Luke Ford

Dennis Prager was in classic form this rainy Saturday morning, 2-14-98, as he spoke before 200 persons at his liberal Los Angeles synagogue on the week's Torah portion - Yithro (Jethro) which he says is the most important Torah portion. It contains the Ten Commandments.

Jews refer to the Ten Commandments as the Ten Statements. Ten Commandments is a Christian term. Jews and Christians also divide them differently.

The Jewish perspective begins with the verse: "I am the Lord thy God who took thee out of Egypt, out of the land of bondage."

Prager said he just realized how this tied in with his recent thinking on happiness. According to the original Hebrew, the phrase means that God did us a favor. Therefore, we should be grateful, and act out of gratitude towards him by doing His will.

Prager has no problem with those who do God's will because God said so, but he says that it is more happiness-inducing for us to do God's will out of gratitude.

DP pointed out that if God took the Jews out of Egypt so they could be free, then he was ethno-centric to racist. Rather, God took the Jews out of Egypt so they could do His will - take ethical monotheism to the world.

DP then moved on to the second statement - "Thou shalt have no other gods before me."

Prager has lectured and written exhaustively on false gods. He notes that no one ever acknowledges that they worship a false god. The worshippers of Ba'al did not think they worshipped a false god. DP agreed with the Talmudic statement that he who denies false gods, it is as though he kept the entire Torah. [The Talmud says this about many things - if you do X or Y, it is as though you kept the whole Torah. It is a way for an individual Talmudic rabbi to emphasize a point.]

Prager says God is the source of morality. God is the one "ends" in life. Everything else in life is to be a means to God and His moral demands.

DP says he gets lots of mail from people who say that money is a false god. Prager disagrees. He points out that the greatest evils have not been committed to make more money. Prager holds Nazism and Communism as history's greatest evils. Prager understands that money is simply a medium of value, a means of exchange. True false gods include art, education and health.

Prager says that he gets the most negative mail about the seriousness of secondary smoke. His second source for negative mail is a misunderstanding of the Third Commandment, frequently translated "Do not take God's name in vain." Prager says that it is better translated "Do not carry God's name in vain." It has nothing to do with saying "God dammit." Rather, it is saying that one should not appear religious, should not carry God's name, and then do evil, for this discredits the best source for making a good world - God-based ethics. Orthodox Jews throwing feces on women praying at the Western Wall, or Christian inquisitors or Islamic terrorists harm religion far more than any group of atheists.

Prager says that he gets loads of negative mail from old Protestant ladies taking him to task for saying "Oh my God… or Geez…"

Prager wants to write a book one day on Stupidity and Religion. He says it would have to be published after his death or it might cause his premature demise. He referred to the Orthodox Jewish practice of writing God "G-d." Prager sarcastically said he wanted to outreligious the religious by writing God "---." Then he said, dashes would be idolatry. How much more respectful would it be to write nothing, just a blank for God's name. Prager says this "G-d" stuff was not the practice in Orthodox life when he grew up.

The fourth commandment is to keep the Sabbath. Prager says there is no nobility in him keeping the Sabbath. He does it for selfish reasons. It is his favorite time of the week. A time to put workaday concerns aside. He is convinced that all things being equal, Sabbath keepers have better health than those who do not keep the day holy. DP would love to be tested between 3PM Friday and 7PM, to compare the level of stress in his body.

DP says that he envies those who do not keep kochure but he feels sorry for those who do not keep the Sabbath.

Prager then talked about the Fifth commandment, to honor parents. He pointed out that at his shul as a kid, the congregation rose when the rabbi was given an aliyah (call to the Torah) even though many members of the shul wanted the rabbi fired. They were not honoring the rabbi, so much as his position. Same with the news media and its practice of rising when the President of the US enters a news conference.

[Prager keeps referring to the news media as the "press,' instead of acknowledging the large media contingent (TV and radio) of the new news media.]

P. gave several personal revelations during his talk. He mentioned that a psychologist who gave him therapy had recently died. While in therapy years ago, Prager had told him about some childhood trauma (age five). The psychologist told P. that he suspected that the event did not occur the way P. related it to him. Dennis said he had two reactions to the psychologist's statement. One, he wanted to punch him. Two, he thought about how we often choose to remember the past a certain way.

