Jumping the Fuse

Sometimes a person comes across a moment that creates symbolism that is larger than life. A coincidental cosmic allegory from which a pure and crystal clear insight emerges. This week, for example, I was watching the news on the television. On channel 10, commercials started, so I switched to channel 2. There were commercials there too, so I returned to 10: a bank commercial. I moved to 2, shampoo commercial. I went back to 10: car commercial. I went to channel 1 and found a sponsorship broadcast. “This program is sponsored by the ‘Sycamore’ brand, the adult wetness solution.”

Do you understand? On 2 and 10 they are advertising banks and shampoo. On channel 1 is a sponsorship broadcast for adult diapers. If this is not symbolic, what is symbolic in life? We had a similar allegory with the beginning of President Obama’s priesthood. You surely remember the picture of him speaking on the phone with Netanyahu with his feet on the table.

At that exact moment, the relations between the two were defined, and no excuse will help. Obama, disgustingly self-aware, would never release a photo of himself talking to Putin or the Saudi king with his feet on the table in a ruling position. Today, I am convinced that the insulting picture was released on purpose out of malice. Obama cannot stand Netanyahu. Those around him despise Netanyahu. What is more, with this Ramat Shlomo story, he just could not hold himself in any longer.

Captain Karl Adolf Schlitz also could not hold it in any longer. On April 14, 1945, toward the end of the war, Captain Schlitz, commander of submarine U-1206 in the Wehrmacht navy, went into the bathroom. Now is the time to mention that the bathrooms in the submarine, and especially the act of flushing, were a very serious and technically complex matter due to the vital need to prevent water from entering the craft. Therefore, every German submarine crew went through a special flushing training, and upon its completion were the men authorized to use the toilet.

You certainly get the gist; if you do not smell it, that Schlitz did not enter for the sake of a flute solo but rather he conducted a symphonic orchestra. At the end of his premiere, Captain Schlitz flushed the water and sank the ship. What happened? The opinions are clearly divided. Captain Schlitz forcefully claimed that the restroom was damaged, but according to testimonies of staff members who survived, the captain simply let go of a week’s constipation [sorry for the vulgarity] that clogged the toilet. Since he was too embarrassed to consult with his commanders – who were trained water flushers, so to speak – he flushed the toilet without instruction. As a result, the submarine filled with sewage and water. The water leaked into the battery room and upon contact with the acidity of the battery, a chemical reaction was set off, which resulted in a poisonous chlorine gas that filled the submarine.

Schlitz was instructed to bring the submarine up to the surface. When it was exposed, an airplane from the British air force attacked it and sent it into the depths of the ocean filled with feces. And so went down in the glorious history of the navy the sinking of a ship as a result of defecation. To my regret, I have never stepped foot in a submarine, but I am convinced that submarine fighters in every navy have heard the tale of Captain Schlitz, and therefore many of them still suffer from constipation today.

Obama does not suffer from constipation, though. He could not hold it in any more, so to speak. The Ramat Shlomo episode fell into his hands like a ripe fruit. The timed attacks, the exaggerated insult and the rude remarks from Obama’s people all indicate pre-planning. They waited for an opportunity to get at Netanyahu and the Israeli government, both for indulgence and to strengthen Obama’s weak stance. Despite the fact that neither Obama nor his Jewish groupies understand the implications of their actions and the complexity of the matter, they are still likely, in their foolishness, to sink the submarine not just in feces, but also in blood. Already this week, following the tail wind that has blown in Washington, there was the subtle smell of a burnt tire, informing of a possible new Intifada.

Obama’s people are pushing him to exert pressure on their strategic partner out of irresponsible patronage. The Jewish leftist organization, “J Street,” is even getting people to sign a petition calling for Obama to take a more aggressive stand toward Israel, supposedly to pressure Israel for its own good. The only thing left is for them to say, “Relax, breathe deep; in the end you’ll enjoy the rape [coercion].”

This is a twisted logic that does not take the future implications into account. Not only did a conservative newspaper, the Wall Street Journal, come out against the U.S. government’s behavior, but also the main editorial in the ultra-liberal Washington Post pointed out its foolishness. The American government’s decisiveness is causing Arab leaders and the Palestinians to adopt even tougher stances. Instead of entering into talks with Israel, the Palestinians are making radical demands and waiting to see how Obama will take care of Netanyahu. Israeli citizens do not like this vitriolic hand bending, and they stand behind the Prime Minister.

Three scientists, a biologist, physicist and mathematician, are sitting in a coffee shop and see two people enter a house on the other side of the street. After a short while, the scientists notice that three people are leaving the house. The physicist says, “The first measurement was not precise.” The biologist deduces, “They reproduced.” The mathematician calculates, “If one person enters the house now, it will be empty again.” The present American government sees eye to eye with the mathematician regarding the solution for the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and its projections on the local and global realities. A simple equation of territory in exchange for peace is assumed as a platonic ideal in the sky that needs to be brought down to earth using all necessary means — even a diplomatic crisis of no measurable proportions.

Furthermore, Obama’s grasp of the geo-political reality is rooted in empty conversation and in infantile and dogmatic ideological remainders that originate from society groups and an ultra-liberal atmosphere. Israel, according to them, was established in a colonial sin and as a compensation for the horrors of the Holocaust. This is what we heard in his speech in Cairo. Obama ignores the Islamic fundamentalist threat and insists on not using the word “terror” in relation to clear Islamic terror. His government behaves with an unclear softness toward Iran and its ally, Syria.

It seems that Obama and his people insist on pushing Israel into a forced solution because, to their superficial understanding, the moment that Israel retreats to the lines of ’67, the world’s swamp of troubles will dry up. They ignore the strengthening Islamic fundamentalism and the silent reality of unquantifiable bloodshed that all has a direct connection to radical Islam.

Regarding the humorless scientist joke, even after an Israeli retreat, the house will not go back to being empty because the struggle is about much more than territory. The dogmatic solution of territory in exchange for peace has failed miserably. The equation is much more complex. We need to be bold and openly say that without Jordanian involvement in a territorial solution, a Palestinian state has no existence. The Jordanian king is not a sacred cow, he is the son of a Bedouin family from Hejaz, to which the British gave employment. We must put creative solutions like swapping territory on the table without stuttering and blushing.

At any price we must maintain the Jewish character of Israel, even at the price of temporary anger from the American government. Most importantly, with all due respect to the sex appeal of Obama and Auntie Clinton, Jerusalem is not an extension cord. The dream of generations will not be trampled by the shoes of Emanuel and Axelrod. Leftist dogmatism can lead to equally catastrophic results as rightist dogmatism, since dogmatism in general is the problem, and we do not need big examples to understand that.

During the Cultural Revolution in China, the government decided that the red in the traffic lights would be the symbol to drive and not to stop, since red is the color of the communist revolution and therefore it is more fitting for motion. Since China is a large country — the bureaucratic system is huge and its citizens are as plentiful as the sand on the shores — the transition did not go over with enough efficiency and it caused countless deadly accidents. So they changed it back.