defensible borders, or when did you stop beating your

self?

This seems to be the mode we’re in now. Defending ourselves. Here I am as a Modern Orthodox Zionist woman, having to send out notices about our mikveh’s policy because of a power-hungry man who thought himself above G-d’s laws.

And here is an article about defensible borders for Israel. All the garbage about “if Israel only stopped with the settlements, everyone would be friends…”

Sarah Honig wrote about the [most] recent Kerry gaffe:

Here, verbatim, is Kerry’s syntax-defying wisdom: “As I went around and met with people in the course of our discussions about the ISIL coalition, the truth is we – there wasn’t a leader I met with in the region who didn’t raise with me spontaneously the need to try to get peace between Israel and the Palestinians, because it was a cause of recruitment and of street anger and agitation.”

Translation: “peace between Israel and the Palestinians” means Israeli concessions of the sort that will critically compromise Israel’s self-preservation prospects. Only that and that alone will satisfy the “leaders” with whom the insightful Kerry met “in the region.” These were all Arab and/or Muslim and obviously they “spontaneously” gave voice to their enmity toward Israel – enmity which supersedes any discomfort arising from the hideous internecine Arab feuds.

These non-too-objective leaders are chronically prone to blaming any and all misfortunes on Israel (including the polio epidemic back in the day, followed by cancer, later by AIDS and most recently we’re told that Israel deliberately spreads Ebola). Is it then really any wonder that they would blame Israel for the Islamic fanaticism that overruns Iraq, Syria and threatens other domains?

I started writing this post a few days ago. Kerry is old news. Things have changed and not for the better. Now the chickenstuff is hitting the fan. I’m quite annoyed that no one is really calling Jeffrey Goldberg to task for tattling. He seems to enjoy this “someone said” business a little too much. The fault in any relationship is when outsiders feel it’s their business to talk about it, without really saying anything of substance.

And yet the world gives the murders in the Islamic State a pass. Even the NY Times editor basically admitted their double-standard in dealing with the Palestinians:

The editor’s stunning admission that he considers Palestinians exempt from scrutiny due to their stateless existence.

So that makes it okay? I could label it with some of the words that Goldberg uses, but I won’t. I’ll let you ponder some of the choices you think I would make, and let you choose your own.

Many people are looking at the contrast between the remarks of the mothers of the murderers from last week, from Canada and from Israel. Here’s one:

Consider the respective reactions of the mothers of sons responsible for carrying out the Ottawa parliament building and Jerusalem light rail attacks. Susan Bibeau, the mother of Michael Zehaf-Bibeau, stated the following of her son’s heinous actions, “As a person and mother I am horrified by the actions of my son, I am sickened by it. I will never understand what drives a person to such senseless violence…” That is an appropriate emotion for random violence directed against the innocent. The mother of the Jerusalem terrorist by contrast, was pictured holding a glorified photograph of her son as if he had accomplished some great feat. She displays no shame over the fact that her son is a child murderer. Instead, she excuses his conduct by claiming that it was a mere traffic accident. Her abhorrent and unnatural behavior is encouraged, aided and abetted by the Palestinian Authority and its culture of death.

Michael Freund states clearly re political correctness and Islam:

If their actions run counter to the spirit and law of Islam, then imams, sheikhs and ayatollahs the world over should be denouncing them at every opportunity and distancing themselves and their faith from those who kill the innocent.

But that is clearly not happening.

Moreover, each attack is followed by the same assurances from Western leaders, who go out of their way to stress that the terrorists are misrepresenting Islam and perverting its teachings.

I decided to finish this after reading an article on Wikipedia about Misattribution theory of humor. I’m just quoting here a bit and I’m sure you’ll figure out why very soon.

Tendentious vs. Innocuous Humor

Freud made a key distinction between tendentious and non-tendentious humor. Tendentious humor involves a “victim,” someone at whose expense we laugh. Non-tendentious humor does not require a victim. This innocuous humor typically depends on wordplay, and Freud believed it has only modest power to evoke amusement. Tendentious humor, then, is the only kind that can evoke big laughs. However, Freud believed a mixture of both tendentious and non-tendentious humor is required to keep the tendentious humor from becoming too offensive or demeaning to its victim. The innocent jokework of the innocuous humor would mask the otherwise hostile joke and therefore “bribe” our senses, allowing us to laugh at what would otherwise be socially unacceptable. Therefore, we often think we are laughing at innocuous jokes, but what really makes them funny is their socially unacceptable nature hidden below the surface.

Granted this is just one theory of humor. Basically, scientists agree that they can’t really figure out what’s funny.

We should not need to have victims. This is not funny.

So I shouldn’t leave without offering some hope, should I?

Along comes A Mighty Girl on Facebook and offers a glimmer of hope.

18-year-old Angel Magnussen of British Columbia, Canada wanted to make 5-year-old Marcus Cirillo a special gift after learning that his father, Corporal Nathan Cirillo, was killed last week while standing guard in front of the Canadian National War Memorial in Ottawa. The kind-hearted teen with Down syndrome makes blankets for sick children and decided to make Marcus a special one so that he could have a “warm hug”.

“She was quite determined that when she made his blanket that one of the hearts that’s quilted into it, has the letters ‘DAD’ quilted into it so that each time he hugged that blanket he would feel his dad and know that his dad loved him,” Angel’s mom Cheryl explained. The airline WestJet hand-carried the blanket to Hamilton, Ontario where RCMP officers agreed to deliver Angel’s gift to Cirillo’s regiment to give to the boy.

I guess we’ll have go go one hug at a time, and let people know we don’t think it’s funny.

And Israel has a sovereign right to define its own defensible borders, without being bullied.

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s