Tikkunim revisited

I've noticed a number of people have come to my site looking for recommendations for a good tikkun, due to my previous post some months ago in search of one myself.

I have since looked at a ridiculous number of tikkunim in my search for the 'best' (quite subjectively, based on my criteria mentioned in the previous post). I ended up buying one, and will probably buy three more to round out my collection.

Thus, my official recommendations:

1) "Tikkun Kor'im Hameduyak" from the Ish Matzliach, published by "Machon HaRav Mazliach". This is the tikkun I use for most of my preparation.

Pluses:
- It's very large (a plus for when I'm tired and my eyes aren't focusing well)
- Very clear typesetting; the font is quite readable, words are well-spaced, and nikkud and te'amim are distinct and carefully placed.
- The text seems to be fairly good. It differs in some places from the Koren edition, but in those cases almost always agrees with Breuer.
- There is very little 'clutter'. A few abnormal notes or bits of nikkud are carefully footnoted (generally 1-3 per page), but other than that there are *no* extraneous marks... IMHO, a great plus over the Tikkun Simanim. The footnotes also give a few leyning tips - generally when a commentator specifies that it should be read with a conscious pause to emphasize the correct meaning (most of the time being in line with the te'amim).
- Abnormal syllables are marked (ie, mil'ra when one would have expected mil'eil or vice versa). The mark is inline with the right-hand text (as are k'ri/k'tiv differences), which seems confusing but one quickly adapts to.
- Shva nah/nach are labelled, as are kamatz katan/gadol and dagesh kal/dagesh chazak. The symbols are fairly intuitive and relatively subtle, so a quick reading can ignore the differences and focus on the words.
- Weekday aliyot are marked.
- There are short overviews of hilchot k'riat hatorah, hilchot sefer torah (ie when to tell if a word is pasul or not), and k'lalei hadikduk. The text is fairly clear, though could use a few more figures.

Minuses:
- It's a Sefaradi tikkun, so aliyah breaks can sometimes be a little bit skewed from an Ashkenazi tradition. Sometimes this is marked in a footnote; other times it is not. Haftarot have both Sefaradi and Ashkenazi versions, however, so all one needs to do is check the aliyah length to confirm it matches with one's tradition.
- The tikkun only has Megillat Esther and no other megillot.
- Haftarah sections only have one column; this can be an issue if one is learning to leyn from a scroll.
- It's awfully big, which can be a pain to lug around and keep on the bimah. (Yes, I also listed this as a plus. So sue me.)


2) "Tikkun Simanim", the most popular tikkun in use today. I only looked carefully at the Ashkenazi version, but the Sefaradi version seems to be comparable, with only minor differences. I don't own this yet (though I have bought it for another leyner), but expect I'll buy it relatively soon and keep it as a reference, perhaps as one run through to check everything.

Pluses:
- It's got every possible bell and whistle - every bit of nikkud is marked, weird te'amim/pronunciations are footnoted some ridiculously number of different ways, and they even have little marks for parallel structure to make learning easier.
- Importantly, it has the Minchat Shai along the side, which is one of the major authorities on differing manuscripts and the 'correct' masoretic version. Generally, the tikkun follows the Minchat Shai.
- It comes in three different sizes, which is nice as it allows one to prepare with a larger size, but to bring the smaller one along for shul or traveling.
- All five megillot are there (IIRC), and haftarot have two columns (again, IIRC, I don't have it in front of me; I'll edit it if this is incorrect)
- There's a very nice introduction to nikkud and te'amim with lots of examples and figures.
- Nice, but occasionally annoying: it differentiates between things like Pashta and Kadma (even though anyone who looks at the word should be able to tell) and between P'sik and Munach l'garmeh (useful, though again not too exciting).

Minuses:
- The page is too busy. There's footnotes, random other pronunciation guides, etc. all over the page.
- This was the killer for me: On the left hand side are 'shaded' phrases that show parallel structure, with footnotes to explanations on how best to learn the section. It may be useful for some people, but when I want to learn on the left-hand side, I want it to look exactly like in the scroll... and not with any helpful hints.
- Because of all of the information crammed into each page, the typeset is fairly small, which can be a pain in poor lighting or when one is tired.

In short: it's the most complete tikkun out there, and it's a great reference book, but not one I would use for the bulk of my preparation.

3) The Tikkun put out by the Koren chaps. I won't give pluses or minuses for this, but just discuss it. As most of my readers who have gotten this far in the post will know, the Koren edition of the Tanach was for a long time the authoritative version, and it is still a highly respected edition. They put out a fairly frill-free Tanach that has a few nice features - the tikkun shows places where one can break for extra aliyot (or where one shouldn't), and has a very large, clearly readable typeset. The version I saw was not in the classical column format of most tikkunim, but I believe there is one out there that looks more 'tikkun-like'. One other complaint: the version I saw only had Megillat Esther, and not other megillot.

In short, it's a good idea to practice against the Koren edition at least once in prepping for a parsha, so it's a useful tikkun to have, but nowhere near essential if one has other copies of the Koren. The aliyah break suggestions are a nice touch, though.

4) This last tikkun is one I have only seen once and am planning on buying as soon as I can get my grubby paws on another copy. It was a tikkun put out by the Choreiv (Horeb) publishers, using the Breuer edition of the Tanach, based directly off of the Keter Aram Tzova/Aleppo Codex (those parts that survived). This text has IMHO superceded the Koren text as the authoritative Masoretic text, and I also try to use the Breuer Tanach in resolving differences between texts. Most of the differences are fairly minor (stuff like shvas vs. t'nuot chatufot), but I wouldn't be a leyner if I wasn't anal retentive.

It was an odd edition - very thick but kind of short. Facing pages corresponded to the 'marked' and 'unmarked' columns of a typical tikkun. IIRC, it only had Megillat Esther, and had next to no other marking/help that characterize the Ish Matzliach and Simanim tikkunim. The column format is nice in that if the scroll one is reading from has an unusual format (some do), the Breuer will prepare one very well for switching column formats without a hitch.

When I find this tikkun, I plan on using it as my 'bimah' tikkun. The typeset is large, there are *no* confusing extraneous marks, and the text is the best out there. I will probably prep with the Ish Matzliach, use the Simanim to look up specific words and phrases, and run through once with the Breuer to confirm all of my words are correct. The Koren will be pulled out for leyning at big simchahs where you've got half a dozen extra aliyot to squeeze in, or to adjudicate disputes between Tikkunim (in addition to the Breuer).

So, there you have it: my recommendations as a nearly professional leyner. I'd recommend that beginners get the Simanim tikkun just because it really holds your hand for everything... though you should make sure to do at least some prep with another tikkun! More advanced leyners should use the Ish Matzliach in conjuction with Breuer's (if you can find it).

I'm welcome any thoughts that visitors have on other tikkunim they use. I looked at another half-dozen or so, but these were the ones I felt were the best out there.

Enjoy, and happy leyning!

Oh, by the way. People who are looking to find copies of Rav Breuer's "Ta'amei Hamikra Bekaf-aleph Sefarim Uv'sifrei Eme"t" are going to have some trouble. My girlfriend's family scoured bookstores in Israel for days before they found one old copy buried somewhere. My advice would be to find a leyner who has it and borrow the book - either that, or get a kick-ass girlfriend. I'll try to write a review after I complete it to let you know if there's any information there that you can't find elsewhere. I certainly consider Breuer the authority regarding this kind of thing. Good luck!

Alternatively, the Simanim people put out a book called 'Tuv Ta'am' which seems to have a lot of the basic information. I plan on buying it sometime, but haven't gotten around to it yet. It's probably a good replacement for Breuer's book, though not straight from the horse's mouth.

Did you know...

...that there is a private company in the United States that is involved in the manufacture and distribution of WMDs? Yes, they even sell kits with the necessary ingredients and instructions on how to assemble one.

I bought one.

Yes, Duncan Hines makes some serious Weapons of Mass Deliciousness.


Disclaimer: This post was not in any way influenced by a sucrose overdose as an aftereffect of baking a Butter Recipe Golden cake smothered in Chocolate Buttercream frosting. Not at all.

I vant to suck your...

I'm sure all of my readers already know about this issue, but I'll pitch in with my own plea.

I receive frequent phone calls from my local Red Cross (Chesapeake Region) about their critically low inventories of blood and platelets. Ironically, during the supposed 'season of giving', this problem has become even more acute; I imagine because many donors may be on vacation or otherwise occupied. In my region, some blood types have less than a day of supply left, and are falling behind seriously in the donation department. A week or two ago, I received a call that they had two units of platelets left for the entire region - hardly enough for day-to-day medicine, let alone coping with emergencies.

So, I urge you - wherever you are - go donate some blood. I personally donate platelets instead (my blood type is AB+, so whole blood is of extremely limited use, but apheresis donations are exactly what they're looking for), but the point is that you should donate something. It's not hard to do - donating blood takes much less than an hour, and platelets only about two hours - and anyone who's healthy probably won't feel any ill effects besides a touch of orthostatic intolerance. You can donate blood every 8 weeks, and platelets every two weeks. It takes little effort, and it's well worth it. Heck, many Red Cross regions now have incentive programs set up for frequent donors! You might even make a profit. (One downside is that you get a ridiculous number of T-shirts and postcards...)

The blood won't go to waste: it will be used to save people's lives, every day (generally used in surgery or trauma cases). How much easier could it be to make such an important impact? Think of it as storing up some good karma - after all, if you (or a family member) needs a transfusion someday, wouldn't you prefer there to be a ready supply?

Please. Make me happy. I'll be your best friend.

Confidence building my ass

Now that my exams are over and I can relax and do work for the next month or so, you will hopefully be seeing more of my posts. I promise they won't all be on the topic I'm about to discuss, either. I swear. But you're going to have to live with this post because it needs to be said.

