You are so confused it is hard to know where to start. I'll just go in order...
1) What you term "religiosity" is not a base impulse. Gasping for breath after being submerged in water is base impulse. Eating when you're hungry is a base impulse. Protecting your children from attack is a base impulse. Maximizing pleasure and minimizing pain are base impulses. Having sex whenever your hormones demand is a base impulse.
Saying a blessing before eating is about delaying your base impulse (to eat when hungry) in order to thank G-d for the food and acknowledge that this is His creation. Wrapping tefillin every day, an inconvenience for which there is no "rational" explanation, goes against the base impulses of a human being.
Your "wherever my heart sees fit I will go" humanism is much more base than "religiosity". I don't know about other religions. We Jews have 613 commandments to follow. They haven't changed in 3000 years. Only an ignoramus would say that complying with them - a challenge every Jew struggles with daily - is a "base instinct".
Eating food without acknowledging G-d is a "base instinct". Animals, for example, don't say a blessing before eating, and they are not instructed to do so. It takes much dedication and personal refinement to achieve a state of sensitivity where you realize that eating without a blessing to G-d is a crass state of being.
Judaism is about elevating an individual above nature, above the animalistic "base instincts", to connect with G-d, and to transform nature in service of G-d.
2) In ages past, you and I probably *would* have to be killing one another
G-d forbid, why would you say such a thing?! Where is this anger coming from? Why do you wish to kill me? The only one mentioning violence, over and over, is you!
3) You are not well read on the story of Hannukah. I'll have to break down your points into several portions:
a) The Greek Hellenists were not atheists, they were polytheists. The Jewish revolt came not because of "atoms", but because the Hellenists started erecting shrines to idols throughout the land, even in the Holy Temple!
The Hellenists were religious. They accepted the Jewish G-d. Their point was, you Jews are right, there is a G-d of gods. But there is also a god of the earth, and a god of the sun and a god of the trees. They were willing to accept the Jewish G-d, as long as the Jews accept all their gods in return. Moreover, they enforced their polytheism with military force!
It's true, some Jews were lured to hedonism and polytheism at this time. Yet the Jewish nation did rebel, starting with the Maccabees. They weren't the Taliban of their time! They were fighting a war to preserve the spiritual integrity of the Land of Israel and the Jewish people.
b) You chose the wrong person to BS with the "atoms" argument. The philosophers of antiquity had no modern understanding of atoms. Atomism deals with abstract, philosophical notions of a building block of reality. Epicurus, for example, believed that the difference between gods and humans was that the souls of gods adhere to their bodies without escaping while the forces holding human atoms together cannot hold the soul forever.
This was not the Bohr model or Molecular Orbital Theory! These people had no idea what they were talking about.
Furthermore, reading traditional Greek philosophy, after being acquainted with Jewish mysticism is like getting a Ph.D and going back to kindergarten. The questions Greek philosophers raise are not only answered by our tradition, the very premises on which those questions are made are invalidated by even a Jewish child's understanding.
It is only your ignorance and arrogance that holds you back from learning the basic tenets of your own, incredible heritage, which has withstood 3000 years without a single successful challenge to its foundation, and which grows, from "strength to strength", year after year, as the sun rises and falls on all others.
It is an injustice that you, as a Jew, spend time with this nonsense of people playing guessing games about the nature of existence when your own identity is interwoven with the fabric of creation!
600,000 Jewish heads of household, along with families numbering in the millions, stood Mt. Sinai and mutually witnessed an event unparalleled in the history of humanity. Nature itself bent on one knee. Not for one man did this occur, not in a dream; the entire world knew, in life, that the Jewish people were born! Fear descended upon the world of the Jewish people, for the knew that we carried the name of G-d.
Through our own mistakes, expulsions, dispersions, pogroms, assimilation and genocide we have survived, not just as a people, but as a nation united with our heritage and our inheritance. What other people have this history? What other people can claim such miracles? Wake up!
Your ignorance of your own people, your own inheritance needs to end. It's time to grown up and take responsibility for your own learning, for your own yiddishkeit.
