idly whacking a ball against the wall over and over again. They make contact; they just don't whirr or sting. At the very least, though, his brand of understatement is a blessed relief next to Hopkins' coming on like a bad Bette Davis impersonator...Hopkins takes such great care to festoon his character in crepey elegance that he succeeds only in turning it into low camp.

CNN: The score, by Danny Elfman, is excellent...

Salon: Be sure to listen for the way Danny Elfman's score swells like a flooding fjord during the electrifying blow-job scene.

noreply@blogger.com (lar) — Thu, 03 Oct 2002 15:12:00 +0000

This Passes for Genius?

All I need is one goofy idea...

Bringing dance to prayer: Activist wins ‘genius’ grant

...

Choreographer, dancer, community organizer, teacher and now public persona, Lerman last week received a five-year MacArthur Fellowship for $500,000, a prize that carries with it the public recognition of genius status.

...

A member of [Reform] Temple Micah, Lerman at times used the congregation as a laboratory, developing synagogue-based programs like dance midrash to bring movement and dance into the stand-up-sit-down world of traditional Jewish prayer...

“To bring movement to the life of prayer is extraordinary,” says Ron Wolfson, vice president of the University of Judaism in Los Angeles, director of the Whizin Center for the Jewish Future and co-founder of Synagogue 2000. “Liz is able to make people comfortable with the idea that movement is a possibility, and she expresses it in a nonthreatening way to people who never believed they could move.”

[Reform rabbi Daniel Zeman] adds, “Personally my prayer experience has been changed forever” by Lerman’s work...But organized Judaism — not just alternative basement services and chavurot — he says, must acknowledge the primacy of Lerman’s work as an example of the power creative expression can provide to help create community.“It should be a signal to the Jewish community about what I’ve said all along about Liz: that there are incredible artists out there and that we have to be open enough to embrace them and bring them into our synagogues and communities. Liz is out there in the art world blazing new forms. We have to allow this in and allow it to affect the mainstream.”

“If we don’t bring these artists right into the mainstream,” Zemel warns, “if we don’t recognize them, we’re blind to the geniuses among us, and they’ll go elsewhere, out into the secular world.”

Let me show you the door...

noreply@blogger.com (lar) — Thu, 03 Oct 2002 14:52:00 +0000

Federalist Society on the Laws of Armed Conflict

Just posted on Israpundit a link and comment on a Federalist Socieyt report, "A Legal Analysis of the Attacks on Civilians and Infliction of Collateral Damage in the Middle East Conflict."

noreply@blogger.com (lar) — Tue, 01 Oct 2002 17:11:00 +0000

Canadian Anti-Idiotarians

According to today's FT, Canadian Business Rallies Against Kyoto:

Canada's decision on ratification is expected to have a crucial effect on the long-term future of the United Nation's efforts to curb climate change even though its approval is not essential for the protocol to come into force.

The dispute has escalated since Jean Chrétien, the prime minister, announced plans at the Earth Summit in Johannesburg last month to put the protocol to a vote in parliament this year.

The widely-held belief that it will win approval from parliament has unleashed intense criticism from opponents. "It's the goofiest, most devastating thing that was ever conceived and has ever been contemplated by a Canadian government in the history of this country," said Ralph Klein, premier of Alberta, the leading oil-producing province.

Last week, a broad cross-section of Canadian industry launched a coalition to fight ratification plans. Gwyn Morgan, president of EnCana, an energy producer, accused the government of being "led down the garden path" by a European Union plan to gain commercial advantage over other countries".

"Now that the US and Australia have dropped out, the EU countries are worried that the jig is up. They're scrambling to make sure Canada ratifies so they can at least have competitive advantage over our country," Mr Morgan said.

...

Canada does not emit enough greenhouse gases for its approval to have a decisive influence but a rejection would be significant because it would mean that there were no countries in the Americas taking on legally-binding emission targets.