I'm going to have to be honest with you. Sixteen months ago, I supported the Israeli disengagement from the Gaza Strip. It was not wholehearted support; for one, I was skeptical of the government's ability and readiness to adequately compensate and relocate more than 0.1% of their population (that would be like the US compensating and relocating 300k people; possible, but damn difficult). I was also concerned about the growing vilification of anti-disengagement protesters; there were tens of thousands (if not more) of them, and they were almost uniformly peaceful in their forms of protest... yet were systematically demonized by the media and government. I've previously written about the aftereffects of this, and it was troubling me even before the disengagement began. Nonetheless, it seemed a fairly minor concern (and a reversible one) compared to the possible benefits.

Why did I support the disengagement? After all, large swaths of the communities in which I associate were strenuously opposed to the move. I had several reasons:

1) I felt that a civilian withdrawal from Gaza was inevitable for any sort of final solution. The West Bank is an entirely different situation, as most of the settlement placements allow for the drawing of a logical border between Israel and a Palestinian state (more on this later); Gaza, though, had the bulk of the Palestinian population living between the major settlement bloc (Gush Katif) and Green Line Israel. Furthermore, the population numbers were staggeringly in the Palestinian favor (8k to somewhere on the order of 1-1.2 million), and the land no longer has as much strategic significance as the West Bank... especially with a mostly demilitarized Sinai.

2) With an such an obvious inevitability, I felt it was a worthwhile gamble. A complete Israeli withdrawal from the Gaza Strip would give Israel - and the world - a chance to see what the Palestinians would do with a land under their de facto control (though not yet a state de jure). If Abbas' 'moderate' talk could be turned into a viable reality, free of Israeli military pressures and the presence of settlements, it would be vastly easier to establish some sort of compromise regarding the stickier issue of the West Bank.

3) Furthermore, any Palestinian attacks emanating from the Gaza Strip would then be subject to an immediate and overwhelming military response. Palestinians would have no excuse of an 'occupation' of the Gaza Strip for continued attacks on Israel (particularly through the use of suicide bombers at border crossings or through Qassam attacks on Israeli towns). Thus, world opinion would be firmly on Israel's side, which was continuing to be attacked despite an extremely costly and painful evacuation of 8,000 settlers. A military incursion would probably be a difficult sell, but various strikes (air/naval/artillery/etc.) would certainly be available to respond to attacks.

So, how well did my plans work out?

Heh. You are undoubtedly aware (unless you have your head in the sand) that the Gaza Strip hasn't exactly been an island of calm. Let's see what happened:

- A hasty evacuation. Palestinians rush to the evacuated settlements to loot, destroy the greenhouses they were supposed to use to become economically self-sufficient, and burn synagogues.

- Hamas wins the Palestinian elections. Not exactly an endorsement of peace. Many critics of the disengagement point to the Hamas electoral victory as a sign that the Palestinians viewed the Israeli withdrawal as a military defeat at the hands of Hamas; hence their popular support. I'm skeptical; it seems more likely that Fatah can't get votes without party discipline or the personality cult surrounding Yasser Arafat.

- Qassam fire continues unabated, and actually increases significantly in range and accuracy (as well as numbers). Since disenagement, something like half a dozen Israelis have been killed by Qassams, and dozens more have been wounded. Economic and property damage (particularly to Sderot) is in the millions, not to mention psychological trauma from nearly daily mortar fire. Attempts to curb Qassam fire by half-hearted military tactics (mostly artillery hitting empty fields and airstrikes, with a handful of commando operations) have only limited success.

- Arms smuggling under the Egyptian border occurs at a breakneck pace; tons of weaponry, some of it advanced antitank missiles (which gave Israel so much trouble in Lebanon) and reportedly longer range rockets (though this may have been a boast by the al-Aqsa Martyr's Brigade). Egyptian authorities are reluctant to commit much force to ending smuggling, and world reaction to Israeli closures of the border makes that a politically unwise move for more than a week or two. Also, smuggling of funds by Hamas occurs openly through the EU-controlled Rafah crossing. Hamas begins training its forces in earnest for an all-out battle with Israel for control of the Gaza Strip, fortifying its positions and improving its weaponry and tactics.

- Hamas operatives attack Israel by tunneling under the Gaza border, kill a number of soldiers, and take Gilad Shalit hostage. This precipitates semi-serious Israeli ground action in Gaza, which is scaled down due to the Lebanon war, international pressure, and disagreements between the political and military echelons (Olmert and Peretz generally working on dead-end negotiations and urging 'calm' despite previous claims to the contrary, while IDF commanders urge an incursion in force to permanently hold positions being used for much of the rocket launching, with West Bank-style nightly arrest raids to make the Strip 'behave' in much the way that the West Bank does). Negotiations for Shalit's release, while rumored for months to be 'nearly complete', seem to drag on indefinitely. Indirect IDF action to curb Qassam fire (e.g. artillery) ends up accidentally killing a number of Palestinian civilians.

- Fatah-Hamas tensions, always a significant issue, come to a head. General disturbances break out in Gaza, resulting in a number of deaths and assassinations (including several children who are gunned down during an assassination attempt). Repeated 'truces' arbitrated between Abbas and Haniyeh fail to stop the fighting. As part of one of these truces, the PA pledges to stop rocket fire (supposedly deploying thousands of police to do so), yet the rockets continue to fall - today, hitting next to a nursery in Sderot, though fortunately not killing any children.

- Throughout it all, the Palestinian economy falls apart even more in the factional violence (particularly with the general Western embargo of aid to Hamas, given the organization's continued endorsement of terrorism).


So, where does this leave us? The Gaza Strip is a mess. And, to be honest, I don't have much patience for those who want me to feel sympathy. Israel left, in a difficult process, and this is what the Palestinians have made of their chance. The violence has only increased (despite the complete absence of Israeli troops and civilians for close to a year, and the relative absence of troops thereafter) and the Palestinians are doing a wonderful job of torpedoing any hope they may have had for a decent future.

It makes me furious. Do I still think Israel should have gone through the wrenching process of disengagement? Probably, if only to show that this is what happens. However, I see no reason to endorse any further Israeli withdrawals or concessions. No 'confidence building steps' to support Abbas - no $100 million in withheld taxes to shore up his party, no Fatah 'militant' (read: terrorists who we don't hate quite as much as Hamas) groups allowed in from Jordan, and certainly no release of prisoners just to show we're nice people. [Note: All three of these have been approved/will be soon by the Olmert government. Whiskey, Tango, Foxtrot...]

These sorts of things betray the thinking that was behind the disengagement - noble thoughts, but ones that have clearly been disproven by continued Palestinian intransigence and violence. Every Israeli concession has been treated as a sign that the Palestinian method of 'negotiation' (ie, shoot at people until they give up) works, and they only redouble their efforst at such forms of... ahem... diplomacy.

So, you ask, what is the solution? Obviously, Israel cannot let the situation in Sderot continue, nor can they allow Hamas to use Iranian funds and weapons to make the Gaza Strip a fortified terrorist state within 20 km of the Israeli heartland.

My proposed solution is not a 'solution' but a stalling tactic. I'd suggest that (probably after the fall of the Olmert government) the IDF be given a green light for a systematic military operation against terrorist activity in Gaza. This will involve the establishment of semi-permanent military positions on or near major Qassam launching areas (the withdrawal from which last year allowed terrorists to achieve much better range and accuracy in launching Qassams) and other strategic regions; a system of roadblocks and checkpoints to restrict the transport of weapons and terrorists; aggressive action along the Philadelphi corridor and in Rafah to close tunnels and stop smuggling; immediate targeting of all Hamas government leaders who are involved in the military wing of the organization; nightly arrest raids into Palestinian cities; destruction of arms caches, etc.

It would be bloody, in the beginning - probably worse than Defensive Shield. And the IDF would pick up casualties during the 'maintenance' phase, as well... but military casualties are better than Israeli civilian casualties (a minor detail that recent Israeli governments have sometimes had difficulty remembering). Palestinian civilian casualties would also occur, but probably not significantly worse than from the current Gaza infighting and indirect Israeli tactics (airstrikes/artillery/etc.). Most importantly, this operation would make the Gaza Strip 'behave' in a way that it hasn't for over a decade. The model was adopted for the West Bank because it was necessary given the lack of an effective border and the relatively increased movement between Palestinian and Israeli areas. It can be adapted for Gaza, and it can work to keep things on a 'low simmer' as they are in the West Bank.

A good solution? Hardly! The world would be pissed, but to be honest, they're going to be pissed anyways, so Israel might as well earn some security at the same time. It won't work forever, but it will buy Israel some peace for its citizens. Suicide bombings were stopped by the WB barrier and Defensive Shield; Qassams and Hamas rearmament can be stopped by similar tactics.

The only long term solution, though, is not one Israel can impose... or even one that can be negotiated with Western pressure. It will come someday through the Palestinian people themselves. They will look at their leaders and role models and realize that the Palestinian logic of 'resistance' and refusal to compromise - even in the face of serious chances (such as the disengagement, or the 2000 Camp David summit) - will always fail, as Israel isn't planning on marching into the sea anytime soon. They will rise up and install new leaders who will follow the example of Sadat and Hussein in working with the Israelis in a spirit of compromise - albeit a grudging one.

Until that day, though, the disengagement has taught me that Israel cannot afford any more 'confidence building measures' that expose its nurseries to shelling.

[Note: As of this morning, there have been fifty-six Qassams fired at Israel since the 'truce' began a few weeks ago. According to this article, only three months in the past year have had more Qassam attacks than this past month, during the supposed 'calm' from the 'truce'. I am less than impressed. So, Israel pulled its troops out of Gaza again to honor a 'truce' that in fact brings no peace. Hmm.]

Surrealist Threats 101

Israeli newspapers keep on reporting about how various Palestinian terror groups (Islamic Jihad, Hamas, AAMB, to name a few) have been making menacing statements along the lines of 'If Israel doesn't stop arrest raids in the West Bank, we'll stop the cease-fire in Gaza.'

