Back in April the divisiveness was so bad that I suggested the only way to fix the country would be to go to war. Not to toot my own horn.. I think over the months of the fighting over judicial reform similar was probably said by plenty of people.

The other day I asked how we move forward, as a functional country, from the rift that has opened up here, with all the "red lines" that have been crossed the past few years...I didnt have an answer and I think this is the big question and issue our leadership is going to have to think about in the near future..

I don't know what happened.

An Arab boy was found murdered in the forest of Jerusalem early this morning.

So far that is all I know.

I do not know who murdered the boy. I do not know why that person murdered the boy.

A young boy was murdered, and that is horrible, for whatever reason, by whomever it was done.

Another thing I do know is that the public has no idea yet who is responsible for this, or why.

Yet, many, be it politicians, media or just regular people, were very quickly jumping on the assumption that it was perpetrated by "settlers" as an act of revenge for the kidnap and murder of Eyal, Gilad and Naftali.

And many others have been assuming that the murder was committed by other Arabs, be it family in an honor killing or other Arabs as part of a family feud, or other Arabs as part of some criminal activity.

And I have even seen some assume that this is some sort of blood libel - Arabs killed the boy and made it look like a "settler" revenge plot just to turn the media and public momentum away from backing Netanyahu's efforts to dismantle Hamas, and turn the blame on the evil settlers.

The one thing in common is that nobody yet knows, yet people are making assumptions. The problem is not making assumptions - not really. he problem is that they then publicize these assumptions, logical or illogical as they may be, and throw blame and accusations around based on them.

Another thing I find interesting - in the wake of the kidnapping and murder of Eyal, Gilad, and Naftali, so many people were writing all over the internet and in newspapers and in chat groups, about how necessary it is to avenge the deaths of the three boys, how we must wipe out Gaza, how we must flatten PA Hebron, yadda yadda yadda - and then when the accusations start coming about the murder of an innocent boy (whether the accusations are baseless or not), suddenly everybody says a Jew would never do that!

Let's let the security forces do their jobs (according to reports they responded very quickly to the information when it was first reported), find who did this, and then we will know who to blame and what to fix.

The past couple of days has seen a preponderance of articles in which people described themselves as haredi, as not haredi, as amalek, as whatever, all in response to Rabbi Shalom Cohen calling some segment of Jewry by the name "amalek" .

In no particular order:

• Don't call me Haredi
• Go ahead.. call me Haredi
• Who you callin Amalek?
• Redefining Reform
• If the Kippa fits
• People of the cloth
• What is wrong with us?
• (there are probably more, but those are the ones I have seen)

For most of us, our lives are far more complex than what can be neatly packaged into this or that label. Personally, there are plenty of aspects of my life in which I act/behave/prefer things that fit more with some of the various forms of  Haredi society. At the same time there are plenty of aspects of my life that are more in tune with some of the various forms of Dati Leumi society. And, surprisingly enough, there are also plenty of aspects of my life that are more in line with the general public and not this or the other religious society. And that's putting it briefly. It can probably be described in far more complicated combinations.

When I answer telephone polls and surveys, and I answer plenty of them, I always refuse to answer the standard question of "what are you - haredi, dati, masorati, chiloni?". I always answer I am 'Yehudi". I am just a Jew. The questioner is always taken aback and not sure how to proceed. On the one hand, it is not fair to them - they just want to check a box and move on - they do not at all care how I define myself. On the other hand, I feel no need to define myself and limit myself to one inaccurate description just because they want me to. When pressed, when the questioner insists on getting a "clearer" answer, clearer to them that is but not clearer to me, I just say I am a Jew trying to keep Torah and Mitzvot to the best of my ability. I have no idea what they actually write down as the answer to the question, but after that they move on to the rest of the survey.

My point is that I am happy to live my life the way I see as being most proper and appropriate. That includes aspects of many different societies. I don't want to define myself as "Haredi", nor do I want to define myself as "not Haredi". I am often told that here in Israel it does not work like that - you have to pick a side, you have to define yourself. I disagree. If you feel that way, you are letting other people dictate for you how to live your life.

I prefer to decide what I feel and/or know is right or wrong, to give in to my temptations or to conquer them, to accept challenges and face them head on or to avoid them and avoid the lifestyle confrontation. Insisting on a label, whether for myself or to stick to someone else, is just a way to conveniently allow myself to be judged or to judge others. I prefer not to do that. I am happy to let each person live by his or her beliefs, no matter how wrong or ridiculous I might think those beliefs are, as long as they are not trying to harm me (or others, really) in the process. I am happy to be let to live my life by my beliefs, no matter how wrong or ridiculous someone else thinks they are, as long as I am not harming someone else in the process.

