Pages

Jump to bottom

24 comments

1 SanFranciscoZionist  Mon, Jan 9, 2012 11:01:38am

Eh, the article is all stuff I hear all the time, but your commentary...now that's interesting!

2 Vicious Babushka  Mon, Jan 9, 2012 11:11:25am

I find this article somewhat insulting. The author sets arbitrary standards, declares herself "better" than these arbitrary standards, and demands that everyone else accepts her standards.

It's like someone from, say, South America who comes to the U.S. and claims to be a "better" citizen than some Kentucky meth-head, in spite of not fulfilling all the requirements that are currently in place for U.S. citizenship.

3 CuriousLurker  Mon, Jan 9, 2012 11:15:35am

re: #1 SanFranciscoZionist

Thanks. ;) Yeah, I suppose it's a lot more interesting to us outsiders. I just ask for feedback because I don't really have any context to put it in other than my own personal experiences as an American Muslim, which are obviously very different in numerous ways.

4 CuriousLurker  Mon, Jan 9, 2012 11:27:36am

re: #2 Alouette

I find this article somewhat insulting. The author sets arbitrary standards, declares herself "better" than these arbitrary standards, and demands that everyone else accepts her standards.

It's like someone from, say, South America who comes to the U.S. and claims to be a "better" citizen than some Kentucky meth-head, in spite of not fulfilling all the requirements that are currently in place for U.S. citizenship.

I don't know that I'd call her standards "arbitrary" so much as I'd call them rooted in distinctly American ideas about what democracy is (or should be).

That said, I appreciate hearing your forthright opinion on the matter as it provides additional context from someone who belongs to the Ultra-Orthodox community.

5 Vicious Babushka  Mon, Jan 9, 2012 11:34:49am

re: #4 CuriousLurker

I don't know that I'd call her standards "arbitrary" so much as I'd call them rooted in distinctly American ideas about what democracy is (or should be).

That said, I appreciate hearing your forthright opinion on the matter as it provides additional context from someone who belongs to the Ultra-Orthodox community.

I call her standards "arbitrary" in the sense that "well, it is good enough for me!" and "I am better than...(pick the worst of the worst to be better than)"

There are millennia-old laws and traditions in Judaism regarding Jewish identity and these cannot be thrown out because some "ultra-Orthodox" have imposed additional stringencies in the past 40 years, just as some American liberal Jews have relaxed their observance for the past 150 years.

6 CuriousLurker  Mon, Jan 9, 2012 11:45:16am

re: #5 Alouette

I call her standards "arbitrary" in the sense that "well, it is good enough for me!" and "I am better than...(pick the worst of the worst to be better than)"

There are millennia-old laws and traditions in Judaism regarding Jewish identity and these cannot be thrown out because some "ultra-Orthodox" have imposed additional stringencies in the past 40 years, just as some American liberal Jews have relaxed their observance for the past 150 years.

Ah, okay. I see what you're getting at now now. Thanks for the clarification.

OT: Is your new profile pic you & your mom? Just wondering...lovely photo, beautiful lady.

7 Vicious Babushka  Mon, Jan 9, 2012 12:37:48pm

re: #6 CuriousLurker

Ah, okay. I see what you're getting at now now. Thanks for the clarification.

OT: Is your new profile pic you & your mom? Just wondering...lovely photo, beautiful lady.

That's my grandma holding my dad, in 1919.

8 researchok  Mon, Jan 9, 2012 1:24:51pm

As a matter of clarification, the Palestinians of the West Bank and Gaza are not entitled Israeli citizenship because they are not Israelis. They were formally citizens of both Egypt and Jordan.

Currently, they are 'occupied' by Israel as a result of the outcome of the Six Day War. Upon a peace treaty and/or after UN recognition of an independent Palestinian state, that 'citizenship' will be formalized. As it is now, the PA has issues their own passports, travel, identity and other documents

Israeli Arabs are full citizens (though not always afforded the same 'blind justice' or equal privileges). Israeli Arab citizens represent slightly over 20% of the population.

There has even been an Arab Supreme Court Justice and as it relates to the article you are referencing Arab women in Israel have more rights than in any other country in the region.

