Someone listened to me, once.

Look, I’m somewhere else again!


6 thoughts on “Someone listened to me, once.

  1. I’m doing a total wipe of my cerebral hard disk to eliminate all pretentiousness. I wonder if that’s possible.
    This may have been set off by my saying to someone that young people (?) thought in terms of caricatures, cartoons. So naturally my own caricaturish thinking began to appall me. Another, older term I used (on others only) was “watching TV in their head”. Now it appears I do that non-stop. Except when I am talking like this to myself or someone else.
    Now, then, I’ve theorized that this spurting of imagery and inane commentary is part of the flight-fright-fight response, which makes my heckling people (like you) to get serious with the injustice around you wrong-headed–people in your stressful situation are the last I should hit with my quit-day-dreaming harangue–because it is very inclined, according to my own theory, to launch you even deeper into day-dreaming–as a defense mechanism from all the craziness.
    I’ll go read your Only Democracy? thing. Have a nice day. Enjoy. Laugh if necessary. GK Chesterton said that Christianity hadn’t been tried and found wanting, but just hadn’t been tried. Monotheism is the proper butt of that jibe–the idea that we really all are in it together. That’s a very demanding moral position. Also it seems an inescapable one.

    1. The confusion, confirmed by its authors, of the NIF position, magic seven, is a monument to the calculation by which evil thrives under a regime of law.
      That contradiction is poised to attack anyone the NIF needs to attack. You might fervently endorse equal rights for non-Jews in Israel but not sufficiently endorse that double talk about sovereignty of self-determination.
      This is even more evil than an upfront “Jews first” law. At least in that case the public knows where it stands and the officials are under some control.
      7. Works to deny the right of the Jewish people to sovereign self-determination within Israel, or to deny the rights of Palestinian or other non-Jewish citizens to full equality within a
      democratic Israel.
      See, if the judge had to rule on the basis of this sentence, the word “sovereign” would trump all the equal rights what-not because it comes first so must have been first on the author’s mind. As Aharon Barak said, “equality is a complex right”. Meaning, almost, but not quite completely equal. In fact, that judge might be forced to take the “full equality” term and conclude that the author meant only that all non-Jewish residents (citizens?) are equal to each other, and all of them subservient to “sovereign” Jewish residents.
      The closest analogy to the legal situation of non-Jews in Israel-der-Grosse is slavery.
      Will nobody congratulate me on my birthday now?

  2. I was going to post a comment kvelling over my SSO (sensitive, sensible observer) daughter but this Christopher guy threw me off. What is he trying to say and where did he learn to write like that?


Leave a Reply

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

You are commenting using your 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