WAPO: The gospel according to Trump -- by Dana Milbank
Once again a Newspaper I love to hate.
"Monday on the thrice- married head of a gambling empire who talks about the need to kill members of terrorists’ families."
"Monday on the thrice- married head of a gambling empire who talks about the need to kill members of terrorists’ families."
If Dana is writing as a Religious person, he just struck out on being Christian, having kind sentiments for a fellow human being, or even treating others as you would be treated.
I went to discover the context of the statement which I remember being that while we cannot influence those that want to suicide with threats on themselves, threats and actions against their families might influence them. "They care about their families"
The rule Trump is proposing is biblical, from Exodus 21:22-24
22 And should men quarrel and hit a pregnant woman, and she miscarries but there is no fatality, he shall surely be punished, when the woman's husband makes demands of him, and he shall give [restitution] according to the judges' [orders].
23 But if there is a fatality, you shall give a life for a life,
24 an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth, a hand for a hand, a foot for a foot,
While Rabbis tended to convert life to its value in money and were totally against capital punishment, and Rashi restricts it to when both mother and child are lost, it is clear that at some time some crimes were thought so grave that lex talionis (The law of the Jungle), a life for a life is required.
Terrorism clearly falls under this category, if any crime does. We are talking about the targeting of our innocent so as to inflict as grave a social pain as possible, and doing it in the name of total obliteration of our civilization.
This is done in the context of the aggressor being a tribal civilization where the group, not the individual, is paramount. Clearly a situation in which "it took a village" to create the suicide bomber.
In this situation, inflicting maximum damage on "the village" makes sense, since communal ethics, not individual responsibility rule as an influence in that society.
The question is not, "is it nice, is it humane, is i permissible under international law?" The question is "Is it effective?".
To accuse Trump of making a statement against the common wisdom or our civilization does not answer any of those questions. We are not willing to commit the trillions and thousands of casualties that it would take to teach Muslims to respect individual rights. But we are willing to blame Trump from making a suggestion which might resolve the conflict without such huge expenditures of capital and personnel, without considering its sociological basis. In the meantime our Western policies allow millions of civilians to die in the ME, and hundreds of millions to be placed at risk by suicide bombers, and rogue nations with nuclear capabilities. As Trump would say: "We got a real problem here!!! We got a real problem..."
We need to solve that problem. Dana Milbank, other than insulting our intelligence with out of place quotations from both the New Testament and Trump, provides none.
=========================================
"We know Ted Cruz is a hypocrite. The urgent question before us is whether he is an anti-Semitic hypocrite."
End of reading. I don't know TC is a hypocrite, and no data is presented to convince me.
The fun continues:
1. Cruz comment on Trump's NY values was hypocritical-- Not really, we do thing of NY as a place of left politics (gay marriage, pro abortion..) and money (Wall Street). It is Hypocritical of Rob to state otherwise.
Trump certainly trumped him properly when he made the comment, but that was one expert debater to another, nothing to do with the facts. You can be valiant, place community interest first, and still be left on politics and have money corruption.
2. Cruz has a successful wife working at G. Sachs. Great for him. He mortgaged his home to be elected Senator! Fantastic, he puts his money where his mouth is.
3. He didn't declare his loans. Fact Check has him declaring his borrowings in his financial disclosure papers, but not in his FEC submissions. Since he did declare them in one, not declaring it in the other would only cause trouble so I believe it was unintentional. Not a big deal in either case since he was self funding and that loan was less than 1/3 his total worth.
4. The following shows Eshman is not for any of the front runners:
"But let’s forgive Cruz his hypocrisy. He’s a politician. Trump spent last week pretending to evangelicals at Liberty University he knows the difference between Corinthians and corned beef. Marco Rubio twisted the English language in knots explaining how isolating Cuba is good for average Cubans. Bernie Sanders was against gun control before he was for it. And Hillary Clinton is so anti-Wall Street firms, she is taking away all their money — $300,000 at a time, in speakers fees. "
So what is his point?
5. He is anti-semitic. YEAH! finally we have what Rob means. It may be idiotic, but here it is.
Cruz criticised NY values -> lots of Jews live in NY. There fore he criticized Jews!!!!
"he knows that by saying “liberal New York values,” he is dog-whistling the anti-Semites. "
It is just incredible that this dribble is placed in JJ! Once more: SHAME ON YOU JEWISH JOURNAL.
JJournal: Is Ted Cruz an anti-Semitic hypocrite? - Rob Eshman
"We know Ted Cruz is a hypocrite. The urgent question before us is whether he is an anti-Semitic hypocrite."
End of reading. I don't know TC is a hypocrite, and no data is presented to convince me.
The fun continues:
1. Cruz comment on Trump's NY values was hypocritical-- Not really, we do thing of NY as a place of left politics (gay marriage, pro abortion..) and money (Wall Street). It is Hypocritical of Rob to state otherwise.
Trump certainly trumped him properly when he made the comment, but that was one expert debater to another, nothing to do with the facts. You can be valiant, place community interest first, and still be left on politics and have money corruption.
2. Cruz has a successful wife working at G. Sachs. Great for him. He mortgaged his home to be elected Senator! Fantastic, he puts his money where his mouth is.
3. He didn't declare his loans. Fact Check has him declaring his borrowings in his financial disclosure papers, but not in his FEC submissions. Since he did declare them in one, not declaring it in the other would only cause trouble so I believe it was unintentional. Not a big deal in either case since he was self funding and that loan was less than 1/3 his total worth.
4. The following shows Eshman is not for any of the front runners:
"But let’s forgive Cruz his hypocrisy. He’s a politician. Trump spent last week pretending to evangelicals at Liberty University he knows the difference between Corinthians and corned beef. Marco Rubio twisted the English language in knots explaining how isolating Cuba is good for average Cubans. Bernie Sanders was against gun control before he was for it. And Hillary Clinton is so anti-Wall Street firms, she is taking away all their money — $300,000 at a time, in speakers fees. "
So what is his point?
5. He is anti-semitic. YEAH! finally we have what Rob means. It may be idiotic, but here it is.
Cruz criticised NY values -> lots of Jews live in NY. There fore he criticized Jews!!!!
"he knows that by saying “liberal New York values,” he is dog-whistling the anti-Semites. "
It is just incredible that this dribble is placed in JJ! Once more: SHAME ON YOU JEWISH JOURNAL.
No comments:
Post a Comment