Again, Charlie Hebdo?

At a point, the higher good of making sure that nobody else becomes a victim like especially Georges Wolinski did outweighs the freedom of speech. Did Georges Wolinski really survive the German part of Holocaust only to become a Holocaust victim 70 years later and get his grave spit on by "Charlie Hebdo"? Did Georges Wolinski become a martyr only for evildoers whom will use any excuse to use "Charlie Hebdo" as an excuse once again?

"The words of a wise man's mouth are gracious; but the lips of a fool will swallow up himself. The beginning of the words of his mouth is foolishness; and the end of his talk is grievous madness. A fool also multiplieth words; yet man knoweth not what shall be; and that which shall be after him, who can tell him?"

Even wise words can become foolish in the mouths of fools:

"A fool hath no delight in understanding, but only that his heart may lay itself bare.....[and a] fool's lips enter into contention, and his mouth....is his ruin, and his lips are the snare of his soul." 

Arguing with fools is foolish. Those who emulate Mohammed and follow Early Islam look for anything to do evil like Mohammed did:

"Answer not a fool according to his folly, lest thou also be like unto him."Answer a fool according to his folly, lest he be wise in his own eyes."  

How else can I say that sometimes holding your tongue is better but that holding your tongue is sometimes appropriately answering a fool according to his folly?

Megyn Kelly: "Conservative" and "A Lawyer" Mein Tuchus!

For anyone whom's wondering, "meir tuchus" means "my butt!" Anyway, no true conservative (Classical Liberal) and lawyer would state that "legal" inherently means "should be legal":

1. As far as the SCOTUS being the final arbiters of the law, the SCOTUS ruled in favor of inherently-illegal doctrines such as "Ferguson v. Plessy" and, before that, "Sanford v. Scott". The former was not overturned until 1955 (when "Brown" was fully cleared for implementation), and "Scott" en de facto was never overturned until Jim Crow ended, despite that the end of the Civil War ended it en de jure. 
2. DOMA was in force from the Clinton Administration until just relatively recently in the Obama Administration. 
3. Legalizing same-sex marriage risks religious freedom within certain contexts. For example, why should an Orthodox rabbi be sued by a couple whom he refuses to marry when he believes that the Flood came because of same-sex marriage in part (which the Talmud does state)?

By the way, speaking of rabbis, one'd think that Orthodox rabbis such as Chief Rabbi Binyomin Jacobs would be helpful during this time of Anti-Jewish and Anti-Christian intolerance—although he's not at all tolerant of either Jewish Christians or gentile ones, or any Orthodox Jew whom even tolerates Christians (despite how Christianity as Noahidism is viewed).

A Hypocrisy Which I Don't Understand

How can certain loved ones of mine be against the decision of "Charlie Hebdo" to cease their portrayals of Muhammad, and how can they state that "Charlie Hebdo" is "caving in" to the Islamists? After all, they are attempting to ensure that I will not speak out against certain
other Anti Semites and racists.

My problem, then, is not with my loved ones' disagreement with the magazine: my problem is that they are doing to me exactly what they oppose that "Charlie Hebdo"'s editors are doing to themselves. How can they complain about, for example, the following re the Islamists when they complain about me fighting against particular groups whom support groups like "Charlie"'s enemies?

“We have drawn Muhammad to defend the principle that one can draw whatever they want. It is a bit strange though: we are expected to exercise a freedom of expression that no one dares to.”

I'm at a loss for words when they support "Je suis Charlie" at the same time that they tell me "Don't provoke crazies" and "Don't stir up the hornets' nest." While I'm not "Charlie", I'm certainly:

1. Nicole
2. Juive (i.e., Je suis Juive; or "אני יהודית.")
3. Intent on not caving in to the Anti Semites

Meanwhile, God willing, I'll (so to speak) come back up from the underground eventually.