So, call me whatever you want, but don't call me late for dinner.

Supreme Court Justice Dorit Beinisch finished her term today as president of the Supreme Court justices and retired. Justice Beinisch chose her final verdict to be on social issues, as she says social issues are close to her heart and dear to her.

The ruling Beinisch leaves us with is overturning part of the welfare law that says that a person who owns a car is disqualified from receiving income support. The car has been looked at in the law as a luxury, and someone on welfare and income support, should not be able to collect if they can afford that luxury. This law has been attacked for a very long time as discriminatory against the weaker sectors of society. (source: Jpost)

Beinisch overturning this qualification means the car will now be considered a necessity rather than a luxury.

Beinisch's important decision might have been rendered meaningless even before it was announced. The price of gasoline in Israel is going up to about $8 per gallon. While families on income support might now be allowed to own a car, the director of the Finance Ministry thinks people who can't afford the gas should instead take a bus, reminiscent of Marie Antoinette saying "Let them eat cake"..

The Finance Ministry rejected suggestions that they lower the taxes on gasoline. Instead, they feel they "can influence the use of alternatives and encourage the public to use public transportation and buy cars that use less gas...".

MK Einat Wilf has made a proposal as to what Israeli society needs to do to move forward peacefully.

From the JPost:

MK Einat Wilf, who chairs the Independence faction, said that she has been thinking a lot lately about whether there can be solidarity between Zionists and non- Zionist in Israel – namely mainstream Israeli society with Arabs and ultra-Orthodox Jews.


To have a generous welfare state, she said, “You need a high level of trust among the citizens themselves and the citizens and the government.


That level of trust must be developed in the formative stages of society.”


With hindsight, Wilf came to the conclusion that when Israel was formulating its policy of social justice, it didn’t ask the right questions. “The social justice mechanism was created by Zionists for Zionists to serve the solidarity of Zionists who were engaged in the insane effort to establish a homeland for the Jewish people in this region,” she said.


Two groups were excluded from the Zionist enterprise, Wilf said. One was the Arabs who regarded Zionism as a threat, and the other was the ultra-Orthodox who viewed Zionism as heresy.


However, the solidarity mechanism was extended to the Arabs and ultra-Orthodox on the basis that welfare would breed solidarity rather than that solidarity would breed welfare.


This was not a successful means of creating trust, said Wilf. “The Arabs and the ultra-Orthodox still have an ambivalent attitude to the state and say that it’s all right to take but not to give.”


Wilf suggested that the time had come to bid each other farewell and to allow the Arabs and the ultra-Orthodox to lead their own lives without interference but also without the support of the state.


“That means we won’t have a socialist or a capitalist system, but a Zionist system.”


More significantly, it means that Arabs and ultra-Orthodox who don’t serve in the army or in community services will not receive free education, National Insurance or child allotments. Members of those communities who do serve will receive the same benefits as mainstream Israel.


“It may not be the most politically correct thing to do, but it will be the right and most sustainable thing to do if we are to go forward,” Wilf said.

I don't know if this proposal would work or not, if implemented. I do wonder how it would be implemented - members of the ultra-orthodox or arab communities who do serve and therefore would receive benefits - how would they get them? Would they get their free (or nearly free) education even though they send their kids to ultra-orthodox or arab schools that don't qualify for State allocations based on the new system? Would parents pay and then get reimbursed?

And would it work the same in the opposite direction? Would ultra-leftists who refuse to serve in the army also lose those allocations? Would "Tel Avivis" who find ways out of the army also lose their benefits?

Obviously they would have to create the system that knows how to differentiate and understand why someone did not serve in the army. If I did not serve because I made aliyah at an age at which they weren't interested in training me - do I lose my rights and benefits? Will they recognize that even if I live in an ultra-orthodox community or would they assume I don't qualify for ultra-orthodox reasons? If someone did not serve because he was disqualified for health reasons, or for whatever other reason the army exempts people - would they lose their benefits or would they get them despite not serving?