Now, aside from the fact that the cease fire was clearly decided on merely for the Gaza Strip (making their suggestions kind of nuts), I'm rather amused that Israeli papers are making such a big deal about it. My reaction upon hearing these pronouncements was pretty simple:

WHAT cease fire?

You mean the one where Palestinian terrorists said they would stop attacks against Israel if Israel pulled out of Gaza? Well, guess what: since Israel pulled out 9 days ago, there have been eighteen rockets shot at Israeli territory. That's two a day.

Now, I don't know about you, but if the US was getting rockets shot at us by Mexico twice a day, I don't think we'd consider that a 'cease fire'. What are the terrorists going to do, shoot rockets at Israel? They already are.

Honestly, a threat needs more than the capability of carrying it out. To have any effectiveness, you are also required to not be carrying out said threat at the same time you're threatening it "or else".

Just call me a Russkie

I recently considered applying to a fellowship in graduate school that I received an email about. It's the Dolores Zohrab Liebmann Fund, that funds a number of graduate students (primarily in the sciences and engineering) at a moderate level for a few years.

What convinced me not to apply, though, was this stipulation in the eligibility rules:

In her Will, Dolores Zohrab Liebmann stated that:
"It is my desire that no benefit from such Fellowships or scholarships be enjoyed by any person who, or institution which, supports, advocates or upholds the principles and doctrines of Communism."

Accordingly:
a) If the Candidate or the institution supports, advocates, or upholds the principles and doctrines of Communism, the Trustee reserves the right to reject the application.
b) The Trustee also reserves the right to require the Candidate to submit an affidavit, affirmed or sworn to before a Notary Public, confirming that he or she does not support, advocate, or uphold the doctrines of Communism.

Whew. What is this, the 1950s? We have to swear we're not Communists? Sounds like Senator McCarthy is chuckling from the grave.

Now, I'm not a communist, but neither am I a wholehearted supporter of unrestrained capitalism. My grandparents are proud Labor Zionists, and I have a lot of sympathy for pseudosocialist viewpoints (though I think they are often misapplied). Would that mean I 'support' some of the Communist doctrine? Probably Ms. Liebmann would think so.

Now, I understand this still exists today because it was in her will. But it just seems so... archaic. It makes me wonder what made Ms. Liebmann so opposed to Communism that this was her sole stipulation about the candidate's character or ideology.

Weird.

It's official

I'm a complete sucker for any piano-heavy music, particularly rock.

It takes me about 10 seconds of listening to stuff like this before I want to buy it.

There, I've confessed.

I want one of those floating aircraft carriers

I have so many pending posts sitting half-written in my folder that I'm not quite sure where to start, or where to find time to complete them.

Until such a time, I'll leave you with a brief review.

I recently rented Sky Captain and the World of Tomorrow, that scifi/comicy/almost animated movie from a few years ago that was a miserable box-office flop. It's been on my 'see when I'm bored' list for a while, and I had a free rental, so I picked it up.

Hmm. How to describe my reaction? On the one hand, I can see why it flopped... yet on the other hand, I had a lot of fun watching it.

In short (mild spoilers to follow), the movie looks like it's taken right out an early-20th century scifi story/comic. It is set in a 'futuristic' 1930s New York, where a journalist and her ex-lover mercenary pilot team up to find the originator of a group of killer robots that are stealing technology and resources from around the world. The film was fairly unique in that while nearly all of the sets where computer generated/animated, the actors were real and integrated rather seamlessly into the action (though they were intentionally filmed with filters to make them look more 'animated', a reversal of the usual trend).

What I really enjoyed about the movie was the sense that the creators of the film had an immense amount of fun in making it. There are little superfluous touches everywhere that point to it, from clandestine SF references to over-the-top cliches and some completely ridiculous dialogue between the two leads. It's not meant to be a movie that you watch for thinking or realism or much of anything other than escapist enjoyment.

The creators were paying homage to an entire era of SF and film-making; to airbrushed versions of 1930s New York city, to treasured mythos in early 20th century speculative literature (mad scientists, Shangri-La, etc.), to clunky robots and giant airships. The technology was completely unworkable and inconsistent - something that would normally have me complaining like no other. But it was so obviously intended to be unreal that I just sat back and enjoyed the artistry. It is similar to the feeling I got after watching Peter Jackson's King Kong; not really a good film, but one that was a work of dedication and love for a genre.

One other bit that was worthwhile was the art. As nearly every set was computer-generated, the art figured in very significantly... and was beautiful. Everything from the gritty New York to the mountain passes of Nepal to a flying aircraft carrier... all of it was lovingly crafted with an eye to detail and 'comic realism', if that makes sense.

Nonetheless, I can see why it was not successful in the box office. The plot is beyond cliched and the dialogue is ridiculously over-the-top (both intentional, I believe). I think the film would only appeal to those who are willing to look past the standards by which we usually judge movies (plot, characters, 'interest', etc.) and see the genius and care that went into the film.

In short, it's entertaining, but not really good as most films are measured. I'd recommend it for some light enjoyment, but certainly for nothing more.

Clarification

So, I posted two days ago about UNIFIL's French commander saying stupid stuff. Looks like Kofi Annan doesn't agree with him:

A spokesperson for Kofi Annan told The Jerusalem Post by phone on Thursday night that contrary to an earlier report, there was no decision to fire on Israeli planes whatsoever.

"The French units of UNIFIL have deployed with anti-aircraft batteries. The rules of engagement allow these weapons to be used only in self-defence in case a position is under imminent attack by air, no matter who attacks," the spokesperson clarified in an official statement.

"French peacekeeping forces have routinely deployed with such weapons since their peacekeepers were attacked by helicopters in Cote d'Ivoire in November 2004," the statement said.

The spokesperson also told the Post that
"any change of the rules of the engagement to allow for a more liberal use of these weapons would need to be based on a political decision by the UN secretariat and the countries contributing troops to the peacekeeping force," and added that "such a decision is not on the horizon."

Just to be honest, and all.

Welcome, readers!

Lately, I've noticed a sharp upswing in the number of 'original hits' on the site, and I know that many of my semi-frequent visitors are less-than-frequent commenters. So I thought I'd issue an official invitation to y'all to introduce yourselves. I'm hardly going to bite anyone's head off, and I'm quite interested to know who you all are, and your thoughts on my posts. Undoubtedly, all of you have perspectives on the issues I discuss that I haven't considered.

So, welcome, and feel free to stay a while!

Excuse me?!

I can't believe this.

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/775387.html

Commanders of the French contingent of the United Nations force in Lebanon have warned that they might have to open fire if Israel Air Force warplanes continue their overflights in Lebanon, Defense Minister Amir Peretz told the Knesset Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee on Monday.

Peretz said that nevertheless, Israel would continue to patrol the skies over Lebanon as long as United Nations Security Council Resolution 1701 remained unfulfilled, adding that such operations were critical for the country's security, especially as the abducted IDF soldiers remain in Hezbollah custody and the transfer of arms continue.

Over the past few days, Peretz said, Israel had gathered clear evidence that Syria was transferring arms and ammunition to Lebanon, meaning that the embargo imposed by UN Resolution 1701 was not being completely enforced.

Israel plans to inform the joint committee of representatives of UNIFIL, the Israel Defense Forces and the Lebanese Army that unless the arms transfers are stopped, Israel will be forced to take independent action, Peretz said.

So, let me get this straight. The same reluctantly-contributed force that isn't doing shit to disarm Hezbollah, stop arms transfers from Syria, has refrained from making a commitment to respond to Hezbollah rocket attacks on Israel, and in general has done absolutely nothing to fulfil Resolution 1701... is now willing to engage the Israeli Air Force in battle for overflights - not bombing, but intelligence overflights for the simple reason of keeping track of the terrorist activity UNIFIL isn't stopping.

*seethes*

Hat-tip to Sandmonkey for pointing this one out.

Fantasy that's worth something

Some time ago, I promised a commenter of mine (eddie_s) that I would try discussing some book recommendations, particularly in the fantasy/SF genres. I'm not even remotely ashamed to admit that I have a high opinion of my taste in books, and I'll gladly share my recs for the best of the best. This will be a two-part series; first, I'll discuss fantasy (of which there are much fewer good authors), then I'll tackle science fiction. Oh, and I'm not going to mention Tolkein. That should be required reading before any of this stuff.

Let's start off with some good series:

The Malazan Book of the Fallen
Steven Erikson

Rarely have I read a fantasy series of such detail, scope, and brilliance. I've found that fantasy books can be worthwhile reading through one of two ways: first, either through intricate world-building, and secondly, through brilliant characters woven into a compelling plot. Erikson manages to do splendidly at the first, and remarkably well (though not superbly) at the second. The books are long, and not for those who can get frustrated by half-explained phenomena that are only revisited half a book later, but they're definitely worth it. I wrote a post about the series in more depth back in June; read it for a more detailed recommendation. The series begins with Gardens of the Moon.

Discworld
Terry Pratchett

I'm not sure this counts as 'fantasy', but Terry Pratchett is a master of comedy and brilliant social commentary. His books are light, fun, reading, and are generally high quality (some of his early work is a bit rough, though). He has a number of story lines throughout his books, so you don't need to all of them to know what's going on - just the ones in the story line you like (there's a nice table in the Wikipedia entry that roughly orders the books by story line and topic). Read it for a light break from heavier stuff.

Taltos and Dragaera series
Steven Brust

Steven Brust is a literary genius. Of all the modern fantasy I have read, I suspect the quality of his writing is the highest. It's clever, profound, hilarious, and fun to read. That, and his plots and characters are brilliant. A big bonus is that the Taltos books are all relatively short (call it 250 pages or so) and easy to read. I'd start with the Taltos books in publishing order (Jhereg, Yendi, Teckla, Taltos, Phoenix, Athyra... uh, I think then it's Dragon, Orca, Issola, Dzur, but I'm not sure), and somewhere in there (definitely after the first three), start on his Dragaera books (Phoenix Guards, Five Hundred Years After, and the Viscout of Adrilankha books). The Dragaera books are completely different, though set in the same world - they are a parody of Dumas' wordy and swashbuckling style, are rather long for Brust (500-ish pages), and are completely hilarious - for someone who enjoys the clever use of language. I can't tell you how many times I have reread these books. (He's got some other good standalones, too, but they're a bit more specialized; ask me about them after you've finished most of his two series.)