As for better and fully understanding what is going on in the region, good luck.

I predict it won't be long before you are back in the dark with the rest of us.

9 Bob Levin  Mon, Jan 9, 2012 2:21:18pm

I've got to make this short, and I'll write something more later. I'll amplify what researchok mentioned about citizenship.

The residents of Gaza and those under the laws of Fatah are not exactly Israeli citizens. They are closer to being citizens of Egypt and Jordan--but alas, some really bizarre world politics took place in the 70s, and they can't be Jordanians or Egyptians ever again. The UN has also said that they can't be Israelis, since Israel isn't allowed to annex the entire West Bank. Israel is allowed to develop defensible borders. That's the dispute, and the weirdness, and why this can't be solved by any other means than commerce.

10 Bob Levin  Mon, Jan 9, 2012 3:55:04pm

re: #7 Alouette

Aren't you just a little curious to find out if you know my cousin? A little bit o' Judography?

11 Bob Levin  Mon, Jan 9, 2012 5:10:55pm

Okay, I just read the article, not the whole article, because the excerpt was bothersome enough. I'm also somewhat suspicious of it, since there is such a concerted effort to delegitimize the State of Israel. What better places to do this than forums that are supposed to be about Jewish culture? What better issue to exploit than the recent news, inequality between sexes. So, for me, after reading it, it might be a work of fiction.

For instance,

Had you asked us six years ago where we dreamed of raising a family, we’d have answered ‘Israel’ without hesitation.

This means that at least 8 years ago they began to make plans to move to Israel. That's at least two years of thoughts, doubts, and plans. And now they are surprised by Israeli law and Jewish custom? This doesn't make sense. If people move from one city to another in the US, you'll find out property values, cost of living, tax structure.

And then there is this:

What this means practically is that the government body that oversees all major life-cycle events—as well as regulating food production—is a religious institution, the Chief Rabbinate of Israel.

Food production? No. Farmers do this. Kibbutz or Moshav does this. To certify if something is Kosher, yes there are organizations that do this, all over the world. If you want to keep a kosher home, this is essential help, not religious oppression.

Regarding burial, for reasons mentioned below, they aren't that far from legal conversion, and if this issue is really that important, they can take the next half-step. That's why people move to Israel, to continue to take the next half-steps in their spiritual life. For their daughter's burial:

In Israel, any citizen not affiliated with a religious group has a special status vis-à-vis burial. Following the mass immigration from the Former Soviet Union in the 1990s, the number of individuals in this special class grew, and the Israeli government sought to develop suitable arrangements for burial. Jewish tradition ascribes significance to all burial -- Jewish and non-Jewish -- and thus, though there are generally separate burial grounds for non-Jews, all bodies are treated with respect and care.

I would gladly trade places with her daughter, since I very well could be an ocean away from Israel. That's another one of the reasons for Aliyah, to finally rest anywhere in Israel. Plus, there are private cemeteries in Israel, and cemeteries on Kibbutzim and Moshavs. It's a solvable problem.

Orthodox religious law is the law of the land: Only a man can marry a woman, only a man can grant a divorce.

This doesn't even make sense. Both spouses sign the Ketubah. There is a tractate of Talmud about this. Functionally, it's a marriage license. A divorce also requires a document, called a Get. Got news for this couple, divorces are acrimonious. Whether the husband decides to give the Get is all part of the acrimony. There is considerable pressure put on the husband to give this document when appropriate. It's an issue, the acrimony. No different than any place else.

To me, this is the kicker:

We could not be married in Israel because of Erin’s official lack of Jewishness, despite the fact that we are observant Jews who keep Shabbat and a kosher home.

If they keep Shabbat, and they have a kosher home, then this is not a big deal to have discussions with a Rabbi, which they should already be having, to get certifications. It's not like in Chicago you don't have licenses and legal issues if you want to drive or own a business--did they expect a bureaucratically free society?

The only issue that might be a sticking point in their already fully converted life would be Taharat HaMishpacha. Okay, that's reasonable. But, again, it is a matter of finding people that make you comfortable.

