Secretary of State Antony Blinken is celebrating the fact that Hamas said it welcomed a UN Security Council resolution Monday endorsing the Biden plan (falsely described as the Israeli plan) for a ceasefire-hostage deal in Gaza.
Hamas accepted nothing. It simply pocketed the concessions in the proposal, which by the Biden administration's own admission was "virtually identical" to Hamas's own proposals, and demanded the thing it still really wants: victory.
The resolution calls for Israel to leave Gaza; for Gaza to return to the territorial status quo ante; for outside money to rebuild Gaza; etc. Notably, it does not call for Hamas to be ousted or disarmed. That's the new starting point for a deal.
What Hamas wants is for the deal also to include an explicit Israeli commitment not to return to war to destroy the terrorist organization. There's no way Israel will agree to that. That's why, for months, I've been saying a deal is impossible.
Meanwhile, Blinken is giving away the store. The correct U.S. posture should be: give up the hostages, and maybe we'll let the leaders of Hamas live, in exile. Not this garbage about how nice everyone is going to be, and pretty please.
This week’s portion launches the great story of Abraham, who is told to leave everything of his life behind — except his immediate family — and to leave for “the Land that I shall show you.”
There’s something interesting in the fact that Abraham is told to leave his father’s house, as if breaking away from his father’s life — but his father, in fact, began the journey, moving from Ur to Haran (in last week’s portion). His father set a positive example — why should Abraham leave him?
Some obvious answers suggest themselves — adulthood, needing to make one’s own choices, his father not going far enough, etc.
But I think there is another answer. Abraham (known for the moment as Abram) needs to establish his own household. This is not just about making one’s own choice, but really about choosing one’s own starting point. It’s starting over.
Sometimes we start over in fundamental ways even if much that surrounds us remains the same. Sometimes the journey we have to ...
The story of Noah is familiar; the details, less so.
Noah is often seen as an ambivalent figure. He was righteous -- but only for his generation. What was his deficiency?
One answer suggests itself: knowing that the world was about to be flooded, he built an Ark for the animals and for his own family -- but did not try to save anyone else or to convince them to repent and change their ways (the prophet Jonah, later, would share that reluctance).
Abraham, later, would set himself apart by arguing with God -- with the Lord Himself! -- against the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah, saying that they should be saved if there were enough righteous people to be found (there were not).
Still, Noah was good enough -- and sometimes, that really is sufficient to save the world. We don't need heroes every time -- just ordinary decency.
Hi all -- as I noted last month, I'm going to be closing down my Locals page, at least for tips and subscriptions -- I may keep the page up and the posts as well, but I'm no longer going to be accepting any kind of payment.
Look for cancelation in the very near future. Thank you for your support!