Assassin, Liveship Trader, and Tawny Man trilogies
Robin Hobb

Robin Hobb (formerly known as Megan Lindholm) is a brilliant fantasy author who has captivated me with her characters. They are some of the most real and engaging constructs I have ever come across, and I get extremely invested in their well-being (which, given her somewhat depressing plots, are constantly in danger). I've never read her books written as Lindholm (other than Gypsy, co-written with Steven Brust), so I can't recommend those books (though I've been meaning to track them down and read them), but I've devoured everything of hers as Hobb. She wrote three interlinked trilogies all set in the same world, starting with Assassin's Apprentice and ending with Fool's Fate. I thought it was a masterpiece, and have since been lending the books out to everyone I know (to great success, and I suspect generating large amounts of income for Ms. Hobb). She's recently begun another trilogy in a different world, of which the second book was just published a month or so ago. So far, it's shaping up to be pretty enjoyable, but I'll reserve judgement until the whole thing is out. Definitely not 'epic' fantasy for those of you who like that kind of thing, but they're amazing stories.

Chronicles of Amber
Roger Zelazny

These books are short, fun, and infinitely confusing. The books are layer of plots upon plots between rival claimants to a mysteriously vacated throne where quite literally the entire multiverse is at stake. They don't end, really, since Zelazny died while the issue was unresolved. But my, oh my, are the books good.

Other series that are of interest but not quite as highly recommended:
- Tad Williams' Memory, Sorrow, and Thorn books (I personally enjoyed his standalone War of the Flowers much better, and his Shadowmarch books so far look decent, but I'll withold judgement on them until later). Oh, also his standalone Tailchaser's Song is oodles of fun.
- Robert Jordan's Wheel of Time series: I enjoyed most of the first six, but then sort of drifted off. I have the eleventh book on my shelf, but haven't bothered to finish it yet. Excellent world, but it gets lost in details sometime. Good stuff, though
- George R. R. Martin's Song of Ice and Fire; see my comments here, though I've since become even less entranced with his work
- Ursula K. LeGuin's Earthsea books - they were fun, but a bit slow... I haven't read the 'new' Earthsea books, yet
- Susan Cooper's Dark is Rising books - great series to start kids off with after reading them Tolkein, but somewhat simple in retrospect
- L. Frank Baum's Oz books - all 14 of 'em: great for kids, but again pretty simple
- Orson Scott Card's fantasy - both his standalones (Homebody, Treasure Box, Magic Street, etc.) and his Tales of Alvin Maker books. I like most of his stuff, but his books aren't really fantasy, just using that as window-dressing for a good yarn. Full disclosure: to my unending chagrin, I've never read the Alvin books.
- Guy Gavriel Kay's Fionavar Tapestry. Fun and interesting reading, but a bit cliched.

Books that will not get my recommendation, though some may be of passing enjoyment:
- Anything by David Eddings; perhaps someday I'll detail my experience reading the Belgariad
- Feist's Riftwar books - repetetive, uninspired, and poorly written
- Terry Goodkind's Sword of Truth drivel - very popular, but derivative and horribly written with exceedingly flat characters
- Terry Brooks. *yawn*
- Cook's Black Company novels. I read a few, but didn't find them exceptionally worthwhile. I guess I'm a discriminating military fantasy reader.
- Stephen Donaldson. Eh, never read his Thomas Covenant books, but I did get through his 'Mordant's Need' duology, and it was drivel. Fun drivel, I'll grant. But drivel nonetheless.
- L. E. Modesitt, Jr. Oh my, the Recluse novels were some of the worst stuff I've ever read.

These lists aren't complete; for example, I still need to read some stuff by Charles de Lint, and I've only read a handful of stories of the like of Nina Kiriki Hoffman. I'll gladly take recommendations. I've also kept out things on the dubious border of fantasy, such as China Mieville's horror/steampunk. Brilliant writing, but I don't think it fits here. Nonetheless, this is a start for those who haven't read much in the genre.

Some helpful advice

Dear person from Malaysia who came to my site after searching for 'hezbollah website',

I won't bother commenting on your interest in finding Hezbollah's website - I have, after all, looked at the Palestinian Authority's 'websites' from time to time. Perhaps you have a deep interest in understanding the psychology of Hezbollah's motivations and public relations. Uh. Perhaps.

But just a friendly idea - you might not want to use Yahoo to find it. At least use a decent search engine; you'll get results much quicker.

Also, I'm sorry if all you found here was an analysis of the Israeli side of the situation. I could, I suppose, have tried looking at Hezbollah's side to things as well - who knows, I might have even linked to their website! Just to balance things out, of course. Perhaps I refrained from doing so on the grounds that I'm not such a big fan of Hezbollah, and some of my overwhelming contempt for murderers who would hold millions of their own people hostage might have spilled out a teensy bit.

Hope you enjoyed your stay here.

Love,

wiggin

Rotzim Chibuk?

I normally don't post random links, but I can't help myself.

Free Hugs in Tel Aviv

It just made me smile. Say what you will about crazy leftists in Tel Aviv, but I secretly have lots of sympathy with their take on life... and sometimes they do things that should make everyone realize that we're all well-meaning in our methods. I also was particularly touched by the little kid in the stroller who, after one of the huggers hugged his mother, spontaneously grabbed one of the cookies on the tray in front of him and offered it to the hugger. Says something about 'natural' generosity, I think.

...that, and the music was oddly captivating. I'll need to get some music by Daniel Salomon and see if it's just a fluke or not. Anyone have any info on him? For some reason, it reminded me a little bit of Cake.

Anyways... anyone in Baltimore who wants to go down to the Inner Harbor some day and try that? For that matter, I'll probably spend some time in downtown Chicago in a few weekends... anyone there interested in going down with me and spreading some cheer? Daley Plaza would be a nice place for this, no? (hint, hint, Val)

Full Disclosure: I'm well aware about the 'Free Hugs Movement' and all but bleh, I couldn't care less about Juan Mann, I just loved the particular Israeli incarnation of it. Oh, well.

Increase your capacity by 30%!

It's funny what kind of associations relatively innocent phrases can have in today's world. To illustrate:

As many of you know, I spend obscene amounts of time in various laboratories doing mind-numbingly boring activities, so I have a lot of chance to let my mind wander. One day, I kept noticing that my eye kept being drawn to a magnet stuck to one of the cell culture refrigerators. I hadn't consciously read it, but then I gave it a look, and was startled. In big letters, the magnet proclaimed, "Increase your capacity by up to 30%!"

Needless to say, I was somewhat confused about why spammers would have gone to the trouble of making magnets... and more importantly, how such a magnet had found its way to the inside of a cell engineering lab. After all, everyone knows that scientists are particularly well-endowed. (It's all the mutagens that we and our scientific forbears work with. That, and our spectacularly good genes. I mean, have you ever seen an unattractive engineer?)

...only a moment later did I realize that the magnet was advertising a custom freezer rack service to optimize space utilization in the hideously expensive -80 degree freezers we use so much.

One wonders what their marketing department was thinking when they came up with that slogan.

Bullets you can't see

I have previously posted about an on again, off again blog that I've found immensely fascinating. Lone Soldier is a blog syndicated in the Jerusalem Post about an apolitical American Jew who (nearly on a whim) chose to move to Israel and enlist in the IDF. He joined an elite infantry unit and fought during the height of the intafada.

He was called up from the reserves for a complex mission deep inside Lebanese territory, and he wrote two fascinating pieces about his experiences. The first is more of a factual piece, detailing what he and his unit did during the war. The second post, though, is what really got me thinking.

The post is long, but I'd definitely recommend it to anyone who is thoughtful about war and its consequences. A short excerpt of some haikus he wrote on a scrap of paper during the war:

Stars become dislodged
and race the hellfire missiles,
quitting every time

In the metal rain
summer's harvest is cut down
with the harvester

bullets you can't see.
Sagger missiles fly slower,
like red knuckle balls

Nasrallah's portrait
on a barely scratched billboard
grins above the ruins

The wall clock mocks me,
far louder then the shells' shriek
it counts aloud my breathes

He may be a spy.
his flock chews the camouflage
as the shepherd pleads

My baby nephew
in little baby Jordan's,
I smile in the bush

I can only recommend that you read the rest of the post. I wish I had things that profound that I thought about and wrote.

Pretty

Sometimes, I wonder if my entire schooling and career in engineering and the sciences has been solely due to my love of colorful or shiny things on fire.

I am serious.

Oh, my

I am in love.

Well, to be honest, I haven't looked at this too carefully yet... but it looks to be something that university (especially medical) libraries should have done ages ago. Doing lit searches in biomedicine can be painful if you actually want to read the articles, neh?

Not to mention pulling together all those useful little sites you use once every six months and then have to pull out of your bookmarks, buried in some musty folder along with some oh-so-hilarious internet meme from 1998.

*scratches head*

So in the last few days, there have been increasingly strong rumbles from the Arab and Israeli press that a prisoner swap is in the works for Gilad Shalit (IDF soldier taken hostage in a raid from the Gaza Strip a month and a half ago)... and some signs that a similar deal will be taking place with Hezbollah for Goldwasser and Regev. Numbers tossed around have been about 800 Palestinian prisoners for Shalit, and all of the few dozen Lebanese captives (including Samir Kuntar) and some bodies of Hezbollah members.

So my question is... if Olmert was going to cave into the terrorists' demands in the first place why all this waste? Why did some 170 Israelis die, and why did Israel have to kill nearly 2,000 Lebanese and Palestinians?

The war in Lebanon and incursions in Gaza would make a lot more sense if Olmert didn't throw everything to the wind by negotiating yet another lopsided prisoner swap.