12 CuriousLurker  Mon, Jan 9, 2012 6:25:41pm

re: #8 researchok

re: #9 Bob Levin

Thanks for the additional info on the citizenship status.

13 CuriousLurker  Mon, Jan 9, 2012 8:57:36pm

re: #11 Bob Levin

Okay, I just read the article, not the whole article, because the excerpt was bothersome enough. I'm also somewhat suspicious of it, since there is such a concerted effort to delegitimize the State of Israel. What better places to do this than forums that are supposed to be about Jewish culture? What better issue to exploit than the recent news, inequality between sexes. So, for me, after reading it, it might be a work of fiction.

I didn't get the sense that there was any effort to delegitimize the state of Israel—that's a pretty strong charge. I'm not familiar with most of the columnists and people who run Tablet Magazine (or their parent org, Nextbook), but they seem legit enough and don't strike me as moonbatty Jew haters or anti-Zionists, especially since Jeffrey Goldberg is among their contributing editors and I am familiar with him (I can't imagine him lending his name to any online outlet if it had questionable intent WRT the legitimacy of Israel).

The magazine also interests me because of its focus on the arts & culture which, to be honest, is much more my cup of tea than politics, my fondness for LGF notwithstanding.

This doesn't even make sense. Both spouses sign the Ketubah. There is a tractate of Talmud about this. Functionally, it's a marriage license. A divorce also requires a document, called a Get. Got news for this couple, divorces are acrimonious. Whether the husband decides to give the Get is all part of the acrimony. There is considerable pressure put on the husband to give this document when appropriate. It's an issue, the acrimony. No different than any place else.

WRT marriage, I'm somewhat familiar with the Jewish divorce and Get as it's very similar to the Islamic process. Ours doesn't require a written document, but it's also the husband who grants the divorce, however (the same as in Judaism) a woman can petition for divorce. That said, the fact that may divorces are acrimonious and husbands are often pressured to give the Get doesn't change the fact that the process is still somewhat lopsided in favor of the man (again, as it also is in Islam). It is what it is in both our religions, there's no getting around that.

As for the rest, I appreciate the info as most of it is new to me. I'll be sure to look into those things in greater detail.

14 CuriousLurker  Mon, Jan 9, 2012 8:58:46pm

re: #7 Alouette

That's my grandma holding my dad, in 1919.

I should've recognized the clothing styles. That's the same year my dad was born.

15 Bob Levin  Mon, Jan 9, 2012 10:12:37pm

re: #13 CuriousLurker

I thought the article was parallel to the charge that Israel is an apartheid state. It's not. Nor is the state apparatus hopelessly entrenched in sexism. If there are problems, those problems can be handled through the political and legal processes.

BDS is a real dynamic. And it is sophisticated, a word that does not apply to wingnuts and moonbats.

A journalist cannot quit every time his or her publication crosses the line with regard to Jews and Israel. They'll never work, eventually. In Goldberg's case, The Atlantic recently published some horribly antisemitic pieces--and so he stays there and fights. That's a viable strategy.

The Forward has written some excellent pieces about sexism within Israel and Judaism. The pieces were informative and enlightening. At best, this isn't a very good piece, and it really won't tell you anything.

That said, the fact that may divorces are acrimonious and husbands are often pressured to give the Get doesn't change the fact that the process is still somewhat lopsided in favor of the man (again, as it also is in Islam).

There are two tractates on the subject of marriage and divorce. If I were going to make a statement about the relative sexism in Jewish law, I'd make it a point to know both of those very well. I've been through both, but I wouldn't be comfortable drawing a definite conclusion. I just don't know them well enough. In this summary, there is no advantage to either sex. A woman may sue for divorce, and the court will require the husband to sign the Get. If there is any sexism in the process, it takes place outside of Israel, where rabbinic courts have no real authority.

On the other hand, the identity of the children is transmitted through the woman. The general rule in Jewish law is that men are obligated to perform commandments which have an element of time. This leads me to believe that male and female are concepts more closely tied to Yin and Yang rather than biology. There are also strong statements stemming from law about the wrongness of mistreating women. In other words, some things are wrong, some things are very wrong. Mistreating women is very wrong.

