Sunday, August 14, 2011
Casey Johnson, Getting Away With Murder
With regard to the above title it should read "Casey Anthony" And every reference to Casey Johnson inside the post should read "Casey Anthony. I apologize for this senior momemt., ,
Sunday, July 17, 2011
"The Cult of the Black Hats" and the Murder of Leiby
I hesitated to write this blog because I was afraid that it would be only of interest to Jewish readers but I decided that it was necesssary for my own mental health to express my views on the horrendous murder of an eight year old Jewish child named Leiby who was a part of the "orthodox" community in Brooklyn, New York. And the more so because as the "New York Post" reported this morning, there were already those who claimed that "it was G-d's Will that this had happened, that Leiby took the wrong turn and got lost because it was G-d's Will. It wasn't an evil child predator or a mother who stupidly allowed her young son to walk the "safe" streets of New York by himself. One doesn't want to imagine what this poor woman is suffering now.
Only people who have given up the ability to think and act for themselves to some "higher" being, in this case their rabbis, could make such nonsensical statements. Like all members of cults they blindly follow what their rabbi tells them, thus absolving themselves from any responsibility for their actions.
This form of so called Judaism is totally alien to me, someone who was born a Jew, and who believes that G-d created man in his Own image and gave to man not only the gift of life, but the capacity to think and reason and the ability to choose between good and evil. G-d's actions and motives are unknowable to man so it is up to the individual to use his own conscience (hopefully he has one) and "siachu" (brains) when making decisions. Every man is accountable for his own behaviour and must face the consequences. As Dr. Phil would say "you did it, you own it".
He also gave man through Moses, the Ten Commandments and the Torah, "G-d"s Rule Book" for leading a decent life. What good is following the Laws if you are an adulterer, a thief, someone who beats their spouse and children, or a sexual predator and murderer? Will there be an outcry from the rabbis in this community, denouncing this monster as an outcast, whose crime demands the punishment meted out in the Torah which they claim to believe in? Judaism demands that a good Jew follow all the Mitzvot but it is an empty exercise if it is done without meaning, understanding, or for the purpose of becoming a mensch, a decent human being.
These narrow sects which arrogantly claim to be true Jews and superior to all others, practice a religion which is a mockery of authentic Judaism.
Too many of them disregard the words of Hillel, which describe the essence of Judaism, "What is hateful to you, do not do unto your fellow man".
In their isolation they contribute nothing to society at large, as Jews have done since time immemorial. And at their worst they are betrayers of
truly pious Jews who not only obey the words of the Torah but also its spirit.
Only people who have given up the ability to think and act for themselves to some "higher" being, in this case their rabbis, could make such nonsensical statements. Like all members of cults they blindly follow what their rabbi tells them, thus absolving themselves from any responsibility for their actions.
This form of so called Judaism is totally alien to me, someone who was born a Jew, and who believes that G-d created man in his Own image and gave to man not only the gift of life, but the capacity to think and reason and the ability to choose between good and evil. G-d's actions and motives are unknowable to man so it is up to the individual to use his own conscience (hopefully he has one) and "siachu" (brains) when making decisions. Every man is accountable for his own behaviour and must face the consequences. As Dr. Phil would say "you did it, you own it".
He also gave man through Moses, the Ten Commandments and the Torah, "G-d"s Rule Book" for leading a decent life. What good is following the Laws if you are an adulterer, a thief, someone who beats their spouse and children, or a sexual predator and murderer? Will there be an outcry from the rabbis in this community, denouncing this monster as an outcast, whose crime demands the punishment meted out in the Torah which they claim to believe in? Judaism demands that a good Jew follow all the Mitzvot but it is an empty exercise if it is done without meaning, understanding, or for the purpose of becoming a mensch, a decent human being.
These narrow sects which arrogantly claim to be true Jews and superior to all others, practice a religion which is a mockery of authentic Judaism.
Too many of them disregard the words of Hillel, which describe the essence of Judaism, "What is hateful to you, do not do unto your fellow man".