A Message To My Persecutors (And Everyone Else)

Reposted Entries With Disclaimer (Read the Disclaimer First)

Disclaimer

The disclaimer shows that Emily, Facebook, and others are lucky that they're not getting sued. After all, " I wouldn't even be warning [Emily and others] if--even for all the evil that [she and others] have done to me, and I could certainly repay [them] with evil [e.g., suing them]--I didn't care about [them] and your whole cabal at Hillel--for your Kabbalic "Rabbin"ism is as Eastern Mystic ways, thus apostate [The link showing that Non-Tanakh Judaism-- in this case, Reconstructionist Judaism--is Apostate Judaism and is in fact "Jewish atheism" here is new. Emily is a follower of UMBC's apostate "rabbi".]! "

Entry One

Just because I don't respond to or engage with everything doesn't mean that I don't have a view on it. Maybe, e.g., I could just be letting you look stupid after a certain point in a conversation. Don't think that you've won the argument because maybe you haven't. In fact, you might've lost it so badly and I'm trying to save you for embarrassment even, even while I'm letting you look stupid enough.

And one last word to Emily [Entry Two here], by the way: my mistake was giving you a chance to understand my comment. You twisted my comments about Non-Orthodox Jews who care about Shavu'ot into lashon-hara, and I should've reported and/or blocked you right there and then. By the way, I'd take "Katz" out of your name--you are no kohenet-tzedek and do not deserve a name that means "Kohen-Tzedek". You walk in the ways of the Levi'im-rahim, not Tzadok. And you give the priesthood to "rabbis" like Jason--how dare you! If you keep that up, you will be cursed as was Uzziah and Jeroboam--and more so because you are a kohen who gave the priesthood to Non Kohanim. 

Also, you can see that that's G-d's promise, not any kind of threat--though I'm certainly warning you about what "rabbis" like Jason wouldn't dare tell you, since they follow Talmud instead Tanakh. So, if you have any legal case, you have one against G-d, not me--and I dare you to try to tell Him that anyone is threatening you, for you would be like Anathoth and others who told a real kohen-tzedek to stop prophesying! In fact, I wouldn't even be warning you if--even for all the evil that you have done to me, and I could certainly repay you with evil--I didn't care about you and your whole cabal at Hillel--for your Kabbalic "Rabbin"ism is as Eastern Mystic ways, thus apostate! 

I hope that I was clear enough to you and the other revisionists, Anti Messianics, Anti Semites and/or Self Haters, and others about whom I'm thinking. By the way, don't comment on this entry--I will not publish your comments or any comments of those in your circle. As I stated, I should have blocked you last time and will block you this time to save you for embarrassment even--you embarrassed yourself last time by twisting my lashon-tov into lashon-hara. Also, forgiving doesn't mean forgetting. 

Entry Two

"Emily Katz Boling

·                                 Please remove the tweet you posted with a link to our conversation. It has my name on it and I would not like that on Twitter and then you proceed to talk badly about me and my boyfriend (who has done nothing) on there.

Thank you

"

I'm not removing anything. You commented on something that I shared publicly (e.g., on the article itself, and as I would've shared in general on Facebook had I looked at the privacy settings more closely--and "Friends of Friends" is public enough, anyway); you're held to account publicly. After you slandered me when I exemplified UMBC JSU/Hillel as a Non-Orthodox community that cares about Shavu'ot, I owe you no favors.

Besides, I removed Frank as well. I don't keep non-friends' boyfriends as friends. Besides, what does that say about him that he's dating you--someone who would slander someone just because he or she is Messianic? If Frank has a problem with it, he can come to me. You're his girlfriend, not his mother; and he's old and mature enough to talk to me (I can only hope, anyway.).

Let me tell you something else, Emily. What I said and what you said is in replay all over again. Don't lie about me, and you won't be held to account for doing so:

Nicole Maratovah Czarnecki likes a link.