P. says he is deeply grateful to his parents that all his limbs are in tact. He says that most of us should be grateful to our parents for simply being alive, as it is so difficult to raise children. He remembered the time his son David announced, "I am a bird," and jumped out the window. P. said, "stupid me for not telling him that he wasn't a bird."

On Friday's radio show, Dennis said that he always sent his mother flowers on Mother's Day. The only day of the year that he does so. P says it is not normal for sons to overflow with love for their mothers and to constantly want to call, share feelings and send flowers.

Prager noted that the Fifth Commandment serves as a bridge between the first commandments which deal with man-to-God issues, and the last ones that deal with human to human issues. P. noted that this is a favorite foundation for rabbis to float away with eloquence.

P says that the most serious mistranslation of the Hebrew Bible, is to confuse the original "Thou shalt not murder" with "Thou shalt not kill." There are two words in English and Hebrew for killing. Immoral killing is murder. The sixth commandment refers to murder.

Prager then covered not committing adultery, pointing out the complexities in the matter while reiterating that a couple should confine their sexuality to their marriage, even if they wanted to play outside, and even if each gave the other permission to do so. Society would collapse without marital monogamy, says P.

Number eight. Do not lie in court. P. would like to see enacted the ancient Jewish principle that witnesses who lie in court receive the punishment that would've been inflicted on the plaintiff. For instance, if a person falsely and knowingly testifies that the plaintiff murdered, then the witness should be put to death.

As for "Do not covet." P. says to distinguish between wanting a house or wife or car similar to one's neighbor and not wanting one's neighbor's property.

As for stealing, P. was against it.

While Dennis preached, his five year old son Aaron ran around the synagogue chasing girls. A boy after my own heart.

My friend Chris responded to my post with this:

I hate to be the one to ask this question. But.

Are Dennis' activities on his Sabbath fair grist for unsolicited written commentary, for world-wide distribution?

Is it just me, or is it indeed an invasion of Mr. Prager's privacy to follow him into and then detail comments he makes at his Temple while teaching the Torah? Comments he himself did not reven ecord? If the writer were to confront/overhear Mr. Prager using the bathroom afterwards, would whatever he heard as well be open to reportage?

Prager cannot even teach Torah to members of his own synagogue without worrying what type of coverage he may be getting?

I am disgusted that things that Mr. Prager does in- and desires to keep-private not be respected. That someone would abuse the privaledge of knowing where Mr. Prager attends synagogue to further his personal financial/social wants is the worst. If Mr. Prager wanted this lecture public, he would have taped it to offer it publically- as he has done before.

I think it patently unfair to follow him into his schul and report what he does - good or bad. This is a religious and holy activity, and he has a right to have his Sabbath observance respected as private. Everything he does at all times is not for general public consumption.

This may have been something that other's wanted to hear. Some may have wanted to hear what he said to his wife or son afterwards as well. Is it fair to follow him from shul to eavesdrop to report that? To interview Prager's highschool buddies and post whatever sexually-explicit stories they may "seem" to remember?

Mr. Prager made clear to the writer in question -long ago - his desire that this type of activity stop. His assistant has also made clear her disapproval.

So have other of Prager's associates. Yet it continues, and indeed gets more egregious over time.

Where does it end, Luke? And where does the support for this gossip end from members of this list?

Steve wrote: You guys are starting to remind me a little of one of my favorite movies: The King of Comedy. Robert De Niro and Sandra Bernhard play two competing fans/groupies of a talk show host, played by Jerry Lewis. They end up teaming up and kidnapping him. It's a great film if you like black comedies."
Chris followed up to my reply:
In a message dated 2/15/98 11:18:39 PM, Luke wrote:
> Mr. Prager made clear to the writer in question -long ago- his desire that this type of activity stop. <
<<This is a lie.>>
Technically, I miswrote. Dennis' assistant -Dennis' ONE assistant- "forwarded" this desire to Luke months ago, again in my presence. Apologies for that. You assume that Dennis finds any of your activities worthy of dealing with personally. That is why he employs an assistant. An assistant that she tells me you mischaracterized on you page as having originally been the Prager's "babysitter". THAT is a lie. She was a dear friend of the family long before the arrival of Prager's youngest son, and she was NOT a babysitter for any of the other children. This was from her mouth.
>My Prager site >(www.dennisprager.net) and my postings are only an update on what I have done for years with Prager's knowledge. We have talked regularly >for years. I know the man pretty well, and his values, and I largely live my life in the light of them.<

