Google+ Followers

Friday, 22 June 2012

Alice Walker Joins the Cultural Boycott of Israel


Another victory in the cultural boycott as Alice Walker, who took part in the boycott of Apartheid South Africa, declares Israel to be even worse.  Psychologically, the Cultural Boycott is of crucial importance in undermining the morale of the settler-colonial state of Israel, just as it did in South Africa.   Because, although we trumpet the economic victories, which are extremely important, Boycott is above all a political weapon.

Tony Greenstein



How Do You Say 'Purple' in Hebrew?

Alice Walker in 2006
Alice Walker's views have undergone a sea change since the publication of a Hebrew edition of The Color Puple in the 80s. Photograph: Tara Todras-Whitehll/AP

June 20, 2012
By Blair Thornburgh

You can’t say Alice Walker doesn’t put her money where her mouth is. The news that the Pulitzer-prize winning American novelist has refused to authorize a Hebrew-language translation of her landmark novel “The Color Purple” comes as little surprise. She has been involved for decades in pro-Palestinian activism. Initially drawn to the cause after the Six Day War in 1967, Walker has since been a vocal and personal advocate for Palestine, calling Israel “the greatest terrorist in that part of the world” in interviews, and even volunteering to join the 2011 flotilla named “The Audacity of Hope” that set sail to protest the Israeli naval blockade of Gaza.

It’s not the first time that Walker has withheld her work from a particular market for political reasons, either: She would not allow a film version of “The Color Purple” to be shown in South Africa until after Nelson Mandela assumed the presidency. The parallel is not lost on her; in fact, it’s central to her argument. Walker invoked the South African situation explicitly in her letter to Yediot Books, which was to be the publisher of the translation. She denounced Israel as “far worse” than South Africa and in 2009 was one of many signers to a petition that referred to Israel as having an “apartheid regime.”

The obvious question is what kind of effect — if any — withholding a translation will have. Walker says she never meant to deprive any readers. Her letter expresses a hope that, like the eventual release of the movie in South Africa, “The Color Purple” may one day be enjoyed in Israel “by the brave Israeli activists (Jewish and Palestinian) for justice and peace.” She wants to share, not to censor. “But,” she writes “now is not the time.”

Publishing a book involves more than just literary creativity. It’s part of a business, one that’s competitive, globalized, and political, and the translation of a book like Walker’s can often bring all these elements into play in dramatic ways.

When best-selling Arabic novelist Alaa al-Aswany raised objections in 2010 against the Hebrew translation of his book “The Yacoubian Building” by the Israel/Palestine Centre for Research and Information, he decried the act as “piracy and theft” in tandem with a vehement reassertion of his position on normalization with Israel: “I reject it completely.” Beyond al-Aswany’s political views, it was the unauthorized distribution of the work, the deprivation of his ability to profit from its dissemination that angered him. Conversely, even authorized commercial translations can run into sensitive territory, as with the 1992 Hebrew edition of “Mein Kampf.” The Israeli academic publisher Akadamon consciously downplayed its release to avoid sensationalism. It was marketed only to students, translated only in excerpts, and published in a nondescript black-and-white cover.

Obviously, it’s too sweeping to attribute Walker’s ban on production of a Hebrew edition to a desire to keep money out of the hands of the Israeli book industry, and it would have too miniscule an economic effect to calculate besides. And she’s certainly within her rights to dictate the terms of distribution for her creation. But restricted access to books just doesn’t sit well with a call for nonviolent social change.

Walker must be aware that the book’s themes of social struggle and oppression transcend its setting in the American South and can become relevant for any reader who has been a victim of political injustice. Prohibiting a Hebrew translation will keep “The Color Purple” not just out of the policymakers’ hands, but also those of the ordinary, regular people, of the “brave activists,” and of their families and friends. A powerfully symbolic gesture it may be, but one that’s ultimately self-defeating. Poetic, perhaps, but not practical.

Read more and here:

23 comments:

Alan said...

Civil disobedience is a two way street. We revived the Hebrew language against your will; we will translate any book we want into Hebrew anytime we want. Alice Walker will be sent to where all the Rhodesian White farmers had to go.

Tony Greenstein said...

You don't seem to get it. You're now wanted. It's touching that you wish to steal and break copyright over the book of an anti-Zionist. But then we have all the talen too, so it's no surprise you are jealous.