Yesterday

Public Friends Friends except Acquaintances Only Me Custom UMBC Close Friends Family See all lists... Friends of Friends and Ac Home Notre Dame Classmates and People That I Follow On Twitter Family Friends Creative Kids Camp and Greater Greenbelt Relatives? and Relatives Friends and Acquaintances Church and CCA College Friends Chapelgate Christian Academy College of Notre Dame of Maryland UMBC Howard Community College Howard CC Baltimore, Maryland Area University of Maryland, Baltimore County Acquaintances Go Back

As a Messianic Jew, I find two of the comments really problematic:

1) "The event it commemorates—God giving the Torah to the Jews at Mount Sinai—is arguably the most pivotal in the narrative of the Jewish people. But from the treatment it receives next to its more popular siblings—at least within non-Orthodox American communities—you wouldn’t know it." I care about Shavu'ot, and even admire what people like UtahSoccerMom do. Also, the Kosher Korner at UMBC (which is Non Messianic and has mainly Non-Messianic patrons, mostly those who go to the JSU/Hillel events headed up by a Reconstructionist) is closed beyond the Shavu'ot holiday (May 13-May 19, although Karaites and Messianics like me celebrate Shavu'ot on only the 19th).

2) "Hanukkah is so visible that conservative talk radio hosts think it threatens Christmas." I have never heard talk-radio hosts say that. They're more worried about the Atheists and Agnostics who threaten the legality of Christmas and Hanukkah celebrations within the United States.

www.tabletmag.com

When it comes to theological significance, the late-spring festival of Shavuot is no slouch: The event it commemorates—God giving the Torah to the Jews at Mount...See More

Like ·  · Promote · Share

·                                

Emily Katz Boling Nicole, I am particularly offended by your comment that you make about UMBC Hillel and JSU and speaking about the Rabbi as if being reconstructionist is negative. Since you partake in Shabbat and other activities led by JSU and Hillel it would behoove you not to speak poorly about those who have welcomed you to our events and activities. The Kosher Korner is closed during Shavuot because the man who works there as well as the restaurants that provide the food for the Kosher Korner observe all of Shavuot and therefore cannot work on those days and having someone else do so would make the place unkosher since it is being operated on days that are Yom Tov. And since those are the majority of people who eat in the Kosher Korner, not messianics or karaites, then they close it. You are treading on very thin ice with some of the stuff you say. Hillel may have a reconstructionist rabbi but we have many students who are from all different sects of Judaism. JSU on the other hand is a student run organization, also comprised of many different sects of Judaism. Just remember Nicole, you too benefit from these events and it is not a nice trait to speak poorly of those who have welcomed you to Shabbat and other activities.

Yesterday at 10:02pm · Like

·                          

Nicole Maratovah Czarnecki Firstly, I was saying that I found her comment highly problematic. I even said straightly out, "Also, the Kosher Korner at UMBC (which is Non Messianic and has mainly Non-Messianic patrons, mostly those who go to the JSU/Hillel events headed up by a Reconstructionist) is closed beyond the Shavu'ot holiday (May 13-May 19, although Karaites and Messianics like me celebrate Shavu'ot on only the 19th). " I do not see what is neigative about saying that the JSU and Hillel care. Perhaps reading my comments in context would help. Secondly, while we're on the subject and since you brought it up, I am not the only one who has had issues with Jason (I will, out of respect for his or her, not say who. If he or she would like to mention who he or she even is, he or she may do so.). Having a clergyman or clergywoman who is intolerant of those who are not Talmudic is a real issue. After all, UMBC is supposed to be diverse and welcoming. Thirdly, I disclosed that I was Messianic only because I never wanted to be accused of being an infiltrator and proselytizer. I see that my honesty upfront was a problem, and that there are certain people with whom I cannot be honest lest I be slandered.

17 hours ago · Like

·                          

Emily Katz Boling No because I knew exactly what you were insinuating by specifically mentioning Hillel and JSU and I also gave you and explanation of why it wasn't open. ANd ok so you'll spare saying the persons name out of embarrassment but you'll say the rabbi's name...See More

14 hours ago via mobile · Like

·                          

Nicole Maratovah Czarnecki You took the comment right out of context again. She said that Non-Orthodox Jews don't care about Shavu'ot, and I was giving examples to counter her statement. So, you again slandered me. So much for holding about UMBC JSU and Hillel as good examples--at least to people like you--which was my mistake.