CHRIS: Have you ever been invited to his home? This man you know pretty well?
>BTW, as of 1994, I was the biggest overall customer of his writings and tapes, purchasing twice as many as anyone else.<
Relevance?
>I respect Prager's privacy so much that I did not even mention the name of the syngagogue where he spoke. Nor did I mention a word that he did not utter from the lectern.<
You wrote publically words he spoke -in privacy- to his community. Words he did not even tape for later distribution. Everything he says is not automatically for public consumption. This is an idea all too often lost on many writers.
>While there were many criticisms from people like you a month ago, Chris, they have muted when they saw how honorable my approach, and my site, is. <
You were largely ignored as well when you've written numerous posts of a pornographic tone to this list over the months. Silence is not always agreement.
>Six weeks ago I emailed a Prager assistant a copy of all notes that I thought might use on Prager's biography. She has made no suggestions and no further concerns to me.<
She was clear on your intentions originally, and told you that you would alienate yourself from herself, Dennis, and others if you continued to pursue this book. She followed through. That is not "making no further suggestions".
That is a statement unto itself.
>Prager and I talked briefly yesterday and we plan to talk more in the future.>
What did you expect him to do, flee? He got away with as little interaction as he could have and went about enjoying his Sabbath. How does one deal with what you are doing? I don't envy him here. He is understandably understated thus far.
>He is a strong man, most able to articulate his own concerns. So far he has neither articulated any concerns, problems, criticisms, nor has had any assistant tell me any concerns in his name.>
I stand behind my statement. If Laurie, his ONE personal assistant, posts to the contrary here, will you then stop the reporting or the writing the book?
>I am curious. Prager frequently gives personal examples in his lectures and on the radio. Do you think this is gossip and slander?>
I am unaware of anyone's ability to gossip about one's self.
>I have posted nothing about him, nor in yesterday's post did I post anything about myself, etc... that he has not done similarly.<
You do not have the same rights to Prager's thoughts that he does. This is the primary problem. You somehow think you do.
>I liken my journalism, in part, to that of a therapist (in this sense).<
You are not professionally qualified to perform either.
>Chris, your attacks place you in the company of the person whose computer sent the unsubscribe message. Without you helping to provide the hostile atmosphere, that deed and other unseemly things would not have flowed over this list and my life.<
I accept full responsibility, then.
You recieved NUMEROUS death and beating threats about your first book on pornography. You played them for several of us, to our shock, one Shabbat.
Who created THAT atmosphere? You do this stuff constantly. You've consistantly created hostility toward yourself and revel in it as noble. Is this a thread that has run throughout your life? I am just the current protagonist. You reject that. Almost every friend that we have had in common has left your friendship behind due to this. Why is that? A conservative conspiracy?
>Once again, taking Judaism, ethical montheism and Dennis Prager to the world.
>That is my obligation to the man who changed my life. :) >
Many loonies have felt a "duty" to do many unethical, unwanted things. That is no defense.
>I confined the personal comments to this list because it is much smaller, and more intimate. It is talking with friends, where I will say things that I would not say more publicly.<
Anything from this list can go around the world in a few moments.
There are no "friends" here (generally)- this is not an "intimate community."
It is an E-MAIL LIST. Largely anonymous. We know almost NOTHING of each other beyond our debating skills and positions.
This is yet another example of an inability to distinguish boundaries appropriateness in my opinion. "Whatever I feel is appropriate, is." "If I dislike a boundary, I will breach it." That has not been a great barometer for behavior thus far.
In a message dated 2/16/98 1:29:20 AM, Luke wrote:
>Well, you have lied about me many times on this list, but here you tell the truth. I make not just thousands of dollars from posting on the Prager List, but millions of dollars. Yep, I'm really raking it in.>
You have told me and DP's assistant of your plans to write an autobiography of DP's life. Your web site - it must be assumed - is the "spring board", as it was for your last book. Is this to be only a labor of love? Or are any profits to go towards charity?
If so, I retract many of my criticisms, and I apologize.
