One part in particular stood out, a letter from the Chafetz Chaim regarding the behavior of those still sincerely committed to Torah amidst all the heresy and spiritual rebellion:

The Chafetz Chaim, in his great humility, included himself in that description even though his dedication toward Am Yisrael is legendary:

• He wrote beautiful and compelling books that are still studied and taken to heart almost a century later by the majority of religious Jews.
• He beseeched the Heavens and fasted for days on end—and did so repeatedly—for the sake of Jews whom he barely knew.
• His tenderness and understanding toward individual Jews of any age and status is still spoken of.

 
And the religious people of whom he spoke had their hands tied in so many ways as described in the book. (Really, what can you do as Rosh Yeshivah of Slutsk if one of your boys pulls out a gun and thus forces the entire yeshivah to listen as he blabs on about the joys of socialism?) What could they have done?

Engrossed in their daled amot. Engrossed. Not trapped and not looking out in dismay at the world crumbling around them. Willfully engrossed within their own world.
 
Just like me.

Yes, it hit me like that. He was talking about me.
 
Yes, I daven for other people. I have a list of sick, the captive, and the spiritually distant for whom I daven. I’ve davened many times for the benefit and salvation of Am Yisrael and even for the sincere Noachides. I repeatedly ask Hashem to bring all of Am Yisrael (including myself) to do teshuvah out of love, and not through of any suffering or humiliation.
 
But it’s not enough.
 
Why?
 
Well, what do you think I do almost every time I see:

• mention of the Women of the Wall, led by that glory-seeking atheist hypocrite?
• Or whenever I read about Christian missionizing in Eretz Yisrael?
• Or read about the encroachment of the Conservative/Reform movements, especially with regard to giyur/conversion?
• Or the IDF enlistment of girls, in particular the spike of religious girls who want to serve in combat (which is problematic on so many levels, it deserves a post of its own)?
• Or Charedi-looking Jews (REAL ones and not government provocateurs in disguise) acting like thuggish vandals out of a sense of unearned piety?
• Or anything along those lines?

I flee.

I flee into myself, I turn the page, I find another distraction, I fleetingly muse, “Oh, we just need to daven more and Hashem will take care of it…” (without immediately davening myself!).
 
Why?
 
Because these things cause me so much pain.

But even more, they make me very, very, very ANGRY.

And there’s nowhere to put that anger.
(Actually, there is. I could channel it into passionate prayer. But because the anger is so painful, I don't even do that much.)

And there’s nothing practical to do.

Demonstrations or confrontations? I get depleted in the worst way from the atmosphere and emotional upheaval the comes from such things—and it doesn’t change anything. People just hate you and whatever you stand for even more than they did before…and they can fight back in the worst way. They are capable of doing things that you, as a decent person, will not contemplate.
(Although the hundreds of sincere female religious worshipers who came to the Kotel to pray with sincerity in the face of the Women of the Wall was a nice idea that worked out well.)

Nor is there anyone to talk to.

The leaders are completely corrupt and consumed with narcissism. And their groupies…well, I know what their groupies are like having grown up with feminism, Conservative/Reform and all the rest, and having dealt with these people after I became frum. I know exactly how sincere, yet exactly how brainwashed and needy they are, and how unwilling they are to really hear the other side of things.

Unless they approach you, or unless they are already on a quest for truth, then there really is no point in addressing the issues because you’ll just come away feeling even worse, they'll despise you, and all for nothing.
 
Having been one myself, I know how self-righteous and determined they are while possessing very little actual knowledge.
 
On the other hand, I’ve spent years increasingly delving into classic Torah sources in the original Hebrew—and not by rote, but really thinking about what these great Torah Sages had to say to us and what they really meant and how to apply it today—because it is applicable today, despite what even some otherwise respectable charedi Orthodox Jews might tell you.
 
So, here is a picture of my world before I discovered Torah-true Judaism:

Ironically, I was consistently indoctrinated that the above is beautiful, colorful ("See? Look at the pretty red rose in the foreground!"), full of light and is the pinnacle of all there is.
 
Then I discovered Torah-true Judaism and it looked like this:

And I was amazed to see what color and light and beauty really looked like, even as it still looked kind of overcast and damp.

But the more I learned, the more I was dismayed and shocked at how much I’d been lied to (all with the best of intentions of course, by people who were just as deluded and deceived as I’d been).
 
And as I delved deeper and deeper, it started looking more like this:

And it’s only getting more expansive and awe-inspiring.

(Of course, I must also disclaim any rose-colored glasses. I see the warts in the frum world. I really do. But the actual Torah, the halacha, the real wisdom from real Sages, the increasing closeness to Hashem? It looks full of expansive color and beauty.)
 
And every time I read about the very disturbing issues listed above, all I can think is that they want to completely demolish everything and revert everything back to this while I’m sitting in the middle of it:

I can’t tell you how horrible the very idea is.

After all this expanse, color, and beauty, I kick and scream against having to ever go back to that dark gray ugly world again.
 
So it’s very easy for me to sit at home with my emuna and mussar books, surrounded by Torah-observant neighbors of whom I’m very fond, in my neighborhood which is designed especially for Jews like me, where Shabbat is a truly beautiful and peaceful place with no cars or stereos and the sound of different melodies of love-songs to Hashem flow out from open windows on Shabbat night, and to blog about emuna and the Kli Yakar and think I’m doing enough, and to blind myself to the ugly muddy tsunami that is rising around the pretty bubble of my own daled amot.

I’m wrong.
 
And the words of the Chafetz Chaim woke me up to that.
 
The people are drowning! And where am I?
Engrossed in my own daled amot, thank you very much.
 
But it’s not right. I’m basically sitting here as if thinking,
I can’t swim out that far. Anyway, there are sharks in the water and those drowning will just lob a spear into or upend my inflatable lifeboat, drowning me along with them. So I’ll just keep on doing my own personal best and hope that will weigh the scales to the side of merit.
 
Wrong! says the Chafetz Chaim. I need to care about all those lost Jews enough to pound the Heavens for their sake. Instead of running away from the disturbing news, I need to shout out to Hashem,
“STOP! I protest this madness! I protest this destruction! You must please turn these precious Jews around right now! You must please wake them up now and with a great deal of gentleness and kindness because they obviously can’t do it on their own! And while You're at it, if You could also gently shake me awake to do COMPLETE teshuvah from love, I'd be very grateful!”
 
If I really loved and cared about the people outside my own daled amot, this is what I would do. And b'ezrat Hashem, I'll already start.

