The T word... could be you

 https://www.instagram.com/p/DRUhfpqjUc9/?img_index=5

Anniversary

 Wow, it's been 3 years since I published this:

I do Believe It's Still There (Jul 9, 2023)

Remember: EXAPTATION IS COINCIDENCE!

(thanx for the unwavering support)

What Will Grow?

 

I feel a lot of people don't take the intentions of the Iranian regime so seriously. The Iranian leaders have said openly, many times, that Israel should simply not exist, and the fact that they finance Terror groups like Hamas, Hezbollah and the Houthis is not a secret.

But still, people think that the region is just "complex" and what needs to be done is to give incentives to those governments to go back to "reason", to the "normal", which means, for us, to care mostly about the Economy.

Maybe people think that all this bloody rethoric is a political trend, a bad choice of method to mantain power. That what those people want, obviously, is to be influent, so they use this "trend". But I think it goes deeper than that.

Why do some leaders go in the direction of inciting violence, in first place? Some theorists may have an explanation that goes like this: "give people a 'common enemy', and you gain popularity".

It is not a wrong vision in itself, having a "common enemy" is indeed a strategy of power. But these things are not "created" out of nothing, neither do they pass so easily, with just a simple adjustment of direction.

Hatred as a form of power is something that has deeper roots than people use to think.

There has always been people who have a tendency to hate the different and place all the blame in the other for everything.

The Iranian regime grew from the part of the Iranian population that had that tendency, which is old in the Arab World. Hatred for the Jew is not a recent political invention.

There are so many people in Iran - as in the Arab Muslin World - that want, not to destroy someone, but to seek good things for themselves, but the ones that rose to power in Iran - and in some other parts - come from the background of hatred.

And they formed their whole structure of power around it.

Who are the people that a murderous regime have as leaders, and who are the people around the leaders?

Who are the men that have been chosen to lead and to be part of the Terrorist groups? The ones that plan and execute mass murders, mass rapes?

Their intentions are clear and this is the direction they are going to. In extremists ideological regimes, fidelity to the "cause" is the main thing that anyone must show for their leaders, their peers and their subordinates.

So we don't know how far it can go.

This kind of problem is not solved with simple "incentives" to be "normal".

They've crossed so many lines, and the danger for the good people - including the good muslins - is a danger of death, because those cults don't really care about life. They put a "cause" so much above life that life loses its value.

We can't let investment in violence, domination, be something that pays back. We can't make everything so relative that other countries feel safe to be best friends with bloody and aggressive dictatorships.

The recentes facts show that all this have left the realm of speech and turned into action quite a while ago. With horrible consequences for people.

Are we passing a clear message that threatening and targeting a country like Israel, and to finance terrorist groups against them is unnacceptable?

Or are we letting that part of humanity - I don't have the demographics - grow?

Humanities Cut In Half

Recently, a civil group in Israel released the report called "Silenced No More", which shows, with undeniable evidence that includes tons of vídeos of the deeds, how sexual abuse was a modus operandi, not an exception, in October 7th and the subsequente captivity of Israeli civillians. And before that, there was already an immense documentation of atrocities perpetrated by Hamas and their followers. It shows cruelty with no mercy, it shows people having pleasure and laughing while inflicting pain and horror.

To me, something else that deserves attention, is the ways in which a lot of people, from or alligned with the mainstream academic world, don't want to allow us to draw conclusions from what we see.

I think that the way people act does say something. "Punitive rape", for instance, is an abomination that only makes sense to extremely perverted minds. The hatred for women showed in those situations, the way that they commited cruelty against infants, show they have no consideration for anybody.

And yes, all that shows that the intention they have is centered on the destruction of the other, it shows, very clearly, that is has nothing to do with creating a land where "everybody can come and go freely", where "people have all their rights respected", where "palestinians and Israelis can live side by side as equals".

It has nothing to do with equality, with civil rights. It's about hatred, destruction. But some people say we can't conclude that.

The intellectual movement, the world vision that seems to want to dissociate "method" from "intention", and "intention" from the essence of a movement, is nowadays the mainstream in the academic world and, unfortunately, it influences the press, the political world, and the entertainment world.

It focuses on "what is unfair in societies", but instead of recognizing advances when they happen and legitimate attempts to make things better, it pays attention almost solely on what is out there that they consider "not really fair".

And by not really recognizing the good things, like not recognizing that Israel, for instance, has accepted two states in the beginning, and made attempts for peace many times since, and do have muslins integrated in their Society, some people paint a world that is totally negative.

They create a vision of an "unbearable world", and consider the problems they see as the sole cause and the whole explanation of whatever conflict happens, and whatever happens in the conflict.

By not recognizing anything good about societies, they exempt the side they consider "oppressed" of any responsibiliy in building solutions, in creating concrete instruments for making a better World. They consider these "oppressed people" and their mentalities as mere inevitable consequences of problems.