Some analysts believe that could lead to the development of a North America Free Trade Area (Nafta) climate initiative, scuppering the UN's long-term ambitions of drawing the US back into its international coalition on climate change. "Canada is crucial, not because it is required to get Kyoto into force but because it changes the long-term dynamics," says Michael Grubb, professor of climate change at London's Imperial College.

Jennifer Morgan, director of the climate campaign of WWF, the environment group, says that Canada's ratification would split the north American block. "It is both economically and politically important because it sends a signal about just how isolated the Bush administration is on this."

Hold on a minute. The WWF (not World Wrestling Federation, but World Wildlife Fund; the wrestlers lost a copyright infringement suit and had to change their name to World Wide Entertainment) says that the U.S. is "isolated," but two paragraphs earlier, the article says that if Canada ratifies it will be the only country in the Americas with binding emissions targets, and if it doesn't ratify, there will be a North American climate initiative. So who is isolated?

noreply@blogger.com (lar) — Mon, 30 Sep 2002 15:10:00 +0000

The Euroweenies Are Whining Again

The WaPo reports that New U.S. Doctrine Worries Europeans. It includes these gems from our alleged allies:

Rallies by tens of thousands of anti-war demonstrators in London and Rome on Saturday were reminiscent of the protests of the early 1980s in favor of nuclear disarmament and against President Ronald Reagan's tough stance on the Soviet Union.

Uh, yeah, right, they protested against the tough stance that actually won the Cold War and brought down the Soviet Union. They were wrong then, and they're wrong now.

The Europeans say the administration views them as "Euro wimps" who don't pull their weight militarily, and who prefer prevarication to plain-speaking and appeasement to action. Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld's recent appearance at a NATO meeting in Warsaw, during which he snubbed the German defense minister because of Schroeder's strong opposition to military action against Iraq, was the latest insult.

Okay, so at least they understand the situation. And why is it an intolerable insult for Rummy not to meet the German defense minister, but okay for Schroeder to dis the U.S. and for his foreign minister to compare our President to Hitler? Do they think they can do that without consequences?

"There's a tone of contempt that people here deeply resent," said John Wyles, a journalist and policy strategist who works for GPlus Europe, a consulting firm.

This is precious. The Europeans who have been calling us simplistic cowboys for the last year (longer, really, since right after Bush became president) are now complaining about our contempt for them!

Many people contend that the Americans have put too much emphasis on a military approach to attacking terrorism and not enough on dealing with what they identify as root causes, such as poverty and lack of freedoms. "None of this in any way justifies or explains what happened on September 11th," Patten said, "but perhaps it means we have a slightly more nuanced idea of how you deal with terrorism."

But they complain about contempt? Patten is foaming at the mouth with supercilious contempt for the U.S. And he's wrong. As many people keep pointing, out poverty does not cause terrorism. Osama is not poor! The hijackers were from middle class families. It's as if the Euroweenies just don't want to admit the facts staring them in the face. And then they act superior to us, and complain that we act superior to them.

noreply@blogger.com (lar) — Mon, 30 Sep 2002 02:51:00 +0000

Gerry Adams Was a Terrorist?!

Why is it news that Gerry Adams was a terrorist? This is the man that Bill Clinton invited to Washington in 1993 despite the opposition of the entire U.S. intelligence community, who assured the president that Adams had personally directed murders, among others,

...the execution of a Belfast mother of 10, Jean McConville, after she was twice caught using a radio transmitter to tell British spies about the movements of IRA members in west Belfast's Divis Flats complex.

noreply@blogger.com (lar) — Mon, 30 Sep 2002 02:32:00 +0000

German Election

Just posted on israpundit about this quote on the recent German election:

"[T]he real problem...is that 25 percent to 30 percent of the German population holds anti-Semitic beliefs,” he said. “We had an election campaign that was anti-Semitic, anti-Zionist and anti-American.”

