Closing Thoughts For the Night (Shabbat v'Laila Shushan Purim)

• The more that I look into a certain line, the more that I wish that I could tell Granduncle Tony, "No; we look like Great-Granddad's grandma!" (Pop-Pop did not look a Trudnak, unless the Trudnaks are and/or look[ed] like Daniloviches.).
• Many a time I see relatives in other relatives (including per the thought above), it hurts.
• How the heck do you deal with being an illegit (Yes, it's derogatory; though that's what I am, and I thought the connection was wrong.)? How do you also deal with knowing that others are (forgive the derogatory shorthand again) illegits and you're not exactly allowed to tell them? As I've stated before, I'm an illegitimate (really, delegitimized) descendant of John Allan. I even thought that it was a joke or wrong connection: 

Now this I never heard about. Wouldn't they have known if John Allan had an out-of-wedlock child? I had always heard that he was some sort-of great-something granduncle. Though Wikipedia does say, "In October 1830, John Allan married his second wife, Louisa Patterson.[30] The marriage, and bitter quarrels with Poe over the children born to Allan out of affairs, led to the foster father finally disowning Poe.[31] " Was Charles one of those children?

• How do you (and I know that I'm hashing up a dead horse again) deal with knowing that you have prominent family who have wrecked the world (e.g., John Allan and certain Daniloviches)? 

By the way, I know that I used mixed metaphors: "hashing up an old matter" and "beating a dead horse". I must also say that I've also hung on PolishForums.com too much, given that (unfortunately) Poles tend to eat horses (and hashing up horses is treif; so the metaphor works). Also, as I said on Twitter, I know that my knowledge of "Not my circus; not my monkeys" means that I've also hung on PolishForums.com too much and (with all due respect) interacted with assimilated relatives quite a bit—and have few new answers in the process.

"Stand With Israel, Not Netanyahu"

Even I, a staunch Zionist who was already mad enough at Netanyahu and his Haredi Judaism which he attempts to disguise as Yahadut Chilonit, took a few steps back and thought:

If Netanyahu was largely passive while Arab citizens were being assaulted, he led the demonization campaign against the 47,000 African refugees and asylum seekers who entered Israel without permits. Despite reducing the number of refugees entering Israel to practically zero, thanks to the Sinai fence, he continues to lock up thousands of these desperate people – who, like our own Jewish ancestors, sought to escape persecution and poverty. Netanyahu’s policies flout Jewish values, and have been overturned multiple times by the High Court as immoral and unjustified. But they play well to his xenophobic base. 

Good points and reminders. In fact, I wager that some of the Sudanese and other refugees may even be Falasha and Lemba Jews who are making aliyah in what many would call an illegal way—and if any "illegal" olim are among the Sudanese refugees, the Government of Israel has no right to deny those olim ("eleh Kushim!") their taglit. Also, think about this: what if some illegal immigrants from Mexico, Guatemala, etc. are Anusim who'd make aliyah if Netanyahu and his yadidim let them? After all, they're not considered Yehudim al pi HaHoq Shivut. They otherwise have to be under the auspices of nasty people such as Dr. Michael Freund. (Just like Netanyahu, Dr. Freund can fool people. That's even part of why I save most of my e-mails in my backup folders—that is, so I do not ever lose the proof of when I run into mitchazim like Dr. Freund. That's why I still have the link to the 2012 conversation.).

 Likud-led fear and hatemongering hardly stops with our non-Jewish minorities. Progressives, civil rights activists, leftists, the judiciary and anyone who criticizes the occupation have all been accused of being enemies of the state. So much for Jewish solidarity or democratic discourse. 

Indeed. I've experienced this myself. I even have a Facebook friend who called Senator Diane Feinstein (with whom I myelf hardly ever agree) a "witch" for standing against Netanyahu, and I've seen others harp on the fact that Senator Feinstein comes from a Jewish Catholic family (which I did not know until they harped on her for it. As I learned, the Feinsteins and the Rosenburgs were and are Russian Byzantine Catholics.).

From a family of Roman Catholic Anusim and b'nei Anusim, I know that feeling ("You're not Jewish!"; "Your family betrayed their people!"; "They're meshumadim!"; "They're bogadim!"; "Oh; no wonder your Hebrew's not good: your family didn't tell you that they're Jewish!")

