![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Rant time
Okay, ![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif)
ridemycamel has requested the following:
Unrelated, but I want you to rant about any aspect of the Palestinian conflict and your involvement as a Jew demon in human form. Bitch about Palestinians, Israelis, other Jews, whites, etc. You can direct it anyway you want, and of course, bonus points if you use racial slurs.
'Cause I haven't ranted about that, ever. Oy. Actually, I suppose I haven't ranted on it for awhile, since it has a tendency to not change very much, despite what the media seems to think. But we just had Israeli Apartheid Week here in Hogtown, so the timing's good. The aspect I'm going to rant on specifically is the Palestinian-Israeli debate on campus, since that's where I was all last week.
The following rules are now in effect:
Before bringing up suicide bombing in an argument, you are now obligated to explain why it's automatically worse than any other sort of bombing. Make the explanation good.
When someone's giving a lecture and you want to take issue with what he or she says, wait for the Q&A session. Why don't people understand that?
"Accredited media" means "accredited media," not "some schmuck with a video camera." If someone doesn't want to be videotaped, it's polite to not videotape them. Also, no one actually believes that you're making an independent documentary.
"Questions" mean exactly that, not "long-winded statements describing in detail how your party is going to solve the conflict." STFU.
The latest atrocity is not "the worst [blank] ever." Newsflash: It probably isn't, and it's all a matter of perspective anyway. I don't care if Desmond Tutu says that Israeli apartheid is worse than South African apartheid; it's bad political rhetoric to rank your suffering in comparison with someone else's. Your situation is dire enough without exaggeration.
Zionists are no longer allowed to tell pro-Palestinian and/or anti-Zionist Jews: "You should be ashamed of yourself." Wow, no one's ever told me that before. I'm now totally ashamed of myself. I think what convinced me this time was how you shouted it in my ear. Asshat.
White people must now pass an IQ test before being issued keffiyehs.
The only person who's allowed to call me a kike isbrownfist. No, I don't care if you called yourself a kike first.
The phrase "a secure Israel and a democratic Palestine" is now banned from political discourse unless you're being deliberately ironic.
Palestinians are not responsible for anything the President of Iran says.
Stop coming up with conspiracy theories. Don't you have enough to worry about without making shit up?
No, I don't hate myself. I probably hate you, though.
If you've prefaced your statement with "I think we can all agree..." I probably don't agree with what you're about to say.
Supporters of a secular, democratic, one-state solution do not believe that Israelis should be sent back to Europe. Therefore, telling me to go back to Europe since Canada is on First Nations' land is not a very effective argument.
This is official notice that Jonathan Jaffit is kicked out of the Tribe. But he should never be banned from campus events because he makes them far more entertaining than they otherwise would be.
Anyone have anything else to add? I have a feeling I'm leaving stuff out.
ridemycamel has requested the following:Unrelated, but I want you to rant about any aspect of the Palestinian conflict and your involvement as a Jew demon in human form. Bitch about Palestinians, Israelis, other Jews, whites, etc. You can direct it anyway you want, and of course, bonus points if you use racial slurs.
'Cause I haven't ranted about that, ever. Oy. Actually, I suppose I haven't ranted on it for awhile, since it has a tendency to not change very much, despite what the media seems to think. But we just had Israeli Apartheid Week here in Hogtown, so the timing's good. The aspect I'm going to rant on specifically is the Palestinian-Israeli debate on campus, since that's where I was all last week.
The following rules are now in effect:
Before bringing up suicide bombing in an argument, you are now obligated to explain why it's automatically worse than any other sort of bombing. Make the explanation good.
When someone's giving a lecture and you want to take issue with what he or she says, wait for the Q&A session. Why don't people understand that?
"Accredited media" means "accredited media," not "some schmuck with a video camera." If someone doesn't want to be videotaped, it's polite to not videotape them. Also, no one actually believes that you're making an independent documentary.
"Questions" mean exactly that, not "long-winded statements describing in detail how your party is going to solve the conflict." STFU.
