העורך Editor

פשוט מאוד.

הנה דוגמא, מראש ממשלתם (כסלו תשפ”ד):

“אנחנו לא שואפים לכבוש את עזה, זו לא המטרה שלנו. אנחנו רוצים אחריות צבאית כוללת כדי למנוע את את התעוררות הטרור מחדש. המטרה שלנו היא לוודא שמה שקורה שם יהיה שונה. כדי לעשות את זה אנחנו צריכים לפרז את עזה. שחרור הפלסטינים מחמאס ייתן להם עתיד אמיתי. אנחנו צריכים כאן שינוי תרבותי. לא יכול להיות שייכנס לעזה ממשל אזרחי שלא יילחם בטרוריסטים ושיהיה מחויב למימון מחבלים במקום להילחם בהם”.

במקום שאין מתרגם, אפרש את כל הסתירות בדרך המתישב על הלב (מכאן ולהבא ולמפרע בדבריו ובדברי חבריו):

1. אל הגוים: תימכו בי. אני לצדכם.

2. אל היהודים: תימכו בי. אני לצדכם.

3. אל כל מי שיש לו איזה שהוא דעה: תימכו בי. אני לצדכם.

ולא קשיא, הא לן והא להו.

וק”ל ודו”ק ולק”מ.

בפורום “אוהבי ציון” פורסם הצילום הבא:

תגובתי:

“כשתראה אפי’ בהמה שפלה ואפי’ של רשעי ישראל בצער וכ”ש וכו’, וכי תעלה על דעתך להתעלם משארך ולעזור לשבעים הזאבים אויבי ושונאי השי”ת ועמו?! חלילה מלחדול ח”ו, ועוד להכניס ספחת גרים גרורים לעם ישראל?!”

They, uh, “listened” to the man’s own admission!

Their “extremist files” entry starts like so:

Walsh is a self-described “theocratic fascist” who is one of the most prominent anti-transgender voices in American right-wing media. Walsh sometimes suggests his most extreme comments are satirical or in jest, as when he explained why he describes himself as a theocratic fascist. However…

Then, under the subsection titled “In His Own Words”, they write:

“I am literally a theocratic fascist. I do indeed believe that my religious beliefs should be forced on people by the government. And not just the government, but a government headed by me as a dictator.” – on YouTube, April 3, 2019

This is too old to even blame on unchecked AI-slop. If you’re human, check out the hilarious video linked above.

Reminds me of how anti-Zionists find the quotations they need…

This insider non-liberarian is addressing the martial strategy of Israel vs. Iran, but the same inexorable logic would apply to all States everywhere, all of whom overreach, all of which harm both their people and others. He’s making my case for me!

Some excerpts for Aikido:

Despite the uneasy and artificial “peace” agreement, imposed recently (and arguably prematurely) by Donald Trump, the debate still rages, and speculation still swirls around the Iran-Israel conflict — particularly over the irksome question as to how it will play out in the long run.

…

This is the reason that regime change must be a minimal imperative for Israel at the end of the hostilities—which are likely only to delay, not eradicate, the perils that precipitated the recent conflict.

It is because of this that, to ensure the permanent defanging of Iran, Israel must aspire to a goal beyond regime change. It must focus its efforts on inducing the disintegration of the country in its present configuration into several self-governing ethnic entities — principally non-Persian ones.

It is important to note that Iran’s population is far from monolithic. To the contrary, it is a heterogeneous mixture of diverse ethnicities, almost equally divided between Persians (50-60%) and non-Persians. Thus, as a recent publication by the MEMRI research institute points out, the overall population comprises- among others – Kurds in the west, Baloch in the southeast, Ahwazi Arabs in the south, Azeris in the northwest, and Turkmen in the northeast. Other groups include the Lurs and the Lak people…

And how many countries’ populations are monolithic?!

Israel cannot rely solely on regime change to ensure its post-war security, for at least two reasons.

The first relates to what the successor regime might be, with no guarantee that it will be at all amicable towards the Jewish state, particularly given the widespread negative view of Israel prevailing in large segments of the Iranian public.

The second relates to the uncertainty of the fate of any successor regime, no matter how benign, and the possibility of it itself being overthrown by some other regime, which might well be far more malevolent than its deposed predecessor.

Accordingly, in order to address these unknowns, Israel must go beyond the goal of regime change. Instead, it must aspire for Iran to be dismantled into separate self-governing ethnic entities to ensure that, in the future, it will not become the grave menace that it was in the past.

Sounds like every democracy and every election! None of them can be trusted to play well “in the long run”.

Time for secession!

Read the rest of Dr. Sherman’s particulars here…

Here is ChatGPT’s basic summary of an old but evergreen article:

The article “Why Is EVERYTHING ‘Anti-Semitism’ All of a Sudden?!” presents a forthright critique of the contemporary use and abuse of the term “antisemitism.” It argues that while genuine antisemitism undeniably exists, the label is frequently co-opted as a political instrument to enforce ideological conformity and suppress dissenting voices. Rather than addressing clear and specific acts of Jew-hatred, the accusation of antisemitism is often broadened to encompass a wide range of criticism or disagreement, particularly surrounding Israel and Jewish communal issues. This broad application serves the interests of those seeking to police speech and maintain political control under the veneer of combating hatred.

The piece challenges several common assertions found in official definitions of antisemitism, such as the dismissal of Jewish economic influence as mere “myth” and the automatic conflation of Jewish identity with the policies of the State of Israel. The author suggests that Jewish prominence in various sectors is a manifestation of the blessing granted to Avraham’s descendants, and thus cannot simply be brushed aside as conspiracy.

Moreover, the author questions the propriety of labeling certain criticisms—such as comparisons between Israeli policies and those of historical regimes like the Nazis—as inherently antisemitic. Instead, the article advocates for honest and open discourse, acknowledging that holding Jews to a higher standard does not automatically constitute bigotry. The discussion extends to the charge of dual loyalty, which the author treats as a legitimate question in light of complex Jewish identities and allegiances, particularly outside Israel. He argues that non-Jews cannot simultaneously reject Judaism (by not converting) while maintaining genuine neutrality toward it – making some level of antisemitism universal and inevitable.

Ultimately, the article rejects the modern bureaucratic constructions of antisemitism as insufficient and sometimes misleading frameworks. The problem of Jew-hatred, the author contends, is a persistent reality that cannot be eradicated by rhetoric or legal definitions alone. Practical self-defense and a resolute stance, including the readiness to protect oneself physically and politically, are presented as necessary responses. The piece concludes with a strong call for Jews living in the diaspora who find the discourse on antisemitism frustrating or inadequate to make aliyah, thus embracing a more sovereign and direct confrontation of the challenges facing the Jewish people today.

It’s more inflammatory than that. Find it over here…