Perhaps, by the way, maybe the Anusi and "meshumad" minds are among the ones which are quickest to pick up on trouble. Our ancestors knew when trouble was coming and/or already came, and at least two of us (Senator Feinstein and me, though I suspect that there are more who) knew that Netanyahu and the Haredim were trouble (By the way, I'll have some kavod for Taylor Swift if she goes to Israel and dedicates her famous song to Netanyahu.).

Anyway:

This week’s Netanyahu drumbeat claims that the Iranian threat trumps all traditional diplomatic considerations. But those who, like me, believe that Iran is an existential threat to Israel, and fear that the agreement currently being negotiated will be too forgiving and trusting of Iran need to acknowledge that Netanyahu has blown it. 

His anti-Obama tirades, his support for West Bank settlements over all other considerations, his efforts to undermine the Palestinian Authority, his expropriation of 988 acres of Palestinian land at the end of the Gaza War not only wasted the new diplomatic opportunities he promised toward the war’s end, but alienated and antagonized the very European leaders who, along with U.S. President Barack Obama, are the partners necessary to stop Iran’s nuclear program. 

Excellent reminder and point as well. For being such a Zionist, Netanyahu isn't taking the higher road. He also is not trusting יהוה. For example, bulldozing the houses of innocent Bedouins does not help—and deliberately failing to distinguish between the innocent and the guilty is a chillul יהוה.

Bulldozing the houses of terrorists and their accomplices is fine. Destroying terrorists and their accomplices is fine. Stereotyping all Arabs as terrorists and bulldozing their houses is not fine.

As for (and back to the point about) taking the higher road, to stoop down to the level of an enemy or even lower is a chillul יהוה (cf. Tehillim 25:21-22 and Mishlei 26:4). The applicable mitzvot, after all, say to love your neighbor as yourself (not be like him or her in doing evil), treat the stranger well (not do as he or she has done to you), and let יהוה avenge you. Netanyahu is doing the exact opposite when he has the IDF go beyond proactive counterproliferation, preemption, and deterrence.

By the way, counterproliferation, preemption, and deterrence are obviously mitzvot and acts of kiddush יהוה.

Netanyahu plays the statesman abroad, but back home he is known for his paranoia, his self-aggrandizement, and his lashing out against the courts, the universities and the media. Netanyahu aspires to be Israel’s Churchill, but in nurturing a nation divided against itself he has become our Nixon. 

I and others who follow news from and about 'Eretz Yisra'el keep trying to say that, though nobody believes us. Hopefully, Director Futterman (despite that he's looking at the situation from a leftist perspective) can affect you to get that through your head.

"[A]ll Men Are Created Equal[ly]"? Or Are They Created Equitably?

By the way, if you want an example of a group who think that all should be equal:

The haredi press raised further concerns that many of the immigrants would refuse to undergo a conversion process or that the procedure would be conducted by institutions and courts which do not meet the strict standard, and that as a result their children will create mixed marriages later on.

Note "strict standard" and a dread of "mixed marriages". Also consider that Thomas Jefferson considered Blacks, e.g., to be "as incapable as children". So much for "equally":

1

:  in an equal or uniform manner :  evenly equally

>

2

:  to an equal degree equally

 by young and old>
Try "equitably" instead:

1
:  having or exhibiting equity :  dealing fairly and equally with all concernedequitable

 settlement of the dispute>
2
:  existing or valid in equity as distinguished from law equitable defense>
After all, the Haredim would have to treat Non-Haredi Jews as fellow Jews who were created b'tzelem Elohim v'm'Yisra'el; and Thomas Jefferson would have had to treat Blacks as fellow humans who were created b'tzelem Elohim. Since they wanted equality, though, they could make only those who fit their standards to be considered as their compatriots.

Shema Kolainu, "Shema, Yisra'el", and Us People With Disabilities (Originally On LinkedIn)

Note: I will not be surprised if LinkedIn deletes this post, though. Nonetheless, I could not sit there and just be silent. 

'Im kol kavod l'Doqtor Weinstein (with all respect to Dr. Weinstein), this pretty much goes to my point. People blame people with disabilities for bad attitudes (I have experienced this from even my own family.) and act like we're at fault when we don't get hired by (excuse my language) ablelisits (which is, as I found out, what we call those who hate us because of our disabilities).