16 CuriousLurker  Mon, Jan 9, 2012 10:53:24pm

re: #15 Bob Levin

I thought the article was parallel to the charge that Israel is an apartheid state. It's not. Nor is the state apparatus hopelessly entrenched in sexism.

Huh? *blinks* Who said Israel was an apartheid state or that it's apparatus was hopeless entrenched in sexism?

I don't know much about BDS except what I've read on Wikipedia. I tried to find other digestible information, but as with most things I-P related, the level of emotion involved, as well as the the twists, turns, and framing quickly turned it into a unnavigable morass as far as I was concerned, so I simply gave up trying to understand it.

Thanks for the additional info on marriage & divorce and the recommendation on The Forward. I've run across it before, but hadn't put it on my regular reading list.

17 Bob Levin  Mon, Jan 9, 2012 11:17:42pm

re: #16 CuriousLurker

Huh? *blinks* Who said Israel was an apartheid state or that it's apparatus was hopeless entrenched in sexism?

Really? Google 'Israeli Apartheid'. I got about 2.5 million results. Then Google 'sexism in Judaism'. I got about a million results. I estimated to higher totals because all I have to do is wait three days for my estimates to be spot on. And if the religious right controls the Israeli government, then it's Israel that is sexist, according to this twisted logic.

This is the atmosphere in which these articles appear.

18 CuriousLurker  Tue, Jan 10, 2012 1:39:46am

re: #17 Bob Levin

Really? Google 'Israeli Apartheid'. I got about 2.5 million results. Then Google 'sexism in Judaism'. I got about a million results. I estimated to higher totals because all I have to do is wait three days for my estimates to be spot on. And if the religious right controls the Israeli government, then it's Israel that is sexist, according to this twisted logic.

This is the atmosphere in which these articles appear.

Well, yeah, really, seeing as how I thought the context was the discussion we've been having here and the specific article I referenced, not the entire web and all the insanity & propaganda it entails.

The same could be said of Islam & Muslims. I just Googled "Islamic Apartheid" and got 8.7 million results. "Sexism in Islam" gets 2.5 million. Shall I now assume that every conversation I have here about any article is in that atmosphere, regardless of who I'm having it with or what their stated intentions are for posting it?

I don't understand why we're getting derailed into a discussion about BDS, apartheid states, etc. I'm well aware of what kind of twisted crap is out there about both your religion & mine, okay?

For well over a year I've been doing my level best to come to a better understanding of Jews, Judaism, Israel, and Zionism by speaking directly to Jews and trying to get different points of view instead of just swallowing whatever bait is being dangled in the vast ocean of the web. I could easily stick with my "tribe" where I'm unlikely to encounter uncomfortable facts or be challenged to rethink anything.

At times, there have been articles posted & comments made here that have caused me to wonder if perhaps my attempts to get past all the walls, propaganda, and inflamed passions is a foolish, naive endeavor.

My point is—and I'm going to be blunt here—that sometimes I feel like there's a deep, lingering mistrust, a rush to defensiveness where none is required. I GET that there is anti-Semitism & Jew hatred all around (both amongst Muslims and non-Muslims), and I take that into consideration when I'm reading things online.

I'm also fully aware that there is Islamophobia & anti-Muslim hatred out there (both amongst Jews and non-Jews), and I take that into consideration when I'm reading as well. Trust me when I say that I have scads of things tucked away in files that have made me blanch in revulsion, but I'd rather not focus on those things because they're not constructive and could easily poison my heart & mind since, like you, I'm only human and therefore susceptible to such things.

I don't consider every Jew to be my mortal enemy or even someone whose intentions I should automatically be mistrustful of. If I post something here it's because I want to have an frank discussion about it without having to tip-toe around or explain my reasons for asking every time.

By the same token, I also prefer to assume that when someone here (Jewish or otherwise) asks me about something related to Islam or Muslims, they're doing so in good faith.

If my sole intent was to promote pro-Muslim framing, then I'd be posting radically different Pages than I currently do, and I'd be vehemently pushing back against even the slightest perceived negativity towards Islam/Muslims, regardless of whether or not the info was accurate.