Monday, September 22, 2008
Sunday, August 17, 2008
Layering Narrative
whoever gains the most was the most likely culprit
This is a very "Arab street" mindset. Not only is it "contestable", as you said, [Name], it is also easily manipulated.
For example, for any given action or event, there may be multiple beneficiaries. There is no doubt that a dozen nations, organizations, even individuals benefited from the extermination of Mughniyeh - Syria, Israel, the US, Iran, Saudi... perhaps even factions and individuals within Hezbollah.
Whatever the truth, whether it was a Syrian down payment for peace talks with Israel, a Mossad/CIA hit team, Saudi agents taking a hit at a top pawn of Iran or even members of Hezbollah who hated Mughniyeh... perhaps Mughniyeh supplied weapons to the Chechens, and it was the Russians who caught up with him.
There is simply no way for us to know for sure, without entering this data into a geopolitical context, and this is where manipulation becomes not only possible, but useful.
It is useful for Israel to have the Arab world fear the long reach of Mossad hit teams. It is useful for Syria to blame Israel for the hit, giving Damascus plausible deniability in front of Hezbollah and the Arab world. It is useful for Hezbollah to blame everyone else, in the hope of deflecting attention from fractures in its organization... and so on.
Given all this, I have found that Arabs, the average person, not those in a position to understand the proper context, are unique in their ability to compartmentalize information - thus preventing its synthesis, and the formation of a single coherent narrative. At least this is how it appears from without.
This can be very confusing for outsiders, and I am speaking as someone who grew up in the Soviet Union, where people knew how to read the news and were no strangers to compartmentalizing between public and private.
For example, take the attacks by Zarqawi's al Qaeda in Iraq in Jordan a couple of years back that resulted in massive civilian casualties, all Muslim. I remember quite clearly reading editorials in Amman discussing how Muslims could not have been responsible for such horror, and that only Jews could have resorted to such brutality.
This was a popular sentiment, as usual, that Mossad and the CIA, disguised as al Qaeda, were bombing Muslims in the Middle East to divide them, and bombing the West to provide a pretext for invading Muslim lands.
I remember polling conducted within months of the attacks where up to half of the population believed that Israel/US/West was responsible. What was stunning, however, was that, simultaneously, something like 80% of Jordanians now rejected terrorism as a tactic, even when conducted by Muslims against the Jews/US/West.
There is a disconnect there. On the one hand, it is almost a matter of civic duty to publicly demonstrate Arab/Muslim unity and denounce the Jews/US/West for murdering Muslims. On the other hand, there is a private layer of understanding that Muslims were responsible, and that terrorism is an unacceptable form of violence.
Something similar occurred in Lebanon. Publicly, many Sunnis and Christians were denouncing Israel's bombing campaign; privately, many were outraged that Hezbollah asked no one before plunging the country into war, and were hoping the Jews would bloody Hezbollah and thus weaken it's growing power.
So, while I understand your desire to "speak in probabilistic terms", I also know that most average people, particularly those on the ground, linked by family and tribal structure, intuitively understand the situation and who is responsible for what.
When it comes to Arabs, you can often learn more listening to gossiping women than reading the most respected editorial writer.
This is a very "Arab street" mindset. Not only is it "contestable", as you said, [Name], it is also easily manipulated.
For example, for any given action or event, there may be multiple beneficiaries. There is no doubt that a dozen nations, organizations, even individuals benefited from the extermination of Mughniyeh - Syria, Israel, the US, Iran, Saudi... perhaps even factions and individuals within Hezbollah.
Whatever the truth, whether it was a Syrian down payment for peace talks with Israel, a Mossad/CIA hit team, Saudi agents taking a hit at a top pawn of Iran or even members of Hezbollah who hated Mughniyeh... perhaps Mughniyeh supplied weapons to the Chechens, and it was the Russians who caught up with him.
There is simply no way for us to know for sure, without entering this data into a geopolitical context, and this is where manipulation becomes not only possible, but useful.
It is useful for Israel to have the Arab world fear the long reach of Mossad hit teams. It is useful for Syria to blame Israel for the hit, giving Damascus plausible deniability in front of Hezbollah and the Arab world. It is useful for Hezbollah to blame everyone else, in the hope of deflecting attention from fractures in its organization... and so on.