When I was in college in America, there was a girl in our daily seminar whom I'll call “Toni.” She was a petite brunette with a gutsy, exuberant personality that bordered on obnoxious.
But she was so good-natured that everyone liked (or at least tolerated) her anyway.

She was also passionately and fanatically liberal.

Raised by a rabidly feminist single mother, Toni threw herself into battle for the liberal side in every class discussion.

Abortion is obviously the pet cause of every feminist extremist, and Toni’s mother had been no exception.

Except that her mother's abortion history was exceptional, even for the craziest fanatic.

One day in class, we were debating abortion and, as can be expected, the discussion went nuclear. Toni thrashed out all the standard talking points in favor of abortion, including the “right” to abortion for any reason and at any stage of the pregnancy.

Due to Toni’s increasing vehemence, people started quieting out of the debate. While nearly everyone present supported a "right" to abortion, most people also felt that having an abortion for what they considered a weak reason (like gender selection) or past a certain point pushed certain moral boundaries.

I seem to remember Toni up on a chair, shouting, and thrusting her finger at a male classmate who was calmly and somewhat anxiously trying to reason with her, validating her feelings, but just pleading for a fair hearing of the different angles of abortion.

But Toni only grew louder and more forceful about her position.

Finally, Toni shouted something like, “Abortion is a woman’s inalienable right that NO ONE has any right to take away! AND I KNOW ALL ABOUT ABORTION BECAUSE MY MOTHER HAD THIRTY* ABORTIONS AND I TOTALLY DEFEND HER RIGHT TO EACH AND EVERY ONE EVEN THOUGH I—I…”

Her voice cracked.

The room went silent as everyone just stared at Toni, who crumpled back down onto her chair, trying to hold back the tears that started streaming down her face.

Then she said, “Even though I always wondered why I wasn’t aborted too. When I was five or six, I asked my mom why she didn’t abort me, like she had and continued to do with her other pregnancies. ‘Is it because you knew it was me?’ I asked. But of course she didn’t know it was me. I was just lucky. And I don't know why. It was all so random.”

She looked around helplessly at us. “I’ve always gone through life with this feeling like I just missed the knife. But really, I should have been aborted too. I shouldn’t even be here. But I am. And who knows why?” She paused, then forced a smile through her pain. “And I always wondered about my siblings and who they would’ve been?”

“It sounds kinda like you have survivor’s guilt,” someone said gently.

“Yeah,” Toni said with a vigorous nod and a rueful laugh as she rubbed off her tears with the back of her hand. “I’ve always had this major survivor’s guilt. How was I the only one to escape the knife? Or whatever it was…”
 
That same day, two maternal girls named Julie and Nancy took Toni under their wing. They didn’t look like the maternal, nurturing type with their jeans and plaid flannel shirts (and Nancy enjoying a good day at the shooting range), but they both saw that vulnerable little Toni desperately needed some nurturing.

Unfortunately, radical feminists usually make terrible mothers. (Actually, even mainstream feminists often make terrible mothers.) They’re incredibly self-centered, resentful, and demanding. And what happens is that their children must validate their mother’s every action and view—even if it hurts the child—or lose that mother’s love completely.

This is why you have children of non-nurturing career-obsessed materialistic women who proclaim their undying admiration of their mother and insist they loved how she raised them (though she just shunted them out of her way).
 
If the children don’t do this, their mother wholly rejects and despises them.
(This is exactly what happened to Rebecca Walker, daughter of feminist icon Alice Walker, who wrote the celebrated The Color of Purple.)
 
In Toni’s case, Toni even needed to defend the killing of her unborn siblings and the theoretical annihilation of her own existence in utero in order to keep her mother’s love. Especially with no father around, young Toni would have subconsciously realized as a child that she was wholly dependent on this heartless woman for her bare existence.
 
And that’s pretty terrifying.
 
Baruch Hashem, the survival-driven façade of defending her mother’s “right” to commit heart-breaking depravity simply crumbled.
 
That day, Julie and Nancy headed over to Toni’s apartment to spend the night there, making sure Toni was okay.
 
The rest of the year, they made a cute threesome, with Julie and Nancy affectionately calling Toni “Li’l Ton-Ton” and stuff like that. They weren’t overbearing; they were gentle, supportive, and honest and just what Toni needed. And while Toni kept her outgoing, high-spirited nature, she lost the blaring coarse behavior she used to sometimes engage in.

But it was true that in the encroaching Leftist environment of the Nineties, Toni wasn’t allowed to have her say until it just came gushing out by mistake. You really weren’t allowed to have normal feelings or even basic morality. (Sort of like the Nazi era or the Communist era.) A lot of people, especially girls, were in a lot of pain, but they weren't allowed to acknowledge the real reason why because that would've demanded healthy accountability from the adults of either gender.

Despite all the liberal propaganda, you weren't really allowed a choice and there was no real freedom.

You were just a slave to the agenda of the most degenerate, selfish people who were running things, whether it was government, social programs, schools, the media, and all the regular people influenced by them.

And that’s why I left it all behind.
_____________________________
*While I’m writing this to the best of my memory, it still happened over 20 years ago, so maybe some details are off. Even if Toni's mother didn’t have 30 abortions, it was still some shockingly high number that left even the most degenerate Leftist wide-eyed and slack-jawed.

When I was in college and just becoming frum, I was surprised to see a fat lady in a shaitel and fur coat strutting around outside the classroom one day.

As the only obviously frum Jew (I was wearing long skirts and long-sleeved shirts) in the college, her demeanor embarrassed me; I looked around, hoping that no one would associate her strutting and her nose stuck up in the air (literally!) as anything to do with me.

I felt even more anxious after I entered the classroom and I saw her stride in too, constantly swishing her fur coat and swiveling her head around in a very show-offy way.

But after we were all settled in, our professors introduced this guest as a “former” man who was one of the pioneers of transgender surgery.

Boy, was I relieved!

Not only wasn’t this person frum, but he wasn’t even really a lady!

I was also happy for the opportunity to ask questions that I’d always had about these people—and here it was!

First of all, he spoke in a fairly male voice (the operation can’t adjust everything) and he said everything in this commanding tone of voice while strutting back and forth all the time.

Not terribly feminine, I'm sure you'll agree.

We asked him to what gender he was attracted before the operation, and also how feeling like he was actually female in the body of a male was different than same-gender-attraction. I can’t remember exactly what he said because he refused to answer the question and spouted off a bunch of mumbo-jumbo, which left me feeling confused and as I looked around, I saw the same confusion on the faces of my classmates.

