From The Ethics Alarms Res Ipsa Loquitur Files: What Does The Public Learn From These Things? Can They Figure It Out Themselves?

[This is the successor to a completed post that WordPress, for some reason, deleted beyond recovery when I hit “publish” at about 6:30 am today, thus robbing me of 90 minutes of my life and nearly my sanity. My inclination was to let it stay in cyber-hell and forget the whole thing, especially since the viewership here has similarly vanished lately and I feel like I could be more productively catching up on my “Everybody loves Raymond” episodes, but that would be petulant.]

There are a lot of dots to connect, but it shouldn’t be hard for the unbiased and attentive. I know they are out there, even if the Democratic Party is certain they are not.

So here are the dots…Let’s begin with the attack against a group of Jews celebrating Hanukkah at a rabbi’s home in Monsey, New York over the weekend. Grafton Thomas used a machete-like blade, and stabbed five celebrants.

  • The attack, which officials said began after 10 p.m. this past Saturday, was the 13th anti-Semitic incident in three weeks in the state and the most recent in a string of violence targeting local Jewish communities in the region.

Earlier this month, four people were fatally shot in  an attack on a Jersey City kosher grocery store.

  • On Friday the 27th, the day before the Monsey attack, Tiffany Harris, like Thomas an African American, was arrested for  punching and cursing three Orthodox women awhile shouting, ‘Fuck you you, Jews.’

Harris then was released on her own recognizance, and a day later arrested for another attack.

  • NYC’s Democrat mayor Bill de Blasio immediately shifted blame and accountability to…well, guess.

You’re RIGHT! He told Fox News, “An atmosphere of hate has been developing in this country over the last few years. A lot of it is emanating from Washington and it’s having an effect on all of us.. Not just the President — I’m saying, but we have to be clear. We need a different tone starting in Washington.”

  • OK, let’s be clear. The members of “The Squad,” Rep. Tlaib, Rep. Omar, and Rep. Ocasio-Cortez, have been making anti-Jewish pronouncements since they were elected in 2018. Many member of the Congressional Black Caucus, including the recent co-chair of the Democratic National Committee, Keith Ellison, have had friendly ties with Nation of Islam Louis Farrakhan, who regularly refers to Jews as vermin. Maxine Waters has openly greeted Farrakhan with hugs. New York Democrat Thomas Lopez-Pierre’s campaign slogan was stopping “Greedy Jewish Landlords.” A  black Trenton, New Jersey City Council Chair used the phrase “Jew me down;” a black Jersey City School board member opined in the wake of the kosher market massacre that Jews for were at fault for living in that neighborhood. The “Women’s Marches,” “resistance” protests all, had the endorsement of Farrakhan, and at one of them speaker Tamika Mallory referred to him as the “Greatest of All Time.”

Writes Debby Hall on a pro-Israel site,

Demonization of Israel on the left has also contributed to whipping up the people who would ultimately commit these attacks. BDS, a movement calling for Israel’s destruction, is essentially letting people know that Jews have no right to self-determination and as a result, no right to live.

  •  New York Governor Andrew Cuomo released this boilerplate:

     Nice. Of course, that “zero-tolerance thingy was somewhat undercut by the  release of Tiffany Harris into the community. The Governor also has not been a practitioner of  inclusion and diversity himself, raising the question of what he means when he uses these words. For example, this year he said in part, “These extreme conservatives who are right-to-life, pro-assault-weapon, anti-gay…if that’s who they are and they’re the extreme conservatives, they have no place in the state of New York, because that’s not who New Yorkers are.” In a similar vein, Cuomo has said that those who do not support same-sex marriage don’t belong in his diverse, inclusive state.

Orthodox Jews do not support same sex marriage.

  • Finally, an NBC fact-checker tweeted,

This is, I repeat, a fact-checker. Rationalizations are not facts. From the Ethics Alarms list: 46. The Abuser’s License:  “It’s Complicated”…”The implication is that “yes, this looks bad, but if you knew all of the details, history and considerations, you would understand..If [an act] was unethical, it is important to say so, to make certain that nobody labors under the misconception that it was the right thing to do when they face similar decisions. “It’s complicated” is also lazy…. Complexity doesn’t relieve us of the responsibility of seeking the right approach to these matters. “It’s complicated” is an ethics cop-out.

After she was roundly condemned on Twitter, the fact-checker buried the fact of her own bias, taking down the tweet, making her account private, and finally taking down her account.

Observant Americans should be able to connect these dots, though the mainstream media and politicians, counting on the public’s own biases  and certain that they can fool all of the people all of the time, will try mightily to spin, obscure, bury and otherwise interfere with accurate perception.