And let's say all this works out and they get a system in place that deals efficiently with all the various issues and conflicts that crop up. What happens then with the Arab and Ultra-Orthodox communities? Would they be self autonomous? Would we have three prime ministers and governments in Israel - one for the Zionists, one for the Ultra-Orthodox dealing with their issues and providing their services, and one for the Arab community dealing with their issues and providing their services? If they are being excluded from the Zionist State, they need to have some governing structure of their own - will we have three states for three people? And then if we ever make peace with the Palestinians will that become four states for four people, or five states for five people (including Hamas)? Will the Zionist State be able to give land in exchange for peace if that land is lived on by people from the Ultra-Orthodox or Arab states?

And if you thought the issue of "hadarat nashim", or the exclusion of women from the public sphere, was the problem only of the haredi community (and Arab, but it seems MK Yitzchak Herzog believes we can ignore it by the Arabs), it is time to think again.

Much has been said about the increasing trend toward extremism, and that extremism filtering down to the Dati Leumi communities as well, this happened pretty quickly, and that it happened despite the current backlash and general atmosphere surrounding the issue of hadarat nashim makes it almost unbelievable.

In the latest, Machon Meir, an organization somewhere between Dati Leumi and "Hardal", printed in their shabbos newsletter-parsha sheet an announcement of the upcoming memorial service for the five Fogel family members that were killed in Itamar. The article ran a picture of the victims, with the face of Ruth Fogel, the mother, blurred out.

the blurred picture of Ruthi Fogel

This upset many, and from what I saw it seems like there was an ad hoc campaign of many letters of complaint being sent to Machon Meir. Some were upset by the specific blurring, while some were even more upset by the notion that the need to blur is already filtering down from the haredi community down to the Dati Leumi community.

Machon Meir has apologized claiming a human error in the decision to blur the face. they said because this publication is meant to be read in shul they have had a policy of not including pictures of women.

I don't know if they have published pictures of women in the past or not. Maybe this is new policy, maybe it is old. If this is really their policy, they should have just left the picture out completely.

Either way, the problem of hadarat nashim is far more widespread than previously assumed, and is not limited to the haredi public alone. I have thought and said all along that the issue is far greater than just accusing the haredi public, and one can find examples of it throughout our society, if one were to only look. Our society, and I do not limit this to Israel alone, is very sexist. As much as we have advanced in equal rights and treatment of women, of minorities, of those who are needy and others who have been treated badly throughout history, we still have a long way to go. Blaming it on one specific community will not solve the problem.

Here is a fabulous article, witty and pretty accurate, from Yair Lapid about the 10 plagues plaguing Israeli society today.

The following is an excerpt.. For the full article, click on the link above..

1. Jealousy
“There’s one significant difference between America’s business culture and Israel’s business culture,” I told a group of American businesspeople I was asked to address. “Around here, we don’t have what you call a win-win situation.”


The Americans stared at me with confusion, yet the Israelis in the room started to nod, as smiles spread across their faces.


Holiday Lesson
A tale of 2 stories / Donniel Hartman
Op-ed: Passover story has two sides, up to us to choose between pride, arrogance
Full story
The win-win situation is the basis for America’s entire business world. Instead of wasting our time attempting to defeat each other, let’s find a way that will make both of us gain and go home satisfied. In Israel it doesn’t work, because the only meaning of victory is seeing your rival’s body lying trampled on the floor. We may have learned this in the army, or maybe it’s part of the Jewish character, but victory isn’t worth much for us unless we had a chance to truly pulverize someone.


This isn’t necessarily a bad thing. In a small society like Israel’s, competitiveness is necessary. The problem is that with the passage of them it produces another phenomenon, which is much more worrisome: We hate winners.


When the Americans see someone like Steve Jobs or Mark Zuckerberg, who made billions thanks to their talent and determination, the first thing they say to themselves is “I want to be like him.” This, in many ways, is the engine that drives Western society: The desire to make it like the winners. Why? Because the basic premise is that they made it big because they’re talented.


On the other hand, when Israelis see someone successful, the first thing that crosses their mind is “I hope he loses it all.” I wish to see this schmuck falling on his face. I hope his business gets closed down, his too-pretty wife leaves him, the police probe him and he ends up in jail. Why? Our basic assumption is that they succeeded because they stole something from us when we weren’t paying attention.


Succeeding in life is a difficult business – you need to work 16 hours a day, face failures along the way, remember that nobody owes you a thing, and take risks. It’s much easier to sit home and say “it’s impossible to succeed in Israel without favoritism.”


2. Superficiality
Every time someone laments the death of Israel’s leftist camp, I tell them to read rightist blogs and websites. Why? Because rightist publications are the last place where the Left still rules the country. When you read them, you discover that leftists control the army, the courts, the government (that is, the Lieberman-Bibi government!), the media, and US Jewry. If it wasn’t so dangerous and crazy, it would be funny.