Basically, he refused to say whether he had been attracted to men or women before the operation, which is weird.  

However, it would have been rude and politically incorrect to push the point too much, so we didn’t.

But his basic conclusion was that we “regular people” couldn’t understand people like him.

(Of course! Because the answer to "Were you attracted to men or women?" is waaay too complicated. Oh, sure.)

Then he told us his story. Mostly, it was about the pre-op and operation itself, rather than his family background, experiences, and self-discovery (which if he'd really been female, would've been considered the most important).

As he related his experiences prior to surgery, he suddenly said, “And I needed to prepare myself psychologically to be a woman!”

I frowned at that. After all, he apparently already was a woman! I mean, that’s why he was so big on the operation, right?
He simply needed to change his body to fit his mind and inner self.
So why and what exactly did he need to “prepare”?

He declared, “I knew that the minute I would get up off that operating table, I would need to compete! I needed to be ready at all times! Every time I’d leave the house, I’d need to be ready for that competition every moment!”

Hmm…constant vigilance and competition? Sounds like stereotypical male qualities to me!

After looking around to see whether my fellow female classmates were as mystified by this idea as I was (yes they were), I raised my hand and said nicely, “Excuse me—I’m sorry—but I’m just trying to understand what you mean by ‘compete’?”

He laughed at me. (It was a full-belly, chuckley masculine laugh—the same kind of condescending male laugh that sparked the feminist movement.)

I waited for an answer, but there was none. Just that incredibly annoying laugh. So I continued, “It’s just that…well, I’m a woman and…I don’t feel like I’m competing with other women. I mean, certainly, I don’t think about competition every time I leave the house.”

The other young women present (which was most of the class) nodded in agreement and murmured things like, “Yeah, I also don’t feel that way. I don’t feel like I’m competing, I don’t think about competition every time I walk out the door.”

He laughed again. “Oh, yes, you are! You’re definitely in a competition! You’re just not aware of it. Women compete all the time. You may not think you’re competing, but you are!”

Well, I was a bit rattled by him telling me what I secretly think and I feel. Very condescending. And yet again, it was one of those stereotypical masculine behaviors that drove a generation of women into feminism.

Also, I found his tone and manner of speaking rather aggressive.

“I don’t deny there times that women do get competitive with each other,” I explained, “but I really don’t feel competitive every minute of the day. And I’ve never heard any other women express that. I’m sorry, but I really don’t understand what you mean.”

And I was also thinking that feeling competitive like that all day long sounded very unpleasant. Why would he have an operation that would put him in that kind of situation?

Unless, of course, he liked competition—just like those Alpha male types!

But he smirked and just repeated that I wasn’t aware of my real feelings. Still smirking, he added, “You compete for men.”

Now I was really offended. (Yes—offended! And with no campus “safe space” available for me to cower in!) To my mind, only icky girls competed with each other for men. How dare he imply that I was an icky girl!

“No, I don’t compete for men,” I said, aghast. “I would never play those kinds of games. And I’ve never had a friend who does. You’re right that some women do, but they’re usually not so emotionally healthy.”

He responded by tossing his auburn-clad head, flapped his hand at me dismissively, and went on with his saga.

Well, in addition to getting all ready for all that imaginary competition, the other thing he did after getting up from the operating table was to physically engage with as many male partners as possible - if you get my drift. Like hundreds of partners over the few months following the operation.

Needless to say, this is not normal female behavior. Even very licentious women don’t go to that degree.

Once again, such trampy behavior is much more typical of men (even though this is definitely not typical of your average man). But it is most common in men attracted to other men.

Suddenly, he made an outrageous statement (paraphrased to avoid censorship by my filter): There is no difference between forcibly violating a woman and engaging a woman in a casual consensual encounter!

He continued to proclaim that they were exactly the same and that there was no difference between them.

I think all we females did a double-take as one. Even the female professors did a double-take and looked around uncomfortably.

The guys in the room looked shocked and uncomfortable.

Of course, this was too much and we females protested this highly offensive statement.

(The guys looked relieved. Phew! So we're not criminals after all!)

He loudly disagreed and changed the subject by continuing with his story.
(Just like a man!)

It occurred to me that only a man could equate the two situations. And even so, most men wouldn’t.

At one point, I asked him why trans males needed to be female. Why couldn’t they do stereotypically female things while being a man? And why did they dress so differently from normal women? If you’ve ever seen them, they dress like the male objectification of women. Real women dress casually most of the time. (And yes, I realize that this trans guy didn't dress as provocatively as many trans do, but maybe that was because he was obese.) After all, we’ve all known women who refuse to wear skirts and women who seem naturally attracted to stereotypically male roles. How was this different?

He was thrown off by the questions and just blustered about.

And that's all I can remember at this point.
___________________________
Anyway, I'm concerned about Western culture's attitude and support of this obviously problematic mindset because it affects the Jewish community too. Even some Orthodox Jews end up swallowing the Leftist pseudo-science talking points regarding abortion and same-gender attraction.

These men are obviously very messed up and rather than actually identify with femininity, they seem to have a very stupid and stereotypically male (not ALL males, but the shallow beastly kind) idea of the female personality. Rather than showing themselves to be women, they encapsulate the kind of shallow unrealistic image of women held by only the most piggish kind of men.

Yet there is a powerful movement to impose validation of this onto society.

And that is pretty scary.
___________________
Continue on to Part II.

More and more, I've come to realize that being a Jew who keeps Torah and mitzvot is like living in another dimension within a dimension.

If you've been making a real effort to come close to Hashem (however clumsily) and to internalize Torah values, it colors everything you see.

It colors it with Truth.

You end up living in a dimension rich with the most beautiful colors, but this multi-hued dimension exists within a dimension comprised of varying shades of gray blah.

And you increasingly see things (including yourself) as they really are.

Mostly, it's a beautiful and enriching experience that calls for a lot of gratitude.

But when someone from the outer gray dimension makes contact and does so with the desire to invade your dimension with their depressing gray tints, accompanied by resistance to your pouring some of your colorful stuff back into their blah dimension, it just becomes an unwanted and irritating experience.

For example, I recently got an email from someone who is not Jewish, but thinks they are. The email mourned the fact that a local and identifiably Jewish institution, along with many other such institutions around the country, has now received a terrorist threat.

And I knew what was coming and what the mournful tone disguised.

So guess who my contact blamed? Trump and Pence.

(Yeah, Pence, who recently cleaned up a Jewish cemetery after an antisemitic hit.)