<<Well, Chris, why don't you provide all the examples where I have written up this type of personal information on Dennis? I am sure that you just did not make up these wild questions, but that they are only based on things that I have posted here, or on my dennis prager site, in the past>>
They are based on what I and others sense coming. I do not get a sense of boundaries from you. I am not alone here, am I?
<<So I don't have a list about your many lies about me. But I do remember you complaining about the "pornography" that I post to this list?>>
Anyone on this list over a month can retrieve numerous posts of yours (from their computer archives) dealing with blatant, explicitly sexual themes, using explicit sexual language, even asking if "any women on this list are into DP and pornography?".
VERY classy. That's what I was speaking of. I've never accused you of "posting pornography", but of "posting ON pornography" (occassionally vulgarly) and on other sexually explicit topics. You may recall several posts responding to your peculiar tastes in topics and such - not from myself. I am reminded of the post where you detailed a fantasy about wanting to sexually degrade and humiliate women, and suggesting that ALL men have this fantasy.
True or false, that is - as I told you privatly at the time - NOT appropriate grist for this list.
I was the one who introduced you to this list, remember?
...DP's personal assistant spent over two hours drilling this theme [not writing about Prager's personal life] home with the both of us present. She is far more a Prager associate. Several mutual friends of ours and Mr Prager's have discontinued contact with you over it.
How much discouragement does one need?
Mr. Prager has many employees- but ONE assistant who handles his daily and business affairs. She has done so for several years. You are ACUTELY aware of this. To suggest otherwise is very dishonest. Her name [Laurie Zimmet] stands alone in all his literature.
She has made it clear that this is so offensive to Dennis that she is done with you and thus has not responded further, and that DP would not likely respond either. She spoke to you of this for over two hours one night - with myself in attandance. She has made his disapproval of this unauthorized autobiography clear - in my presence - to you.
What else must be said? My intent is not to embarrass nor in any way to do anything but protect the rights of a man I respect and who has changed our world for the better. We owe that type of man reasonable loyalty, in my opinion.
Luke Ford has written numerous errors in his biography on Dennis. I have been told this by the (angered) individuals themselves. The people on this list and others go into his website, read it, and because it is in print they may believe it to be true. That is a terrible wrong done to Dennis Prager.
Secondly, much of the personal information Luke has put in this unauthorized, misinformed biography, he learned by ingratiating himself into Dennis Pager's and Joseph Telushkin's lives. Personal statements that J.T. made before his Los Angeles family (his congregation) Luke believed was fair game for world wide public reading. Personal information D.P. has shared with his community (his congregation) Luke feels is fair game for world wide public reading. What I reject about Luke Ford is his inability to distinguish between that which could be put on his website and personal, gossipy information that should not be put in any public forum.

In my opinion, Luke is behaving like an ungrateful, unstable, intrusive, and yes, actually mean person. His web site on Dennis Prager is filled with slander and gossip (and much that is false beyond what I have previously outlined). He hides behind the protective blanket of combining it with already published information and helpful daily reports on DP's radio show and appearances. He is immoral for putting up such a site, and any of you who encourage him to continue it and any of you who read it are just as wrong as he is. You also owe Dennis Prager an apology.
Finally, I ask Luke Ford one question. If Dennis Prager publicly requests that you desist from continuing with your web site on him and that you drop your unsolicited, unauthorized biography on him, will you do so? Are you as grateful to Dennis Prager as you have publicly committed yourself to being? If DP asks you to stop, will you?
I likewise promise that, if Dennis publicly states that he is in favor of - or is even neutral to - what you have been doing, I will both apologize here and pay yearly dues for you to any three of your favorite Synagogues.
Luke: Yes, if Prager says that he is strongly opposed, I will drop both.
I do not look for his seal of approval, for it is an independent site.
I gave him advanced notice about my plans.
The rest of your posts, Chris, on this matter, are so disgusting, nasty and personal, that, for the moment, I will ignore them.