On the other hand, don’t the leftists do the exact same thing? After all, any religious Jew in this country has at least three stories about the time he was treated like a combination of Yigal Amir and Rabbi Levinger just because he goes to synagogue on Shabbat.


We expect intelligent people to be able to distinguish between “they” and “him.” Not all Jews are thieves, only Bernie Madoff is, not all Israelis are suicide terrorists, only Baruch Goldstein was, not all army veterans are disgusting thugs, but rather, only those who trashed their Cyprus hotel room.


People like to invent enemies. It spares us the need to address complex worldviews. Anyone who thinks differently becomes a murky, malicious element threatening our lives. Every such element has a name. “The seculars,” for example, are people who have sex with virgins at night club bathrooms, do drugs, and lack any values. “The haredim” are a bunch of parasites who produce children all the time, don’t join the army, and have no interest in working. “The religious” are delusional settlers who only care about the occupation, “the leftists” are all bleeding hearts,” and “the rightists” are not too bright.


The strange thing is that the very same people who resort to such generalizations are deeply offended when such generalizations are applied to them. They are convinced that if only we listen to them, they’ll surprise us. For some reason, they are unwilling to pay the natural price for this privilege: Listening to others as well.


3. Self-righteousness
Does the Itamar massacre shock you? Are you sure it shocks you? How much does it shock you? Are you shocked enough? If the massacre happened in Tel Aviv, would you be more shocked or less shocked?


Are you interested in speaking at a women’s rights panel? If it was a panel on billiards or poker, would you have time? What’s so important that you have no time for such important panel? What can we conclude about your attitude to women then?


Do you know how many Gaza children were killed in Operation Cast Lead? Don’t you see this as a stain on your conscience? Don’t you think that people who keep silent are no less guilty? Are you in favor of peace? If you’re in favor of peace but do nothing about it, does it mean you’re against peace?


Are you in favor of securing Gilad Shalit’s release? What do you mean when you say “of course”? Did you attend the rally in support of his release? How many such rallies did you attend? How can you talk about the “details of the swap” when he’s imprisoned there – don’t you have a heart?


4. Victimization
In English it’s called “Shit happens.” In French they say “C’est la vie.” In Spanish it’s “Asi es la vida.”


There’s almost no language that doesn’t includes an expression that means, simply, that bad things sometimes happen. Life is a dirty, sad business, and sometimes the earth shakes, a flood hits, fire erupts, and accidents happen. It’s terrible, but that’s how it is and nobody is at fault.


Only in Hebrew there is no such expression, and that’s not a coincidence.


Around here, when something bad happens, we want someone to be at fault. If we’re hurting, we want someone else to hurt even more. If a disaster befalls us, someone must pay the price. If he’s not a criminal, then he’s an offender; or at least negligent. In any case, he should quit. If he doesn’t quit, it means he refuses to take responsibility, this scumbag, so let’s get a lawyer and sue him.


Those who saw the calm, noble manner in which the Japanese addressed the tsunami and earthquake should keep in mind the following fact: Japan, a country of 126 million citizens, has fewer lawyers than Israel. Perhaps that’s the reason why they are focusing on rehabilitation rather than on accusations or lawsuits – because the Japanese too know how to say “shit happens.”


Around here, the demand for a commission of inquiry to look into the Carmel blaze was voiced while the fire was still burning. Bring us someone’s head, we demanded, doesn’t matter who, as long as it’s clear that someone’s at fault for what happened to us.


There’s one thing you must know about commissions of inquiry: They always find something. After all, it’s impossible for committee to hire investigators, question witnesses, uncover documents, discuss the issues for long months, and then one day convene a press conference and say: “Good evening - following an intensive, lengthy investigation we are forced to declare that we found nothing. Thank you and good night.”


Can you imagine what would happen then? Precisely. Someone will establish a commission of inquiry to look into what went wrong.


5. Our system of government
Everyone thinks that the State of Israel has no minister of health, but they’re wrong. The state of Israel has a talented health minister called Benjamin Netanyahu.


Mr. Netanyahu is our 12th health minister in the past 15 years. Can we manage a healthcare system that way? Obviously not. Can we manage any other system that way? Obviously not.


6. Taking God’s name in vain
There’s nothing wrong with our God, the problem is all those people among us who claim that they are the only ones holding the right user manual.