Never mind the facts, like how antisemitism saw its upswing during Obama's years.

Never mind that it was Obama's administration that allowed so many Jew-haters into the country.

Never mind the spiritual message that, as the End approaches, Hashem would like some more teshuvah from His beloved Nation (and for certain non-Jews, including fake converts - however innocent and well-intentioned - and smarmy evangelicals, to stop mucking around).

I would have liked to explain that it's not Trump's policies that lead to antisemitism, it is the psychotically knee-jerk opposition to Trump's policies that emboldens Jew-haters.

But I didn't bother.

There are different kinds of Jew-haters.

White supremacists, for example, see the anti-white racism and anti-male bigotry in the wake of anything Trump does or says, and they conclude that the anti-white racism, the politically correct censorship, and "reverse" chauvinism built up under Obama won't go away without their nasty "help."

And then there are the Jew-haters in the Arab world. Over the years, I learned the hard way that it is impossible to explain Arab mentality to American liberals. They don't want to hear that different value systems genuinely exist, or that someone of the opposite perception may honestly believe in their perception as the emesdikker emes (the truest Truth) as much as the liberal believes in his or her perception as the emesdikker emes. 

And the truth is that if American society (or at least its media) presented a united front with their President while coming down hard on ANYBODY (regardless of race, gender, citizenship, etc.) who don't toe the line of law in America, terrorists would leave Americans alone. (It would have been better, however, if Obama's people hadn't let them and their nasty preachers in the first place.) With years of clan violence under their belts, Islamofacists are experts at spotting a breach and then exploiting it.

And in part, that's what's happening.

Of course, you can (and should) criticize a President's policies if they're bad. But as far as a big part of the Arab world goes, this media-driven free-for-all against the President (even when he's right) is the same as waving a fresh juicy carcass in front of a ravenous panther.

And I'm saying this as someone who is not pro-Trump (although I'm enjoying his presidency so far) and thinks that he ultimately will not do the right thing by Eretz Israel.

When I hear of Jews being hurt, I think I need to daven more and take on more mitzvot.

In other words, I need to do some soul-searching.

But I also think that the person who emailed me needs to do some soul-searching.

• Being a Noachide is fine.
• Being a Torah-observant Jew is fine.

But being a fake Jew who marries a real Jew and then raises their children as fake Jews who might marry real Jews? In other words, increasing intermarriage under false pretenses and totally misrepresenting Torah Truth?
Not okay.
Really, horribly, tragically not okay.

But I can't say anything, neither politically nor spiritually.

Liberals tend to be political evangelicals. They tell you what you need to think. They aren't interested in hearing the other side. To deceive you, they approach you in an amicable manner and open a dialogue with you by asking questions.
But it's all in order to convert you to their distorted theology.

Conservatives can do this, too, of course. The difference is that:
A) The conservative position is usually the correct one and can be proven so.
B) Because everything in society and the media is vociferously against conservative values, conservatives are usually well-informed of the opposing opinions and not speaking from a place of total and complete ignorance.

Anyway, I know that anything I say in reply will simply not be heard.

I know I'll just be knocked with kindergarten-level talking points that show no real knowledge or understanding of the subject and have nothing to do with whatever I just said.

And so I just press "Delete."

And I also find myself speechless in gratitude and amazement that Hashem plucked me out of all that mind-altering Leftist muck and put me in a place where my soul has at least a fighting chance.

(And thank you very much to all of you fine frum Jews - whether FFB or BT or converts - who've used your hearts, homes, words, and deeds - whether big or small - so that people like me could make this journey in the first place.)

Originally appeared in the Hebrew-language Kol Hayehudi online newspaper HERE.
(Thank you very much to Neshama at Going Home...to Yerushalayim, both for posting this herself and for taking the thought and effort to make sure I saw it.)

Here the Kol Hayehudi article in English:
(Since it's my translation, any errors are also mine.)

*Farbrengen is a Chabad/Lubavitch tradition in which like-minded people gather together to inspire each other toward spiritual advancement.
(In Hebrew, a farbrengen is called a hitva’adut.)
Chassidic melodies are sung, Torah and Chassidus are discussed within in the context of personal character development. Participants are supposed to discuss and pinpoint character flaws along with suggestions for improvement.
Apparently, people improving their character and working on their middot are of great concern to Israel’s security.
ISIS enthusiasts working on their Jihad are, of course, far less threatening. ;)

One of the things that liberal Jews and everyone else likes to have conniptions about is how Jewish immigrants were also discriminated against and later banned from coming just as they were being genocided in Europe.

So as Jews, we are supposed to understand and empathize with all immigrants.


Furthermore, because Jews have done well in America (proving discrimination and bans against Jewish immigrants to have been very wrong), many Jews feel this means that all immigrants should be given a chance.

Well, the one HUGE difference between Jews and everyone else is that fundamental American stuff, like the Constitution and many Western laws and cultural values, are based on Judaism. In other words, Jews are the source for American culture. This is why, for example, there is exists the term “Judeo-Christian values.” Notice how you’ve never heard terms like “Islamo-Christian values” or “Animist-Christian values” or “Hindu-Christian values.”

(FYI: "Judeo-Christian" is not an accurate term. Yeah, we all know what people mean when they say it, but just to be nitpicky: Any Jewish values found in Christianity are still just that: Jewish. And any Christian values are not.)

Anyway, there was no problem letting Jews in because Jews upheld—heck, invented—the very values America held dear. (Well, not "invented," per se, but transmitted directly from God...)

Jews also lacked the crime and alcoholism rate to which other groups—like the Irish and Italians—were prone.
(Although we love your accents, Irish people! And we love your food, Italian people!)

And for better or for worse, Jews wanted to assimilate.

(This is actually a bad trait in Jewish immigrants, but it tends to be a good trait for everyone else coming to America.)

In general, Jews wanted to be American and speak English and get educated and rich, move into nice neighborhoods, and get along with everyone.

(And even the minority of Jewish immigrants that did sequester themselves do not display the terrible socio-economic problems that other immigrant neighborhoods in America and Europe show. Yes, I know there are problems. But it is not the same as Mexican, African, or Muslim immigrant neighborhoods. It's just not.)

Do Papuans and Syrians and Mexicans want to wholly assimilate into America? Likely some really do. But as things look right now, a large percentage of them don’t.
(And if you don't believe me, then please read The Immigration Dilemma: Part of the Geula Process and Refusing the Wretched Refuse.)

Another big difference was that Jews helped—and still help—their fellow Jewish immigrants in America.