noreply@blogger.com (lar) — Fri, 27 Sep 2002 19:03:00 +0000

Protest Update

2 pm walkabout in downtown DC revealed---nothing. Zip. Zero. How boring. How disappointing. Nothing going on in front of the World Bank. One middle-aged guy in a t-shirt and clown pants wearing a football helmet was being interviewed by a Japanese tv crew and said that the police were overreacting. But there was nothing to react to. The cops--and there were a lot of them--were just standing around. Except for the Japanese, the tv crews weren't doing much of anything either. And there were a few gawkers, like me. So I walked over to the White House. Same thing. Lots of police, no protestors. I did talk to three young women from Long Island University who were holding anti-war signs, but they were pretty much the whole thing. They said that most of the action had taken place in Freedom Plaza earlier in the day, as this WaPo article reported. Almost 600 people were arrested, so maybe that cut down on the fun by the time I got out there. A protest was planned for the afternoon in front of the Gap in G-town. (Apparently, it's going to be a "nude-in," with demonstrators taking their clothes off. I'll try to get some photos.) So, that was about it. Downtown is quiet, but other than that it's pretty much same as always: tourists, businessmen, bike messengers hanging out in the squares, homeless people talking to themselves. Only difference was, a lot more police. That was, I admit, somewhat intimidating, especially the heavily armed Park Police, who were not at all like Ranger Smith. I think Satufday will be more active.

noreply@blogger.com (lar) — Fri, 27 Sep 2002 17:32:00 +0000

So Should I See This Movie or Not?

Moonlight Mile, staring Dustin Hoffman as Ben and Susan Sarandon as JoJo, the parents of a murdered woman and Jake Gyllenhaal as Joe, the woman's fiancee.

Salon: Dustin Hoffman, Susan Sarandon and Jake Gyllenhaal anchor a dazzling true-life comedy that might be the funniest movie about grief ever made.

Slate: Death Takes a Quaalude: Moonlight Mile is the worst film of the year

A few comparisons:

Salon: "Moonlight Mile" is a blessed relief because it doesn't treat grieving as a cottage industry, recognizing that although grief has certain universal attributes, everyone's sorrow also has its own complex, fine-grained texture.

Slate: I'm at a loss to account for how off this film is—how a movie can seem so conscientiously earnest yet so creepily exploitive. It's like a Christmas stocking over a crematory.

Salon: "Moonlight Mile" is a prime example of a picture that survives (and maybe even thrives on) the whole brutal Hollywood moviemaking process and doesn't leave its heart at the door.

Slate: Yuck. It's not the touches of comedy in a story framed by grief. It's the combination of the maudlin and the arch. Joe [the main character] is like a Woody Allen character amid the Gentiles, and in this context his eye-rolling higher consciousness is repellent. And when Silberling [the director] turns him into a fount of truth, his candor inspiring the parents to face up to their past and move on, the movie becomes an affront to the living and the dead.

Salon: [O]ne of the most surprising qualities of "Moonlight Mile" is how strangely energizing it is.

Slate: Moonlight Mile is like In the Bedroom (2001) made sweet and uplifting. It's even more vomitous than what Silberling did to Wim Wenders' Wings of Desire (1988), which he remade as City of Angels (1998) with Nicolas Cage as an angel who becomes fully human only when the woman he loves (Meg Ryan) celebrates their impending nuptials by bicycling into a truck.

noreply@blogger.com (lar) — Thu, 26 Sep 2002 18:53:00 +0000

Almighty Kofi

Today's Journal points out that some Christian leaders have apothesized the UN:

The Vatican's foreign minister, Archbishop Jean-Louis Tauran, expressed the Holy See's view that any decision to use force "must come about through a decision taken within the framework of the United Nations." This is the same U.N. that the Catholic Church challenges (rightly, we think) when it pushes for population control and a world-wide right to abortion.

Protestant clerics have also found a higher moral authority in Kofi Annan. General Secretary Jim Winkler of the United Methodist Church General Board of Church and Society -- the denomination to which both President Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney belong -- has stated flatly that "no member nation has the right to take unilateral military action without the approval of the U.N. Security Council."

Ditto for 37 British, Canadian and American members of the World Council of Churches Central Committee...

Whatever one thinks about Mr. Bush's alleged "unilateralism," at least he's democratically elected, which is more than you can say about much of the General Assembly. Any institution that hails Yasser Arafat, who built a career on terror, is nobody's moral exemplar.