Given all this, I have found that Arabs, the average person, not those in a position to understand the proper context, are unique in their ability to compartmentalize information - thus preventing its synthesis, and the formation of a single coherent narrative. At least this is how it appears from without.
This can be very confusing for outsiders, and I am speaking as someone who grew up in the Soviet Union, where people knew how to read the news and were no strangers to compartmentalizing between public and private.
For example, take the attacks by Zarqawi's al Qaeda in Iraq in Jordan a couple of years back that resulted in massive civilian casualties, all Muslim. I remember quite clearly reading editorials in Amman discussing how Muslims could not have been responsible for such horror, and that only Jews could have resorted to such brutality.
This was a popular sentiment, as usual, that Mossad and the CIA, disguised as al Qaeda, were bombing Muslims in the Middle East to divide them, and bombing the West to provide a pretext for invading Muslim lands.
I remember polling conducted within months of the attacks where up to half of the population believed that Israel/US/West was responsible. What was stunning, however, was that, simultaneously, something like 80% of Jordanians now rejected terrorism as a tactic, even when conducted by Muslims against the Jews/US/West.
There is a disconnect there. On the one hand, it is almost a matter of civic duty to publicly demonstrate Arab/Muslim unity and denounce the Jews/US/West for murdering Muslims. On the other hand, there is a private layer of understanding that Muslims were responsible, and that terrorism is an unacceptable form of violence.
Something similar occurred in Lebanon. Publicly, many Sunnis and Christians were denouncing Israel's bombing campaign; privately, many were outraged that Hezbollah asked no one before plunging the country into war, and were hoping the Jews would bloody Hezbollah and thus weaken it's growing power.
So, while I understand your desire to "speak in probabilistic terms", I also know that most average people, particularly those on the ground, linked by family and tribal structure, intuitively understand the situation and who is responsible for what.
When it comes to Arabs, you can often learn more listening to gossiping women than reading the most respected editorial writer.
Investing in the Right Future
A better future for everyone lies in unlocking the gates to Gaza and allowing us to learn and gain exposure to the broader world – with all of the challenges, controversies and diverse perspectives it offers.
That's cute. Maybe we should also allow Iranian students to study nuclear physics at MIT? "The poor boy only wants to learn computer science, you heartless Firouz!" Half the top leadership of al Qaeda learned engineering and medicine. This did nothing to civilize their brutality, but entrenched and structured their hatred and vitriol with intellectual rationality.
Why was Abed denied, when others were not? Why is there "secret evidence" on Abed, and not on the half dozen Gaza students who continued on their Fullbright dreams? "Secret Evidence"? Not so secret, since it was shared with US officials, who denied him the visa, not Israel.
Could the secret evidence against me have been extracted through the torture of some young Palestinian?
What about torture of an old Palestinian? It doesn't really matter, does it? Torture is wrong. Of course, it also works.
This reminds me of a documentary about the original PLO women fighters; the ones who were the first to start bombing Israeli buses and gunning down families in their sleep, back in the 1960s. Back then Palestinian society was not violent and would often turn them in to avoid trouble with Israel.
She explains quite clearly how the PLO used terror attacks against Israeli civilians to trigger a disproportionate Israeli military response, and then capitalized on the resulting anger among the people to recruit angry young men.
In any case, the former PLO woman tells how when she was finally captured, Israel knew she had hidden weapons and explosives somewhere, but they did not know where. They beat her, but she would not say anything.
Then they sat her down an a desk, made her some tea, brought in another PLO woman fighter and beat the second woman in front of her.
Finally the Israeli interrogator ripped the second woman's clothes off and raped her with something like a bat or a baton. That's when the first PLO woman had enough and told Israel everything: where she hid the weapons and the explosives and all her friends who were waiting in Jordan with orders to attack so and so, on this date and on that date. And this is what she admitted on camera! Who knows what Israel finally got out of her.
Gruesome? Yes. Brutal? Barbaric? Inhuman? Yes. Then again, no one asked her to murder innocent people. Fuck her and fuck her friend. The only thing that matters is the interrogation was successful, and innocent people, who did not choose that life, were saved.