___________________________

Sources: Victory Girls, Pittsburgh  Post-Gazette, PJ media, Twitchy, Libertarian Republic, Daily Wire, Washington Post, Israelycool

 

26 thoughts on “From The Ethics Alarms Res Ipsa Loquitur Files: What Does The Public Learn From These Things? Can They Figure It Out Themselves?

  1. I believe you are the first to publicly state the patently obvious connections. When I listened to Cuomo’s comments yesterday his remarks suggested the Monsey attack was precipitated by Trump rhetoric. Cuomo is a significant part of the problem.

  2. Let’s not forget Jessie Jackson calling NYC “Hymie Town.”

    Conservative Jews are a tiny voting block. They don’t count. I read recently that Muslims out-number Jews in England on something like a ten to one ratio. That’s why the Labor Party is anti-Semitic. It’s all about garnering votes. I’m not even sure liberal Jews like conservative Jews. So what politician is going to care about violence against conservative Jews when the black vote and liberal Jewish vote are to be had?

    • Mmhmm, and let’s not forget “Columbia Jewniversity” and “Jew York City.” It IS all about votes. That’s why Columbus Day is headed to becoming a regional holiday. Who gives a damn about the guy who runs the pizza place and one or two other families in whitebread Vermont (actually the whitest state in the union)? On the other hand, come to NJ, where between one in five and one in four voters are Italian, and viva Colombo!

  3. Well said, Jack. I’ve thought for some time now that the least inclusive groups in the country are often those on the Left who proudly claim how inclusive they are.

  4. They can, but the media won’t let them. The left, though it’s happy to weaponize the “otherism” of Jews against Christmas celebrations, history lessons, and anyone else on the right it can use it against, will happily sacrifice them if it gives them a platform to point the finger at Trump or the right, or white males. Now, the left doesn’t like Israel at all, because Israel has slipped into the place formerly occupied by South Africa as the nation of deliberate racism and oppression of poor folks who never did them wrong, and they don’t like the idea of Jews as infantrymen or fighter pilots or intelligence agents, but they love having a pre-ennobled set of victims they can point to and weaponize as an attack on those big bad white supremacists, wherever they are. The great thing is that it works both ways. If it’s a white male who attacks Jews, then he’s a white supremacist and oh-isn’t-it-terrible-the-right-is-at-fault. If it’s someone else, then it’s the “climate of hate” created by the right and still oh-isn’t-it-terrible-the-right-is-at-fault.

    • I call this the “Pulse Nightclub Dilemma.” This conundrum rears its ugly head when two lefty favored groups get cross-wise. A Muslim guy using automatic weapons to murder gay people! What to do? Muslims murdering journalists! What to do? Black people murdering Jews (okay, the wrong kind of Jews, but still, Jews). What to do? The spin goes supersonic.

  5. “This is the successor to a completed post that WordPress, for some reason, deleted beyond recovery when I hit “publish” at about 6:30 am today, thus robbing me of 90 minutes of my life and nearly my sanity. My inclination was to let it stay in cyber-hell and forget the whole thing…”

    There are better options than composing your blogs in WordPress.

  6. It’s not possible for progressives to connect any dots that might lead back to their ideological views, instead they’re narrowly focused on blaming everything bad on those they oppose even if they have to lie to place blame. If they can’t find anything bad to attack those they oppose they’ll just make up shit. Progressives have shown us time and time again that the ends justifies the means is a way of life for them.

  7. The real takeaway is the media’s over backward bend to avoid addressing the racial element to these incidents. The perpetrator in the Hanukkah attack is clearly not a white guy. The perpetrator of the face slap is not a white woman. There is a bunch of navel gazing, “waiting for the facts to come in” before concluding that the perpetrators are anti-Semites. Yet, when Dylann Root attacked a Black church, there was no such navel gazing – everyone was absolutely certain the attacks were racially motivated.

    Why the difference? I wonder if Russia or Ukraine can help us figure that one out . . . .

    jvb

  8. I got the connection, but didn’t have all of your examples. Thanks.

    I am old enough to remember (though I was very, very young at the time) that the American Jewish community was publicly and actively very, very supportive of the Civil Rights Movement and Martin Luther King, offering more than money and time, but the influence of another minority that remembered the worst of bigotry and ignorance come true in the Holocaust. What happened? Do today’s black leaders not know? Just don’t care? What’s the rationale for this 21st century sea change? Interested in theories… Is it really just resentment of a highly successful minority community by a less successful one? Is it that simple and that stupid?

  9. Steve writes:

    Now, the left doesn’t like Israel at all, because Israel has slipped into the place formerly occupied by South Africa as the nation of deliberate racism and oppression of poor folks who never did them wrong, and they don’t like the idea of Jews as infantrymen or fighter pilots or intelligence agents, but they love having a pre-ennobled set of victims they can point to and weaponize as an attack on those big bad white supremacists, wherever they are. The great thing is that it works both ways. If it’s a white male who attacks Jews, then he’s a white supremacist and oh-isn’t-it-terrible-the-right-is-at-fault. If it’s someone else, then it’s the “climate of hate” created by the right and still oh-isn’t-it-terrible-the-right-is-at-fault.