The latest atrocity is not "the worst [blank] ever." Newsflash: It probably isn't, and it's all a matter of perspective anyway. I don't care if Desmond Tutu says that Israeli apartheid is worse than South African apartheid; it's bad political rhetoric to rank your suffering in comparison with someone else's. Your situation is dire enough without exaggeration.
Zionists are no longer allowed to tell pro-Palestinian and/or anti-Zionist Jews: "You should be ashamed of yourself." Wow, no one's ever told me that before. I'm now totally ashamed of myself. I think what convinced me this time was how you shouted it in my ear. Asshat.
White people must now pass an IQ test before being issued keffiyehs.
The only person who's allowed to call me a kike is
brownfist. No, I don't care if you called yourself a kike first.The phrase "a secure Israel and a democratic Palestine" is now banned from political discourse unless you're being deliberately ironic.
Palestinians are not responsible for anything the President of Iran says.
Stop coming up with conspiracy theories. Don't you have enough to worry about without making shit up?
No, I don't hate myself. I probably hate you, though.
If you've prefaced your statement with "I think we can all agree..." I probably don't agree with what you're about to say.
Supporters of a secular, democratic, one-state solution do not believe that Israelis should be sent back to Europe. Therefore, telling me to go back to Europe since Canada is on First Nations' land is not a very effective argument.
This is official notice that Jonathan Jaffit is kicked out of the Tribe. But he should never be banned from campus events because he makes them far more entertaining than they otherwise would be.
Anyone have anything else to add? I have a feeling I'm leaving stuff out.
no subject
As for being self-hating, I thought that was the proper way for any Jew to be. I don't know why it should have anything to do with Zionism, though.
no subject
It's true that a measure of self-hatred is crucial to being a good Hebe, but the amount of decreases the farther one gets from Brooklyn. It's far better to be neurotic.
no subject
I would add...also not responsible for the policies of various North African countries, or for anything Sadaam did, or for what the Germans, British, Russians, etc. etc. said or did.
Good list! :D
no subject
(no subject)
(no subject)
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject
Palestinian mothers breed weapons of mass destruction!
no subject
But...I thought we liked democracy! o_O
A certain cad wanted to make t-shirts with arrows pointing down and the caption "Demographic Threat." It was one of his more clever moments.
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
no subject
no subject
On the intarwebs, however, the first person who links to Rense.com immediately loses the argument.
no subject
I would say that suicide bombing is worse than conventional military bombing because military bombing should have an intended military target (even if it misses) whereas suicide bombing is often random or designed only to produce maximum carnage among civilians.
More importantly, military bombing is often the result of a democratic decision to go to war whereas suicide bombing can be taken up by any crank for no reason. Because military bombing is undertaken by a state and the bomber will presumably be around to answer for it, there is a potential moderating effect. The suicide bomber will never have to face consequences because he or she is dead.
Furthermore, the bombing state is more likely to negotiate because it is unified and has its own goals, risks, and restrictions. One could argue that the suicide bomber acts in conjunction with a terrorist organization, organized and with its own concerns, but these organizations are different from states in that they do not answer to laws, treaties, or the will of a larger constituent, and their members aren't bound to do their organization's bidding in the same way a subject is legally bound to obey his or her state. For example, if a minority in a state wants to continue a war, it can't break away and continue the struggle without a civil war, but 40 percent of a terrorist organization can easily splinter.
So conventional military bombing is somewhat better than and fundamentally different from suicide bombing.
no subject
Military bombing typically results in civilian casualties; far more people have been killed by state-sanctioned bombing than by terrorist groups. Military targets are typically not located on remote islands where no civilians are allowed. Civilian casualties, given this, are not an accident -- they are a calculated part of the equation, regardless of how bad the government claims to feel about it. (At least terrorist groups are honest about not caring who they kill.)
If there's someone in a crowd that I feel like killing, and I fire my gun randomly at him, I am still morally and legally responsible for everyone else I hit, even accidentally.
Because military bombing is undertaken by a state and the bomber will presumably be around to answer for it, there is a potential moderating effect. The suicide bomber will never have to face consequences because he or she is dead.
That makes sense. But one could also argue that the suicide bomber is more moral because he is willing to die for his beliefs, whereas the state's decision-makers are not.
