Mishegaas

Filed under Mishegaas

5 Responses to “Mishegaas”

  1. I happen to agree with some of what he says, but this paragraph in particular really struck me as… bizarre? COntradictory?

    The Palestinians are strikingly unburdened by the pathologies of their oppressors, not least of all because they do not reciprocate their occupier’s widespread racism. Their responses to their sadistic dispossession and unbearable suffering run the gamut from peaceful to violent resistance, including the desperate barbarity of suicide bombings. Yet unlike their tormentors, they’ve not lost their humanity and essential decency, their acceptance of their enemy’s humanity, their cultural generosity of spirit and life, their respect for the sacredness of all life, their sanity. I can’t imagine that Palestinian soldiers would cruelly and coolly remain unmoved — devoid of an abiding sense of rescue — by a Jewish mother dying in her house as her children watched in fear and horror.

    What?! HOw about those engaged inthe violent resistance he mentioned a few words ago, or the desperate barbarity? They wouldn’t remain “unmoved — devoid of an abiding sense of rescue — by a Jewish mother dying in her house as her children watched in fear and horror?”
    Um, come on, here. I’m about as left as a person can get, and I definitely think he’s engaging in some deep denial here. This doens’t negate the other things he says (which I – and you- have said for years), but I think that paragraph is in fact the very paradigm of the example of the flaws of the other side of thiscoin.


    Kol Ra'ash Gadol · July 31st, 2007 at 11:34 pm
  2. Khalaf’s missing the two largest points.

    1) The degree to which Palestinian terrorism, the raison d’etre for Israeli actions, is itself an extension of the Arab anti-semitism that funds it.

    2) The degree to which Israeli action, and especially the demagoguery he cites, is itself an extension of the Christian anti-Arabism that funds it through organizations like CUFI.

    Both of these back ends would rather fan the flames of the conflict and push it into crisis than see peace in the region.


    Rich · August 1st, 2007 at 10:07 am
  3. I used to be a TA in the religion department at a nominally Catholic university, where *most* of the students were under the impression that “Jew” was a bad word. We always got a kick out of the awkward phrasing they’d manage to come up with when discussing the “Judaic peoples” or a “person of the Hebrew faith”.

    Once a girl waxed philosophical about how calling myself a Jew bothered her the same way Black people using the “n-word” in public did. She conceded that it might be okay if we called ourselves that when safely amongst our own people, but not in mixed company in order to avoid giving others the impression that they could also call us “Jews”. Oy.


    Jewdeist · August 2nd, 2007 at 11:39 am
  4. “JEW” is considered offensive by many. Working with a large publishing house, their guidlines specifically insist on “Jewish Person” over “Jew.”


    Merliner · August 2nd, 2007 at 1:51 pm
  5. “Jew” is definitely a bad word when used as a verb, as in “Are you trying to jew me down?” (and yes, there actually are still people who use this).

    As “Gyp” should be.


    themicah · August 2nd, 2007 at 2:12 pm

Leave a Reply

If your comment does not immediately appear, do not freak out and repost your message a dozen times. Please note that all new visitors must have their first comment approved by the editor, and you must provide a legitimate e-mail address and use the same username for the system to "remember" you. The editor maintains the right to refuse comments deemed inappropriate or unhelpful. Users who repeatedly delve into ad hominem attacks or other troll-like behavior will be banned.

Trackback (Right-click & 'Copy Link...') | Comments RSS

"I may attack a certain point of view which I consider false, but I will never attack a person who preaches it. I have always a high regard for the individual who is honest and moral, even when I am not in agreement with him. Such a relation is in accord with the concept of kavod habriyot, for beloved is man for he is created in the image of God." —Rav Joseph Soloveitchik