I don't do that. And I won't. That's not why I'm here. I just want to be able to talk to people openly without all the damned bigotry and religious & political baggage being dragged into the conversation every time.

So can we do that, Bob? Can we sit down and just talk person to person without having to remind each other every time about all the hatred & bias that's lurking out there, and without having to measure every sentence against their looming presence? Or is that just another liberal pipe dream?

19 Bob Levin  Tue, Jan 10, 2012 4:42:46am

re: #18 CuriousLurker

So can we do that, Bob? Can we sit down and just talk person to person without having to remind each other every time about all the hatred & bias that's lurking out there, and without having to measure every sentence against their looming presence? Or is that just another liberal pipe dream?

Sure, but you know how to do this? We get down to business, and we have the same business--we have to understand what Abraham knew about the universe. We never talk about the business of being Muslim or the business of being Jewish.

What are our spiritual jobs? Right now, they converge. What's also odd is that Jews never talk about Judaism. We're just a little off topic, and that get's in the way.

Of course, there are the more secular discussions--that bona fide nutballs could win an important US election, that's important business. They have a case, those who take on that task. But in the arena of bigotry, we just walk through it and get down to brass tacks. I'm totally up for this.

And there are other important secular discussions about food, water, energy, and medicine. Those help. But to me, it all never gets too far away from Abraham.

So, there's Abraham--and about 4000 years ago he somehow came to the understanding that the people of the world would see things through his perspective, that they would somehow be descended from him. That's a pretty damned profound understanding, since that is what has happened. But how does one earn that honor? Many explanations from Jewish interpretations don't quite add up. However, I think the text gives us sufficient clues to what might have set him not just apart, but made him a cornerstone of humanity.

Let's start here. No more combing JPost or Hurriyet. No more posts from Reuters. Just us two trying to answer an old question. And you know what, it makes the Middle East conflicts in every country secondary--because they're not getting down to business. If they would get down to business, I don't see much time for war. If one is genuinely feeling one's Jewish Neshumah (deep soul) and you are feeling the Muslim concept for deep soul (there has to be one, Abraham and all), who has time to argue over dry land? Who has time to study bigotry? Who has time to even entertain the idea of segregated buses? Everyone is just a little bit off topic.

Anyway, that's where I would start. That's how I would bypass the muddy waters. Let's talk about Abraham. I know the Jewish story of the man. But I don't know the Muslim story. What do you know about him?

20 CuriousLurker  Tue, Jan 10, 2012 10:43:12am

re: #19 Bob Levin

You've got yourself a deal. ;-)

I'm in the middle of my workday right now so my attention is too divided to reply properly, but I'll come back later tonight.

21 CuriousLurker  Thu, Jan 12, 2012 12:48:59pm

re: #19 Bob Levin

P.S. I haven't forgotten you. I got waylaid by a project last night and am still trying to catch up.

22 CuriousLurker  Sat, Jan 14, 2012 6:33:25pm

re: #19 Bob Levin

Anyway, that's where I would start. That's how I would bypass the muddy waters. Let's talk about Abraham. I know the Jewish story of the man. But I don't know the Muslim story. What do you know about him?

Where to start? There are many references to Abraham (a.s.)1 in the Qur'an and he figures very prominently in Islam. Of course, we call him Ibrahim. We also mention him, along with our Prophet Muhammad (s.a.w.s.) twice in each of our five daily prayers. He's the only other prophet mentioned during prayer.2 This is what we say:

Allahumma salli 'ala Muhammadin wa 'ala aali Muhammadin, kama salaiyta 'ala Ibrahima wa 'ala aali Ibrahima innaka Hamidun Majeed.

O Allah, send grace and honor on Muhammad and on the followers of Muhammad, just as you sent grace and honor on Ibrahim and on the followers of Ibrahim. Surely You are [the most] Praiseworthy, [the most] Glorified.

Allahumma barik 'ala Muhammadin wa 'ala aali Muhammadin, kama barakta 'ala Ibrahima wa 'ala aali Ibrahima, innaka Hamidun Majeed.