Alice Walker is the antithesis of White farmers. They are your speciality Alan - being a die hard racist. Alice Walker was an opponent not a supporter of Apartheid (South African style)

Anonymous said...

It's sad that Alice Walker and so many others have been suckered into equating Israel with apartheid South Africa because there's absolutely no justification for this claim, and Israel-haters like Mr Greenstein and his fellow-travellers know it. They adopt the strategy that if you tell the same lies often enough, people will come to accept them as the truth - a tactic employed by Goebbels to great effect. But then, it's no surprise that Mr Greenstein and his ilk should draw inspiration from the German National Socialist Party of the 1930s, better know as the Nazis. (Just remember, the Nazis were socialists. How do I know this? The answer lies in the name. What's more, Mr Greenstein is obviously a racist. Anyone who seeks to destroy and/or kill any particular group of people because of their race, colour, creed, nationality, sexual persuasion, hair colour or whatever can only be regarded as such.)

But back to the subject in hand. In apartheid South Africa, there were no black Judges and Members of Parliament; no black servicemen held high rank in the South African military; black people were not allowed to study in white-only schools, colleges and universities; black people were not allowed to eat in white-only restaurants nor stay in white-only hotels etc etc. The list of areas where black people were discriminated against purely because of their colour is endless.

Now compare this with Israel where non-Jews - Christians, Muslims, Hindus etc - do hold high office in the judiciary, in parliament, in the civil service and machinery of government, in the medical profession and in the armed forces. There has even been a Muslim President of Israel. Jews and non-Jews eat in the same restaurants, stay in the same hotels, travel on the same buses and in the same train carriages, study at the same schools, colleges and universities etc etc. Muslims account for roughly 20% of the population of Israel; Muslims account for roughly 20% of the student population. So where's the apartheid? Will someone please explain to me now they can equate the South Africa experience with life in Israel?

That's not to say that Israel is perfect. But then, neither is the UK. Nor France. Nor Jordan. Nor Italy. Nor Australia. Nor Germany. Nor the USA. Nor Gaza. Nor China. Nor Russia. Nor, indeed, any country or governed territory worldwide. Iniquities and unfairness exist in every society and every effort should be made to get rid of these.

For Mr Greenstein to seek to demonize Israel with such lies whilst ignoring far greater iniquities in other countries - eg Lebanon and Jordan where refugees are denied the right to education, medical care and earning a living etc - demonstrates that he is not interested in human rights. All he wants is the demise of Israel and he will resort to any lies and obfuscations in pursuit of this. And, sadly, too many innocent and naive people are taken in by this and support him in his objective. It's time for people to ask for justification of these statements rather than blindly accepting anti-Israel propaganda.

Anonymous said...

I doubt whether Mr Greenstein will have the integrity and courage to publish my previous comment

Tony Greenstein said...

I don't think I need lectures on integrity and honesty from a Zionist who doesn't even have the courage to give his real name!

Israel is not France or the UK. It is a Jewish state. The UK is a Christian state but it doesn't affect one's rights or obligations. One isn't schooled in Jewish or non-Jewish schools, other than by choice. One doesn't have Jewish villages 'unrecognised' or 'present-absentees' a truly Orwellian concept. Or the Professor Demographics who warn, like Arnon Sofer of the 'threat' of a non-Jewish majority. In Britain people don't care two hoots.

Ah yes the Nazis were socialists. How does this twit know? Because it's in their name. Nothing to do with whether 'socialists' destroy union, incarcerate and murder trade unions. Their name says it all and I guess Anonymouse says everythign about the person who dares not reveal her/his identity.

Yes and most dictatorships have 'parties' with the word democracy in them and South Africa called itself a 'Christian' State. So you accept all that too? The far-right pro-Zionist party of Michal Kaminiski, you know the one who won't apologise for a few hundred jews in 1941 who were burnt alive by fellow Poles, is leader of the Law & Justice Party. Presumably it believes in Justice then?

I don't seek to destroy anyone, let alone a specific group. But I want to prise your grubby little fingers off the throats of the Palestinians, whatever it takes. That is the message. Your days of strangling another people are coming to an end. And however much you cry people know apartheid when they see it.

Incidentally I've only described that within Israel. Within the occupied territories there is no doubting that separate roads, separate legal system, a separation wall mean Separation i.e. Apartheid.