    It is absurd to say *the Left* does not like Israel since *the Left* has been, generally speaking, defined by Progressive Jews.

    There is a total problem, an enormous problem, an irreconcilable problem, that surrounds the founding of Israel. Telling the truth about what happened there is crucial … if one is interested in truth (and one might not be since truth-telling is always problematic). What is interesting overall is the inability, the lack of will and desire, to ‘tell the truth’.

    It may be true that Leftists use Palestine as an issue similar to South Africa (though there is absolutely no relationship, of any kind, between these two situations) and this is part of the problem. When factions get weaponized it seems inevitable that the *real truth of the matter* gets over-swamped. Good luck getting to any clarity at all.

    But in-clarity is the currency of Israel. The less the real issues are understood (what happened as the Israeli state was founded to the cities and communities that were there is the main question). The more this is obfuscated, the better it turns out for those who have no intention of ‘reconciling’ with the inhabitants of Palestine. This is a perfect example of what I constantly try to talk about in an environment of people who have no interest at all in the real issue: Power and how power functions.

    …and oppression of poor folks who never did them wrong

    This to me is a thoroughly amazing sentence. If one understands the *real history* of Palestine, one understands beyond doubt that existent cities were razed, people were rounded up and moved, through deliberate and rational policies that were decided on by clear-thinking people. But the amazing implication here is that Palestinians have no ground for complaint. It is a fantastical assertion.

    The way that *The Left* is used here is as a rhetorical trick — self-trickery in the first instance (which is the most devilish sort) — in order to be able to go on to trick others.

    What I am coming to understand is the profound confusion of *narratives* in our day. The truth becomes so obscured with layers of lies and distortions that it becomes impossible to sort through them. This paragraph by Steve illustrates this issue. You have to break it down to pieces and then try to address each piece.

    The power-players take advantage of this narrative confusion because they are absolutely clear about what they want.

    My own theory — it is influenced by theological and metaphysical ideas I admit — is that this reestablishment of the State of Israel will not turn out well. Christian Zionism will turn out very badly for Jews. Remember: Jewish history is very very long. And it is not over. And the strange brand of secular American Zionism will eventually backfire.

    I know this post is completely a waste of time. Some *cannot hear for all that they have ears*.

    • This has always been puzzling. It has always appeared that leftist Jews were very happy to be anti-Israel (to virtue signal) and even further anti-Semitic causes. Few of them seem to be religious. They mainly seem to want to be called Jewish so they don’ t have to be called white (it’s NOT OK to be white). An example is Bernie Sanders using Linda Sarsour as a surrogate and his support for politicians such as Ilhan Omar. It is kind of like Corey Booker having a neo-Nazi speak for him at a rally. I mean, they might agree substantially on economic matters but…

      This isn’t just an American phenomenon. The recent report on the British Labor Party showed blatant anti-semitism ingrained in the very party that most Jews in Britain have voted for historically. I don’t mean the subtle racism we are trying to stamp out here. I mean British Labor Party members feel comfortable shouting “go back to the gas chambers” at Jewish Labor Party members in Labor Party meetings in front of a crowd and discussing the ‘fact’ that Jews are subhuman and don’t deserve to live in front of strangers.

      • I think there is a very large and important difference between those who are anti-Israel and those who are critical if Israeli policy. And similarly between those who simply hate Israel, or Israelis or Jews, and those who understand the actual facts about how the state was founded and at what cost to the Palestinians in their communities and their cities.

        In order to be Pro-Zionist in the modern sense one has to willfully fail to see this history, the history of what was done. It is a strange mental manoeuvre which involves non-seeing in one area and heightened-seeing in another. You have to have diminished sympathy for the inhabitants and an augmented sympathy for the newer arrivals. You have to deny a whole stretch of real history (the exile) and you have to give a special credence to a *modern narrative* of Jewish return to their own land after a rather long absence. Christian Zionism has done a great deal of this *work* (as it might be called) by a kind of a rewrite of theological understanding of the Jewish Exile. But secularists though they might operate in the shadow or subtle influence of theology, say that they deny these elements of the story and only focus on the Return from the mid-20th century European calamity. Yet the narrative is basically the religious story told in secular terms: the long-suffering Jews miraculously return to their land where they are opposed by Evil Arabs who mean them no good. They resolve to fight and they do fight and — secular miracle of secular miracle! — they triumph. Every step of the way is a ‘righteous step’ since they can do no wrong. They are outside of the metaphysical possibility of doing wrong if you see what I mean. Only those who oppose them do wrong, and therefore the problem is the Palestinian inhabitants who simply will not cooperate with Destiny, a destiny determined by state machinations and *what is good and correct* seen in the eyes of a distorting modernism heavily determined by distorted narratives and straight propaganda.