The only thing I could think of after the movie ended was, torture works!
Was my “crime” sharing a classroom or a lunchtime conversation with someone Israel believes poses a danger?
Now we're getting somewhere. He knows EXACTLY what's going on, and what "secret evidence" Israel has on him. I am willing to bet he chose his words specifically to create doubt about the details of the evidence Israel has on him. Perhaps he was approached by terror groups at a lunchroom or classroom, and asked to perform some tasks for them in America. Whatever it is, he knows exactly.
Granting students from around the world scholarships to study at America's best universities is a privilege. This country is fully capable of making the right decisions about who it should invest our finite resources and human capital in.
I have no doubt there are some bright Georgian students, who are not at war with the West, who did not participate in terrorist activities, nor supported terrorist groups, who will certainly not be using their future skills for Jihad.
In fact, there are even some Gazan students who, too, meet such criteria.
Fidaa Abed is just not one of them.
That's cute. Maybe we should also allow Iranian students to study nuclear physics at MIT? "The poor boy only wants to learn computer science, you heartless Firouz!" Half the top leadership of al Qaeda learned engineering and medicine. This did nothing to civilize their brutality, but entrenched and structured their hatred and vitriol with intellectual rationality.
Why was Abed denied, when others were not? Why is there "secret evidence" on Abed, and not on the half dozen Gaza students who continued on their Fullbright dreams? "Secret Evidence"? Not so secret, since it was shared with US officials, who denied him the visa, not Israel.
Could the secret evidence against me have been extracted through the torture of some young Palestinian?
What about torture of an old Palestinian? It doesn't really matter, does it? Torture is wrong. Of course, it also works.
This reminds me of a documentary about the original PLO women fighters; the ones who were the first to start bombing Israeli buses and gunning down families in their sleep, back in the 1960s. Back then Palestinian society was not violent and would often turn them in to avoid trouble with Israel.
She explains quite clearly how the PLO used terror attacks against Israeli civilians to trigger a disproportionate Israeli military response, and then capitalized on the resulting anger among the people to recruit angry young men.
In any case, the former PLO woman tells how when she was finally captured, Israel knew she had hidden weapons and explosives somewhere, but they did not know where. They beat her, but she would not say anything.
Then they sat her down an a desk, made her some tea, brought in another PLO woman fighter and beat the second woman in front of her.
Finally the Israeli interrogator ripped the second woman's clothes off and raped her with something like a bat or a baton. That's when the first PLO woman had enough and told Israel everything: where she hid the weapons and the explosives and all her friends who were waiting in Jordan with orders to attack so and so, on this date and on that date. And this is what she admitted on camera! Who knows what Israel finally got out of her.
Gruesome? Yes. Brutal? Barbaric? Inhuman? Yes. Then again, no one asked her to murder innocent people. Fuck her and fuck her friend. The only thing that matters is the interrogation was successful, and innocent people, who did not choose that life, were saved.
The only thing I could think of after the movie ended was, torture works!
Was my “crime” sharing a classroom or a lunchtime conversation with someone Israel believes poses a danger?
Now we're getting somewhere. He knows EXACTLY what's going on, and what "secret evidence" Israel has on him. I am willing to bet he chose his words specifically to create doubt about the details of the evidence Israel has on him. Perhaps he was approached by terror groups at a lunchroom or classroom, and asked to perform some tasks for them in America. Whatever it is, he knows exactly.
Granting students from around the world scholarships to study at America's best universities is a privilege. This country is fully capable of making the right decisions about who it should invest our finite resources and human capital in.
I have no doubt there are some bright Georgian students, who are not at war with the West, who did not participate in terrorist activities, nor supported terrorist groups, who will certainly not be using their future skills for Jihad.
In fact, there are even some Gazan students who, too, meet such criteria.
Fidaa Abed is just not one of them.