Just saying.

Wow

According to Ha'aretz, the city with the greatest absolute number of chess grandmasters is...

Be'er Sheva.

Be'er Sheva? A city in the middle of the desert with 185,000 people has more grandmasters than Moscow?!

Grassroots counterterrorism

I recently posted a piece on how horrified I am with events, despite my understanding of the need for the war to be fought and for Hezbollah to be seriously damaged.

Then the IAF destroyed a house in Qana, killing 37 children and another 20 or so others. (Update: Actually only 28 people were killed in the bombing. Typical Lebanese government exaggeration and anti-Israel Western press bias. Meh. Same idea.)

Something like this incident was bound to happen eventually, in an air campaign of this scale. I am not going to get into details of whether the IAF should have been more careful (if that was even possible), or whether Israel should further limit the scope of its air strikes. That's being debated endlessly by the rest of the world to little effect. The simple truth is that no matter how many civilians were killed in the bombing, Hezbollah is certainly not going to suddenly stop firing rockets if Israel stops bombing Lebanon... so the conflict will continue until Hezbollah's ability to launch significant rocket barrages at Israel is neutered. What I want to discuss instead is why Israel had to bomb a building inside Qana in the first place.

Some 150 Katyushas have been launched at Israel from Qana. Most of the other villages subjected to direct IAF raids have similarly been used as launch sites against Israeli targets - effectively using the entire village as a giant cover for their activities. This is not supposition... this is fact, confirmed by Lebanese sources. What is more worrying is that this is often being done against the wishes of the population living in the village. Several cases have so far come out there Christian villages were used as cover for rocket launches, even launching from churches and the like (targets Israel is loath to destroy). Even in Shia towns, much of the populace may not enjoy the inevitable IAF retribution, and certainly wouldn't like Hezbollah putting weapons caches and bunker entrances in mosques.

Put simply, Hezbollah is holding far more than two Israeli soldiers hostage, but all of southern Lebanon. Israel can't hit Hezbollah positions without also hitting civilian targets - even in ground attacks (if most of the residents of the villages under IDF ground attack had not left ahead of time, the civilian casualties from being caught in the crossfire would have been truly horrific). This situation leads me to two questions:

1) How can Israel - claiming to fight moral and ethical wars - protect 1-2 million of its own citizens from harm while minimizing the civilian casualties? The bombing of Qana was just the latest and biggest of the IAF's unacceptable collateral damage. Is there a way to do this? This is not something to curry international favor, or even to make me feel better about the war. It's a measure needed for Israel's own soul.

2) Lebanon is aware of what Hezbollah is doing. Most of them are pissed about it. In fact, most of them didn't like Hezbollah much before the war, either. So why is Hezbollah still there? Is it just fear of starting another civil war? Needing 'striking power' against Israel? Why don't the people of Lebanon finally get rid of this... parasite... that is using them as a shield against IDF attacks?

I think the answers to these questions are really part of one concept. Lebanon needs to get rid of Hezbollah. Israel can weaken them... even kill most of them (though the cost in civilian casualties would be ridiculously high)... but it cannot remove Hezbollah from Lebanon. The people in Lebanese villages need to tell Hezbollah, "No! You may not use our village to store weapons, or to attack Israel, or to house your fighters. You cannot use us any more." Yes, Hezbollah has guns and organization. But they're a handful of thousands against the will of four million people. They cannot win such a conflict, if Syria is restrained from intervening.

How can this be achieved? Well, I'm not sure. Israel can't pull out under Hezbollah fire, or else the Lebanese people will view Hezbollah as their saviors. I hope that Israel can carry out more careful strikes (and more significant ground attacks, despite the horrific and inevitable casualties on both sides) to seriously destroy Hezbollah's 'infrastructure' in southern Lebanon. Then, if Israel withdraws (while keeping a warning eye on Syria), the Lebanese people need to use that moment to throw Hezbollah out of their country. The organization will be seriously weakened, and most of their fighters scattered and ill-supplied. It will be a golden opportunity.

Somehow, though, I'm doubtful that Lebanon will take advantage of this opportunity. It simply won't happen. I don't know why, so I don't know how it can be changed.

We need some brave Lebanese to take a stand... to unite against a predator that is destroying their society and country, time and time again. The 'cedar revolution' of last year gives me some hope that this is possible... but something needs to be done to spark this event. Only then can this senseless slaughter conceivably end.

Suggestions?

Despite this, I actually have friends

As many of my readers may know or suspect, I am not always very adept at handling social situations. I've always felt that there is far too much uncertainty and far too many unknown variables in most social interactions. To be honest, most social occasions have always felt like an inefficient waste of time, and I've always been keenly suspicious of those who enjoy themselves and find social interactions 'natural'.

*coughs* Wow, reading that paragraph makes me sound like a complete introvert. While many of you may think that as a result I must be an exceedingly awkward, quiet person, this is in fact not the case. Over the years, I learned that there are a set of rules that one can fall back on as a default setting in social gatherings: manners. So, upshot is that I've become a very polite person on the surface, but when anyone gets to know me, they realize that deep down (or not-so-deep down) I'm an asshole. Oh, well.

Anyways, I've ingrained 'polite' responses and actions into myself so deeply that I don't even notice I do them any more. Sometimes this can lead to embarrassment, such as the following scenario.

Many times when people greet me they say, 'Hello, wiggin, how are you!' And my inevitable response is, 'Hey! I'm doing fine, how are you?' It's polite, simple, and allows the other individual to decide whether to (a) have a longer conversation, or (b) keep walking. Leaving such decisions out of my hands is the cornerstone of my strategy for social situations - keep the other person talking, and let them steer the coversation (of course, this all disappears as soon as I get to know someone, but meh).

Unfortunately, sometimes people instead greet me with 'Hello, wiggin!' I then get into trouble when I automatically say 'Hey! I'm doing fine...'

*hangs head* Yes, volunteering such banal information has become a reflex. It invariably causes the other person to do a double take - either ignoring the non sequitur or listening to me further make a fool of myself by saying, 'Uh, I guess you actually didn't ask how I was doing, and I just volunteered the information. Never mind.'

And that's why I like machines more than people.

That terrible knock on the door

Have you ever had something go seriously, terribly wrong in your life? And do you remember that feeling you felt in the pit of your stomach when you first had an inkling that something horrible might have happened, but you didn't know for sure yet?

I'm not talking about losing your keys here. I know that this feeling has only happened to me once in my life, and it was one too many times. It is a feeling of utter helplessness - a feeling where you know, deep down, that something terrible has happened... but you aren't quite willing to admit it to yourself yet until you had proof. It is the world crashing down around your ears, a signal that your life has irrevocably changed, for the worse.

Today, at least five Israeli families around the country received the worst news imaginable. Their young, vibrant, dedicated sons and brothers had been killed - one in a helicopter crash, the other four in a pitched battle with entrenched Hezbollah forces in southern Lebanon (Note: details are still a bit sketchy; will change the numbers/details if things are updated).

These families must have been watching the news as reports came in of heavy fighting in the north. They probably didn't want to watch the news, but couldn't tear themselves away. They knew that Yonatan or Micha or Noam were in the north, probably involved in the fighting. They knew. And so the mothers and fathers of these young men sat there, glued to the television and radio, hands on their mouths, with a feeling deep in the pit of their stomach. A feeling of helplessness, that would not go away.

And then, each of these five families had their worst fears confirmed. An IDF officer came to each home to tell them the news. Perhaps they saw the car park and the officer slowly walk up to their door. Perhaps, instead, their first confirmation was a careful knock on the door. Around the country today, five families heard the words of, "I am sorry but I have some terrible news for you. Your son is dead."

And around the country, a hundred - no, a thousand other families heaved a sigh of relief that at least it wasn't their son. The feeling is tempered by grief for the other families - for all of Israel is a family - and they probably feel just the slightest bit guilty that at least it happened to someone else.

This elaborate scenario is playing out on a nearly daily basis. The one time I had that feeling in my life was nearly unbearable. Imagine having this feeling every single day while this business continues. Have you seen the parents of Israeli combat soldiers while their sons are away on duty? These mothers and fathers continually worry - they can't help themselves. They age prematurely.

What is even more heartbreaking is the families who simply don't know - and may never know. I cannot get Noam Shalit's quiet, pained face out of my head. Nor can I forget the heartbreaking letter his family wrote in the hopes their son might be allowed to see it.

How can this end?

And now something less morbidly depressing...

...I'll try to take the edge off of that last post with a short joke my girlfriend coined (though I'm sure hundreds of other people have, too):

What's a pirate's favorite amino acid?




Arrrrr-ginine.

*bows* Yes, I know, I'm a regular wit.

Wiggin becomes a peacenik

Many of my readers have undoubtedly been wondering where I've been for the last few weeks. After all, I normally intersperse my normal posts with attempted analyses of crises in Israel... and the ongoing situation in Lebanon and Gaza seem to fit the bill rather nicely. Yet I've tried to stay away from blogging on the issue (particularly Lebanon) as it is being discussed to death on the internet. I normally try to present some slightly new idea in my analysis, but I honestly haven't had any.

Oh, I can still tell you about the crisis in exhaustive detail. I could explain to you why Hezbollah's unprovoked attacks were aided and abetted (both directly and indirectly) by elements of the Lebanese government. I could talk about differences between intentionally targeting civilians and unintentional civilian deaths as a result of collateral damage. We could discuss about the care and precision with which the IAF has been hitting targets, and their considerable successes with relatively few civilian casualties for an air war of this size against an enemy entrenched in the midst of civilian populations. I could talk myself blue in the face saying the same things that have been said everywhere else... heck, if I wanted to, I could even take the Lebanese side and exhaustively detail their arguments.

But I won't. I've spent too much time elsewhere doing exactly this, and far too much time reading other media/blogs/forums discussing these same issues. Do you know why? Because, while I do believe all of that stuff, I think it is irrelevant. On my blog, I feel I can share with you what I really think about the situation devoid of political sentiment, of the need to explain to the world about Israel's actions.