As for the Security Council, one of its permanent members is China. Leave aside the murders in Tiananmen Square and Buddhist Tibet. In China, many of the co-religionists of those clerics who now place so much trust in the Security Council are harassed, jailed and sometimes killed. Catholics loyal to the Pope remain persecuted, as are Protestants whose only crime is reading the Bible, without official authorization, in their own homes. Last December five members of an evangelical sect were sentenced to death in secret trials. This persecution goes well beyond Christians, as members of the outlawed Falun Gong can grimly attest.

Russia, another Security Council member, has its own issues with religion: Non-Russian-Orthodox from Pentecostals to the Salvation Army have faced restrictive registration laws against the exercise of their faiths.

noreply@blogger.com (lar) — Thu, 26 Sep 2002 15:46:00 +0000

Who's a Jew?

This report from the JTA on a new census of American Jews shows the tenuous nature of Jewish identification. The compiler of the census claims that there are

6.7 million Jews out of 288 million Americans, far higher than the closest, most recent estimate of 6.1 million American Jews... and that 2.5 million Americans are a subgroup “socially or psychologically connected” with Judaism, though they are not Jews themselves. This group includes people who are practice Judaism “as a secondary religion,” or aspects of Judaism in addition to their primary religion; who were raised Jews or have a Jewish parent but now practice another religion; call Judaism their ethnicity or culture but practice another religion; or have a Jewish partner or spouse... and that 4.1 million more Americans have at least one ancestor — “a grandparent or beyond” — who is Jewish.

What is practicing Judaism as a "secondary" religion mean? Or practicing "aspects" of Judaism"? Or practicing another religion to the exclusion of Judaism, but considering oneself still ethnically Jewish? Where does that leave people--i.e., converts--who practice Judaism but aren't ethnically Jewish? And did the author include Jews for Jesus? Why, or why not?

I can see an argument that including these people in a larger, sociological definition of the Jewish community might have some benefit when trying to work to reduce anti-Semitism or increase support for Israel. But that people see the definition of "Jewish" as malleable and open to individual interpretation is alarming. Halakha is the only sure guide to Jewish identity and continuity.

The article does make this point:

Jonathan Sarna, a professor of American Jewish history at Brandeis University, said both Tobin’s study and the upcoming [National Jewish Popluation Survey] NJPS will show that, in fact, the numbers of “strictly halachic” Jews are declining. If nothing else, that raises troubling questions about the future of American Jewish political influence, Sarna said. While Sarna said Tobin’s rosier portrait is not based on “utter nonsense,” since “vast numbers” of Americans today are indeed tied in some way to Jews, that does not say much about the future of American Jewry...20 million American also have ties to French Huegenots, a culture that died out, he added. “Many of these people who have a piece of Jewish heritage” aren’t selecting that piece and “see no reason why Judaism should be central to them or their children,” he said.

noreply@blogger.com (lar) — Mon, 23 Sep 2002 20:03:00 +0000

Report on the Toronto Film Festival

From a friend, Alidog. Hey, the description of this blog does include "pop culture." But I have to be somewhat political--Alidog apparently didn't see the anti-American 9-11 movie,which I've noted(top of page), a couple of times (middle of the page, 8/28). Also, Bruce Campbell (middle of page, post entitled "Who Wants Some!") was there:

Mediocre or one of the best ever; reports varied on the quality of this
year's slate of movies at the Toronto International Film Festival. My festival
experience this year was just ok, the first time ever that I did not
see something truly mindblowing - no masterpieces. However, I did see a lot
of good films that may or may not be released within the next year or so. So
here it is, your annual report - this year very skimpy on content - for film
details - check imdb.com.

Note: One update from previous fests: Spring Forward (1999), a small
indie by Tom Gilroy starring Ned Beatty and Liev Schrieber, has just come out
on DVD. Make a point of renting this dialogue-driven gem about two men, one at
the end of his career, one just starting out, who bond over the course of a
year on the job. Production credits are very good and the acting is excellent.