But the human mentality is made not purely of seeing problems and reacting to them, with no limits. It's also about knowing what you want.

And every culture in the World, and Islam surely included, offer to people different ways of reacting to things than losing all the moral boundaries.

The wisdom that becoming a cruel perpetrator is even worst than suffering injustice, is one of the pillars that separates human civilization from chaos.

To see the human mentality as a whole, we must admit that the way in which people act shows us the World they are trying to build.

The event that started the current War, the horrible massacre of October 7th, displays a level of cruelty that shows a movement aimed to the destruction and humiliation of others, and its total disconnection from any possibility of a good outcome shows that they were using whatever claims of injustice that want others to believe, as excuses to the exercise of pure hatred.

The central idea that guides the modern mainstream academical thought about societies is an idea that is not exactly wrong at the very principle. It's the idea that problems create tensions that push us to seek a better balance.

But there needs to be a framework, moral boundaries, for the resolution of any tension. Otherwise you just fall into unlimited violence and cruel dictatorships that are worst than any problem you initially detected.

These frameworks exist in every culture, and should not be thrown away.

In fact, for historical reasons, the Western World, which is seen by the mainstream academical world as some kind of devil, is where this process of tension and resolution within frameworks happened more continuosly.

The prosper countries in the West like the United States, have wrong deeds on their History, of course, but also dealt with immigration and the tensions it causes in a scale that no country in the East ever had to deal with, and even with all imperfections, and problems, bridges have been built, opportunities have been given to people. It's not all negative. America is a fruit of "dialectic processes" like no other.

And in the case of the Middle East, it is easy for some people, to disconsider all that Israel have tried for peace, and see only the problems, then you justify or relativize the long string of terrorist attacks that happened all along Israel's history, and then you see any security measure that Israel had to take as "oppressive", and exempt the other side of the obligation to show any engagement in creating conditions for peace.

But then you are cutting the human being in half. You keep the problems, but throw away his vision of a good future, his vision of peace. The framework, the boundaries within which problems must be solved.

History shows us that all cultures have their boundaries and the reactions of different peoples under oppression show us that these basic principles don't simply disappear when there are problems. What does make people throw away basic values is the seduction of movements that promise glory, admiration, power, as rewards for violence.

And by seeing the human being as whole, we can see a Society in Israel, dealing with the problems, not with perfection, but within Democracy, and with legitimate offers of peace through History. And in the other side, the seduction of a hatred movement that cares not for its own people.

With their way of portraying the human being as blindly propeled by problems and not as also a creator of solutions, and by making the details of the Terrorist actions irrelevant, the mainstream academic people are trying to make us blind to the fact that, in order to create a World where nobody dies of War - a World we desire but has never existed yet - we need to consider the end of hatred movements the priority. And they want to make us blind to the fact that it would be insane for a country that wants its people to feel minimally safe from absolute horror, to not get into a War that the enemy already started in the most horrible way.

The actions of people obviously have something to say about the direction which some forces are trying to lead the World to. And that what Israel wants - the end of the Terrorism backed by Iran - is absolutely vital, and, unfortunely, necessary to fight for. It is unfair to ask for a people not to fight against something that is trying to destroy them.

These mainstream academic people want us to see people's actions and then go ask them, the mainstream academic people, what is really going on. Then they will tell us the problems that "justify" those deeds. But by seeing people's actions, we can already have a vision of what is going on. By seeing people's actions, we can infer their goals, and by seeing their goals, we can have a good idea of their real motives.

Things Called Countries

There are things called countries.

There is a collective aspect to existence. We may ask, well, why not only individuals? Billions of independent individuals around the World? Well, when you have a family, and you know others who have families, and none of you want your house to be invanded, people make an agreement, "let's watch out for each other's houses". That's what the police is for.

We need laws. If we are sure that some things are unnacceptable, we have a moral confidence that some things need to be protected and we know others agree, we make laws.

The process through History until the moment we currently live in, was surely not smooth. But we evolved in many ways, and the laws we have, at least in the Democratic World, including respect for difference and equality of opportunity, put us in a good place to struggle to make an even better World.

And also, there is simply no better idea than having countries. Otherwise there are no laws. Unless you have one Big Government for all the Globe. But I think that would be an insane direction to go to. Because, if this Government becomes tyrannic, there are no alternatives left, there is nothing to balance it, to counter it.

With one Global Master, there is no diversity. With no country at all, there is no law.

So, yes, countries. And just like the formation of our current laws, the formation of our current borders was not smooth. It wasn't smooth anywhere in the World. But there should come a moment when we say, okey, these are the countries we have, let's now just seek peace.

Take the Jews for instance. They were expelled, displaced, mass murdered, stolen, and they only want less than one percent of the Middle East. There was displacement of Arabs too, but at least as much Jews. And their ancestral homeland is the only land they want. Just as the Muslins have Mecca, plus ninenty-nine percent of the whole Middle East. This is the opportunity to say, yes, these are the countries we have now and, as turbulent as the past was, now is the time for peace. 

