Commentary: Masochist, Liar, Or Revictimized Victim? And What Is Jesus To Many "Christians", Anyway?

Dr. Blasey Ford is one of the following: a liar, a masochist, or a revictimized victim—and there is nothing else that one conclude. Which, though, is Dr. Blasey Ford? Let's look at it this way:

1. Most masochists aren't going to go as far as to claim to have been threatened with rape, let alone to go out of their ways to endure everything from defamation to threats because they claimed that they were almost raped.
2. Most liars are going to act like Casey Anthony—whom slandered her father and her brother by claiming that they sexually abused her—as well as those like Bill Cosby, Clarence Thomas (whose claims of enduring a "high-tech lynching" can, with everyone looking back, be compared to Bill Cosby's claims of enduring a "public lynching"), Bill O'Reilly, and Brett Kavanaugh (whose behavior reminds me of that Bill O'Reilly when the Ailes scandal broke and when the accusations against him were investigated and reinvestigated).
3. Given, then, that even most masochists would not try to endure what Dr. Blasey Ford had to endure, and that Brett Kavanaugh acted like (among others) Casey Anthony, Bill Cosby, Clarence Thomas, and Bill O'Reilly (especially Bill O'Reilly), one has to intellectually-honestly conclude to Dr. Blasey Ford is a revictimized victim of sexual abuse.

So, then, what about Jesus? Dr. Blasey Ford is certainly not Jesus—and nobody else but Jesus is Jesus—although she certainly was defamed and threatened especially in His name. The ones who defamed her in His name, then, stated that they basically don't consider Jesus to be Lord, and they're willing to go as far as to make Him out to be a lunatic and/or a liar by claiming that He as the Lord would ever command anything contrary to what He commanded.

By the way, as I've said before, this is an example of why many Jews don't believe in Jesus and why those of us that do ended up not knowing that we're Jewish until much later: with the Jesus that those like Dr. Blasey Ford's persecutors being presented as the Jesus of the New Testament, Jews are going to not believe in Jesus and/or not be openly Jewish—and many of my own ancestors did both. Also by the way, nobody who supported Brett Kavanaugh can truthfully claim to love Israel—though if he or she can actually truthfully claim to love Israel, he or she will have to do teshuvah for supporting a man whom is associated with Anti-Semitic D****d *****, went out of his way to help make sure that Julie Swetnick's claims were not investigated, and helped to try to discredit sexual-abuse survivors as pawns of George Soros¹².

In conclusion, any self-identified Christian who supports Brett Kavanaugh will either have to face that they called Jesus a liar and/or lunatic when they called Dr. Blasey Ford a masochist and/or liar or hear that they never really were Christians³, not to mention that even many Christians would rather victims and survivors of sexual abuse work with openly-Non-Christian and other openly-Non-Judeo-Christian-values than so-called "Christian" and other "values" ones that are not Christian or other values-beholden organizations at all¹.

¹Concerning the ones whom are working with Soros-affiliated organizations, they at least know that Soros doesn't really value them although they can still get their message out. They also know that many "Christian" and other "Judeo-Christian-values" organizations who should be helping sexual-abuse victims really aren't Christian or otherwise self beholden to Judeo-Christian values. They'd rather thus work with openly-dishonest organizations than trying-to-disguise-themselves-as-honest ones.

²This isn't to mention that those who support Brett Kavanaugh and D****d ***** have the same kind of thinking that affected acts of Pseudo-Christian Anti Semitism, such as the pogroms and the Holocaust—in which quite a few gentile women were also affected, and in which even some Jewish women probably participated and many gentile women certainly participated (and in regard to women whom did survive the pogroms and the Holocaust, I can imagine that they recall how they were treated by fellow women whom should've been helping them as they see and hear how fellow women are persecuting Dr. Blasey Ford and Julie Swetnick

(By the way, don't think that those like George Soros aren't actually helping the types like Brett Kavanaugh and D****d *****—George Soros even told Steven Kroft that he considered the Holocaust "fun"—and by the way, compare George Soros' attitude with that of Alex Kurzem: Alex Kurzem did not consider the Holocaust "fun".

³As well as face that they took the bait of Brett Kavanaugh, D****d *****, and George Soros for whatever reason.