Bubba Ho-Tep - directed by don coscarelli, who gave us phantasm IV,
comes this fun romp with the inimitable Bruce Campbell(!!!) playing a geriatric
elvis (the true king baby!) who teams up with Ossie Davis (who believes that he is
JFK) to defeat a soul-sucking mummy that is preying on nursing home residents.
Although the climax was lacking, this is a tour-de-force for Campbell, he is the
KING! If this comes within 50 miles of you (or more) go see it (still seeking
distributor). A must for Campbell fans (which all of you should be. else, shame!
and learn grasshoppers).

The Eye - made by the Pang Brothers, Hong Kong's answer to the
Wachowski Bros, moody suspenser follows a blind woman who, after having cornea
transplants, see the dead. Fine fun, with a kicky opening credit sequence. Word on the
street (could be bs) is that Tom Cruise has optioned this for remake. Other
than a hokey love interest that appears shoehorned into the script with a
ballpeen hammer, this is a solid work.

Spun - Jonas Akerlund of music videodom, brings quick, slap dash
video-editing and style to Jason Schwartzman's(Rushmore) lost weekend methamphetamine
binge. Film contains lots of lewdness, requisite drug use, nudity, bondage,
etc etc, and animation. Cast is top notch, including John Leguizamo (who of
course has some of the best scenes), mena suvari, brittany murphy, an arquette,
debbie harry(!), eric roberts and others of note, and features Mickey Rourke
as the cook! Not for the squeamish, but good adult fun.

Auto Focus - dir by Paul schrader (Affliction, writer of several
classics) starring Greg Kinnear as Bob Crane and Willem Dafoe as his swinging
partner in crime. This film is filthy! Chock full o' porn! You kiddies won't see
the unrated version I got a gander at, but never fear, there is more than
enuf that will pass the censors. Biopic abt the downfall of family man bob crane,
who after starting on Hogan's heroes goes on a downward spiral of sex
addiction. Kinnear is fantastic and dafoe is creepy (as usual). Again NOT FOR THE
SQUEAMISH. Do not go see this with your parents, inlaws or children.
But do see it. Naughty!

Gerry- dir by Gus Van Sant (good will hunting, to die for, but also
even cowgirls get the blues), "starring" casey affleck and matt damon.
Public Service Announcement!: whatever any smarty pants reviewer or film professor sez
(and I have one such, a friend, who calls it so) this is NOT a masterpiece,
this is torture. A film about how one wrong turn can change your life, film
tracks 2 friends on an idle hike who go off the path, get lost and wander the
desert for days. Sitting though this film felt like days.

Nada (Nothing More) - Cool spanish-cuban coprod that combines elements
of buster keaton, kafka, and various screwball comedies. Follows a young cuban
postal worker who takes to rewriting ho-hum letters passing through her office
into romantic or spiritual epics. Filmed in b&w with colored sequences.
Visually interesting and gives us a look at Cuba without the polemics. Well
worth a visit.

The Intended - dir by kristian levring, stars janet mcteer, olympia
dukakis, brenda fricker and jj field. A cross between Red Dust (if you haven't
seen this film, get on it - precode dazzler by v. fleming with Jean Harlow and
clark gable- hot!) and Conrad' Heart of Darkness, film follows a may december
couple (mcteer as the older woman) trying to make money in malaysia in the
1920's at a small english compound populated by a sinister group of people.
Mcteer's luminous eyes in the jungle night were frankly terrifying. This film is
not Dogme, but it sure seemed like it. Olympia Dukakis was beyond creepy.
A tough row to hoe, but a good film.

Lost in LaMancha - a blast. Documentary about the failed making of "The
man who killed don quixote" by Terry Gilliam (the man who brought you 12
monkeys, fisher king as well as baron munchausen etc). The problems with this film's
production are the problems of every production (cast issues, locations, sets,
money, etc) writ LARGE! The only thing that didn't happen appears to have been a
plague of locusts. If you are into Gilliam, the filmmaking process or seeing a
disaster occur, (or just want to see johnny depp wrestle with a fish) check this
film out. it is excellent.