O Allah, send blessings on Muhammad and on the followers of Muhammad, just as you sent blessings on Ibrahim and on the followers of Ibrahim. Surely You are [the most] Praiseworthy, [the most] Glorified.

As you can plainly see, there's hardly anything you could consider animosity towards Jews in those words, in fact we're asking God to grace, honor, and bless us the same way He did you guys. As I mentioned these 2 lines are repeated 5 times daily, or 1825 times a year. Multiply that by around 1.6 billion and you have... well, I don't like math, so let's just say you a LOT of acknowledgement & beseeching.

Abraham (a.s.) is a crucial part of the story of monotheism for us. Among other things, the Qur'an says that Abraham and Ishmael (a.s.) were reformers who laid the foundations of the Kaaba in Mecca as a center of pilgrimage for monotheism (I've read that Adam first built it, but it was destroyed during the Flood, but I'm not sure on the details of that, so I'll leave it alone for now).

The story of Ishmael and Hagar (r.a.)3 is an integral part of Islam as well as it plays an extremely important part in the rituals of the Hajj. BTW, just for future reference in case you see it, we call Hagar Hajar, and Ishmael Isma'il.

I think I'd better stop here because we don't have much time left. This thread will automatically close after 7 days, and we're already at like day 5.5. That's my fault for being distracted by work, but it couldn't be avoided. I hope you'll have a chance to answer and we can pick it back up in another thread soon (or even create a new one just to discuss it, if necessary).

Thanks for being willing to have this conversation. :)

1. The abbreviation "a.s." stands for alayhi salaam (peace be upon him) and is required whenever any of the Abrahamic prophets' names are mentioned in writing or in speech. Occasionally I forget to do it, and sometimes I just say/write it the first time and assume that it'll be implied thereafter.

2. Here's a list of the Prophets in Islam. Not sure if it covers all of your? Maybe you can enlighten me...

3. The "r.a." is another type of honorific by way of making a supplication for someone on mentioning them. It stands for radi Allahu anhu/anha (may God be pleased with him/her him/her), and is only used for people who, while not prophets/messengers, were very important, respected and pious. Do you guys have this as well?

23 Bob Levin  Sat, Jan 14, 2012 9:57:51pm

re: #22 CuriousLurker

A new thread would be a good idea. I thought these were eternal, but 7 days and gone, how about that.

We pray three times a day with a community, and I'd say twice, quickly by ourselves. The communal prayers mention Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. The teaching is that these three figured out the Torah before the Torah was officially given to Moses. Now, this has some remarkable implications if you sit down with it and give it a good think. We can probably go into this later.

The important thing is how we go about the discussion. Theoretically, in the Jewish world, we would discuss this by a process of hypothesis and rejection. For instance, "this is what this means"--"no you're wrong it couldn't possibly mean that, this is what it means." The idea is to forge hypotheses that can withstand any argument.

This is a logical approach, and we see this over and over again in the Talmud.

Somehow, I believe it's from long stints of living in Europe, the notion of faith has crept into Jewish thought as more than a base set of postulates. If you think about it, every field has a base set of hypotheses. Even the sciences.

But lo and behold, Abraham is thought of as a man of faith, whereas I see him as a scientist. We can discuss this. In European philosophy, Kierkegaard wrote a nice essay on Abraham, Fear and Trembling, which is studied as if it is truth, when in fact I think it completely misses the point. In other words, Kierkegaard's Abraham is not the Abraham that I know of. However, it seems to be the Abraham that most rabbis accept. As I've said before, I think I'm a minority of one.

When we discuss Abraham we have to have some idea of what constitutes proof. There are actually many ways to discern proof, one of which is a double blind experiment, but that is only one. There are those that think it is the only way to discern truth. However, there is geometric proof, legal proof, literary proof--which is very close to what I'll call a Detective's Proof. That is, this hypothesis is the only one that accounts for all of the facts of the case--or all of the incidents in the story, all of the implications of the story.