I'm not aware of a Muslim President of israel. Who? Yes Israel doesn't have quite the same petty apartheid. Their Jewish only roads in the West Bank had no signs 'Arabs forbidden' but if an Arab tried to use the road with his Arabic number plates then....

Likewise there are no villages or towns with 'No Arabs or dogs' but Arabs can't live there and in mixed cities like Safed the Chief Rabbi Shmuel Eliyahu, forbids renting to Arabs (dozens of other rabbis support him when he's criticised).

So I guess that our anonymous poster would have joined the nazi party when it was around - after all it was socialist and they definitely favoured Zionists above other Jews.

Jan Kriwol said...

"I'm not aware of a Muslim President of israel. Who?" Yes Israel doesn't have quite the same petty apartheid. Their Jewish only roads in the "West Bank, had no signs 'Arabs forbidden' but if an Arab tried to use the road with his Arabic number plates then....

Likewise there are no villages or towns with 'No Arabs or dogs' but Arabs can't live there and in mixed cities like Safed the Chief Rabbi Shmuel Eliyahu, forbids renting to Arabs (dozens of other rabbis support him when he's criticised).

I haven't seen yet a Muslim President in France or in the UK or france..... or a Native American as a president in the US........or a Jewish President in the US......Did you Mr. Greenstein, what an Argument.....

You arguments are SO WEAK, no wander you are not relevent.
There is NO City in ISRAEL (not the west bank), that you want find Arab citizens, for you few Loony Idiot Rabbis a Israel represent all the country.
Mixing the West Bank when is fits your poor arguments as Israel, when it is never been and will never be Israel is Childish, as its is an Army Zone and Not Israel.

Israel is not perfect as your UK is not, you lost your case claiming it is apartheid, as Anon mentioned, pushing the same poor arguments again and again is just pathetic.

You are a joke !

Tony Greenstein said...

If the idiot Jan Kriwol bothered to read then he would know it wasn't me who raised the question of a Muslim President of israel but a Zionist fool.

Why is it a weak argument to point out that a state official, because that is what rabbis in Israel are, paid for by the state, has advocated that people don't rent to Arabs in his city, that hundreds of other rabbis have supported him and that a holocaust denier who defied him has been attacked and received death threats. Weak?

I suspect that you Jan and your family were also Nazi collaborators in the Netherlands since you dont' seem to understand a simple argument.

Israel has no or not much petty apartheid but the distinctions remain. That to me just suggests that Zionist racists are cleverer than their thicker Afrikaaner counterparts.

I find it difficult to follow your last paragraphs but the West Bank appears in all israeli maps as part of Israel. It has already been annexed in all but name or didn't you notice?

Alan said...

>>Israel has no or not much petty >>apartheid but the distinctions >>remain.


Same as in UK, where the Monarch MUST BY LAW be a member of the Anglican Church.




>> That to me just suggests that Zionist racists

Youare correct that there is a structural injustice in ISrael, but it is not to be called (well by rational people) "racism" because it is not based on "race" differences but rather rerligious ones. Your use of the term "racism" indicates that you don't ==think== or ==ponder==; you're brain is on foaming-at-the-mouth autopilot. Your mental rabies is a gorgeous thing becuase whenever you think a wrong fact(as here, it means I can find a way to arbitrage against you.

The Palestinians are going to go where the Apache Indians, or the Welsh Sovereigns, or the Al Andalus sovereigns went..... into a historical footnote. Nothing tht is said or done in Anglo-Occupied Celtic Home Islands.... will change that. There are now so many Hebrews in all portions of River-to-Sea, that the Arabic-speakers will NOT be able to cobble together their desired Hebrew-free country. They will have to do it in Amman. Maybe the Brits can help them, same like the Brits cobbled together a Hashemite Royal Family there in (was it) 1953. Sorry!!

Jan Kriwol said...

Greenstien.
Calling names is just the type I thought you fit into.
I want go down to your low level.
Its just a pity that persons like you are combined with the Palestinian cause.
If they are smart, they should ignore you as I will from now on.

Tony Greenstein said...

The Arabs of Palestine don't wish to have a Hebrew free area. What they want is that those who speak Hebrew aren't entitled to dispossess them, shoot them, confiscate their land, remove their entitlement to citizenship and residence etc. It's about rights not skin pigmentation.

