The attractive young lady says “shalom” and right away I know I’m in trouble. I’m just entering El Al’s special security screening, as much psychological as technological. And I can’t decide whether it’s polite or patronizing to respond with the only word of Hebrew I know (which is also “shalom”). It’s a very Canadian moment. In the face of elaborate precautions against international terrorism and anti-Semitism, I’m paralyzed by a language issue. And uneasily aware that standing speechless at El Al security with beads of sweat forming on your forehead is not a promising start to a trip.
Ultimately I settle for “Hi,” and after having my luggage passed through their special X-ray machine and my brain through their special psychological understanding I am cleared to fly to Tel Aviv (on a trip sponsored by the Canada-Israel Committee). I concluded that they had other things on their minds than whether it was dorky for a tourist to mispronounce their equivalent of “Hello” (and that my airplane seat bore no useful resemblance to a bed). I turned out to be right on both counts. The story of language in Israel is an amazing one not least, to a Canadian, because of how relaxed everyone seems to be about it.
Israel’s familiar language miracle is the resurrection of Hebrew as a vernacular rather than liturgical language. As Paul Johnson’ s History of the Jews notes, when Eliezer ben Yehuda went to Palestine in 1881 and insisted he and his wife, née Deborah Jonas, speak Hebrew to each other, “Theirs was the first Hebrew-speaking household in the country (indeed in the world) and Ben Yehuda’s first son, Ben Zion, was the first Hebrew-speaking child since antiquity.” For Israel to resurrect Hebrew was at least as improbable as if the United States had sought to revive Latin in 1776. Indeed more so, for there were more people capable of conversing in Latin in 1776 than in Hebrew in 1881, and it had been a living language more recently. But, my goodness, it has succeeded. Continue reading
Woo hoo. Gonna have a nuclear war. Tens of millions dead! Countless cities laid waste! Bring it on. Yee haw.
If a member of the Bush administration said such a thing it would have raised eyebrows around the world so high as to dent ceilings. So why is it unremarkable when a senior Chinese general says it? We have met the enemy all right.
Maj.-Gen. Zhu Chenghu of the People’s Republic of China told foreign reporters last week that if, in response to some unspecified Chinese action (think island off east coast), “the Americans draw their missiles and position-guided ammunition onto the target zone on China’s territory, I think we will have to respond with nuclear weapons…. We Chinese will prepare ourselves for the destruction of all the cities east of Xian. Of course the Americans will have to be prepared that hundreds of cities will be destroyed by the Chinese.” Continue reading
The newspapers tell me there’s a line of golf balls with Bible verses on them. It is a pleasure to return from the Holy Land and find this teed up for me. It’s like a little bit of manna on a tiny white stick.
Harken unto me, O manufacturers. In the Land of Scot have you made balls bearing passages including 2 Timothy 4:7 (“I have finished the course. I have kept the faith.”) That one makes some sense, since according to Hebrews 11:1 “faith is … the evidence of things not seen.” Which in my case would include not only improvements in my score but, all too often, my ball itself.
But you also used Ezekiel 46:9 (“But each shall go out straight ahead”) and Isaiah 40:26 (“Lift up your eyes on high and see … not one is missing”) which prompts the immediate thought that many Bible passages must be taken allegorically, as the latter appears to contravene the rule “Lift not thy head until thy follow-through be complete.” The former I do not ever expect to see fulfilled even in an allegorically comprehensible fashion. Continue reading
Do you realize I’ve never even made a phone call on my computer? Or owned a BlackBerry? But Og have fire. Og modern. Og see future coming. Og worried.
Og laugh at recent Citizen story that growing number of North Americans have only cellphones, not land lines, to be as isolated from telephone solicitors as if they lived in a cave. There are now 183 million “mobile subscribers” in the United States and 17 million in Canada (all, I note, with driver’s licences), but a proposal last year for “a free, ‘opt-in’ cellphone White Pages in the U.S. was shelved” due to fear of solicitation. And most people don’t list their cellphones in the current mastodons-R-us white pages in Canada. Don’t they want their drapes cleaned and a new long-distance plan?
Alas they do not. The story went on that 30 per cent of residential land lines in the U.S. now have unlisted numbers, costing their owners $1 billion a year in protection money, and in Canada the situation is thought to be similar. Then it quoted the managing partner of “a research firm specializing in phone books” (Og not know this job exist) that one suboptimal result of people eccentrically seeking more control over total strangers shouting in their ears at inconvenient moments about things they don’t want is having to program hundreds of friends’ numbers into our cell phones. Continue reading
JERUSALEM – The problems of the Middle East are clearly horrendous. But by coming here, I have learned something important. And bad. The events of the last 12 years have convinced a significant portion of Israeli public opinion that “there is no one for us to talk to on the other side.” How would you like me to persuade them otherwise?
I am here as a guest of the Canada-Israel Committee, in case that affects your judgment about my judgment. We have seen a number of officials and commentators, including some Palestinians, and others whose profession is not public policy. Some were not “hawks” or right-wingers on other issues, let alone ultra-Orthodox, and seemed bitterly disappointed to have been driven to this conclusion. But driven they were.
The background is the upcoming unilateral “disengagement” from the Gaza Strip, the forced removal of all the roughly 8,000 settlers there and the destruction of their farms. It is painful for Israelis for several reasons. Economically, these settlers are very productive farmers. Theologically, withdrawing them seems finally to give an explicit “No” to the question of a Greater Israel, and could lead to violent resistance, to Jews killing Jews. But there is also bitter non-biblical argument that withdrawing now, in this way, is strategically unwise because it rewards the violence of the “Second Intifada.” Continue reading