Friday, August 15, 2008
As for Lebanon
Lebanon deserved hell for sheltering the PLO. Syria, Jordan and Egypt did not put up with that bullshit - they understood the destabilizing force that Arafat represented and exterminated PLO members with ruthless efficiency. Yet Lebanon allowed them to set up bases, from which they repeatedly attacked Israeli villages over a 10 year period, often murdering entire families in their sleep.
Ever heard of the Coastal Road Massacre?
You can thank Afatrat for dragging Lebanon into 30 years of war. The only thing Israel did wrong is in not pursuing the PLO into Beirut and exterminating them there and then, instead of accepting the exodus to Tunis. This was Sharon's mistake; he should have completed his mission.
The reason for 20 years of Israeli occupation was that the objectives of the Israeli operation were not completed. To this day, there remains a hostile force on Israel's border committed to murdering as many Jews as it can.
Let's hope two years of Ashkenazi's leadership have borne fruit. The next Israeli leader will need a 21st century army that can finish the wars of the 20th century.
Ever heard of the Coastal Road Massacre?
You can thank Afatrat for dragging Lebanon into 30 years of war. The only thing Israel did wrong is in not pursuing the PLO into Beirut and exterminating them there and then, instead of accepting the exodus to Tunis. This was Sharon's mistake; he should have completed his mission.
The reason for 20 years of Israeli occupation was that the objectives of the Israeli operation were not completed. To this day, there remains a hostile force on Israel's border committed to murdering as many Jews as it can.
Let's hope two years of Ashkenazi's leadership have borne fruit. The next Israeli leader will need a 21st century army that can finish the wars of the 20th century.
Thursday, August 14, 2008
Tripods
Do you justify murder based on doubt?
You, [Name], justify the indiscriminate murder of Jews for no other reason than they are Jews, and then you dare challenge "murder based on doubt"? When Hamas launches a rocket at Jewish civilian population centers, there is no doubt this act is intended to murder civilians. Your cousins target Jews by design. Every morning they wake up and think, "How can we kill the most Jews today?"
You have no problem with that. That's resistance. But an Israeli tank crew mistaking some guy two miles away in a truck with a tripod pointed in their direction as hostile... that's outrageous! A war crime! A journalistic Holocaust, right [Name]?
In a war zone, doubt can get you killed. The troops in that tank identified a hostile threat and engaged it. In a war where the enemy does not wear uniforms, where children and the mentally disabled are sent out strapped with bombs - another of your esteemed resistance tactics - plastering "TV" on your vehicle means nothing. That's what happens, "cause this is war, and people will die, innocent ones too".
4thQuarter
Raw, brilliant music that I highly recommend, if you can still get their CD. I think the group dissolved when they were redeployed back in theatre.
As for tripods, let's do this:
Hezbollah truck with rocket launcher.
What would this look like from 2 miles away?
More pretty tripods.
and of course, the perennial favorite...
The most famous tripod of all.
Of Mythos and Reason
I didn't notice who the author of this post was when I first began reading. I was on the verge of leaving a comment praising the writer for the most coherent, levelheaded argument since I've been reading [Blog Name]...
...but then [Name] decided to go off the deep end and start accusing the usual suspects - America, Israel and a newcomer to Arab scapegoat-itis, Ukraine.
[Name]!!! You're so tantalizingly close to becoming a rational human being, an intelligent one at that, able to evaluate information and draw reasonable conclusions.
But then something kicks in; something deep inside you that forces you to question your logic and undermine your reason... and inevitably, inexplicably, unreasonably and unjustifiably blame it all on America and Israel.
With one hand, you profess a desire to rise above the "Arab street", and the backwardness of its mythos. With the other, you pull yourself right back into the very swamp you intellectually reject and detest.
I am certain you've recognized this pattern in yourself. You are too impregnated with Western deconstructionalism to have not done so.
...but then [Name] decided to go off the deep end and start accusing the usual suspects - America, Israel and a newcomer to Arab scapegoat-itis, Ukraine.
[Name]!!! You're so tantalizingly close to becoming a rational human being, an intelligent one at that, able to evaluate information and draw reasonable conclusions.
But then something kicks in; something deep inside you that forces you to question your logic and undermine your reason... and inevitably, inexplicably, unreasonably and unjustifiably blame it all on America and Israel.