This war sickens me.

All this death, all this suffering, all this pain... it's just senseless. It didn't need to happen. No one wants this war, with the exception of Syria and Hezbollah. Not the Lebanese people, their government, the world... and certainly not the Israelis.

This is not a war about land, or holy sites, or refugees, or settlements, or any of the other issues that complicate the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. It is not a war that can even be won, really. At best, Israel can destroy much of Hezbollah, but they will always be able to get resupply and new recruits. This war happened for the simple reason that Hezbollah and Syria could not leave well enough alone, and because Lebanon was too weak to stop them.

I'm not suggesting that Israel should have done nothing in the face of a blatant act of war and a clear and present danger to its civilian population - far from it. I just wish that there was some... sense, some logic to all of this mess.

Even more so, I wish there was a clean way to fight this war. Bloody as they were, I would almost prefer something like the Israeli-Egyptian front in the Sinai in years past - a combat zone relatively free of civilians, where countries settled irreconcilable differences on a battlefield. I won't romanticize the horror of those wars, but at least they aren't as... dirtying as this one.

The world has been second-guessing Israel's particular military actions in the last week. They allege that some of the attacks against infrastructure were merely punitive and not strategic in nature, that Israel is attacking civilians indiscriminately (or at the very least attacking without a great deal of regard for civilian losses), and that the IDF response has no chance of actually damaging Hezbollah, but merely hurts the Lebanese people (for fairness, I'll mention that others have attributed clear strategic and tactical necessity to nearly all of Israel's actions).

I think this analysis is a bit harsh, but I do have my own doubts. *steeples fingers in thought* It is not right that this war must be fought in a manner that causes so much damage and loss of life. I'll freely admit that the Lebanese people are not quite all victims in this fight, and that it was their responsibility to rein in Hezbollah (regardless of the threat of a civil war). But regardless, this level of suffering and destruction is simply horrible. I don't feel that moral equivalency arguments can work here. So what if Haifa and Natzeret and Tzfat and T'veriah have been under attack? Yes, that demands a response - but not an equal response, rather a response that will actually stop the attacks (whatever that is).

Yes, yes. I've made the arguments myself - about how Hezbollah is hiding behind civilians, blah blah blah. The arguments aren't wrong... it's just that rationalizations and 'ends justify the means' arguments are demeaning to Israel and to the Jewish people. Golda Meir had it spot on: "We can forgive you for killing our sons. But we will never forgive you for making us kill yours." This continual... slaughter... is not something the Jewish State is supposed to be engaged in, justified or not.

I honestly don't know what can be done. I hope most fervently that Israel has done everything in its power to look at other options before continuing on this bloodbath. I wish that the Lebanese people had done everything in theirs to keep this from happening, and that the rest of the world had put more pressure on Syria and Iran to keep things quiet. Oh, I wish, I wish.

Where will this end? I don't know. Perhaps Israel will have to take the war to Syria (some suggest they should have done so a long time ago)... initiating more bloodshed, but hopefully mostly against the military and government, and not suburbs of Damascus. Perhaps the world can step in and finally do away with Hezbollah. Or perhaps Lebanon can come to an agreement with Israel where they unite together to get rid of foreign-supported militias in their borders. Who knows? Unfortunately, what seems most likely is that Hezbollah will be seriously damaged (after a long, protracted, bloody war), and things will go back to their status quo.

*sighs* It's times like these when I am reminded of the words of hope that others have said in other trying circumstances. I have a dream... That magnificent poetry from Martin Luther King, Jr. conveys a beautiful image. It conveys a world without chains, without boundaries, a world without senseless strife... a world where people can live together in recognition of the things that make us all the same and in celebration of the things that make us different.

I have a dream... that someday, Israel and Lebanon will live side by side in harmony. Vacationers from Tel-Aviv will relax on Beirut's beaches, and Beirut denizens on Tel-Aviv's. Northern Israel and southern Lebanon will live in peace and quiet, cultivating their farmland and tourists with equal fervor, making the landscape green and beautiful to cover the scars of war. There won't be a 'border fence' patrolled by heavily armed Israeli soldiers, but rather an open border 'patrolled' by friendly neighbors helping each other build a better future. I have a dream that Lebanon and Israel "will be transformed into a situation where little Israeli boys and Israeli girls will be able to join hands with little Lebanese boys and Lebanese girls and walk together as sisters and brothers." Someday... someday.

We need to find a way that ensures the safety of our people yet at the same time does not compromise the principles of that same people. We need to find the majority of good people in each of our enemy's populaces and cultivate them, building unbreakable bonds of trust and loyalty and peace. We need... to make the world a better place, rather than adding to chaos and strife.

I'll leave you with a thought from another poet who dreamed of peace:

אני מביט מהחלון
וזה עושה לי די עצוב
האביב חלף עבר לו
מי יודע אם ישוב
הליצן נהיה למלך
הנביא נהיה ליצן
ושכחתי את הדרך
אבל אני עוד כאן

פזמון:
יהיה טוב
יהיה טוב כן
לפעמים אני נשבר
אז הלילה הו הלילה
איתך אני נשאר

ילדים לובשים כנפיים
ועפים אל הצבא
ואחרי שנתיים
הם חוזרים ללא תשובה
אנשים חיים במתח
מחפשים סיבה לנשום
ובין שנאה לרצח
מדברים על השלום

פזמון

שם למעלה בשמים
עננים לומדים לעוף
ואני מביט למעלה
ורואה מטוס חטוף
ממשלות וגנרלים
מחלקים לנו את הנוף
לשלהם ולשלנו
מתי נראה ת'סוף

הנה בא נשיא מצרים
איך שמחנו לקראתו
פירמידות בעיניים
ושלום במקטרתו
ואמרנו בוא נשלימה
ונחיה כמו אחים
ואז הוא אמר קדימה
רק תצאו מהשטחים

פזמון

עוד נלמד לחיות ביחד
בין חורשות עצי זיתים
ילדים יחיו בלי פחד
בלי גבולות בלי מקלטים
על קברים יפרח העשב
לשלום ואהבה
מאה שנים של חרב
ועוד לא, לא אבדה התקווה

That last stanza can be roughly translated as:

We will yet learn to live together
Between the lines of olive trees
Children will live without fear
Without borders, without boundaries
On the graves grass will grow
To peace and love
[After] one hundred years of the sword
We have not yet - not yet lost the hope...

The Iraq Paradigm

As I'm sure all of my readers know, events in Israel have rapidly been escalating from a constant, low-intensity conflict to all out war. Israeli troops and armor are rolling into Gaza in force, and it looks like Operation Summer Rains will be a lengthy and bloody process.

This sudden deterioration has been triggered by two things. First, the Hamas government's inaction in the face of Israeli demands to halt daily Qassam fire on Israeli towns, and secondly (and most proximally), the attack on an IDF post in Green Line Israel, and the subsequent kidnapping of Corporal Gilad Shalit. The kidnapping was carried out by the PRC (and umbrella terror group) and the Hamas military wing, and has been the first successful kidnapping of a soldier since 1994 (though the lynching back in the beginning of the intafada sort of counts, I guess).

Since the kidnapping of Shalit, two other Israelis have been kidnapped: one, a 18-year old student who tried hitchhiking his way home in the West Bank, and (probably) an ill 62-year old man from Rishon Letzion. Though this all comes at once, the threat of kidnapping has been a serious one for some time now. For months, IDF intelligence and the Shin Bet have been warning that the Palestinian terror groups were trying very assiduously to kidnap Israelis as a way of leverage over the government, and to enable the release of important security prisoners (ie terrorists).

Why this sudden focus on kidnapping? It's been tried before by the Palestinians, but it has rarely been pursued so assiduously. First of all, Israel set a dangerous precedent a few years back in the Tenenbaum case, where a corrupt Israeli businessman and three dead soldiers who had been held in Lebanon were exchanged for the release of hundreds of detainees in Israeli prisons. More importantly, I think, is the rise of hostage-taking as the method of choice among Iraqi insurgents to bring the West to its knees. (Though it is not reported on too much in the Western media any more, abductions of Westerners and Iraqi government employees has become a matter of course in Iraq.)

Given the ultimate premium Israel places on the lives and bodies of its citizens, the Palestinians wisely thought that adapting Iraqi tactics would give them unprecedented leverage against the 'occupiers'. After all, the West Bank PRC has already threatened to 'butcher' the 18-year old student (Eliyahu Asheri) if Israel does not immediately withdraw from its military offensive in the Gaza Strip... clearly hearkening back to the language and actions of Iraqi hostage-takers.

Now here's the million dollar question: will this tactic work? I would like to suggest that it will be a complete and utter failure, and may have been one of the most foolish mistakes the Palestinian terror groups (particularly Hamas) have ever made.

Israel has adequate countermeasures, whereas the Iraqi situation is much tougher to regulate
Israel is already working on completing plans to 'seal off' most of the Palestinian population from access to the Israeli population. It's a simple matter, then, to revoke all of the remaining work permits, close the border, and sit tight. Of course, the WB security fence will need to be completed first, but that's in the process. I doubt that the latter two kidnappings could have occurred if the WB barrier was complete.

Of course, this does not address attacks like the one that captured Corporal Shalit. The tunnelling problem is one the IDF is still addressing, but I'm confident they will be able to develop adequate countermeasures to this sort of attack in the future.

More importantly, the entire milieu of Iraq is different than in the Israeli territories. In Iraq, the US is dealing with a mostly hostile population, is seriously undermanned, and must always be on guard. In contrast, most of Israel safe from such kidnapping tactics and the military enjoys short supply lines, an abundance of manpower, a comfortable superiority of forces, and enormous support from most of the public. Put succinctly, the potential hostages far outnumber hostiles in areas of Israel behind the security fences, and can be well protected and kept track of.