In their isolation they contribute nothing to society at large, as Jews have done since time immemorial. And at their worst they are betrayers of
truly pious Jews who not only obey the words of the Torah but also its spirit.
Wednesday, July 6, 2011
Casey Johnson and Getting Away with Murder
When I was growing up in the fifties and sixties killing your own child was considered to be the most heinous and unnatural crime a parent could commit, especially a mother. Only an incubus or an evil creature could have committed such an act. In Yiddish the person is referred to as an "ausforf", someone who is outside of normal civilized society. During World War II when Hitler was shoving Jews into the gas chambers and ovens, the most painful choice a mother had to make was should she live while her child went to his or her death. Many chose the same fate rather than a life without them. Your family, your flesh and blood was everything.
In our times the "nuclear family" has been rent to shreds. It seems that the most unsafe place for people today is with their own blood relatives or step relatives. Just ask Nancy Kerrigan's father, but unfortunately he can't answer because he was killed by his own son. For those who are as old as I am, we can still remember those quaint old days when Ricky finding out that Lucy was going to have a baby (the word "pregnant" was verbotten on T.V.) was beside himself with happiness. Nothing was more joyful than becoming a mother or father. Children were sacred and it was unthinkable that they could be harmed by their own parents. It's ironic that while modern medicine has allowed generations of children to survive formerly crippling or fatal diseases they now have to worry about not being done in by their own mothers or fathers or other family members. Not that family murder is a new thing. You only have to go back to Cain and Abel to see that there is nothing new under the sun. "Lizzie Borden" (she got away with it) gave her parents "forty wacks" but it was her step-mother whom she hated and at least it was about something sensible like not getting cut out of the family fortune. However, the murder of one's own child has until now always been considered the ultimate crime.
Since the 60's, the heyday for the Baby Boomers, the most coddled and infantile generation that ever existed until of course, they spawned their own dysfunctional offspring, society has been descending with ever increasing speed into an abyss of selfishness and godlessness, i.e. paganism. For far too many there is no longer the other, it's all about me. In the 60's the "Baby Boomers" stole that line from the Clairol commercial, "You only have one life to live, why not live it as a blonde?" and changed it to "I only have one life to lead so I'll damn well do as I please no matter how damaging the consequences, no matter whom I hurt." Of course, not everyone agreed with or supported this kind of selfish and irresponsible behaviour, they actually had the nerve to be judgemental and cast blame. So to excuse and justify this bad behaviour there arose a vast army of "experts", psychologists, psychiatrists, social workers, doctors turned therapists, nurses turned therapists, educators turned therapists and other charlatans whose job it was
to explain why people were no longer responsible for their actions. They might have done bad things but they were really good people and not responsible because they were poor or abused as children, or they were suffering from some kind of mental illness, Bi-Polar Disorder being the current favourite. For the past forty years or so the "Therapy Industry" has not only been highly profitable for its practitioners but has also enabled and even encouraged behaviour that has been highly destructive of the nuclear family, the bulwark against society falling into chaos.
This Casey Johnson case illustrates perfectly how far our society has fallen off the rails. Susan Smith murdered her sons but at least she was found guilty. Scott Peterson murdered his wife and unborn child, but at least he was found guilty and is sitting on death row. This trial went on for six weeks and it only took ten hours to come to a decision. How could the jury have sifted through all the testimony and evidence in that short of time and come to a conclusion so quickly if they had not made up their minds long ago, even before they learned that she wasn't going to testify. It didn't seem to matter that the defense's theories about accidental drowning or the possibility that someone else might have done it were far fetched and had no facts to support them. The defense was clearly grasping at straws and trying to create some doubt. I wonder if the bumbling defense was just as surprised as everyone else with the not guilty verdict. All the evidence pointed to the mother, and anyone with any sense knows that she did it. But in today's society common sense is in very short supply. Apparently the jury had no problem with the fact that the mother had concocted some story about a kidnapping to cover up the child's absence and then went on with her life as usual. Even after her lack of concern the jury concluded that she had been a good mother. They had been sequestered for six weeks and obviously didn't want to do the hard job of going through all the evidence. They were tired and probably wanted to go home. One is rumoured to have had a cruise booked for today. And if you learn what little you know about the law from shows like CSI then it"s easy to use that catch phrase "reasonable doubt" to hang your hat on even though the "doubt" is based on fiction.