One could argue that the suicide bomber acts in conjunction with a terrorist organization, organized and with its own concerns, but these organizations are different from states in that they do not answer to laws, treaties, or the will of a larger constituent, and their members aren't bound to do their organization's bidding in the same way a subject is legally bound to obey his or her state.
Hamas is the democratically elected government of what Israel and the United States have agreed is the Palestinian state. As a state government, is their violence now legitimate?
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
no subject
I think you have failed to make the distinction between target and method. Is a suicide bomber against a military target any worse than one dropped from an aircraft? Is a 'military' strike aimed at civilians (or aimed without regard for civilian casualties) any better than a suicide bomber?
Hiroshima, City of a Thousand Bars
Re: Hiroshima, City of a Thousand Bars
no subject
When someone was expressing outrage that families of suicide bombers were receiving financial compensation for their self-immoliated relatives, I wondered allowed how much bombing crews are paid to drop bombs from a safe out-of-anti-aircraft-range and get to return home in one piece.
Oooh! That one started a donnybrook, I'll tell you what!
no subject
Love the icon.
no subject
New Rule: Zionists cannot keep on claiming that the Palestinians want to push them into the sea!
WHAT THE FUCK ARE THEY AFRAID OF???!!!!
Zionists act like Jews cannot swim (is the sea not kosher or something), and that the state of Israel does not have fucking ships, boats etc. The Palestinians are not, I repeat ARE NOT, trying to push Jews in to the sea. No one creates a political movement based on pushing the Jews into the sea. Not even Hitler tried to push the Jews into the sea, he made you into lampshades etc. I mean its all fucked up, and I am not celebrating his deeds but lets not keep on citing the same old "Jews into the sea" bullshit. I have no fucking clue why Zionists are scared of the sea, I mean the last time you dealt with one it fucking parted for you, so there is no reason to doubt that it wont happen again (OH WAIT, I FORGOT, THATS A FUCKING MYTH TOO!). The Palestinians want a state, not a sea full of dead Jews. It doesnt make for good fishing, and long walks on the beach.
And, as for suicide bombers. Suicide bombing is no better or worse than conventional bombing, they both kill people. If you read the ideas of Hamas, they argue that all people who live in the Occupied Territories are soldier or will become soldiers (Israel has a mandatory draft for both men and women). Thus, there is no such thing as a civilian. The Americans and Israeli's have a great little term called "collateral damage" which ensures that their fucking bomber pilots are not responsible for civilian death and thus not accountable. Both sides are fucked up and should stop doing it. If you have such a problem with suicide bombing then fine, give the Palestinians the latest bomber and fighter planes, and let the penis waving begin. This is what the whole thing is about. A bunch of men getting together and waving their dicks around to see whose is biggest. Just fucking stop it!
To conclude, no one is pushing the Jews into the sea, so put your penises away and play nice with the Palestinians!
no subject
Also, hee.
They're both fucked up, but...
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
no subject
no subject
Great post/comments.
(no subject)
no subject
I loved these:
White people must now pass an IQ test before being issued keffiyehs.
Stop coming up with conspiracy theories. Don't you have enough to worry about without making shit up?
Supporters of a secular, democratic, one-state solution do not believe that Israelis should be sent back to Europe. Therefore, telling me to go back to Europe since Canada is on First Nations' land is not a very effective argument.
How about, bringing up Joan Peters is grounds for public flogging.
You never commented on my entry a bit back about my friend's wacko convert mom. For shame, meydeleh.
no subject
That's legit, but I like its reference to our immigrant history.
How about, bringing up Joan Peters is grounds for public flogging.
God, yeah. Fortunately there's not a lot of that going around here either.
You never commented on my entry a bit back about my friend's wacko convert mom. For shame, meydeleh.
Oh my! Link! I've had long periods of not keeping up with my friends list lately.