So a country should not attack other.

And that's why a country also have a right to defend itself when attacked, just as family has a right to defend themselves - like calling the police - when their house is violently invaded. And they expect the police to solve the matter.

But now a complex question comes: if a country attacks the other brutally, you need to go after the perpetrators, to show it is not acceptable. But they are in the other country, amidst civillians. So a counter strike will have colateral damage.

And this is where the dilemma starts. Because we don't desire to cause pain to civillians. But it is a dilemma, because the solution is not simply say, "because we can't accept colateral damage, we will give up on the idea that a country has a right to go after the murderers of their people and the rapers of their daughters."

Tough, isn't it? A country, threatened by enemies, lives on this delicate balance. But we need countries. Civilized countries are what separates mankind from the merciless law of the stronger.

There is the individual, and there is the collective. The country that commanded the attack is Iran. Iran is the country that has the power to stop it all.

They have been supporting groups like Hezbollah, Hamas, the Houthis. Groups that openly call for "Death To Israel, Death To América, Death To The Jews". And they can "close" those groups whose only purpose is aggression.

To balance the safety of individuals in dangerous zones where they are not protected by their leaders, to balance it with the need of human beings for a protective country, we need International Leaders to act as righteous judges and place the responsabilities where they should.

Muslim Arabs - and Christians - always had many places to call their own ever since the Middle Ages. Countries where they are the majority or absolute majority. The Jews are 14 million people in the World and they have a small country for the first time in two thousand years. And people dreaming of seeing them totally destroyed, which Google or Wikipedia won't tell us, but I strongly suspect must be in a larger number than the entire Jewish population.

Israel needs to fight with ethic - and, in my opinion, they show they do. Their enemies build tunnels under hospitals - not like Israel, to protect their people, but to shelter Terrorist leaders.

There is, as I say, a collective aspect of existence, and it is vital, too. Mankind can't just watch bloody dreams of domination grow, and destroy all dreams of stability. Israel can't give up defending Israel.

Righteous judges, who but Iran can stop this right now?

Google couldn't guess what I was trying to ask

 

Google, call me. I want to talk about IDF.

 I mean, Inverse Document Frequency...

Oh... P.S. :

Of course it was a joke, a pun

Obviously I  don't understand A.I. at Google level. If I knew that stuff I would be... exactly here, of course.

Now serious, I did use some rudiments of that stuff for a category suggestion function on two apps.

But the whole name of the magical mechanism is TF-IDF (heart)

How to respond a cruel horde

 A photo circulated, of painfully skinny child, as if it showed a starving child from Gaza, as if it portrayed the "famine" that Israel was causing on Gaza. Most of the press went along, it circulated and caused outrage until it was verified that the child suffered from a genetic disorder. 

Quick "retractions" were issued. A lot of people kept believing the starving version.

Last week, the photographer won a prize. I saw a news program just saying "photographer that portrays the suffering in Gaza wins the big prize". And the skinny child photo was there. The news guys didn't say "like this starving child", but the picture was there. 

How can I think it was not on purpose to make people think "see, the starving kid is real"...

How can I think the New York Times didn't publish a "opinion" piece - to which they have "no responsibility", because it's "opinion", saying that the Israeli forces trained dogs to rape people - yes, the guy said that, even though it is doubtful that something like that is even possible... - how can I think they didn't publish it one day before a big report on the rapes that Hamas commited on Israel, was published, just to "balance" things and not let the report have the effect it should have - people horrified by the proven rapes - proven by verified videos made by terrorist themselves.

"Silenced No More" is the name of the report. I shows the painful truth - that rape on October 7th was not an exception, but a modus operandi. It is unquestionable, as far as evidence is concerned.

Look for the report.

Now, my opinion:

Why the press does that? Well, as I say, there is a vision of the World that is challenged by Israel's need to defend themselves - a vision where shaking hands and promising more "investiments" is enough to "save the World", a vision where politicians are not required to take strong stands for civilizational values. The challenge is not desired. People prefer "business as usual"...

Hordes of men came on peaceful day, mercyless, cruel, laughing, killing and raping, and kidnaping, then torturing people.

Israel just had to eliminate the heads of Hamas, and I'm glad they did. Look for the report. Tell me if Hamas doesn't need to be dismantled.

Think what would you feel if it happened in your city. Sometimes a country has to go to war, as Israel did. It could not go unresponded.

Random killing and massive rape. It couldn't be solved by world leaders shaking hands, and promising investments.

It is horribly sad the Terrorists regimes use their own women and children as hostages - unprotected, put in danger - to slow Israel.

But the darkest day in Israel's History, one of the darkest days in the History of the World, could not go unresponded, because this darkness doesn't point to exception, it shows us what kind of forces are growing in parts of the World.