Even the very early Jewish immigration (late 1800s-early 1900s) from Europe received help.

From whom, you might ask?

Sephardim were the first Jews to settle America. They were a bit embarrassed by their impoverished and not-as-snazzy brethren arriving from Eastern Europe, so they were surreptitious about the aid they provided, but the early Jewish aid organizations were largely funded by Sephardim. (You just didn’t see them much in the actual flesh.)

Likewise, the massive Jewish immigration from Russia received enormous help from the present Jewish communities in the USA. Jewish communities generously helped with subsidizing housing, school placement and tuition to Jewish schools, food, furniture, and job placement.

For some reason, people (including many Jews themselves) hate to acknowledge this, but Jews as immigrants are and have always been in a class of their own.

And again, our value system provided America with its value system. We are the source.

Jews need to stop projecting their image onto immigrants from primitive and brutal cultures.

It’s simply not accurate or helpful.

I couldn’t stop thinking about the little news announcement that President Trump will allow the 1250 “refugees” from Papua New Guinea that Obama agreed to take from Australia.

(Australia is pretty big and not crowded. Why couldn't it take them all? Maybe it doesn't want to? Why not? We'll soon see...)

Also my blog provider, Weebly, which provides a wonderful service, recently sent an email requesting donations for an organization which helps relocate refugees and helps refugees “get their slice of the American dream.”

The problem is, many refugees today aren’t interested in the American dream.

(It's also disturbing because there are so many American children and elderly suffering in bad situations. Why does everybody ignore them and insist on donations for carbon footprints and refugees who might be sociopaths?)

I already wrote about immigration here, but I thought I’d write about it again.

Why?

Well, this week's Haftarah in Yirmeyahu/Jeremiah linked to other chapters of Yirmeyahu which discuss nations being punished by being invaded from other nations. And I think we're seeing this now. But it's being done slowly because Hashem is infinitely Compassionate and Merciful and gives us loads of time to shape up.

Anyway, growing up in America’s Eighties, I saw a lot of immigrants, mostly Pacific Asian and Russian. And they did really well in America.

They wanted to do well.

Then, on a visit to London, I saw a lot of wealthy Hindus from India in Rolls Royces.

British friends of mine told me of the high-quality treatment they received from Pakistani doctors.

Immigrants of that time also wanted to adapt to American (or British) culture, and not just enjoy the goodies the West has to offer while hanging on to all their old cultural baggage that ruined their country of origin in the first place.

In fact, that was the truth about a lot of immigrants.

Sure, the desire to acclimate depended on age. Younger immigrants more strongly desired and found it easier to take on the new culture and its language. It also depended on where they lived to some extent. A wholly immigrant neighborhood made and still makes it harder for its residents to acclimate to the new culture.

But Third World immigration is a whole new ballgame today.

Not only is the technological difference vaster than ever (I remember hearing last year that part of acclimating immigrants from South America is teaching them to use an indoor flushing toilet), but the cultural differences are also vast.

While many of these parts of the world are plagued with gang violence, armed skirmishes, and a horribly corrupt government, their underlying culture is problematic on its own.

Let’s look at Papua New Guinea:
(And why are these people being called “refugees” anyway?)

• 2/3 of all households suffer from domestic violence. (Were the incoming immigrants screened for this?)
• In Bougainville, 80% of all men say that they committed physical violence or worse against a girl friend or wife. (I sure hope that none of the incoming Papuans are males from Bougainville!)
• Polygamy is common among Papuans, with the new wife sometimes joining in with the husband to physically abuse the first wife. (Were the “refugees” screened for this, too?)

Travel advisories also tell us a lot:

• Visitors to Papua New Guinea are advised that making eye contact at all is disrespectful. Speaking loudly and making eye contact is considered very rude.

Why, I’m sure these people will fit right in with American culture, no problem!

• Also, Papuans are apparently so violently impulsive (“temperamental” in Travel Advisory-speak) that if there is an accident (even if you are not at all at fault) in which a person, pig, or chicken is hurt, then you are advised to keep driving until you reach the nearest police station.

This means that you are forced to participate in the act of hit-and-run that is so despised and illegal in American culture - even if a person is hurt and you want to help him.

Also, what if a Papuan is driving recklessly in, say, Miami and hits you, killing his chicken?
Can you imagine getting out of your car to exchange the accepted info (and even accept an apology) only to face an outraged Tok Pisin-speaker brandishing a knife?

(I forgot to mention that in Papua New Guinea, everyone carries a bush knife.)

• The Papuan rate of AIDS/HIV is the highest in Oceania. Studies show that this is due to the high rate of aggression against women and the high rate of drug and alcohol abuse.

Gosh, just the kind of people we’d like to have living next door!
No wonder feminists are leading the crusade to accept immigrants!

• Another thing that irks Papuans is if someone seems to be practicing some kind of sorcery. I do not know what the signs of a sorcerer are in Papua New Guinea, but if they just suspect you of casting spells or whatever, they tend to get extremely “temperamental.” Accusations of sorcery are especially common against women.

 

• Cannibalism is a problem is some areas of Papua New Guinea, but I’m sure none of the new “refugees” are from those tribes.

In "vetting" we trust!

The West has not yet realized that different cultures cling to different values.

Many people coming to America just want free stuff and indoor plumbing.

Many are just fine with the values of their native culture, even to their detriment.


For example, many Muslim women think that husbands have a right to beat their wives. Also, the female “circumcision” so common in Muslim and African cultures is often carried out by women. In cases in which the father is willing to forgo it for his daughters, the mother often insists on it.

Here in Israel, we are very familiar with the fondness primitive people have for their unholy values. The pitiable African refugees allowed in by soft-hearted border guards and black-hearted politicians have wreaked havoc in the Israeli neighborhoods they’ve taken over. And if you ask Muslim men in Israel what they think of wife-beating, you’ll receive very honest and confident answers. In fact, if you ask them what they think of suicide bombings, you’ll also get honest and confident answers.

Israel recently and wrongly accepted 100 Syrian orphans. This is a terrible mistake because history has shown there is no chance these orphans will recall this kindness with any kind of gratitude. In one generation, these orphans will multiply to at least 500 people who want to destroy Israel.

The Arab culture in Israel indoctrinates its children toward hatred and Jihad. And the brainwashing is intense, as MEMRI has proven. And does anyone remember the Pan-Arab popular Iranian TV series, Zahra’s Blue Eyes? The story takes place in Israel's West Bank and is about a little Arab girl named Zahra with eyes so beautiful that the monstrous Israelis wanted to pry her eyes out of her face to transplant them into someone else's. Or something.