The Israeli public is much more used to coping with these situations than other Western populations
Granted, Israel also tends to put a higher value on each individual life and body, but the public is no longer shocked by such acts, just angered. I have only sympathy for the Shalit and Asheri families, and the Israeli public has shown signs of wanting all of this incessant death to end... but in the end, Israelis are awfully strong at dealing with this kind of trauma. I think the public would put trust in a military solution (as they did back in '94 with Nachshon Waxman)... and if it fails, they will coldly agree to a significant military intervention to seriously damage the terrorists' ability to carry out further attacks.

This is a public that supported 18 years of fighting in Lebanon to eliminate Katyusha attacks on Kiryat Shmonah. True, they got sick of the hemhorraging of soldiers' lives by the end, but they had a remarkable tolerance for trusting in military solutions rather than appeasement in response to attacks. Since Lebanon, the IDF has learned; now, they have limited objectives that can be carried out in weeks to months in Gaza (as they did back in 2002 in the WB), and seriously damage the terrorist base of operations.

Essentially, the Palestinians are likely to get absolutely nothing for their efforts... except overwhelming Israeli public support for military intervention (which the IDF did not have prior to these attacks).

The Palestinians are about to learn just how stupid their move was
Israel is working with tactics that steadily increase the pressure on Hamas and the PA to shape up, or be destroyed. For the first time, Israel has been talking seriously about wholesale assassination of most of the PA/PLC leadership. They've begun a slow escalation of the invasion in Gaza - a invasion that we all know will go very poorly for the oh-so-brave Palestinian fighters in the streets. Hamas political leaders are being arrested, weapons shops and training camps have come under fire, etc. This is a game of chicken, and Israel is not planning on losing. In an all-out military engagement, there is no question about who will be the victors. It may be a costly victory for Israel, but they will win if they decide on a course of military action.

They're more than happy to use this as a pretext to utterly destroy the terrorist infrastructure in Gaza, while toppling the Hamas government... and the panicky sounds we're hearing from the PA suggests they're beginning to believe Israel.

Put simply, the Iraqi paradigm of kidnapping doesn't pay... at least not in Israel, it doesn't.

The king of military... fantasy?

Any of you who are well-acquainted with the fantasy world are well aware of the buzz surrouding the (relatively) new Canadian author Steven Erikson and his Malazan Book of the Fallen series. He's a much-touted author who first became popular in the rest of the English-speaking world until his publishers consented to publish his books in the US in 2004 (since then, three of his six books in the Malazan series have been published, and the fourth is due out in August).

I recently finished the third of his books, titled Memories of Ice, and feel I have an adequate sampling to weigh in with a short review. I must say... the buzz is right. The man is brilliant.

To briefly sketch the books without major spoilage, Erikson is telling the story of an empire through its military campaigns. The Malazan Empire is a new, aggressive, highly structured empire that is using new military tactics and clever strategy to take a second continent of the world (the first having fallen and been consolidated prior to the series' beginning). Although ruthless in dealing with its enemies and internal corruption, the empire is mostly a benign dictatorship, relying on economics and a fair degree of freedom to conquered peoples (combined with a mailed fist of retribution to any rebellions), and has prospered. This expansion is taking place against a backdrop of upheaval in the pantheon of gods, where new (and forgotten) 'ascendants' are becoming prominent, more established gods are under assault, and the very essence of magic is being corrupted. Add in more than a pinch of politics, some philosophy and mysticism, and you've got the Malazan world.

The books (so far) follow a complex, multilayered plot following a whole host of carefully constructed characters through these tumultuous events... those events being the military campaigns of the Malazan Empire (mostly revolving around a single veteran army). These campaigns are rarely composed purely of engagements with the enemy, but are fit deftly into the growing complexity of the world and its problems.

Malazan's writing has a number of brilliant parts to it, from his interleaved plotlines to his fleshed-out characters, but what really sets his books apart is their focus and realism.

Most 'epic' fantasy series I've read have an entirely different approach. They are set against the backdrop of a fight of the protagonists against some vast evil endangering the cosmos, oftentimes with some individual character (or small group of characters) being the 'savior' of humanity. They may touch on military campaigns and engagements, but the focus is elsewhere.

In contrast, I feel that Erikson is telling a story about an army, and how it interacts with a complex world. He's writing almost akin to the style of some of the masters of military SF, where the story being told is about the military, not about some cosmic war.

And he does it amazingly well.

I love these books. They're brilliant, witty, thought-provoking, fresh, etc. I'd recommend them to anyone with the slightest interest in fantasy. The series has taken residence in my favorite four fantasy series/authors (along with Tolkein, Robin Hobb, and Steven Brust). Trust me, I have good taste, so that actually means something.

A few downsides, though. Erikson doesn't evade all of the fantasy cliches. He has a tendency to finish off each novel with a deus ex machina of one sort or another. At times, he can be a bit long-winded (though it rarely seems that way, with his rapidly shifting viewpoints and swiftly advancing plots). Also, sometimes things are a little bit too much 'just so' to work out convincingly. At least Erikson has no qualms about killing off important characters...

Well, there you have it. 'A love song for Steven Erikson.' My beautiful masterpiece, eh?

Well I'll be damned

I guess HRW isn't too bad, after all.

HRW: We can't contradict IDF findings
By YAAKOV KATZ

While sticking to its demand for the establishment of an independent inquiry into a blast on a Gaza beach 10 days ago that killed seven Palestinian civilians, the Human Rights Watch conceded Monday night for the first time since the incident that it could not contradict the IDF's exonerating findings.

On Monday, Maj.-Gen. Meir Klifi - head of the IDF inquiry commission that cleared the IDF of responsibility for the blast - met with Marc Garlasco, a military expert from the HRW who had last week claimed that the blast was caused by an IDF artillery shell. Following the three-hour meeting, described by both sides as cordial and pleasant, Garlasco praised the IDF's professional investigation into the blast, which he said was most likely caused by unexploded Israeli ordnance left laying on the beach, a possibility also raised by Klifi and his team.

"We came to an agreement with General Klifi that the most likely cause [of the blast] was unexploded Israeli ordinance," Garlasco told The Jerusalem Post following the meeting. While Klifi's team did a "competent job" to rule out the possibility that the blast was caused by artillery fire, there were still, Garlasco said, a number of pieces of evidence that the IDF commission did not take into consideration.

The main argument between Klifi and HRW surrounded the timeline of the blast, which the IDF said took between 16:57 and 15:10, at least 10 minutes after artillery fire in the area had stopped. HRW however disputes this claim and basing itself on Palestinian hospital documentation, claims that the explosion actually took place right around the time of the IDF artillery fire.

Meanwhile Monday, The Post learned that the IDF was currently inspecting a second piece of shrapnel doctors had retrieved from one of the Palestinians wounded in the blast and currently being treated at Soroka Hospital in Beersheba. A first piece of shrapnel, examined by the IDF as well as by an independent academic institute in Beersheba was found to not have come from a 155 mm shell, the type used in IDF artillery attacks on Kassam launch sites in the Gaza Strip. The second piece of shrapnel, sources said, was currently being examined in an IDF lab.

Garlasco told Klifi during the meeting that he was impressed with the IDF's system of checks and balances concerning its artillery fire in the Gaza Strip and unlike Hamas which specifically targeted civilians in its rocket attacks, the Israelis, he said, invested a great amount of resources and efforts not to harm innocent civilians.

"We do not believe the Israelis were targeting civilians." Garlasco said. "We just want to know if it was an Israeli shell that killed the Palestinians."

Lucy Mair - head of the HRW's Jerusalem office - said Klifi's team had conducted a thorough and professional investigation of the incident and made "a good assessment" when ruling out the possibility that an errant IDF shell had killed the seven Palestinians on the Gaza beach.

'We differ when it comes to other pieces of information from other sources that don't relate to the military strike such as the timing and the type of injuries," Mair explained. "While they [the IDF] made a very good presentation, we still think there are enough unanswered questions that have not been examined by Klifi's team…and that is why we believe there should be an independent investigation."

Now I wonder if the Guardian will bother reporting on this turn of events. Heh. Not bloody likely.

I'm sure other people have summarized my feelings on this fiasco much better, but all I can say is this: the reactions of the IDF/Defense Minister/Foreign Ministry can only be considered 'not a total fuckup' when compared to how the media covered the story.

Dr. Shoukas would be proud

Early this afternoon, I went to a neighborhood blood drive and donated some blood. After all, it's a good cause, and I'm healthy, right? Only problem is that my 6'2", 135 pound frame doesn't readily accept the loss of a unit of blood that happily.

Now you're all nodding your heads, assuming that I passed out after the donation. Fear not! I was perfectly fine... at least immediately thereafter.

But clearly my immediate compensation (increased fluid/solute intake, baroreceptor reflex, etc.) was only temporarily adequate. A few hours after the donation, poor wiggin wasn't feeling so hot, so I spent most of the day reading/drinking in bed.

You're waiting for me to get the point, I know. Anyways, as I went through the whole process - from the preparations to finishing up my initial recovery - I was thinking of the detailed changes occuring in my cardiovascular and endocrine physiology in response to the sudden blood loss. I had it all visualized (well, except for the parts where I got a head rush from standing up; I wasn't visualizing much of anything then), with the correct annotated equations/graphs/everything. Okay, so what's so special about this?

Sadly, this occurred without my conscious effort. Dr. Shoukas (my cardiovascular physiology instructor this year) is probably grinning somewhere.

I've been thinking some more...

After yet another bout of late-night bleary-eyed thought, I've got some additions to last night's post. Hopefully, I can flesh them out in more detail when I'm not half asleep.

I've thought of at least two more factors that need to be considered. Genomic size may help to compensate for some of the evolutionary losses brought about by focus on individual survival rather than species-level diversity/selection. After all, the sheer number of polymorphisms/combinations is much higher with the larger genomes of more evolved animals. This would mean that each individual is a walking repository of much more genetic diversity than less evolved species... I think. Yet I'm not sure that this matters that much: genome size seems to 'saturate' at some point, and there is not a direct correlation between genomic size and 'individual focus', for lack of a better term.