Open Letter To Lori Shandle-Fox

I was reading "As A Southern Jew..." and wondering why you complain when you know that the computer class is at a church. What really upset me though is that you make the case seem like Jacob's getting mixed messages.

On the one hand, you wanted to, frankly, be an antimissionary within a church. If, for instance, Jews For Jesus were at a technology camp at a JCC, I'd get the "Stop it!...Stop it NOW!" But at a church? You went as far as entertaining the idea of frankly doing something borderline close to what Donin and Christiani did. On the other hand, you made Jacob feel like you'd be mad at him for living out the values with which he is being raised. Jacob will certainly have a hard-enough time living the South if he keeps getting mixed messages from within his own family.

By the way, he'll also have a hard time if he learns that projection is acceptable. For example, you said that you thought that you heard something other than, "Do you want juice?" Maybe a sentiment about people whom you don't want to be around is manifesting itself in your thoughts and actions in ugly ways. As Jayne said, don't take Jacob to places where Jesus will be brought up if you don't want to hear about Jesus; and I add, don't hang around Christians if you don't want them around.

I also hasten to add that sending children mixed messages and teaching children "Hate thy neighbor and project thy hatred on thy neighbor" are not Jewish values—and certainly not, contrary to what Donin and Christiani taught, ones that Jesus taught, regardless of what one makes of him.

Excerpt From My Upcoming Book (Language Warning): "The Summary Of the Case For Saving The Old Farmhouse..."

Firstly, how the case to save the late Katherine Ushinsky Gajdos’ house is related to shit that I can’t make up:

1.    With my grandaunt Helen Gaydos Wojnar (z”l)—my paternal grandmother’s oldest sibling—being long deceased, her widower and children had decided to tear down her (and my grandmother’s) paternal grandmother’s old farmhouse down without even considering the historical ramifications of tearing down the farmhouse.

2.    Grandaunt Helen’s (and Grandma’s) sister MaryAnn once again told a classic bubbe meise that—I’m sure that—she still hasn’t told anybody: after all, the historical significance of the farmhouse begins with the fact that Anna née Jaszová was not “Maria Anna Yzchinski” by birth. As I mentioned in a telephone conversation and further explained to my father in a text message—since, as I type (on September 6-7, 2017/Elul 15-16, 5777), he’s visited one of Grandaunt Helen’s sons three times while he’s been down in Florida—I understandably wondered if Grandaunt Helen’s widower and descendants left up the farmhouse, which I’d seen the times that we were up on the former Gaydos farmstead (where the Gaydos-Wojnar cabin is).

3.     Bugs, rotting wood, excursions of wildlife within the farmhouse, apparently-common-across-Pennsylvania houses like that, and other given excuses for tearing down the Gaydos Farmhouse are no excuses at all.

4.    Until I brought up the possibilities of renovation or replica building, nobody even considered leaving up the farmhouse.

I gave my father the short version of the historical significance of the Gaydos Farmhouse:

“Mickey Haslin was Great-Granddad Gaydos' maternal cousin. They had the common grandparent of Anna (Szuszanna?) née Jaszová (Yashová), divorced from Jan Haszlinsky and remarried to Jan Uszinsky (Ushinsky). Her parents were Jan and Eva Polinová Jasz (Yash). She was Jewish as were her parents, and as was Jan Uszinsky.

“That is why Great-Granddad identified as "Russian"—his mom, Mickey Haslin's only parental aunt, was born as Katarina Szuszanna Uszinskyová to Slovakian-Jewish parents of Russian-Jewish descent in Gaboltov, Slovakian-Austrian Hungary. Mickey Haslin seems to have done the same—his father was George Hazlinsky, and not a single one of his kids was a "Mary" (even for the traditional Jewish usage for "Miriam". His kids were named Mercedes, Kathleen, and Michael.

“They used a mix of Ashkenazi and Sephardi naming customs, by the way—quite a few Ashkenazim overall, irrespective of beliefs re Jesus or amounts of Sephardi heritage, seem to have done this. "MaryAnn", BTW, could be used for "Miriam Chanah".) That alone makes the farmhouse significant if you ask me—i.e., the Crypto-Jewish paternal aunt of Mickey Haslin and widow of a Crypto Jew (a son of Jan and Anna Hommová Gajdosz) owned that farmhouse as a widow whom posthumously became the paternal grandmother-in-law to one of the three IRS agents whom would help bring Nixon down.