(As if we don't have beautiful eyes of our own!)

And anyway, places like Dubai and Saudi Arabia have plenty of room and funds to help not just 100 orphans, but 10,000 orphans.

So why can't they just hate us from over there?

Do you know one of the big differences between sociopaths and normal people?

Sociopaths think that horrific things like torture, dismemberment, assault, and murder are only bad if it happens to them personally.


They have no problem with it happening to other people, and they can even do it themselves to other people.

So just because a Third World person is crying about the suffering in their native land doesn’t mean anyone should take them in.

First, I want to know if torture, dismemberment, theft, and assault only bothers them when it happens to them, or if it bothers them when it happens to other people, too.

I also want to make sure that they won’t do to others the bad things that have been done to them.

Can Weebly promise me that donations will not be used to relocate within America people who are fans of female "circumcision," domestic violence, violence in general, and people who won't become "temperamental" if someone injures their chicken or looks them in the eye while enthusing about some lame tweet against the latest Ben Shapiro speech?

Along these lines of the above-quoted Hillel's famous phrase from Shabbat 31a, people who identify with bad people are showing that they themselves are bad people.

Americans who ignore the suffering of, say, their own children and elderly (who are likely basically decent people) in favor of helping people of whom the majority seem to hold reprehensible values close to their heart, are unconsciously showing with whom they identify and empathize.

And this is very disturbing.

Part 1|Part 2|Part 3|Part 4|Part 5|Part 6|Part 7|Part 8|Part 9|Part 10|Part 11|Part 12|

So...what are the take-aways?

• Evil people and societies don’t sit around rubbing their hands together while cackling gleefully, “I’m soooo evil—and I love it!” Nor do they realize they are crazy. They ALWAYS think they are the victimized class and see the real victims as oppressors - which gives them the feeling that they can do ANYTHING they want.

 

• “Nice” people are perfectly capable of going along with and even actively maintaining very evil policies and values. (And I don’t mean pretenders, but people who genuinely value “nice” behavior). As counterintuitive as it sounds, being “nice” doesn’t mean you can’t also be a bad person. Of course, truly good people also behave nicely, but people must be judged on the actual values they uphold AND display, and not on how “nice” they are.

 

• Love of animals, veganism/vegetarianism, appreciation of nature, and a calm and healthy lifestyle cannot make you into a good person and by themselves are not even signs of goodness.
  

 

• Historically, when society demands a savior and then willfully ignores the blatant flaws in their designated savior, this is a precursor to tough times and bloodthirsty movements.

 

• Historically, movements that focused primarily on income equality or general economic prosperity (i.e. materialism) and “sticking it to the other side” led to bloody outcomes. Movements that focused on God and core values and morality (i.e. the Ten Commandments, the Noachide Laws, etc.) have done much better. A society that values morality will also have more freedom and economic prosperity.

______________________________________________

And based on historical events and what I see unfolding now, here is what I think could happen:

• Anti-Israel sentiment will continue to rise. With the exception of the alt-Right (alternative and extreme Right), people cannot allow themselves to target Jews directly (especially seeing as the Left itself is comprised of many secular Jews) and still FEEL like a good person (because feeling good has trumped actually being good in most of society today). But like that former Hitler Youth member mentioned in Part 4, they feel it’s okay to yell “Death to…!” a country.

 

• President Trump will want to go down in history as the leader who made peace in the Middle East (which for some reason, always means "in Israel" and ignores all the wars between countries and clans in every other country in the Middle East). He has already made statements alluding to this. And seeing as the Israeli government is easier to push around than any other government in the Middle East, he will press on Israel to make suicidal and halachically forbidden concessions.

 

• Furthermore, Trump has already chosen as his chief strategist Steve Bannon who, while never personally heard spewing Jew-hatred, has shown himself perfectly willing to cater to the alt-Right Jew-haters. Trump has also chosen General James Mattis as Secretary of Defense. Mattis is sympathetic to the Arab side regarding Israel, even though he is not sympathetic to the Arab side in general, especially when it's Arab vs American. (See HERE.)

 

• The American Left will up its battle against religion because it is religious people who are standing in the way of abortion-on-demand, same-gender marriage, and all the trans hype. (Although they are not standing in the way ENOUGH. Yet to Leftists, any limits are bad.) But again, because attacking Jews would harm their self-image as good people, Leftists will attack the Jewish religion (along with other religions, except for Islam) along with whatever they consider “Orthodox interpretation” while saying that the Reform movement and secular Jews are okay. (Sort of like in Rav Schach’s story in Part 2.)

Following these points, Jew-hatred will be increasingly expressed as Israel-hatred.

But maybe I’m wrong. Hopefully, I’m wrong.

Regardless, the main thing is to cultivate a close and personal relationship with Hashem, invest in deep self-introspection to scrub out bad traits and polish up good traits, and keep on doing mitzvot.

As is a well-known Jewish truth, bad omens and bad prophecies need never come true.

Teshuvah has the power to change everything.

Part 1|Part 2|Part 3|Part 4|Part 5|Part 6|Part 7|Part 8|Part 9|Part 10|Part 11|Part 12|

Part 1|Part 2|Part 3|Part 4|Part 5|Part 6|Part 7|Part 8|Part 9|Part 10|Part 11|Part 12|

One of the most powerful weapons of propaganda used by the Left has been TV and movies.

Nazis and Communists also used entertainment media as weapons. Back then, radio took the place of today’s TV, but movies were certainly utilized to push the desired narrative.


For example, children dying for the Nazi cause were glorified, especially in one film based on a true incident in which a teenage boy died in a brutal streetfight against Communists in Germany.

But Hitler also appeared on screen. In one 1934 docudrama, Hitler makes a speech which contains statements like:

It almost sounds like Sesame Street.

Except that he left out the part in which hundreds of thousands of Jewish babies are dumped into fire pits.



Making Moral Degeneracy Appealing

The American film industry has always been horrible.

Film and TV producers were moral degenerates. Time and again, movie stars engaged in behavior so disturbing that Hollywood conspired to hide it from the public. The American reaction to such behavior depended on the times.

In the Fifties, having a child conceived extramaritally was terribly scandalous (as it should be) and the appearance of virtue was de riguer. Today, standards are nauseatingly low. A racist epithet uttered by a white person (reverse racism is okay, though) could erase a celebrity’s popularity, as could violating a child (not a teenager, but an actual child). But almost anything else goes.