With one hand, you profess a desire to rise above the "Arab street", and the backwardness of its mythos. With the other, you pull yourself right back into the very swamp you intellectually reject and detest.
I am certain you've recognized this pattern in yourself. You are too impregnated with Western deconstructionalism to have not done so.
A New Challenge
By "challenge", I meant a challenge to American interests. So, you're right, substantial numbers of our forces are engaged in Iraq and Afghanistan. However, the outcome of Iraq is all but assured. Even were our forces to be run out of that country tomorrow, unlikely as that seems, our primary strategic challenge there - and the focus of GWOT - was al Qaeda, and it is defeated.
As for Afghanistan, everyone accepts that Afghanistan is more or less pacified to the extent that it can be with the forces deployed. The challenge is not in Afghanistan, but rather from opposing forces based in Pakistan, where we are not deployed, and have no intention to be deployed. In addition, these opposing forces (the Taliban) are indigenous and ethnic in nature; their focus is on dominating Afghanistan as they once did, not using Afghanistan as a launchpad for challenging American policy elsewhere - as al Qaeda did.
In other words, we invaded Afghanistan and Iraq to establish theatres to challenge al Qaeda's power base and sanctuary in the Arab and Muslim world. This has been achieved. The remnants of al Qaeda and its affiliates will take some time to be fully extinguished, but our primary war aims have been achieved - al Qaeda has lost the ability to function effectively as a transnational organization with a coherent geopolitical agenda.
Our victories over al Qaeda have exposed us to new challenges, both arising from indigenous forces resisting the projection of our power in their respective regions - Iran and Pakistan. However, these challenges are not connected to GWOT; indeed, both nations have generally, if peripherally, supported our efforts in GWOT. They are now resisting our secondary objectives - the transformation of the region into one that is a conduit for American interests and power.
So, again, I would argue that GWOT has concluded. We certainly are dealing with the consequences of GWOT policies, but these are askew to our original intentions. Iran and Pakistan are real challenges, but of a secondary and self-limited nature. They do not seriously threaten the American strategic equation, though they may contest our regional posture.
In contrast, the challenge to Eastern Europe - the rise of the Russian bear - is a more fundamental American interest, and one with broad consequences for our nation and our allies. History has shown that a Russia that is confident, able to project power and insulate itself with satellites and client states, is a Russia which will come crashing into truly vital American interests.
As for Afghanistan, everyone accepts that Afghanistan is more or less pacified to the extent that it can be with the forces deployed. The challenge is not in Afghanistan, but rather from opposing forces based in Pakistan, where we are not deployed, and have no intention to be deployed. In addition, these opposing forces (the Taliban) are indigenous and ethnic in nature; their focus is on dominating Afghanistan as they once did, not using Afghanistan as a launchpad for challenging American policy elsewhere - as al Qaeda did.
In other words, we invaded Afghanistan and Iraq to establish theatres to challenge al Qaeda's power base and sanctuary in the Arab and Muslim world. This has been achieved. The remnants of al Qaeda and its affiliates will take some time to be fully extinguished, but our primary war aims have been achieved - al Qaeda has lost the ability to function effectively as a transnational organization with a coherent geopolitical agenda.
Our victories over al Qaeda have exposed us to new challenges, both arising from indigenous forces resisting the projection of our power in their respective regions - Iran and Pakistan. However, these challenges are not connected to GWOT; indeed, both nations have generally, if peripherally, supported our efforts in GWOT. They are now resisting our secondary objectives - the transformation of the region into one that is a conduit for American interests and power.
So, again, I would argue that GWOT has concluded. We certainly are dealing with the consequences of GWOT policies, but these are askew to our original intentions. Iran and Pakistan are real challenges, but of a secondary and self-limited nature. They do not seriously threaten the American strategic equation, though they may contest our regional posture.
In contrast, the challenge to Eastern Europe - the rise of the Russian bear - is a more fundamental American interest, and one with broad consequences for our nation and our allies. History has shown that a Russia that is confident, able to project power and insulate itself with satellites and client states, is a Russia which will come crashing into truly vital American interests.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