“Also, BTW, Ashkenazi Crypto Jews and their descendants (Anusim Ashkenazim v'B'nei Anusim Ashkenazim) are probably as numerous as Sephardi ones—even John Kerry would be John Kohn and Madeline Albright was born Madeline Korbelová, e.g.. Cameron Kerry is whom is called a "ba'al teshuvah", meanwhile, whereas John Kerry and Joan Kerry identify as Jewish Catholics; and Madeline Albright is a Jewish Episcopalian.”

In other words, the seven following simple words sum up any tearing down of the farmhouse of Katherine Susan Ushinsky Gaydos: a big mistake of literally-historical proportions!

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?

Originally On LinkedIn:

One of the common sentiments that I read and hear people express is that the journalism field—from the "mainstream media" to the "right-wing blogs"—are increasingly becoming unprofessional and more driven by celebrity status and entertainment than actual journalism. I myself can see this, even when I read the conspiracy theories about—for example—Seth Rich and Justice Antonin Scalia being murdered by, respectively, Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama operatives. There are also commentators and analysts whom are driven more by celebrity status and entertainment that professionalism, and even commentators and analysts have a responsibility to be as objective and driven by the truth as possible—and one example whom I (and others) see as preferring to be a celebrity and showmaster is Sean Hannity, whom would rather promote particularly-Anti-Semitic and criminal businessman Donald Trump than call out Donald Trump's instances of racism (including the racism directed at President Obama, whom he claims was born in Kenya), ableism (including at Sergei Kovaleski), xenophobia (including at Mexico-born-and-naturalized-American Jorge Ramos), misogyny (including at Megyn Kelly, and at his daughter Ivanka and ex wife Ivanka—one of whom he stated that he would date were she not his daughter, and the other one whom he raped and later extorted into retracting her testimony in "Trump v. Trump"), and Anti Semitism (including at Julia Ioffe, the Republican Jewish Coalition, and even his own in-law son, Jared Kushner).

Other fields are just as increasingly unprofessional as the journalism field—among them are the academia, medical, and even law-enforcement and criminal-justice fields, with those like notorious Anti Semites such as the took-a-long-time-to-fire Joy Karenga, nurses whom take sexually-explicit pictures of unconscious patients, and the late Lieutenant Joe Gliniewicz and the should-be-under-investigation-for-perjury-and-evidence-tampering Jose Baez.

The unprofessionalism in all fields, meanwhile, is sadly a symptom of the morally- and ethically-declining American culture—with comorbid symptoms such as a declining work ethic and abuses of LinkedIn, which will become a de-facto social-networking site unless Microsoft and LinkedIn work to restore LinkedIn to its original purpose in the same way that, for example, Fox News had to fire Roger Ailes and restructure the Fox News hierarchy in order to start rebalancing and rectifying the unfairness in which the "fair and balanced" news channel has increasingly engaged.

Incidentally, the same United States that is returning to the production and consumption of organic foods, a balance of modern and ancient medicine, and the use of natural and organic hygiene and house-cleaning products is more willing to restore and maintain its physical health than its moral, ethical, and professional health—as has been since in cases such as the class-action-lawsuit case against the "non-GMO" Naked Juice, which actually fraudulently marketed their GMO-laden products as never having had GMOS in them.

My Basic Twitter Philosophy

Update (November 14, 2024 or 12 Cheshvan 5784):