Another bit deals with levels of genomic regulation. I haven't thought this out carefully yet, but it is clear that higher species have much more complex levels of regulation of gene expression. This allows for a much finer 'tweaking' control of evolutionary factors. Does this matter in the long run, if most humans survive to reproduce? I'm not sure. But something at the back of my head was nagging me about it, so I'm tossing it out there for discussion.

What I would really love is if I could find some hard data on all of these factors to adequately weigh them against each other. I'd like to see studies of genetic diversity of various types of species over time, with and without selective pressures, a look at mechanisms of controlling litter size, etc. Maybe I can try cornering some evolutionary geneticists I know and get some answers.

*chuckles* I used the word apotheosis!

Just the other day, I was feverishly studying for my last exam of the year at some unfortunately late hour of the night. A thought came to me that wasn't necessarily very original, but it seemed quite clever at the time. I tore off a corner of the page I was writing on, scrawled an illegible and large unintelligible note, and went back to studying.

So now, I present to you the thoughts that occur to me late at night. It's a divergence from the subjects of the last few months... which most of you probably welcome.

I've been thinking about litter size. More specifically, human litter size.

Wait for it... trust me, it's worth it. At least for the laughs.

Why do humans have small litter sizes? Until fertility drugs, women would give at birth to two or three children at once only rarely. Total family size tops out at a dozen or so, right? As I'm sure you're aware, this is exceedingly rare, even for relatively 'advanced' species on the evolutionary tree. Most species have lots of offspring in lots of batches. Only a few of the larger (and more evolved) species have such a small number of offspring.

Well, all of my readers are currently wondering if I ever took a basic biology course. Or even watched 'Wild America' on the television when I was six. Trust me, I did both.

The classical answer is that humans invest a lot more in their offspring than most other animals. We pour huge amounts of work into keeping them alive (and nutrients, and time, etc.), whereas less evolved animals have a thousand offpsring in the hope that a handful get to reproduce themselves, right? Makes sense, at least on a surface level.

But here's the interesting part:

An underappreciated effect of having large litter size is that it provides for a large amount of genetic diversity in offspring, right? Recombine the genes enough way, and you'll get a handful of offspring per generation that are exceptional, and have that tiny bit of selective advantage that moves them toward. This is further enhanced by the general rule that DNA repair/fidelity mechanisms are much better in more highly evolved species... which, while being good for individual survival, is not necessarily very good for species-level genetic diversity.

So what does this mean? It means that as evolution progresses, the shift focuses more and more towards preservation of individuals of the species. This selection works spendidly for producing humans, right?

Yet there are side effects to this. Focusing on individual survival short-circuits evolution. Species-level genetic diversity decreases significantly, as do the number of possible permutations per parent. Heck, we talk about 'overpopulation' of humans at some 7 billion, right? Yet less developed species have orders of magnitude higher numbers, and a consequently higher genetic diversity.

What I think this means is that evolution is self-limiting. It is an asymptotic process; originally, very important as a driving force in creating diversity, but eventually defeating itself when it reaches a certain point. One could even argue that human intelligence (in particular medicine and civil engineering) has removed many of the selective pressures that were still being exerted on us as a species.

Are we nearing our biological apotheosis?

I wonder... has this pattern repeated itself in the past? Has a dominant species that stopped evolving been swept away in a cataclysm to be replaced by nimbler, more 'evolvable' species? I don't know if the dinosaurs (or other similar extinctions) count as this, but it is an interesting thought.

I suppose it almost sounds like hubris, but I think it only makes sense. Maybe it will take another few million years, but I think evolution has stopped at humans for logical reasons, not our self-centeredness.

Now is my readers' chance to explain to me that this thought has been elaborated in depth (even mathematically!) by some renowned evolutionary biologist. But I felt good having an original thought for once, instead of spitting back facts to a soulless exam paper.

I'd also be interested to hear more points supporting my idea, beyond DNA replication fidelity, litter size, and intelligence. I think it all comes down to valuing individual rather than species-level well-being.

These guys aren't in the entertainment business for a reason

I know, this is old, and it's just a link... but it's hilarious. I can't help myself.

In June of last year, IDF chief of staff Moshe Ya'alon completed his three year tenure, and was retiring. As a sendoff, the IDF High Command made a little tribute. Singing. A song they made up.

It's kind of scary, kind of funny...

Give it a look.

(If you don't know Hebrew, you might enjoy this anyways... but you won't understand a lick of what they're saying.)

Does anyone sane really doubt it?

I swore I wouldn't beat this topic to death, but I can't help myself.

For those of you who frequently read CNN, I'm sure this will come as no surprise.

In recent weeks, tensions between the Hamas-led Palestinian government and the Palestinian security apparatus (mostly run by followers of Fatah, the ousted party) have been slowly escalating. At least in the Gaza Strip, it seems rather likely that a full-scale civil war will erupt. What amused me, though, was CNN's reporting on the issue. At the end of the article detailing yet another confrontation between police (Fatah) and Hamas' new pseudo-legal security force, CNN said:

Israel and the U.S. State Department consider Hamas a terrorist organization, though it also operates an extensive social services network in the Palestinian territories.

CNN always tacks this on to articles about Hamas. It's like they just have to tell us that an organization that has murdered several hundred civilians and is fighting its own police force isn't completely bad, so it's all right. They also always mention that Israel and the US 'consider' them a terrorist organization; technically true, but neglecting that the rest of the Western world agrees with the US and Israel. Do we need to say that Al Qaeda is 'considered' a terrorist organization? *shrugs* Okay, fine, that's CNN's shtick.

Now here's what gets me. The reasons why Hamas has gotten more legitimacy in the world are threefold:
1) Social welfare programs in Gaza
2) Popular election to run the PA
3) A cease fire with Israel

Do I need to bother to address the first? So what if they give some charity on the side? It might explain their popularity, but that hardly absolves them from being terrorists. (For those who would like to argue that the social and military arms of Hamas are entirely separate, there are a whole host of proofs that you're wrong. I won't belabor the point here; google should help you.) CNN's silly for bringing this point up time and time again.

Okay, but what about the second? If they run the Palestinian government, doesn't that give their military operations an aura of legitimacy? After all, some definitions of terrorism include that it must be carried out by non-state actors. Otherwise, it's just a 'war crime' or somesuch.

Firstly, not all definitions agree. As Hamas still intentionally targets civilians, one could argue that it's a terrorist government. Additionally, one could quite reasonable argue that the PA is not a state actor... it's certainly not sovereign. Lastly, most of the Hamas military wing is not yet part of the Palestinian government's security apparatus, making its military operations fit the definition of terrorism regardless.

...which brings us to the last reason one might not consider Hamas a terrorist organization: the 'cease fire'. Now, neglecting whether this cease fire has held (it has not), I bring the latest ridiculousness to your attention. As you well know, Israeli towns near the Gaza Strip (particularly Sderot and Ashkelon) have been experiencing high levels of rocket fire on a daily basis. Most of these attacks are orchestrated by the Popular Resistance Committees, an umbrella Palestinian terror group.

The founder of the PRC is now the head of Hamas' new security force.

So, let me get this straight: Hamas is following a cease fire by putting their security force under the authority of the man who's in charge of daily attacks against Israeli civilians?

*shakes head* I just don't understand it.

And now Ha'aretz reports that Hamas is so 'moderate' that they are willing to indefinitely extend their cease fire with Israel if Israel pulls back to the 1967 armistice lines. Note that this makes no mention of peace or joint recognition, or much of anything. Just an extended cease fire, to give them time to rearm for the next push.

Tikkun l'korim recommendations?

Note: Those of my readers who don't know what I'm talking about, don't worry; you're not supposed to. If you're really curious, toss me an IM or email or whatever, and I'll explain.

To the rest of you:

I've recently been looking for a top-notch Tikkun to replace my aging and inaccurate one (an old black one from Ktav Publishing that used to be my father's). Much as the old one has a lot of sentimental value, I've found myself increasingly annoyed with its inaccuracy in nikud and trope, not to mention somewhat shoddy typesetting.

So, for any of you who know (or who have leiner friends who would know), I am looking for a Tikkun with the following attributes:

1) Accuracy. Preferably, the text should be based on the Keter Aram Tzova directly (and not on some later mikraot gedolot printing; many of those were prone to errors that have been propagated in later printings). Obviously, this isn't possible for a good chunk of the text, but I'd like all of the text to be accurate to the most authoritative text for each part. (For those of you who are about to recommend the Koren text, please think again. There are multiple Tanachim that disagree with the Koren text on a few points. I personally would bet that R' Mordechai Breuer's Tanach is probably the best text; however, I have not been able to find a tikkun that claims to use this text. Also, I'm not a big fan of the 'Keter Yerushalayim' formatting. If you can convincingly prove to me that Koren (or Adi, or whatever) is a better version, then I'll consider it.)

2) Vavei Haamudim - I'd like the pages to be aligned like the 'classic' column alignments that are found on many of the scrolls... not an absolute requirement, but I'd like it.

3) It must have not only parshiot and haftarot, but also all five megillot.

4) It might be nice (but NOT required) for a short section on nikud rules, rules of k'riat hatorah and aliyot, etc. Nikud is probably the most important.

5) I'd like to have it have a difference between kamatz katan/gadol... I know the rules, but sometimes it's good to have corroborating evidence on tricky cases.

6) If each line could mirror on both sides of the tikkun, that would be great (ie, every word is at the same line, and same PART of the line on both sides).

...if I think of any more criteria, I'll post them. Cost is no object.

While I'm at it, if any of you have come across a good technical text on leyning (things like differences between conjunctive and disjunctive te'amim, and the rules of when one note becomes another), along with a good refresher on really esoteric bits of nikud in Tanach... I would be deeply indebted to you for a reference. I'd prefer if it were in English, but I can bull my way through the Hebrew, if necessary.

Thanks!