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
no subject
no subject
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
Quasi-Off Topic
On the show, the Narn are a vaguely reptilian race (always sci-fi shorthand for "bad aliens") who have red eyes, seem always angry and come from a desert planet. They have recently freed their home world from the Centari Empire (now Republic) in a protracted guerilla war. Despite this, the audience is supposed to sympathize with the Centari because they are the most human looking of all the show's aliens and their ambassador, Londo Molari, is quite the charmer. By contrast, the Narn ambassador, J'Kar, initially comes across as a childish, petulant bully who is not very bright and easily flustered. However, as the series goes on, viewers learn more about the atrocities that occurred under the occupation and J'Kar becomes more competent and sympathetic. I seem to recall Molari once calling J'Kar a "terrorist," but I'm not certain about that.
If it is commentary on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, then Molari's backstabbing, ingratiating manner, coupled with his thick Eastern European accent almost make him an anti-Semitic caricature. (By contrast, J'Kar almost speaks the Queen's English.)
If so, I don't know how much this is offset by the coolest character on the show, Lieutenant Commander Ivanova, being a Russian Jew. The character had flirted with "Neo-Communism" in her youth (It's set in the future) and her starship sports a big honking red star on its back. The character is also incredibly pessimistic. In one episode in which the station had averted utter destruction, another character breathes, "Well the station didn't go boom."
Ivanova nonchalantly responds, "Boom tomorrow. Tomorrow, go boom."
Have you seen the show?
Re: Quasi-Off Topic
I'm a bad geek.
Re: Quasi-Off Topic
Re: Quasi-Off Topic
Re: Quasi-Off Topic
Re: Quasi-Off Topic
Re: Quasi-Off Topic
Re: Quasi-Off Topic
Re: Quasi-Off Topic
Re: Quasi-Off Topic
Re: Quasi-Off Topic
Re: Quasi-Off Topic
no subject
no subject
Truly Off-Topic
Have you read Neil Gaiman and Dave McKean's Violent Cases yet? And you haven't told me if you are interested in Howard Cruise's Stuck Rubber Baby. I sent you an email about it - it has an intro written by Tony Kushner(!)
Thus far, the following books are in the box:
1) All your stuff, except The Master and the Margarita which I haven't finished yet.
2) David Boswell's ultimate "Fire your Boss" comic, Reid Fleming: World's Toughest Milkman. The title is the premise. Lots of sabotage and property destruction by both labor and management. The company CEO, may remind you of Binkus. It's drawn in a B&W cross hatch style with a 1930 feel which compliments its Marx Brothers / Three Stooges sensibilities. Don't let that scare you - trust me: It's funny.
3) Alan Moore's hilarious Top Ten (the actual Alan Moore written issues, not the new guy that sucks). I imagine you read a great deal of cop-negative literature and this may balance it out. Think of it as reading the enemy. The premise is the world has sent all of it's super-powered beings to live in one city and that city needs a police force. Imagine The Watchmen crossed with Hill Street Blues only funny. One character sports the kitty cat Jolly Roger you signed your last note with on his chest. The first two issues / chapters establish place and character. Things get going in three and if you are not addicted and in stitches by six, you are not really Rachel.
4) Welcome to the Zone, another David Chelsea comic about communist folksingers and performance artists in a version of NYC inhabited by space aliens, mutants and undead skeletons. This one is short because it is done entirely in his pointillism style.
5) A bunch of Kyle Baker books: The Cowboy Wally Show, Why I Hate Saturn, You Are Here and Undercover Genie In addition, I'm including Baker's collaboration with Boondocks creator Aaron McGruger: Birth of a Nation: A Comic Novel. In it, the residents of predominantly black East St. Louis secede from the U.S. after another 2000-style disenfranchisement stunt.
Comments?
Re: Truly Off-Topic
Squee!
Have you read Neil Gaiman and Dave McKean's Violent Cases yet? And you haven't told me if you are interested in Howard Cruise's Stuck Rubber Baby. I sent you an email about it - it has an intro written by Tony Kushner(!)
I haven't read either, so by all means send.
Re: Truly Off-Topic
It does have a border. Yours needs a border.
Re: It does have a border. Yours needs a border.
Re: It does have a border. Yours needs a border.
Re: It does have a border. Yours needs a border.
Re: It does have a border. Yours needs a border.
Re: It does have a border. Yours needs a border.
no subject
no subject
no subject
haa! too true.
not yet finished with list tho. but hee so far! :)
no subject