The Quiet American - directed by phillip noyce (who also has this
year's "Rabbit-Proof Fence" a reported must see - i couldn't get a ticket) and
starring Michael Caine and Brendan Frazier. Based on g. greene's novel, film
focuses on the triangle relationship between the 2 white men and the beautiful
Vietnamese woman they both love/want to possess as an allegory for the western
presence in Vietnam in the context of growing American involvement in Vietnam
(early 1950s). This film garnered an array of reviews from sucks to fantastic. I've
never read the book or seen the previous film version which seems to underpin a
lot of the fuss. The film beautifully shot (in Ho Chi Minh) and Michael Caine
feels that it is the best work he has ever done. Go see if you agree. He is sure, at
this point, of an oscar nod for this role and a nom for cinematograhy is
likely.

Tuck Everlasting directed by Jay Russell (My Dog Skip) and starring
alexis Bleidel, sissy spacek, ben kingsley, william hurt, amy irving - i could
go on...Based on my dog skip, and the huge cast I had really high hopes
for this family film, that were mercilessly dashed by a cruel, excessive use of
slo-mo and treacly voiceovers. This film looked gorgeous exteriors and
costuming were excellent but it was utterly devoid of soul. Try and find the 1980
version that stars noone who ever did anything else and achieved much more. This
version is Disney Sunday night at best (since disney made it, i shouldn't be
surprised).

Welcome to Collinwood - starring a bevy a huge stars and first rate
character actors, including george clooney, sam rockwell and william h. macy,
this very little film has some really funny bits and gags, but is all over the
place, has too many characters that aren't developed or are overdeveloped at the
expense of those others, and ultimately doesn't pay-off. it is worth it for the
surreal, comedy aspects. Certainly not bad, but wait for the video - unless you
are looking for something frothy.

The Heart of Me - Period (1930s-40s) drawing room drama from the brits
(you know the type - wings of the dove, howard's end etc) starring helena bonham
carter, olivia williams and paul bettany. Women play 2 sisters in love with the
same man, who has married the one and has an affair with the other. It's all
so very serious, the acting is superb, production top-notch and story
overwrought melodrama. It didn't produce a sniffle from me (what, you think it has
a happy ending???), so it's a miss in my book. Good video rental.

Ma Vraie Vie a Rouen - small french film from the makers of Jeanne et
le garcon formidable (fantastic you must see this film) whose conceit is that the
film, shot in digital on a handycam, is the diary of the main character, who
you only see when someone else, or a tripod has the camera. Sweet coming of age
story runs a bit (20 min) too long but is really well done and really shows
how good tech credits can be using even home digital equipment.

The Last Great Wilderness - directed by first timer David MacKenzie and
written by him and his brother alastair (who stars, and is the yummy lead on
BBC's monarch of the glen - catch this on BBCAmerica - better stuff than this
fall's drivel). Film is an odd mishmash of roadtrip gone wrong, crazy people
in the woods...all reports indicate it is a typical weekend in scotland. This
is a little film and is mainly of interest because, MacKenzie is already
shooting a big budget star vehicle, so this will give insight on how it all
started.

Spirited Away- I didn't see this, but everyone else did and said -
terrific stuff! from the director of Princess Mononoke and Kiki's Delivery
Service. This is out and you have seen the laudatory reviews. Get you to a theatre!

noreply@blogger.com (lar) — Fri, 20 Sep 2002 20:20:00 +0000

Terrorists In Germany

Just posted on israpundit about an article in today's Journal on Muslim extremists living in Germany:

German cities are still home to extremist Muslims. That's raising the question here of what, if anything, should be done about men such as Mr. Barakat: immigrants who live off welfare, hold their new homeland in contempt and are in awe of bloody martyrdom...

noreply@blogger.com (lar) — Fri, 20 Sep 2002 14:57:00 +0000

More on Egalitarianism

Following up my blog on the DC Minyan, or, as one of my friends calls it, the "Fake Minyan," here's an article in the Forward on allegedly Orthodox egal services. The article still inappropriately refers to such services as "Orthodox," but at least it points out that "this brand of worship appears to occupy a theological middle ground between Orthodoxy's commitment to stringent gender distinctions and Conservative Judaism's 20-year march toward full egalitarianism...[and] still lacks the public imprimatur of a prominent Orthodox institution or rabbi..."