Indeed, God has become everyone’s favorite excuse including the most delusional people. You drive through the streets of Beit Shemesh and see a “Taliban woman” draped in black, walking slowly with her children behind her. If the men in white robes arrive, she will explain to them, with deep self-conviction, that God spoke to her, personally, and told her she must wear a tent.


However, it’s not only the modesty discourse that has gone mad (“Modesty, Hanna, modesty,” I heard a haredi father yelling at his five-year-old girl. Five-year-old, for God’s sake!). God has become everyone’s excuse, including the worst people here.


Those who don’t want to join the army, and those who don’t wish to work, those who don’t want to teach their children math and English, those who beat up an old Arab under his olive tree, those who slash an IDF commander’s tires, those who march in Umm al-Fahm, those who murder someone and enter court with a black kippah on their head, those who dance around an empty chair and claim that their rabbi is the messiah, those burning garbage dumpsters in Meah Shearim, and those who use their rabbinical authority to declare that former President Katsav is not guilty.


As Bob Dylan said many years ago, this is why many good people quit religion and go back to God.

They make it sound like the haredim have the highest level of quality of living and economic wealth in the country, and it is all through taking advantage of government funding.

The Supreme Court has ruled that the way the supplementary "Havtachat Hachnasa" is structured in the budget is discriminatory and illegal and must be canceled (beginning with the 2011 budget). Since then people, articles, opinion pieces, editorials, are talking non-stop about how important this is. As if this measly little part of the budget is so important and everything in the country that has been going wrong has been because of that, and now everything will be ok.

I get that equality is important, but some proportion is in order.. The welfare payment was a measly welfare payment. nobody was getting rich off it and almost nobody clamors for welfare payments unless they are absolutely desperate. This is not the big savior of Israeli society nor of creating equality. It is a measly welfare payment. it might have been necessary, under the banner of equality, to cancel or restructure, but let's not make it out to more than what it actually is.

Beyond that, now that the rabidly anti-haredi are so happy that this Havtachat Hachnasa has been canceled and our society is now nearly perfect, we can move on to resolving the final remnants of inequality in society. Sure enough, the haredim are squeezing the rest of the country again with disproportionate budgets that they take advantage of and don't allow anyone else to benefit from. And we have to resolve that inequality immediately.

Now being suggested is that the Haredim benefit by learning in kollel because they do not have to pay for their higher education - they even get paid a stipend for it - while college students have to pay for their higher education!

The shame! Kollel students are not paying the tuitions of college students. What inequality! How unfair. We must either force the kollels to start charging people to learn, and then we'll see how many of those haredim would really be so inclined, or we should cancel the tuition charged in university and have the government provide all the funding.

Yes, that will finalize the equality in Israeli society - start charging tuition to kollel men, or cancel university tuition. Everybody, no matter what they are doing and no matter how different they are, should either have to pay for it, the same amount I assume, or nobody should have to pay for it.

In the meantime, the State refuses to recognize kollel and yeshiva study as higher education and recognize it in the form of granting a degree, akin to a BSc of Judaic Studies or something similar, while someon ein college who studies ancient Chinese languages, or any other topic that has little or no practical use, is just as unqualified for any practical job yet he holds a recognized degree.

So you refuse to recognize his studies at a university level, but you want to compare him to university students and start charging similar tuition?

The kollels are largely not funded by the government. Stipends are provided and some of the general funding is provided by the government, but the bulk of the kollel budget is made up by the Rosh Kolel, or someone else, traveling the world a few ties a year and raising money to run his kollel. The university is funded far more by the government than a kollel is. Also, look at the universities and see their campuses and buildings. Then look at the mostly run down batei medrash in caravans in which kollels learn and still tell me with a straight face that it is comparable to the university, and it is the haredim who benefit form the inequality.

Read the annual comptroller reports, whether national or local cities, and you will see how the inequality is almost always against the haredim. Their education system is funded using numbers far lower per student than the general educational system. The money given for religious services (there is no separation of shul and state in Israel, and until there will be this will remain an issue) is a pittance compared to the money given to the arts and cultural activities.

And it is the Haredim who are benefiting form all this inequality?

I would recommend that the haredi politicians get together some people who are good with numbers, along with some good lawyers, and file a suit in the Supreme Court to demand equality. Let the cat out of the bag. Take it to the public and show that it is almost always the haredim that suffer from the losing side of unequal funding, and if the courts and public insist on equality, it works both ways.

Let's keep it in proportion. People have been making this court decision out to be the salvation of equality in Israeli society. At the end of the day, all it is is a measly little welfare payment.