This can be followed by the cliche proof, but proof nonetheless, that the proof is in the pudding. For us, once we feel we have a good understanding of the law, the commandment, then the performance of that commandment should have a certain effect. But this is far down the road, because in order to anticipate the effect, we have to have a firm grasp of as many conditions as possible leading to the status quo--we have to know what we're trying to change.

For Jews, I think there is the Santa Claus Abraham, the fictitious Abraham who merely understood that there is only one Gd. I don't think this explanation survives the first set of questions, namely that his life and the life of Noah overlapped by 15 years. Of course they knew each other. So Abraham must be a man of knowledge far more profound than simply being another one of a long line of people who knew of a monotheistic universe.

To me, he must have understood the true nature of the universe. This would be the only groundbreaking knowledge that would warrant the promise that his consciousness, his descendants would cover the earth. So ultimately, this is what we're trying to discover--what is it that Abraham knew? (We know when he knew it, at 75 years of age, when he arrives in the narrative of the Torah.)

Your turn.

24 CuriousLurker  Sun, Jan 15, 2012 5:27:24pm

re: #23 Bob Levin

Your turn.

This is great, you've given me a lot to think about and explained a lot of things I didn't know, things that are important (to me, to understanding Judaism).

I'm going to take a day or two to reread & think about what you've written, and to formulate a reply. There are already a few things jumping to the forefront of my mind now... Talk to you again soon.


This page has been archived.
Comments are closed.

Jump to top

Create a PageThis is the LGF Pages posting bookmarklet. To use it, drag this button to your browser's bookmark bar, and title it 'LGF Pages' (or whatever you like). Then browse to a site you want to post, select some text on the page to use for a quote, click the bookmarklet, and the Pages posting window will appear with the title, text, and any embedded video or audio files already filled in, ready to go.
Or... you can just click this button to open the Pages posting window right away.
Last updated: 2016-01-01 10:29 am PST
LGF User's Guide RSS Feeds Tweet

Help support Little Green Footballs!

Subscribe now for ad-free access!Register and sign in to a free LGF account before subscribing, and your ad-free access will be automatically enabled.

Donate with
PayPal
Square Cash Shop at amazon
as an LGF Associate!
Recent PagesClick to refresh
#Thegreatpoolpondconversion - 190915We did the weekly uncovering and hoisting of the gazebo and then started marking the walls. Because we are getting close... Look at the left hand in this picture. Sharpie-gate has invaded #thegreatpoolpondconversion It turns out that one side of ...
DangerMan
16 hours, 48 minutes ago
Views: 135 • Comments: 2 • Rating: 1
Tweets: 0 • Share to Facebook
#Thegreatpoolpondconversion - 190908This is our 20th day, our 20th Sunday. Since we only work one day a week it's also our 20th week. And it was more of the same. Sort of. Following the design committee meeting last week, we started off ...
DangerMan
1 week, 2 days ago
Views: 537 • Comments: 0 • Rating: 5
Tweets: 0 • Share to Facebook
UN: Solar Leads $2.5 Trillion Global Investment in Green Energy CN) – As global superpowers grapple with ditching fossil fuels many nations have flipped the switch on solar power and other renewable forms of energy in the last decade, with investments into those technologies expected to top $2.6 trillion ...
Thanos
1 week, 6 days ago
Views: 729 • Comments: 0 • Rating: 0
Tweets: 1 • Share to Facebook
#Thegreatpoolpondconversion - 190901Dorian. We're mostly out of it now. So we planned, then watched and then it turned north and became mostly a non event (for us).As of Sunday night we weren't even in the cone, though directly east 15 miles at ...
DangerMan
2 weeks, 1 day ago
Views: 695 • Comments: 0 • Rating: 4
Tweets: 0 • Share to Facebook
TVs to Shoes: This Time Consumers Face Pain of Trump Tariffs Just in time for Christmas shopping season! WASHINGTON (AP) — President Donald Trump’s trade war with China, until now mainly an abstraction for American consumers, is about to hit home. Beginning Sunday, the U.S. government will begin collecting 15% ...
Thanos
2 weeks, 5 days ago
Views: 742 • Comments: 0 • Rating: 0
Tweets: 2 • Share to Facebook