The atricle points out that the liberalities in halakha for women's roles in davening are limited and quotes a Conservative, but traditional, rabbi along these lines:

At Kehilat Orach Eliezer, an Upper West Side Orthodox-style congregation known as K.O.E., the congregation has a divider between the sexes, or mechitza, and adheres to most of the main Orthodox restrictions on women's participation. But with the approval of spiritual leader Rabbi David Weiss Halivni, K.O.E recently decided to offer an alternative service for men and women on the evening of Simchat Torah in which all participants will be allowed to read from the Torah.

But Halivni told the Forward that his decision was a limited one, based on other leniencies permitted only on Simchat Torah, and could not be applied to a typical Sabbath. He said it was unlikely that such a practice would be allowed on a regular basis. A Jewish studies professor at Columbia University, Halivni was considered one of Conservative Judaism's top talmudists until he broke with the movement after its flagship institution, the Jewish Theological Seminary of America, decided to ordain women.

Halivni went on to found the Union for Traditional Judaism (UTJ), a small, non-egalitarian Conservative movement, ideologically close the Conservative movement of 50 to 70 years ago (and should not be confused with United Torah Judaism, also UTJ, a haredi political party in Israel).

The article then goes on to discuss the Orthodox position:

The legal basis for all these groups was laid out in [Jerusalem lawyer Mendel] Shapiro's article, published in the journal of the liberal Orthodox group Edah. He argued that as a result of several historical and sociological factors, people have mistakenly placed Torah reading and the recitation of the corresponding blessings in the category of rituals absolutely off limits to women. Still, Shapiro added, it is only permissible to call a woman to the Torah at a private service, or a congregation where opposition to the practice will not cause communal discord.

No leading Orthodox institution or halachic arbiter is known to have publicly endorsed the new prayer groups or Shapiro's article. At the same time, the new practices have yet to be condemned by Modern Orthodoxy's leading institutions. But insiders attributed the institutional silence to the trend being in its early stages, and said the changes were likely to be criticized by leading Orthodox rabbis.

Even Edah director Rabbi Saul Berman, who agreed to publish Shapiro's article in the spirit of open debate, said he could not accept its conclusions.

When asked if such a minyan would be granted membership in the Orthodox Union, the union's professional head, Rabbi Tzvi Hersh Weinreb, said that the matter would be referred to outside religious authorities, including the Rabbinical Council of America. The RCA's executive vice president, Rabbi Stephen Dworken, said that if the issue is ever raised, his organization would have to study it. Dworken added that he did not know of any "halachic authority who permits those types of activities."

If only the WaPo reporter had bothered to do a little bit of research or at least contact someone besides the leaders of the DC Minya before writing his article.

noreply@blogger.com (lar) — Fri, 20 Sep 2002 14:39:00 +0000

Logan's Run

The Slate Explainer briefly describes the Logan Act, which makes it illegal for private citizens to negotiate with foreign states under the premise of speaking for the United States. Dating from the early years of the Republic, it's never been enforced. Why should be pretty clear. No private individual--Jesse Jackson or even a Congressman--can bind the United States to an agreement. If some bozo shows up on Saddam's doorstep and purports to have a deal about inspections, well, too bad for Saddam if he believes it. People who do such things--Jesse, Jimmy, etc.--end up making themselves look like idiots. It's really just not that big a deal.

noreply@blogger.com (lar) — Thu, 19 Sep 2002 04:14:00 +0000

They Just Don't Get It

An article in the Washington Post describes the D.C. Minyan, an egalitarian Jewish worship group, as "orthodox." It's not. They can call themselves what ever they want, but the Orthodox Union, the Young Israel movement, or the Agudath Israel, the organizations of Orthodox synagogues would not admit them, nor would any rabbi affiliated with any of those organizations, nor virtually all members of any of those synagogues, daven (pray) there, nor does the minyan have an Orthodox-ordained rabbinical advisor.

