Nostalgia Corner: Photo IDs

Before I left the Old Country ...

In the late 70s the State of Illinois added photographs to drivers licenses. Prior to that time, all an underaged teenager had to do to buy alcohol or get into an 'R' rated movie was to borrow a license from a friend who had the same eye color and was roughly the same height. Looking back, I realize that while I got a nice laminated photo ID issued by my high school when I was a freshman in 1975, it would be several years before my parents got a card of similar quality from the State.

When I made Aliyah ...

I was given an orange teudat zehut at the airport with my photograph stapled in. Even though my arrival had been coordinated with the Misrad HaKlita weeks in advance, my personal details were entered by hand on the spot. As luck would have it, the pakid made a mistake entering my lastname which I didn't notice until later. When I opened up my first bank account, the bank officer noticed the discrepancy between the way I spelled my name on the forms and the way it was spelled in the teudat zehut. When I explained what had happened, he said "no problem," and just took a pen and corrected the spelling in the teudat zehut.

Poll Results: How long have you been on Aliyah?

The results are in from Oleh Vatik's first poll.

• Not yet: 0 (0%)
• Less than two years: 0 (0%)
• Two to Five years: 2 (4%)
• Five to ten years: 4 (9%)
• Ten to twenty years: 14 (32%)
• Over twenty years: 23 (53%)

Unsurprisingly, the main interest in this blog to date has come from people that have been on aliyah for at least 10 years, preferably 20 or more.

Please keep an eye for the next poll which should be up later today.

Spotlight on the News: Frisking Soldiers

Kfir is once again in the news. In the last month the regiment has been struck by a wave of sign waving incidents. Soldiers from both Shimshon and Nachshon have been court martialed for raising up signs with political messages, and just recently a third sign was found before it could be displayed.

In response the army has resorted to somewhat drastic measures. A recent ceremony involving the Nachal Charedi (which also belongs to Kfir) was closed to the press, and prior to the ceremony the participating soldiers were searched to ensure that they didn't have any signs on them.

I was intrigued by the coverage of the incident. Most of the posts that I saw on the Internet played it straight regarding the involvement of the charedi unit - the soldiers were quoted complaining about the humiliation of being treated as if they were at a machsom, but hardly anyone played up the angle that they were davka charedi soldiers. For reasons I find hard to express, I found it encouraging that a story could be about charedim without the fact that they were charedim being a central part of the story. BTW, the sole exception to this approach was a post on a charedi portal (http://www.ladaat.net/) that interpreted it as a sign of continuing harassment of the charedi soldiers.

I do admit to being a bit nonplussed by the official statement by the Dover Tsahal. As reported by YNet, the official explanation was: " ... the commanders checked the soldiers in order to prevent unpleasantries or the possibility that certain factors would try to use the soldiers to create a provocation (my apologies for the poor translation)."

Regardless of whether or not I agree with the soldiers' actions/motives in raising the signs, I would hope that the reasons for the search would have been a bit more straightforward. Soldiers are supposed to conduct themselves in a certain manner, wherein discipline plays a rather large part. I would have been quite happy if the reason given for the search was that the officers wished to make sure that the soldiers were following orders and that the ceremony would go as planned. Nothing more, and nothing less.

I would also have preferred to see a bit more follow up by the reporters. Is this now SOP for all ceremonies, or just those involving Kfir? And while I was impressed to see the low key treatment of charedi involvement, I do wonder if the religious orientation of the soldiers played a factor in the officers' decisions. Perhaps they thought that religious soldiers would be more likely to make trouble (of this sort) than others? I don't know the answers - that's why I have to ask the questions.

One final thought: Is it just me, or does anyone else find that the most provocative word in the Israeli lexicon is provocation?

Spotlight on the News: The Yoetz HaMishpati

It seems like Bibi has never had any luck where the Yoetz HaMishpati is concerned.

During his first shot at PM, he got stuck with a hold over, Michael Ben-Yair. Ben-Yair spent most of his time indicting senior Likud officials and saw no problem being the chief legal advisor to a government that that didn't want him. He refused to leave the job.

When Bibi finally got his chance to replace Ben-Yair, he slid straight into the "Bar-on for Chevron" affair. Perhaps his track record persuaded him to maintain an official aloof position while the current search committee has been wandering in the desert. In the interests of full disclosure, I should point out that Netanyahu did ok appointing Elyakim Rubinstein, but perhaps that was just the law of averages at work.