While the Health ministry struggles to find a way to deal with the increasing numbers of Israelis becoming infected with the Swine Flu, the mekubalim have found the solution.

Rav Benayahu Shmueli has put together a group of 50 rabbonim and mekubalim who will fly over the country saying psalms, incantation, and blow the shofar to ward off the infectious flu. Rav Shmueli said that the disease spread so rapidly because of the commonality of pritzus, and even among the haredi public because of the inclination to speak lashon ho'ra and gossip. That is why we are afflicted with a disease that spreads via the mouth.

Rav Shmueli also suggested that the recent increase in division among the secular and haredi in society - over recent incidents like the "starving mother", the avreich who drove over a Ethiopian, the accusations that haredim are the cause of the shooting in the gay bar in Tel Aviv, and others, is what causes the spread. If we can control and limit the machlokes, we will limit the spread of such diseases.

Rav Shmueli also suggested a way to prevent becoming infected - he said to be more careful with saying blessings before and after food, and to read the portion of the Ketores.

All his suggestions sound like good ideas....

Rav Yuval Cherlow was asked by a petitioner, how to relate to her second year of Sherut Leumi.

She asked that perhaps she should be preparing for marriage, as she is dating and hoping to get married, by getting a job and saving money so her husband will be able to sit and learn Torah in kollel, and thereby perhaps her contribution in the long term will be greater. Or perhaps she should commit to a second year of Sherut Leumi and contribute in this way now to the Jewish people even though there is a chance that it will be interrupted should she get married. Which contribution is more important?

Rav Cherlow responded that as a society we have to make general rules. That is what halacha is - a set of general rules that establishes with tzibbur of the Jewish Nation, rather than every indivdual formulating his or her own set of rules.

So to start off, we have to establish that the general rule is that girls should serve two years of Sherut Leumi. Now we have to figure out the exceptions to the rule. Is somebody not appropriate for it? Can somebody specific not handle it? Is somebody specific getting married?

In the case of somebody who is an exception and in an exceptional situation, it is better for that person to not serve the second year.

So you have to decide if you fall into the category of the exceptions, or if your situation is exceptional or not, and therefore you should be the exception to the rule. Or does your personal situation fit in with most of the community..

Ynet has a video of a shocking traffic accident that happened yesterday. A driver on a motorcycle attempted to squeeze between two trucks.
What happened to him is what happens, or almost happens, in all the movies that include car chases and drag races. That is, he did not make it out from between the trucks and got smashed.

Moshe Yisraeli ended up laying in the street for a couple of minutes and bled to death.

The shocking part of it is not the dangerous way the victim was driving, trying to squeeze between two trucks. I have seen much worse driving on any given day. Just this past Sunday night on my way back from Bnei Brak I saw two crazy drivers in two separate incidents. One of them switched lanes at high speed squeezing between two cars in alternate lanes to get in and zip by. The second was a similar situation.

It seems like everybody is in a rush, which is the reason traffic kills more people than terrorism and war in Israel. Considering Israel is technically, and even literally, a war zone, and considering Israel is home to non-stop terrorism, that means the traffic situation is pretty bad.

So, Yisraeli's driving is not shocking. Nor is it shocking that the accident resulted in his death. When you play with fire, you might just get burned. When you try to squeeze in between two moving trucks in traffic, you might just get crushed.

What is shocking though is the lack of response and assistance by Joe Q. Israeli (no relation to Joe Settler).

In the video you can see (not really well, but you can see it) cars continuing on their way. Drivers avoid the guy laying in the street and drive around him and his moped.

While society in Israel is changing, and people are minding their own business more than they used to, it still is a very caring and sharing society. If you walk outside in the sun with a baby, Israelis will come out of the woodwork to tell you that you should cover your baby's head from the sun. If you fall down in the street, 5 or 6 Israelis will immediately run over to see if you need help. If you are at the window in the bank, the Israeli behind you will offer advice how to pay less bank fees, or where you can get a better rate on your mortgage.

It is surprising that nobody stopped within the first minute or so and jumped out to help the guy.

As Israel becomes more and more like a Western country (i.e. United States) (for example, in terms of full capitalism and privatization, etc) we find more and more that people are concerned with themselves. People are less concerned with what is going on around them than they used to be. I've got to get to work. I don't have time to stop and help. Don't inconvenience me. I am in a rush.

The sad result of copying the West is the deterioration of the concern we always had for others around us. Now we just don't want to be inconvenienced. (not that this happens in the US, just it is a result of our copying the US in other things)