        What I have just said here, though fundamentally true, will not be received and indeed cannot be received by those who ‘selectively see’ what they want and need to see and deny or minimize seeing all that does not fit their *narrative*. It is a pretty classic case really. It shows that Power determines what is to be Truth and what is to by Un-truth or Lie.

        If you take as an example Miko Peled and analyze his position you quickly see that it is based in a very coherent point-of-view. It is really quite simple. In order for Israel to be established it required some drastic actions. Those drastic actions involved literally removing the inhabitants from their land. These processes — obviously! — continue today. The whole object is to eventually claim all the territory within the parameters of Israel. This is the will of the State of Israel and of those who have power. There is no intention and there never really was any intention to ‘negotiate’ anything but what had been determined.

        Seen in this light things become more clear.

        Leftist Jews are in a terrible bind. But the bind is non-different from the bind that you find yourself in, that *you* find yourself in, that I am in, and all of us are in: we struggle to tell the truth and indeed we cannot tell the truth when our own interests are at stake. The more that we are *invested* in an issue and in an outcome, the more inclined we are to bend narratives — if they are not cut from whole cloth — to suit our objectives.

        But let’s contrast a Leftist Jew with, say, a Rightist Jew. My understanding is that a right-oriented Jew simply does not need to be as concerned about ‘social justice’ as a Left-leaning Jew. The Right-leaning Jew can focus with more concentrated energy on ‘achieving the objective’. Now, there are bona-fide fascistic-Jews who would, if it were possible, ‘scrape Gaza from the face of the Earth’. There is definitely a social spirit in Israel — developing day by day — that would annihilate Arabs and all opposition to the (divinely ordained) Jewish religious project of reclaiming Israel and of invoking the advent of the Jewish messiah. There is a great deal of talk now in Israel about ‘reconstructing the Temple’ now that Israel has been recovered. You see, these are necessary concomitants to a religious definition of this later, modern *return*. (And this is why the ideology and — if you will — mythology of Christian Zionists has to be understood and paid attention to. You have to understand that before Jewish Zionism there was Christian Zionism, and this has to be studied and understood).

        What makes the most sense is to see things in terms of ‘straight power principles’. If one can see things in this way — raw and true — one can skip over all the emotional mishegoss and a good portion of the mythological mishegoss.

        If you want to know my opinion it is rather simple: in the aftermath of WW2 and what was *just one more terrible exile*. The German Nationalist program began essentially a modern exile, a desire enacted by the NS state to get rid of the Jewish inhabitants, and was a repeat of the many historical exiles Jews have dealt with in their Diaspora-Experience. To understand how these events were processed you have to plunge deeply into Jewish psychology and that of ‘Never Again’.

        Getting a state, and military-intelligence apparatus in conjunction with gaining the nation of the US as a central homeland and operations-ground was an opportunity that would not be squandered. (If you are aware of Jewish history you are aware that in no moment of Jewish history has there ever been a nation or state as favorable to Jews as the US has been and this is something understood and documented in all Jewish histories: America is in truth far more important than Israel since Israel could, technically, be sacrificed). And these plans and projects flowered, of course, in the Postwar era and define, substantially, our present. There is no ‘machination’ (doing, activity, visible or invisible) that Jewry will not engage in to secure its position in this world. Here, Jewish objectives combine with American national objectives. And there you have the so-called globalized New World Order. (You will notice here that I begin to introduce certain non-popular and highly resisted Dissident ideas which are circulating in Cyberspace).

        The object, obviously, is to gain as much control over the instruments by and through which power is exercised. And to consolidate those that are controlled. And to dominate in those areas so that only a certain aspect of the *truth* is told and can be told. That is how power functions. The object is to control *how the world is seen* and indeed how things are interpreted. One object is to control what can be said. But the real objective is to control, and determine, what is and what can be thought.

        In a structural sense this is one reason I have benefitted from being allowed to share this space with bonafide patriots of a ‘conservative’ sort. You are not ‘free-thinkers’ you are ‘determined thinkers’: your thoughts are determined for you. And they follow, quite closely, the narratives devised by power. My theory is that *spiritual freedom* is freedom to see *what is* without filter. It is a hard row to hoe but here I am striking at the hard ground! 🙂

        • I tend to write in polemical terms: please over-look my (deliberate) provocativeness when I describe ‘conservatives’. I think it has become a false-term, but I have been influenced by many of those who present this argument (principally in cyberspace and among dissidents). I have a great streak of pretension which borders into something like arrogance . . . 😦

Leave a Reply

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

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com 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 )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.