I'm afraid it's Alan's brain which is on autopilot or autocue. You don't have to be a member of a 'race' to be the victim of racism. After all the Jews weren't a race, therefore by that silly definition the nazis weren't racist.

Indeed because there are no things are 'races' - being political constructs - there is no thing as racism according to your 'logic'.

You are wrong about the Palestinians going the same way as the Amerindians. It's Zionism's misfortune that it is no longer possible to exterminate the indigenous people and having used their own holocaust as the justification for their activities they can hardly then be seen to exterminate others.

The political conditions have changed, hence why Israel is locked into perpetual conflict.

Alan said...

>>It's no longer possible to exterminate

But it is possible to assimilate. The chinese are doing it right now in Tibet and no one can stop it. Same will happen in the Hebrew Republic. Arabic will end up as a culture-museum diorama in this country, same like Welsh or Saami or Yiddish. There is no need to exterminate the Palestinians; the AmerInds & Welsh were not. All that is needed is for the succeeding generations to believe that a victory is not possible. Once Judaism is dis-established in the Hebrew country, that tendency will accelerate. Already there are more Palestinians who hold an IDF veterans-benefit card than who want to join any Jihadist squad. The IDF already prints Hebrew New Testaments to swear in its numerous (Sabra, native-Hebrew-speaking) Christian conscripts. Next we will be seeing Circassian-Muslim military chaplains. We can bring in thousands more of those any time we choose. No one can stop us from doing it. Not Londonistan, not Amman, not Cairo, not anyone. They'll be happy to speak Hebrew, just like people here have been doing for 3500 years now. Hebrew ==is== an indigenous language here.


Could it ever be reverse.... the Arabic-speakers taking control? Not ==again== that is, because the Turks had sovereignty here, not the Arabs, of course. It might happen at the same time Celtic-speaking bureacrats re-gain control of Londonistan.

sorry dude.... you bet on the wrong horse. Being in Londonistan, you just cannot see that yet.

Alan said...

>> why Israel is locked into perpetual conflict

The anglo-Occupying forces in Occupied Celtia haven't dis-established their armed forces. It merely means that the threat level is at a manageable level.

Same for us here. We ==do== have the Palestinians running around inside a locked bottle like drugged cockroaches. We lose abaout one soldier a month to hostilities, which is less soldiers than we lose to traffic accidents.

Who's gonna fight us? the russians? they are signing RIGHT NOW on the dotted line to get natural gas from us. The Turks? They cannot even take action against a Syria which shot down the F-4. The chinese? they admire us, they send hundreds upon hundreds of young people to study in our universities. The Irish? They have trouble paying their EXISTING stock of national debts - they're next in line after Spain for a EU-Central-Bank bailout.

The Germans? they're giving us discounts on nuclear-capable submarines..... having us as a customer gives prestige to the product!!!

The UK'ians? Which ones would that be, the Scots who are agitating to unilaterally disarm?

Europe is ALREADY FINISHED. Britain is going to become Karachi within your grandchildren's lifetime. Their grandchildren will be trying to get residency privileges in Tel Aviv.

christgreen said...

Their grandchildren will be trying to get residency privileges in Tel Aviv......

They can't as they are NOT JEWS......

Greenstein arranged that he is the last Jew in this rot Greenstein tree.........

Tony Greenstein said...

Precisely, now you understand why Israel and Zionism are racist!

Anonymous said...

> they can't as they are NOT JEWS




apparently you have never walked the streets of Tel Aviv in the past 20 years.

A little knowledge is a dangerous thing. Jews can claim citizenship in Israel; which privilege I am opposed to because it would allow clowns like our blog-host entry.

Others can enter, gain residency, and even citizenship, by following the steps and the rules. It happens all the time. There's a few per month.

Israel has just as much right to define its ethnos as does Ireland (got to have the correct grandparent) or Greece (parent) or Saudi (religion).

Tony Greenstein said...

I never walked the streets of Pretoria either to understand the basics of Apartheid.

The whole point of a Jewish state is that Jews are privileged, including being able to claim, as of right, citizenship over and above that of those who have lived there.

Yes exactly there's a few per month and u can bet they aint' even Palestinians who are being ethnically cleansed via family non-reunification programmes.

There is no comparison with states that have patriality clauses and define being Irish or Greek accordingly and those who define their citizenship and in practice Israeli (Jewish) nationality - though there is no Israeli nationality - via an invented history.