Besides, given that Dr. Weinstein founded Hear Our Voices - Shema Kolainu, he should know how Adonai tested our hearts in the desert to see how able people would treat people, let alone kohanim, with disabilities (I, by the way, am mainly a Patrilineal Jew who, although I do have some Jewish heritage on my mother's side, knows that I am descended from Ashkenazi Levites and kohanim; and this, hopefully richly, colors my commentary on YouTube, etc..):

And the LORD spoke unto Moses, saying: 17 Speak unto Aaron, saying: Whosoever he be of thy seed throughout their generations that hath a blemish, let him not approach to offer the bread of his God. 18 For whatsoever man he be that hath a blemish, he shall not approach: a blind man, or a lame, or he that hath any thing maimed, or anything too long, 19 or a man that is broken-footed, or broken-handed, 20 or crook-backed, or a dwarf, or that hath his eye overspread, or is scabbed, or scurvy, or hath his stones crushed; 21 no man of the seed of Aaron the priest, that hath a blemish, shall come nigh to offer the offerings of the LORD made by fire; he hath a blemish; he shall not come nigh to offer the bread of his God. 22 He may eat the bread of his God, both of the most holy, and of the holy. 23 Only he shall not go in unto the veil, nor come nigh unto the altar, because he hath a blemish; that he profane not My holy places; for I am the LORD who sanctify them. 24 So Moses spoke unto Aaron, and to his sons, and unto all the children of Israel. {P}

The attitude that the able people among us came out with was not only unmerciful; it was also abysmally discriminatory. This kind of attitude, even in modern Western (read: Judeo-Christian) countries still prevails figuratively in many aspects, including in the workforce:

"8 And when ye offer the blind for sacrifice, is it no evil! And when ye offer the lame and sick, is it no evil! Present it now unto thy governor; will he be pleased with thee? or will he accept thy person? saith the LORD of hosts."

In fact, three examples of this attitude are demonstrated in two ABC News "What Would You Do?" episodes. One portrays how a woman who is "slow of speech" (as Moses described himself in Torah) is persecuted by ablelists. Two other examples (which I was seeking when I found the first) show how deaf people are slyly rejected by human-resource managers and how parking spaces are regularly taken by ablelists (and even my now-estranged father called out a woman who took an accessible parking space when he and I were at, as I initially recalled, a Blockbuster one time; and I recall that to this day. Needless to say, he was not thrilled when she was parking in the space just to return a video, as I remember. She didn't take it from me. Still, she disadvantaged my compatriots with disabilities. By the way, that was a long time ago.). 

Sadly, this attitude has not changed from Biblical Times to allegedly-Judeo-Christian Times. This is despite how Adonai "desire[s] mercy, and not sacrifice" and even with laws such as the American With Disabilities Act—and so much for "one nation under G-d, indivisible with liberty and justice for all."

If Only Such Was For People With Disabilities

Mike Rowe told a fan, in part:

“We call it a pencil, because all things need a name. But today, let’s call it what it really is. A time machine. A match maker. A magic wand. And let’s say it can all be yours...for just .99 cents.”
The timer read 0:00. The man walked back to the desk. He took the pencil and wrote “YOU’RE HIRED” on the stationary, and few days later, I moved to West Chester, PA. And a few days after that, I was on live television, face to face with the never-ending parade of trinkets and chotchkies that comprise QVC’s overnight inventory.

Sadly, the case is not such for persons with disabilities. Never mind that people with disabilities are not all the same. Never mind that Marlee Martins and Jaime Brewers aren't as rare as society thinks, let alone given an equal amount of opportunity to prove that they're just as capable of success. Never mind that us that quite a few of us even have college degrees, and often postgraduate degrees.

All we are is:

1. "Gimps" and the like (and I've been called a "gimp")
2. Apparently useless in any case. One YouTube comment which I did not allow to be posted was, "Do you think disabled people can help the economy? What about fraudulant people? What about people that on a disability?"
3. As Richard Burt thinks that we are all fakers and/or on the dole (I was also called "lazy" by someone once.).
4. Fodder for jokes, gags, etc. (e.g., "Family Guy"'s Joe Swanson and SNL's despicable parody of Mr. Potter, the real portrayer of whom suffered debilitating arthritis) 
5. Definable by our disabilities, as if all disabilities are in one's DNA. e.g., Being a Jew (of which I am proud) is apparently like being a person with Cerebral Palsy (So, e.g., Dad and Pop-Pop must've been born with C.P....duly noted.).
6. Shames (After all, Dad and Pop-Pop, e.g., lied for years about why Jamie really has Cerebral Palsy.).
7. Exploitables. Who would, e.g., fake being Black or Hispanic for Affirmative Action benefits and get away it? Yet, at the expense of people like me, people really do fake having disabilities.