And to message me on my public-figure Facebook page when I blocked you. How dare you! I want nothing to do with you, and I made that I want nothing to do with you quite clear. Besides, people like you are part of why UMBC JSU/Hillel involvement and Jewish communal life in general at UMBC is declinining. People who try to walk in Tanakh can and should not stand those who deliberately have walked off of the derech-Yehovah v'Tanakh, and persecute those who do walk b'haderech-Yehovah v'Tanakh. People are quickly figuring out that people like you, like Jason, and like others are those kinds of people who do all kinds of chullil-Yehovah b'HaShem-Yehovah--thus breaking the third of the Aseret HaD'varim in particular.

You clearly didn't learn from when Becca persecuted me. You'll learn this time: I am not a doormat; I am not one about who you may speak lashon-hara, and I am one who is not coming back to UMBC JSU/Hillel or even the Kosher Korner--after all, I'd hate to run into you there.

My mistake for ever speaking any lashon-tov about UMBC JSU/Hillel or even the Kosher Korner--after all, you and your ilk do nothing but twist what I say into lashon-hara, every bit for which you deserve to be called out. I also guarantee that if you keep treating me and others as you have treated me and them (and I rightly group you in with certain people), you will drive people all the more away from the UMBC JSU/Hillel and Kosher Korner to the point at which there'll no longer be an UMBC JSU/Hillel and Kosher Korner. After all, people won't want to try to derive benefit from them if all they'll get is Hell for doing so.

Reposted Entries With Disclaimer; And Not Hate Speech Or Anything Else But Standing Up To a Bully

Besides, as I said, Emily contacted me on my public page and commented regarding my public tweets. Her name will be known; to respond to her using Tanakh is not hate speech, and she will not hurt me and (as I'm sure that she has) others and get away with it--especially since she has a name which means "kohan tzedek", and I guarantee you that she is ironically not. She will not violate my First, Ninth, and Fourteenth Amendment Rights to stand up  to her; and she clearly needs lessons in both Tanakh and the Constitution, so I'm going to repost the entries with the original links to Tanakh pirkei and the constitutional amendments (and the relevant articles of the Fourteetnth Amendment) with my emphasis:

• "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; orabridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."I dealt with her on the original post itself several times, and she and whoever is supporting her didn't like that. Guess what; you're part of the government of UMBC JSU and Hillel, whether de facto or de jure, and you will get called out if you bully someone by perverting his or her lashon tov about UMBC JSU/Hillel into lashon hara. UMBC JSU/Hillel is an organization at UMBC, a public/government school; and it has the Fourteenth Amendment, which encompasses the Bill of Rights, apply to it. The Fourteenth Amendment thus applies to the government/public-school organization government that UMBC/JSU Hillel has.
• "The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people." She may not quash my First Amendment Rights of criticizing her in light of her perversion of my lashon tov and in a religious context as hate speech or personal attacks on her or our shared ethnicity. As I said and demonstarted (including with a link to Ezekiel 48), she is a so-called "Katz" who is of "the Levites [who] went astray " and did not do tzedek when she twisted my lashon tov into lashon hara. As a Jew (and one who is a Levite) myself, anyway, I have the right and even a mitzvah to correct another Jew (let alone another Levite) if he or she (in this case, she) has gone astray (even if, and though, she ranks above me). 
• "All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws....The Congress shall have power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article." Again, UMBC JSU/Hillel is an organization at UMBC, a public/government school; and it has the Fourteenth Amendment, which encompasses the Bill of Rights, apply to it. The Fourteenth Amendment thus applies to the government/public-school organization government that UMBC/JSU Hillel has.

I, thus, have a legal case against both Emily and anyone else who reported the original entries as hate speech, and against Facebook for taking it as hate speech under the Constitution and various case-law laws. For example, "freedom of speech does not protect “free thought for those who agree with us, but freedom for the thought that we hate.” U.S. v. Schwimmer, 279 U.S.644, 49 S. Ct. 448, 73 L. Ed. 889 (1929)." Also, "the Supreme Court has identified several kinds of expression that the government may regulate to varying degrees without running afoul of the Constitution, including...stu-dent speech.... The degree to which the government may regulate a particular kind of expression depends on the nature of the speech, the context in which the speech is made, and its likely impact upon any listeners." Tinker clearly reads, "It can hardly be argued that either students or teachers shed their constitutional rights to freedom of speech or expression at the schoolhouse gate." 