Saudi Arabia is an American invention, a barbarous state set up to protect US oil supplies. But being Muslim doesn't mean one has privileges. Quite the opposite.

Anonymous said...

Alan has some valid points about assimilation. Indeed the Arabs have been forcing a social policy of assimilation on millions of black,white and brown people for at least 2000 years.Take a look at the Saudis for a good example. However, that system like all systems underpinned by Islamic Law are all destined for violent upheaval,collapse and the dustbin of History. Hebrew is arguably more 'indigenous' along with Aramaic to Israel and Jordan than say Arabic. Since Israel does not have a policy of forced assimilation it is actually more attractive as a result.This is also why many Arab States simply cant deliver in a global economy.
Cultural-relativists like Greenstein need racism even though it is a 'construction'-it is a useful construction that serves to demonise Israel. For Greenstein the world really falls into 2 camps-those of 'superior intelligence'(he being in that camp) and those of lesser intelligence(which is anyone who does not agree with him). For him the Palestinians are a simply useful 'blackboard' to chalk his thesis which is probably only really intelligible to himself!

Tony Greenstein said...

What rubbish anonymous talks, which is probably why he is anonymous.

Arabs are not and never have been one continuous homogenous mass. Just as it's anti-Semitic to talk of 'the Jews' that way so it is equally racist to talk of 'the Arabs.'

Besides which the Arab peoples consist of all sorts of minorities and are themselves made up of different groups through the ages.

Anon makes the old mistake of rewriting history from the present day perspective.

If the idiot bothered to think outside the box he'd know that 'the Saudis' are a recent invention circa 1920s as a state and the House of Saud was just an Arabian tribal dynasty.

Hebew is apparently more indigenous. No doubt English is in the USA! Ancient Hebrew, was one of the many languages of the region. Present day Hebrew is a European invention.

No of course Israel (in fact Zionism) doesn't have a policy of forced assmiliation. That's because they don't like Jews and non-Jews to intermarry. However given the 'demographic threat' of the Arabs Israel has in fact assimilated thousands on non-Jewish Russians because privileges depend on what one's nationality is (religion = nationality in Israel).

As for explaining why Arab States simply cant deliver in a global economy I suggest that anon takes a rest and lies down.

I'm not a cultural relativist. I recognise a racist even if he does hide his name. Israel doesn't need demonising. It does very well by itself thank you.

No the world doesn't fall into 2 camps - the intelligent and stupid - even though Anon does his best to prove that true. Stupidity is also a social construct to a large extent though I accept that in Anon's case it was probably a deformation at birth.

Alan said...

> Hebew is apparently more indigenous. No doubt English is in the USA! Ancient Hebrew, was one of the many languages of the region. Present day Hebrew is a European invention


Hebrew is 100% indigenous to Judea; Tony can't point to any other place it might have originated.

Modern Hebrew is not a "European invention". When Ben-Yehudah arrived on the boat in Jaffa..... the porters bartered with him in Hebrew. For many hundreds of years before that, Jews in Jerusalem (they've been a majority since the mid-1800's there) with many different "mother tongues" were speaking to each other in the so-called "Market Hebrew".

> he'd know that 'the Saudis' are a recent invention circa 1920s as a state and the House of Saud was just an Arabian tribal dynasty

So true, but..... if Tony knew any actual Saudis (I drink and go go whoring with them frequently in Barhrain and in Manila) he'd know that their sense of national identity is certainly more solid than anything found in the fictitious "United Kingdom", which has already seriously devolved.


> I never walked the streets of Pretoria either to understand the basics of Apartheid


Then you really didn't know it. you knew the leftist's social construct of it.



> here is no comparison with states that have patriality clauses and define being Irish or Greek accordingly

I just made the comparison. You held your breath, stamped your feet, and denied it. You didn't negate it with EVIDENCE. You can't..... there isn't any.

We define our nationality the same way Palestinians do theirs.... by descent. The most common way in the world, actually.


> u can bet they aint' even Palestinians who are being ethnically cleansed via family non-reunification programmes.


And you don't have the balls to stop us




>> though there is no Israeli nationality

Wait; the State of Israel is 4 years older than the Kingdom of Jordan; do you claim that their passports are also invalid? Or is that you are claiming thatit is really East Palestine that got seized by in-migrant Saudi Beduins?




Well, don't lose the rest of your mind worrying about that. Amman is GOING TO GET cleansed of the Hashemi family in that Palace; the Palestinians can make their national home there.