The plain fact is, egalitarian davening is not halakhically permissible (although there are some liberalities). They try to justify this by saying that there are sources that allow "active and vibrant roles for women in Jewish life" that had been "lost or swept under the carpet in the intervening centuries." Those sources do not permit egalitarian davening, as the quote itself implies--it refers only to active and vibrant roles in Jewish life, which women in Orthodox Judaism have--just not in prayer services. Furthermore, the minyan's use of a 10 men plus 10 women standard for a prayer quorum is just made up, as their leaders admit in the article. If they have 10 men, however, and do not daven as they should, they are not in conformity with Jewish law. Finally, in particular, the lack of a physical barrier between men and women (mechitza) is totally contrary to Jewish law, and the people quoted in the article don't even try to justify it. Nevertheless, they call themselves "orthodox" or "halakhic" and that they "have a commitment to observing Jewish law." Obviously, they don't if they're violating what all Orthodox rabbis--the experts in Jewish law--say.

Now, I think anybody can daven however they want. Doesn't bother me b/c I'm not involved. What does bother me is the claim that they are Orthodox and the misrepresentation of Orthodoxy that results. Non-Orthodox Jews or non-Jews don't get a realistic picture. That's clear from the article, which says, for example, that "in most Orthodox congregations, women sit separately and out of view of the men and have no role in services." Wrong. The truth is, in all Orthodox synagogues men and women sit separately and women do not have a role in davening. It is quite telling that the article does not even bother to quote an Orthodox rabbi on the issue. In fact, it doesn't quote anybody giving an alternative view of the DC Minyan. Instead, it quotes a Reform rabbi, who, by the terms of their own movement, reject Jewish law entirely.

Again, I'm not saying that the DC Minyan is a bad thing. If it's meaningful to the people who go, fine. But they should be honest with themselves and with others that they are not Orthodox.

noreply@blogger.com (lar) — Thu, 19 Sep 2002 03:15:00 +0000

Blogs on Insrapundit: Financial Times Shills for Reuters and Harvard's Apologist for Islam

I posted two items on israpundit, shorter versions of which are below:

Wednesday's Financial Times carried a puff piece defending Reuters against claims that it is biased. It doesn't even bother to quote any Reuter's critics. Instead, it quotes the International Federation of Journalists and the head of Reuters itself. Journalists protecting their own.

The Wall St. Journal reported a couple of weeks ago (I hadn't seen this either in the paper or blogosphere) that the new dean of Harvard Divinity School, William Graham, is an apologist for Islam.

noreply@blogger.com (lar) — Wed, 18 Sep 2002 17:59:00 +0000

Bob from Accounting

Take a look at this humor site, bob from accounting. Not as creative as the Onion, and nowhere close to satirewire.com, but great if only for the story, "Bush Launches 'Operation Shut-Your-Piehole' Against European Leaders":

Following a flurry of international criticism regarding a preemptive strike against Iraq, George Bush surprised pundits Tuesday with the announcement he was immediately launching "Operation Shut Your Piehole" against nearly a dozen whiny world leaders and United Nations officials. According to sources, the military action will first target Canadian Prime Minister Jean Chretien, whom Bush vowed to "make my bitch" after repeated comments from the close ally that he was firmly against any unilateral action taken by America to remove Saddam Hussein from power...If required, additional resources will be spent shutting up Bill Clinton, Jimmy Carter, Louis Farrakhan and "that ungrateful little bastard Nelson Mandela."

noreply@blogger.com (lar) — Wed, 18 Sep 2002 17:51:00 +0000

Talk Like a Pirate Tomorrow

Thursday, September 19th, is Talk Like a Pirate Day"!"

Find your pirate name here Mine was, "Bloody Harry Kidd."

And for the political among you, this anti-Chomsky siteis just bizarrely funny