1. If you unfollow me and I am following you, I will unfollow you in turn if I become aware that you have unfollowed me². Since I hold the philosophy that people online are a reflection of whom they are offline (including, as Curt Schilling pointed out, whom they would be offline if they could be that way offline), I have no time for you if you have no time for me, I have, as far as I recall, broken my unfollow-for-unfollow rule only twice, and that includes that I refollowed one person whom'd unfollowed me only because his work in his field is influential enough to merit for him a follow. I will also unfollow you if I recall that you followed me and then unfollowed me after I followed you, whether or not my recollection is correct.
2. If you abuse me in any way on Twitter—for example, if you twist my words (or similarly libel me) and/or engage in Anti-Semitic attacks—I will report and/or block you. ³
3. If you abuse others on Twitter, I will report and/or block you. ³
4. RTs are not endorsements unless the original tweet is favorited and/or the RTs are noted as endorsements of the original tweets. What RTs often are is FOIP (for only informational purposes).
5. While I do "unfollow for unfollow", I do not do "follow for follow"—I follow whom I want to follow, and I will follow those whom follow me if I find them worth following.
6. While and since I won't, and I really even can't, report every abusive instance and/or block every person whom's engaging in abuse, I will call out someone whom's being abusive if I feel (or at least hope) that I can reason with them. ³
7. I get Twitter notifications via text messages—and I don't have a smartphone¹, unlike some of these rich kids and others whom can afford smartphones. As soon as I get a chance to respond to and/or RT tweets, I'll respond to them; and be aware that I can see on my phone what abusive tweets you deleted and/or thought that you blocked from my view—and I will report and/or block you, and/or call you out. ³

Addendum [April 9, 2019/Aviv 3, 5779 (Before sunset)]: 

1. The Democrats & others who want to think that the Modern Right & the Alt Right are the same as well as try to demonize the Modern Right, ignore the #NeverTrump movement are only going to make the #NeverTrump movement fight harder against Trump's trying to destroy the GOP. In other words, their attempts to throw out revisionist tropes and thus give Trump what he wants haven't worked in the way that they wanted it to do so. If you're one of those revisionists and you're thinking about parroting out your revisionism as a response to my tweets, then, please keep away from me. On the flip side, if you're a Trumpite or one who dreads Clinton more than fears Yehovah, also please keep away from me if you're thinking about troping out your own revisionism in response to my tweets. 
2. On that note and a general note, common sense holds that one doesn't have to unnecessarily respond to something that he or she doesn't like. So, please, just don't respond to my tweets if you don't like them and have no reason to respond to them.

Addendum [November 4, 2019/Cheshvan 6, 5779 (Before sunset)]:

If you need a template to write to your Representative about indicting Trump instead of impeaching him:

"Rep. [Whomever]:

"By impeaching Trump, Congress would be handing him 25th Amendment rights and presidential legitimacy. The law (based on the law-from-the-bench principle regarding sitting presidents and indictment) says that one cannot indict a sitting president, but it doesn't say that one can't indict an illegitimate president. The assumption was always that and is that the sitting president had and has to be a legitimate one, since there is the principle behind the law as well as the law itself. Thus, please push for Speaker Pelosi and the rest of the House to acknowledge that Trump is not a legitimate president and thus should not be given impeachment rights, let alone 25th Amendment rights or presidential legitimacy.

"Thank you for your time and consideration of my request."

¹ Addendum: July 2, 2020/10 Tammuz 5780: I do have a smartphone now. It was a gift for Hanukkah, Christmas, and my 30th birthday; and I honestly resisted letting one anyone get me one and using one for a long time. What's not changed: I still block and/or report abusive tweeters.

²Addendum, same date: I realize that part of my problem is that I don't enforce my own unfollow-for-unfollow rule enough (sometimes because I'm unsure right away if someone followed me in the first place). To me, how one interacts with me online tells me how he or she would interact with me offline. In other words, I need to start meaning that I don't have time for anyone whom doesn't have time for me or wants me to have time for him or her. I will thus be enforcing my own rule more.

³ All of that fits my motto, "If you don't stand up to evil, evil will stand you down—and that is evil."

Let Me Be Frank With #TCOT...

Firstly, you can't behind hashtags like "#Isupportheterosexualmarriage" and #illegalisnotapejorative"--how pathetic! Secondly, do you have nothing better to do than to blast Obama--and I myself didn't vote for Obama, but I have respect for the fact that G-d appointed him to be my president? After all, you so-called Christian conservatives, "Render therefore to all their due: taxes to whom taxes are due, customs to whom customs, fear to whom fear, honor to whom honor." (Romans 13:7) Thirdly, don't you know to follow the Twitter TOS? Twitter couldn't care less is one is conservative and Messianic Jewish or gentile Christian as long as he or she follows the TOS--they don't have time to waste tracking which tweeter is who or what. After all, "rulers are not a terror to good works, but to evil. Do you want to be unafraid of the authority? Do what is good, and you will have praise from the same." (Romans 13:3)