It depends.

But the point is that the main influence on American culture has always been run by moral degenerates who were always pushing the bar of decency to reflect their own values and make the world a more comfortable place for moral degenerates like themselves.

And in order for them to succeed, they had to make their worldview appealing.

A few years ago, someone showed me a 20-minute 1928 Laurel & Hardy film. I was shocked at how indecent it was—and all the indecency was covered up by theatrical “Har-har, just kidding!” wackiness:

• Cops were portrayed as petty incompetents.

 

• Convicted criminals escaping from prison were portrayed sympathetically, with the audience clearly meant to hope for the prison escapee’s success.

 

• The running joke through the movie was getting pinched on the backside by hermit crabs (naughty kindergarten humor) and there was even a scene that clearly hinted at same-gender relations in an alley, but to innocents, would merely seem like more naughty kindergarten humor (i.e., two men exiting an alley after using it as a bathroom).

And this was 1928!

Back then, most Americans considered police officers to be the good guys and prison escapees as posing a serious threat to public safety. But in the movies, you could completely switch these values as long as it was all in fun.

Even today, as long as you make people laugh, you can get away with anything on TV.

Emphasizing the "Right" Look: Nazi Germany and Modern America
Just as the Nazis promoted a certain “look” as Aryan, Western media also portrays attractive people in a certain way—even if that way changes slightly from decade to decade. Women and girls have been particularly targeted, with the result being a dramatic increase in eating disorders, plastic surgery (including bizarre plastic surgery, like the Pacific Asian girls who change their bellybuttons or eyelids to conform to those of Caucasians), and the increasingly complex use of cosmetics.

And despite all the “black pride” blather, female black celebrities continue to use hair treatments, make-up, and Photoshop to achieve the “white” look considered more attractive (to Hollywood people, anyway).

In fact, despite all the media focus on “racism,” I think that a fat girl or boy is much more likely to experience harassment and discrimination than a black boy or girl in an all-white environment.

Hollywood-Style Strategic Propoganda and Brainwashing
In his bestselling book Primetime Propaganda: The True Hollywood Story of How the Left Took Over Your TV*, Ben Shapiro (a Modern Orthodox activist for political Conservatism) goes through the greedy history of TV programming and shows how even family-oriented TV shows promoted Liberal values. He also captured on tape the TV producers’ blatant agenda to warp American values via their TV shows.

For example, the 1983 made-for-TV movie, The Day After, which freaked out my generation with its graphic images of the effect of a nuclear bombs, was produced and directed by a man who stated: "My private, grandiose notion was that this movie would unseat Ronald Reagan when he ran for re-election."

While some Hollywood writers and directors focused primarily on getting a good story on screen, with their programs only incidentally reflecting their Liberal politics, many clearly stated an agenda to actively change the minds of society.

It’s chilling to realize how much thought and care they put into portraying a controversial opinion or character in just the right way, so as to manipulate their viewers.

Some of it was good and fair representation, such as putting non-white actors on TV and moving away from racial pigeon-holing (with positive presentations like The Cosby Show and the introduction of an attractive, well-spoken black couple on The Dick van Dyke Show).

But some writers and directors describe outright their agendas.

For example, some knowingly downplayed the actual behavior common in men attracted to their own gender while portraying women as behaving—not even as straight men behave, think, or speak—but as how men-attracted-to-men behave, think, and speak. They do this knowing that the average woman does not behave this way.

Fathers have been increasingly portrayed as fools or completely irrelevant.

In fact, Hollywood considers the paternal role so irrelevant that a TV program may choose not to feature the father of a baby (unborn or otherwise) at all. 

In some Hollywood minds, fathers aren't just invisible; they don't even seem to exist.

Yet Hollywood responds to any criticism by claiming it is merely reflecting real life.

Sometimes, enclosed within their urban Manhattan or luxurious LA bubble, they honestly believe that the nihilistic, atheistic, pagan, or degenerate views and lifestyles they depict on their shows are, indeed, “real life.” But sometimes, they simply feel that such views and lifestyles should be real life and actively seek to impose this on society at large.

This is one of the most disturbing aspects and most similar to Nazi propaganda:
They willfully portray a group as very different than that group actually is in order to change the beliefs and value system of society.

In other words, they knowingly promote a false image in order to fool society.

It’s really no different than the cultivated propaganda of the Nazi or Communist era. It’s a lot more sophisticated this time around, but no less intentional. And like Nazis and Communists, they intentionally inflame hatred against target groups and ideas while garnering sympathy for other target groups or ideas.

Sacrificing Everything to Moloch - What Altruistic Dedication!
Even more shockingly, Hollywood directors and writers are so committed to their degenerate propaganda that they cast aside their own greed to these deceptive ends.

For example, they’ll fight to keep a show that promotes their sick value system even if the show loses money for their network and even if viewers show no interest (or lose interest) in that show. This kind of warped mesirut nefesh is what the Nazis displayed in World War II when, despite heavy losses on the war front, they diverted their people’s much-needed resources to keep the death camps going.

The Nazis' genocidal ideals became more important than the most basic survival of their society and the physical survival of their fellow citizens. To the Nazis, killing a Jewish baby was more important than saving a fellow German soldier or citizen and even took precedence over the barest survival of their glorified Third Reich.

Likewise, Hollywood Leftists consider the destruction of unborn babies and fundamentally essential institutions (like marriage and basic morality) to be more important than anything else. In fact, the cop shows and music videos of a rap culture that glorifies violence, misogyny, and licentiousness show black people at their worst (all created by  self-preening white Liberals). Such programming not only perpetuates negative stereotypes, but has imposed this culture so forcefully that even white upper-class youth seek to imitate it.

The Very Real and Destructive Effect of Hollywood on Society
As un-PC as it is to say it, widespread unwed motherhood has basically destroyed America's black community and is on its way to destroying the rest of the USA.

Regardless of race or class, prison incarceration, drug and alcohol use, dissolute and indiscriminate behavior on the part of girls, same-gender-attraction, and more can all be traced back to whether there was a steady and positive paternal influence in life or not.

(For example, a lot of problems in the black community - including the higher prison rates - correlate with being raised by an unwed mother with no steady father around. Meaning, that problems in the black community have nothing to do with racism and everything to do with radical feminism. White people raised by unwed mothers show similar statistics to black people raised by unwed mothers. The rate of unwed motherhood in the black community is 70%, which is why you see higher crime rates and the like.)