That is all....for now. Not that the list doesn't go on. 

The Anti Semitism And Other Hatred Has To Stop

A Sobering Reality That I've Have Relearned This Week

If you don't stick with someone in his or her bad times, you don't deserve to share in his or her good times. I'm not saying that I haven't been that undeserving person at times. Nonetheless, any person who won't stick with another in his or her bad times doesn't deserve to share in his or her good times. Also, especially those who don't have as many and/or heavy burdens to bear should be helping those who does who do have many and/or heavy-enough burdens to bear.

To think about walking away from people who walk away from me is sobering, and I have to walk away from a person to whom I am somehow a burden. Right now, I'm even thinking of the horror that my aunt told me about in regards to my Granduncle Tony when he snapped at Great-Grandma: "You're a burden!" That she was a burden wasn't the case: that Pop-Pop and others were burdens because they would not help Granduncle Tony help Great-Grandma was the case.

That's probably part of what killed Granduncle Tony (z"l), too: he was the only good son who could really help Great-Grandma (z"l), and few stepped up to help him help her. After all, the two other good sons were unable to help: Granduncle Francis ("Red") had been deceased since 1985 (and he had his own issues during his lifetime), and Granduncle Jim has had to devote a significant amount of his time to Jamie (or who else could and would? Then again, Jamie could've been in a Willowbrook. He wasn't, since Granduncle Jim and Grandaunt Annie didn't let Jamie's accidental overdose on codeine come between them and Jamie. After all, they understood that Grandaunt Annie's sister and the doctors tried to do their best when then-1.5-years-old Jamie was having seizures when his aunt was babysitting him. They, by the way, are an example of those who are bearing burdens—not Jamie himself, mind you, since Jamie is not a burden—they could've even sued or filed criminal charges against Jamie's aunt, and they decided to take the position that life happens and that those who tried to help Jamie had no idea that the codeine to which he is allergic would not help him.).

Being one of the few, if not the only one, who is bearing a burden can take a toll on the bearer in question—which is my point about part of what killed Granduncle Tony. Even as far back as 1964, he was the only one to help Great-Grandma—Pop-Pop was living in Glen Burnie with his wife and three children (one of whom was to be born in August 1965); Granduncle Red was living with his wife and two older children (with the youngest one to be born in 1967), and Granduncle Jim was stationed at Fort Meade. Only Granduncle Tony was there to help Great-Grandma especially after Great-Granddad committed suicide, and almost 50 years of being Great-Grandma's primary helper affected him to die at 68 years old of "chest pains" (as Dad related that Granduncle Tony started feeling to the point at which he needed to go to the hospital) and other issues.

Granduncle Tony, by the way, is, of course, not the only one who had to bear a burden alone—besides that Great-Grandma herself had to bear many burdens alone, others have had to bear burdens alone. Even myself, for another example—I've had to bear burdens alone or at least (at best) almost alone.

By the way, I wrote this primarily in regards to people (including family members) who have ditched me offline and online (and who would ditch me offline, as I can ascertain. After all, people online are reflections of themselves offline, including who they would be offline if they could get away with being so.). Now those people can surely know, if they didn't know, why I, for example, started that #unfollowforunfollow trend on Twitter: as I stated, any person who won't stick with another in his or her bad times doesn't deserve to share in his or her good times. Therefore, anyone in my own life who won't stick with me in my bad times doesn't deserve to share in any of times.

In addition, I want to thank my ditchers for showing me who you really are and not letting me find out later than I already did—and so much for the ones who (Jewish and gentile alike) claim to be fellow Christians and flout bearing others' burdens, since many of you (I suspect) also ditch others and will hear "I never knew you" when you cry out "Lord, Lord" to Yeshua (Jesus). I suppose that others will thank that ditchers for the same as well—and sadly, I can guarantee that some are thanking me for the same thing, and I need to do teshuvah for being a ditcher of those whom I have ditched.

By the way, please let me know if or remind me of when I have ditched you in bad times. I will try to be there to bear your burdens as best as I can from now on—after all, I do not want to adversely affect your life (including your health) in the way that others have affected mine or in the way that others (including, probably, I) affected Granduncle Tony's life and health.