The Yoetz is a bit of a schizoid position. As the name implies, the Yoetz is the Chief Legal Advisor to the Government of Israel. The holder of the position advises the Government and its members regarding the legality of proposed decisions, effectively drawing the line between legal and illegal action with every opinion offered. The Yoetz also represents the Government and its members as needed. On the other hand, the holder of the position is also charged with the ultimate say regarding who gets charged. The Praklitut recommends, but the Advisor decides.

The conflicts of interest inherent to the position are so very obvious that apparently most people just assume that there must be a really good reason for this hodgepodge of responsibilities - but since they can't figure it out, and it's too embarassing to ask when it's obvious that there really must be a simple answer, they simply move on to the next issue.

True story: Some time during Rubinstein's time as Yoetz, I had a job interview at the Ministry of Justice. No, I didn't get an offer, bit I did learn something interesting while I was there. On the wall of the office where the interview took place was a hierarchical chart outlining the different departments and lines of authority in the Ministry. Each position was color coded by department/function and connected by a solid line to those above and below. The Minister was, as to be expected, at the top of the pyramid, with the Mancal and various department heads filling the next level or two. And way off to the side, with its very own color was the Yoetz, connected by a dotted line to the chain of command somewhat below the Minister.

The conversation during the interview eventually came around to the organizational chart. The interviewer explained to me that yes, it was as I understood it. The Yoetz wasn't really a part of the organization at all; the position held enormous power in the Ministry, but officially nobody was underneath it. And it wasn't hard for me to detect an underlying note of resentment in his voice.

I didn't remember it at the time, but later on when I thought about it, it matched up well with what I was once told by an older lawyer with whom I had a conversation during the Ben-Yair years. I asked him how they'd come up with such a strange position, and he told me a story that I'd never heard before. Apparently, the Minister of Justice in Israel was originally intended to be like the Attorney General of the US, including much of the role of the Yoetz. But Ben Gurion didn't like/trust his pick for Minister of Justice, so he created the Yoeta position to lessen the role of the Minister. I've never heard this story confirmed, but it would explain some things, no?

Living in Israel: Customer Service

A friend of a friend recently told me this story:

A woman - we'll call her "N" (just like the press refers to security personages and state witnesses) - was in an Ace outlet when she happened to notice a super duper portable DVD player on sale (the kind with all sorts of connectivity options that are understood only by true teechno geeks). She decided to splurge and buy it, but then found out that there weren't any in stock. No problem, she was assured, she could order it now and pick it up in a couple of sdays when they got their next shipment. So she ordered one.

A week later she stopped in to pick up her order, but was told that they were still out of stock. But no problem and no worries: they'd call her when it call in.

Time flies when you're having fun, but I suspect that it goes slower when there's no DVD player to play music. Even so, close to 3 more weeks managed to crawl by before "N" next happened to walk into the store. Lo and behold, there were a stack of players on the display floor. She went up to the Head Cashier, produced her receipt for the player she had ordered - and paid for - close to a month earlier, and was rewarded with a new DVD player.

When she asked why no one called her she was told that they "must have tried, but no one answered." Did I mention that "N" and her husband work at home and even when they aren't there, there's an answering machine? Never mind, all's well that ends well. "N" took her purchase home.

The first thing that "N" did was check that her new player worked. She stuck in a music DVD and everything was fine. She then picked up her new toy, moved to another room, turned it back on, and ... nothing. Like one of those short-lived insects that are born, fly around a few hours, lay eggs and die, the player had lived its brief life and now was done.

Back to the store. When "N" asked for her money back, the store clerk didn't understand. They did, after all, have several more units in stock, wouldn't "N" prefer to replace her purchase instead of a refund? But "N" was adamant. Once burned, twice shy, she had no desire to tempt fate any longer.

It was at this point that they explained to her that she couldn't return the defective item. It wasn't that they didn't have a return policy, because they did (and do). It was because in order to take advantage of the policy you had to return the merchandise within two weeks of purchase - and "N" had bought the player almost 4 weeks earlier!

Never fear, "N" did eventually get her refund, but it was touch and go there for a while.

When I first heard this story, I grinned, and like a typical oleh vatik I shook my head and mumbled something like "Ah, only in Israel ..." Ignoring, by the way, the fact that the store in question was actually an American franchise because that would ruin my perception of the typical Israeli customer experience.

And then just yesterday I was reminded that perhaps Israel doesn't have a monopoly on odd and incongruous customer service.

20+ years ago I opened an IRA account with a well known American investment house. A few years ago I become vaguely aware of the fact that they had stopped sending me regular financial statements. I know that I should have looked into it at the time, but when you can't touch the cash until you're almost 60 anyway, it's not like you circle dates on the calendar to make sure that you get your statement on time.