So, Emily, anyone who joined her in falsely reporting my response to her as hate speech, and Facebook could all be easily sued; especially since she first bullied me, then reported my response on my own blog which is protected under the Constitution and various case laws as hate speech. However, Messianic Jews are not to sue anybody; so I will (luckily for Emily) treated her as she deserves and sue her, let alone anyone who joined her or Facebook.

I will, nonetheless, repost the entries--and that is that.

Why I'm No Longer Libertarian In Terms Of Comments, Replies, Etc. on My Videos, Blog, Etc.

In other words, I'm seriously done with allowing people to use freedom of speech, thought, etc. as a license to abuse and persecute me on my own social media forums. 

Alcohol, Freedom Of Speech, And My Blogger Audience (aka, A Disclaimer)

Per my last blog entry, I had a total idiot find my blog with an example of the 1st Amendment gone absolutely awry this 4th of July. Please use your freedom like alcohol: responsibly. Alcohol and freedom of speech have health benefits, and libertarians and anarchists are like alcoholics: they don't know when to stop. By the way, I expose even my audience when they're total idiots unless they can prove their idiotic claims.

If you care to read my last entry, you will see that someone from Virginia Beach engaged in (unless provable beyond a reasonable doubt) heinous libel, slander, and perhaps even criminal mischief. To allege that even a public figure is involved in illicit activity without proof crosses the line of what one can legally say about public figures.

Whoever Virginia Beach is, as far as I know, they're lucky that I don't have the power to trace their IP address and report them for alleged criminal mischief. In conclusion, don't ever make a claim that even a public figure is involved in heinous and criminal activity unless you can prove it beyond a reasonable doubt. Otherwise, like Virginia Beach, you're like a libertarian with free speech comparable to an alcoholic with alcohol: you don't know when to stop and you're going too far. 

Alright, Guys; I Never Alleged This (Some Of My Readers Go Too Far)...

Who the Hell would? Let's not carried away here. Toby Keith verbally abuses children and may be an adulterer, but this claim without substantial and beyond-a-reasonable-doubt proof is going too far:

   

Virginia Beach, Virginia arrived from google.com on "The Nicole Factor: I'm Realizing That..." by searching for is toby keith a pedophile?.

01:41:20 -- 13 hours 4 mins ago

Meanwhile, Happy July 4th and use your freedom of speech responsibly, please. By the way, Virginia Beach and others, you will be exposed for ridiculous (unless provable) claims like that Toby Keith is a criminal. 

If You Know One Thing About Me, I Don't Censor Speech...

Some not-so-nice person removed my point about Krystal Keith on her video. I said that Krystal has a good voice and that she doesn't even need that much makeup, but if only she wasn't using her dad's name; she'd make it far! At least unlike Krystal, I can make my own name and show those who want to hear only praise of Krystal and her every action. I also don't, like Krystal's slobberers and perhaps even Krystal herself, disbelieve in free speech.

The only comments that I've ever removed on my YouTube videos, for example, involve pedophilia and a Social Security number. Otherwise, I keep even the most-vile and -hateful comments on my YouTube videos even if I mark them as spam. Now I grant that I report inappropriate and unfair comments (such as racism, lies, etc.) on Facebook, Twitter and YouTube; and I report and block who I need to report and block, but I only mark their comments as "Spam" on my YouTube videos at maximum, so that people can see the comments at their own behest (Unfortunately, I can't merely mark comments as "Spam" on Blogger-- I either have to publish or delete them-- I can't publish and "Spam"-designate them.). As for Facebook, where I can I'll remove or hide certain comments (such as Antimissionarism and other lies); otherwise, even if you disagree with me fairly and respectfully, your comments stay.

In conclusion, imperfect-but-trying-to-be-nice people allow free and fair speech as much as possible; and I can only hope that Krystal Keith (unlike quite a few of her supporters) allow free speech, even hopefully-helpful suggestions, tips, and real constructive criticism.