Anonymous said...

Sitting in his Brighton hovel Greenstein would not know the history of the Arabs who have formed a political,economic,cultural and social entity for at least 2000 years. Greenstein has so overdosed on his own vomit concerning 'racism' that he would even tell Arabs that they are racist to call themselves Arabs.The 'indigenous' notion concerning Arabic in the region is simply fallacious -it is well known that the Arabs are invaders who have conquered whole swathes of land which does not belong to them and has been challenged by Turkic,European,South and North Asians,and a multitude of indigenous African nations. Hebrew in whatever form,old or new certainly has a more legitimate claim as an indigenous language to the area of Israel and Jordan. If Greenstein really believed that Israel demonized itself well enough he would not spend 100% of his time doing just that.

Tony Greenstein said...

Hebrew, which today is somewhat different from its ancient version, was in itself an accummulation of a no. of Canaanite dialects and offspring. I very much doubt if there was one pure ancient Hebrew. As of today, Arabic is as indigenous as Hebrew, whatever version, just as Yiddish was indigenous to much of European Jewry.

Yes when Ben Yehuda arrived in the late 19th Century Hebrew had undergone a revival. Jews (not Zionists - they opposed it to a man and woman) did form a majority in Jerusalem and also got on well with their co-brethren until the Zionists came. Yes the Jews there were also integrally involved in what trade there was, hence the porters you speak about. In the countryside that would have been another matter.

Yes you may indeed go 'whoring' with Saudis but that is hardly a guide to a nationality and if you tried just to see beyond your narrow orbit you might see that the corrupt whorers you find such congenial company are not representative of the majority of Saudis.

It's an invented nation, but then so are Israeli Jews, so you have a lot in common no doubt, including theft of the region's resources.

I see your an apologist for South African Apartheid too. No doubt that's what makes Zionism so attractive to you. I also didn't experience Auschwitz but nor do I deny it. No doubt you think that was a leftist construction too.

Yes Alan you made a crass comparison. I didn't blink an eye as I had more important things to do as I do now. Nations trace their imagined origins in all sorts of ways but they don't privilege those they so define against those already living there.

There's no need to provide evidence since it was just a flimsy comparison based on nothing.

No nationality isn't defined by descent. It is concrete. In any case the 'descent' of Jews to Israel is another of those thousand year myths that the Nazis loved so much. No doubt Valhalla will feature in your next argument. Who cares is Jews have a biblical myth that locates them somewhere 2,500 years or so ago. People who actually lived their in recent times were and are being expelled because of these myths. That is what concerns me, nothing else.

No the passports of Jordan are valid. So are israeli ones. Their only person is to guarantee one access to other countries. They prove nothing but if Israel lies on its own passports and pretends there is an Israeli nationality when there is no such thing (try reading the Tamarin or Shalit decisions of the Israeli Supreme Court if you don't understand) when there is only citizenship then fair enough.

In what is now Jordan people lived where they had for hundreds of years. Zionism had little claim on the place except for a section of the Revisionist Zionists. The Saudi Bedouins were plucked from desert and given a 'kingdom' as was Faisal of Transjordan. Why do you find this difficult to understand. Being a Zionist doesn't mean one has to be thick, though it helps if, as in your case, you are.

As for anonymous. 'The Arabs are invaders who have conquered whole swathes of land which does not belong to them'. Quite. The Afrikaaners also claimed that the Africans there had been attracted by - colonialism and wasn't Australia 'terra nullis'? An empty land. There are plenty of stupid racists like anon and they form good examples of what we have to contend with.

Other than that anon had even less to say than Alan. No surprise there.

Anonymous said...

'Who cares if the jews have a biblical myth...'which aptly illustrates the point that who cares if the arabs have a Quranic myth that locates their revolting slave dealing prophet at the Al Aqusa mosque in Jerusalem or that they have some kind of 'indigenous' claim-
Greenstein will never be taken seriously in any debate and should conceed his life has been a monumental failure-what a waste!

Tony Greenstein said...

I think if the ignorant Anonymous takes a look at the Pentateuch (Torah) he might find that slavery was also allowed there. He who has no sin....

True riling you Anon is the least of my many achievements but you can't win over every fool. After all, you can lead a horse to the water....

In the debates I participate I'm taken very seriously but since you come to my blog....