Hardly anyone wants to talk about or acknowledge this.
(And if you want to point out the pervasive influence of entertainment media on society, the importance of fathers has become somewhat taboo in frum society, to the point that clear halachic obligations applying to men are either dismissed or minimized - despite the fact that many frum people do not watch TV or movies. Yet the influences of general society eventually licks at the frum community, too.)

Of course, some people raised by an unwed mother without any father at all still turn out splendidly and boast of what a wonderful life they've had in their one-parent home. But most people either fare poorly OR fare okay, but could have fared better with a decent father at home.

And the Moral and Virtuous Right Did...Nothing! Of Course!
And right-wing Conservatives basically laid themselves down before the media steamroller. With the exception of scattered individuals, they didn’t turn off their TVs (nor did they limit themselves to watching the very few “kosher” programs available), they didn’t stop going to the movie theaters, nor did they consistently organize massive letter-writing campaigns to protest the programming.
(Sometimes, huge letter-writing campaigns occurred, but not frequently enough.)

And even though Conservatives have the financial resources to do so, they never tried to make a “Conservative TV channel,” even through cable or Internet streaming, and have done very little with independent movie productions (admittedly a big challenge, technologically and financially speaking, but not impossible—and with rising success, opportunities also rise).

Not only that, right-wing Conservatives even allowed themselves to absorb some of the values of the Left. When discussing their pro-life position, they no longer push the “wait until marriage” method, but instead promote methods of pregnancy prevention or, b’dievad, placing one’s child up for adoption.
And even self-defined religious Conservative women have fallen into the desire to look “hot,” with the accompanying expectation to be taken seriously as a professional no matter how distracting or alluring their appearance—and with the blatant double standard that men absolutely may NEVER do the same.








Using foul language has also become acceptable among right-wing Conservatives, even those who consider themselves religious.

So TV and movies continue to promote same-gender attraction, premarital intimacy, unwed motherhood, abortion, fake science, paganism (witches started to be portrayed sympathetically in the Eighties and Eastern spiritualism is promoted), environmentalism, atheism, animal rights (beyond the Torah prohibition of cruelty toward animals), and more.

And they continue to succeed in brainwashing society to think like them.
__________________________________________
*Due to the incredibly foul language and concepts (and even the plot lines of some of the TV shows themselves) expressed by many of the Hollywood bigwigs interviewed by Shapiro in Primetime Propaganda (which was softened a bit via the time-honored method of “strategically placed hyphens”), I ended up not reading the whole book, but simply skipped to the end where Shapiro offers analyses and solutions. It’s a great expose if you need it (or if someone you know needs it) and Shapiro shows his usual brilliance and thoroughness, but because of the language, it falls in the “Did I REALLY need to read this after all?” category of books as far as I’m concerned.

Just being honest.

Part 1|Part 2|Part 3|Part 4|Part 5|Part 6|Part 7|Part 8|Part 9|Part 10|Part 11|Part 12|

Part 1|Part 2|Part 3|Part 4|Part 5|Part 6|Part 7|Part 8|Part 9|Part 10|Part 11|Part 12| 

In NAZI GREENS - An Inconvenient History, Martin Durkin writes:
 
“The Nazis conducted horrific experiments on children (I have seen footage so upsetting it can’t be shown on TV) but at the same time they banned medical experiments on animals.”
 
I myself always loved animals.
 
Aghast at hearing about hunters clubbing baby harp seals, my parents bought me a realistic-looking baby harp seal doll that I loved with its plush silver-white fur and winsome dark eyes, whose funds were donated to an organization that saved baby harp seals.
 
I also yearned to be a veterinarian and often played veterinarian on my stuffed animals.
 
Yet despite my great love for animals as a child, it always bothered me that animal rights activists invested so much in saving whales and the like when human suffering was so common and so obvious.
 
And while they always defend their priorities by saying that species extinction affects people and acting as if without their efforts, there won’t be a world for people to live in, the truth is that the disappearance of, say, the dodo bird did no damage to the human race.
 
Of course if all the bees really did die out, that would have terrible global ramifications on our food supply. Some species are vital for human life.

But as beautiful as, say, white tigers are, saving them is far less important than saving a human being. Protecting white tigers are even less important than improving an impoverished person's quality of life.
 
Judaism holds that the life of a child with Downs syndrome and missing arms and legs is STILL more important than that of a healthy stallion or an endangered species.
 
But the Nazis held a completely distorted view.
 
Today, many people value animals more than people. PETA is a particularly repellent example of this, expressing sorrow over terrorist use of a donkey to kill Jews, but not over the Jews meant to be killed. (Baruch Hashem, the explosives detonated before the donkey reached its target.) Or comparing crated chickens to death camp inmates.
 
I'll just leave you with two quotes from the Nazi era regarding the treatment of animals and you can compare this attitude toward that of animal rights activists (and even some pet owners) today.
 
[Quotes courtesy of World Future Fund: Animal Protection] 
___________________________________________ 

"The German people have always shown their great love of animals and the question of animal protection was always near their hearts.  For thousands of years the German people have always looked upon their household  and farmyard animals as their companions, in the case of horses as their fighting companions, and as God's creatures.  To the German, animals are not merely creatures in the organic sense, but creatures who lead their own lives and who are endowed with perceptive facilities, who feel pain and experience joy and prove to be faithful and attached...Under the influence of foreign conceptions of justice and a strange comprehension of law, through the unhappy fact that the exercise of justice was in the hands of people alien to the nation (i.e., Jews) -- because of all these conditions, until now, the animal was considered a dead thing under the law."
 
-- Hermann Goering, August 1933
Source: Hermann Goering, The Political Testament of Hermann Goering. Tr. H.W. Blood Hermann (London: John Lang, 1939), pp. 70f.
_____________________________________

The Nazi Law of Animal Protection was signed into being on November 24, 1933.
 
Here is a sample:

“It is forbidden to use an animal unnecessarily for what clearly exceeds its powers or causes it appreciable pain…to use a fragile, ill, overworked or old animal for which further life is a torment…to set or test the power of dogs on cats, foxes, and other animals…to perform a painful operation on an animal in an unprofessional manner or without anesthesia…”
 
So according to Nazi law, you could not set a dog on a cat , but you could set a German Shepherd on a Jewish child.
 
To think that people could conjure such sensitivity toward animals and then create Auschwitz where they did all the above to actual people, including children and babies, proves that animal lovers don’t necessarily equal compassionate or moral people.

Part 1|Part 2|Part 3|Part 4|Part 5|Part 6|Part 7|Part 8|Part 9|Part 10|Part 11|Part 12|