Anyway, recently I tried looking at the account on the Internet, but I found out that my Internet access had been frozen because mail had been returned from my address of record. This, by the way, wasn't because I had moved without notifying the investment company - I've lived in the same home for over a decade and a half. But when we moved in, we used the address that the kablan gave us, and since then the Iriyah has informed us that the address (including even the apartment number) is something else. The investment company had the original "kablan address" - I hadn't updated them in respect to the Iriyah's revelations.

So I sent an email inquiry asking how to set things straight. They replied that I should call during office hours and ask to speak to rep who would help me out. So I called and the rep said no problem, he'd send me an address change form and all I had to do was fill it out and send it in. No problem at all. Why they couldn't send it in response to my email inquiry was an excellent question; he said he'd "look into it."

So last night I got an email with instructions how to get the address change form. All I had to do was log into my account on their website and download it. The only problem, of course, was that until I filed the form I couldn't access my account to get the form to file ...

So I wonder, has Israeli customer service progressed to the point that it's indistinguishable from American service, or perhaps in my extended absence American service has regressed to the Israeli level? Or maybe, just maybe, k'mo ba'America was never as good as I remembered it.

How Google sees this blog

I don't expect this blog to be a big money maker, but I signed up for Google Ads to help defray costs. Google Ads runs the ads that you see in the sidebar and underneath the posts. They scan the content of the posts and based on the results they display ads that they feel will abe attractive to the typical visitor to the blog.

So what kind of person does Google expect to visit this blog? Well the first ads that they displayed were in Hebrew for large flat screen TVs. I wonder how many olim vatikim can afford that; I suspect that most of us are still using the 20" Sony that we put in our lifts 20 years ago. Maybe that's not entirely accurate - in addition to my 20" Sony, I've also got a 20" JVC that was bought in Duty Free when the $200 TV was all the rage ...

Last I checked, the sidebar ad was alternating between two different Hebrew ads: the first for a movie that I haven't heard about yet, and the second for Orange (incidentally the only major cellular provider that I haven't used yet). The bottom ads were all in English, but for Israel focused content.

So basically, Google has us spec'ed as thinking about the world in general in Hebrew, while thinking about Israel in English. I'm not sure that I agree, but I do think that it's an interesting theory.

Welcome, Citizens of the Azores!

Most, but not all, olim eventually reach a point where they realize that they are no longer olim chadashim. Some insignificant little event suddenly brings it home that they are no longer rookies; that they have paid their dues and are no longer the greenest apple in the barrel. For some it may happen when they find themselves giving driving instructions to passersby - olim chadashim often lack either the knowledge or confidence (or both) to do so. For some it may happen when they actually start winning political arguments with co-workers. For me, it was the day that I realized that there were more than a few words that I knew in Hebrew that I could no longer instinctively translate back into English. Olim chadashim may speak Hebrew, but they rarely think Hebrew. When that happens, something has changed.

But for most of us, not everything changes. For better or worse, who we are is still in some part a function of who we were. We still tend to compare our current lives to what it was like where we used to live. And where did we used to live? Well if you're reading this blog, you were probably a citizen of an English speaking country - an anglo saxon by Israeli standards - that at some point moved to Israel. So you are now an oleh vatik, but the prism of your experiences gives you a different view of life here than that seen by your tsabar friend and neighbors.

So basically speaking, while we are no longer olim chadashim, we don't really qualify as 100% typical Israelis either. We're something in between. I tend to think of that "something" as being from the Azores. The Azores, for those who may not know, are a group of strategically located islands somewhere in the Atlantic Ocean. The US Air Force maintains a station there to enable planes to refuel during transatlantic crossings. I don't know their exact location, but I've always assumed that since they are owned by the Portuguese that they're relatively close to the European mainland. Which of course means that they should be just about halfway between the US and Israel. Just perfect for those of us that are no longer "from America", but don't quite fit in seamlessly in Israel, either.

My apologies to other English speaking olim; the Azores as a metaphor doesn't work as well for you as it does for US and Canadian citizens. Perhaps the Brits could make do with Malta, but I'm not sure what to do for the South Africans and Australians - anybody out there know of any suitable islands in the Indian Ocean?

Anyway ... Welcome, Citizens of the Azores! Welcome, Citizens of Malta! Welcome, Citizens of yet-to-be-named islands in the Indian Ocean. Let's talk about what it means to be an oleh vatik.