How could that jury look at pictures of this beautiful child and not value her life enough to see that justice be done. Can anyone imagine the horror of her last few moments at the hands of the person who was supposed to love and protect her but instead turned on her. What kind of a society turns its back on its most vulnerable?
In our times the "nuclear family" has been rent to shreds. It seems that the most unsafe place for people today is with their own blood relatives or step relatives. Just ask Nancy Kerrigan's father, but unfortunately he can't answer because he was killed by his own son. For those who are as old as I am, we can still remember those quaint old days when Ricky finding out that Lucy was going to have a baby (the word "pregnant" was verbotten on T.V.) was beside himself with happiness. Nothing was more joyful than becoming a mother or father. Children were sacred and it was unthinkable that they could be harmed by their own parents. It's ironic that while modern medicine has allowed generations of children to survive formerly crippling or fatal diseases they now have to worry about not being done in by their own mothers or fathers or other family members. Not that family murder is a new thing. You only have to go back to Cain and Abel to see that there is nothing new under the sun. "Lizzie Borden" (she got away with it) gave her parents "forty wacks" but it was her step-mother whom she hated and at least it was about something sensible like not getting cut out of the family fortune. However, the murder of one's own child has until now always been considered the ultimate crime.
Since the 60's, the heyday for the Baby Boomers, the most coddled and infantile generation that ever existed until of course, they spawned their own dysfunctional offspring, society has been descending with ever increasing speed into an abyss of selfishness and godlessness, i.e. paganism. For far too many there is no longer the other, it's all about me. In the 60's the "Baby Boomers" stole that line from the Clairol commercial, "You only have one life to live, why not live it as a blonde?" and changed it to "I only have one life to lead so I'll damn well do as I please no matter how damaging the consequences, no matter whom I hurt." Of course, not everyone agreed with or supported this kind of selfish and irresponsible behaviour, they actually had the nerve to be judgemental and cast blame. So to excuse and justify this bad behaviour there arose a vast army of "experts", psychologists, psychiatrists, social workers, doctors turned therapists, nurses turned therapists, educators turned therapists and other charlatans whose job it was
to explain why people were no longer responsible for their actions. They might have done bad things but they were really good people and not responsible because they were poor or abused as children, or they were suffering from some kind of mental illness, Bi-Polar Disorder being the current favourite. For the past forty years or so the "Therapy Industry" has not only been highly profitable for its practitioners but has also enabled and even encouraged behaviour that has been highly destructive of the nuclear family, the bulwark against society falling into chaos.
This Casey Johnson case illustrates perfectly how far our society has fallen off the rails. Susan Smith murdered her sons but at least she was found guilty. Scott Peterson murdered his wife and unborn child, but at least he was found guilty and is sitting on death row. This trial went on for six weeks and it only took ten hours to come to a decision. How could the jury have sifted through all the testimony and evidence in that short of time and come to a conclusion so quickly if they had not made up their minds long ago, even before they learned that she wasn't going to testify. It didn't seem to matter that the defense's theories about accidental drowning or the possibility that someone else might have done it were far fetched and had no facts to support them. The defense was clearly grasping at straws and trying to create some doubt. I wonder if the bumbling defense was just as surprised as everyone else with the not guilty verdict. All the evidence pointed to the mother, and anyone with any sense knows that she did it. But in today's society common sense is in very short supply. Apparently the jury had no problem with the fact that the mother had concocted some story about a kidnapping to cover up the child's absence and then went on with her life as usual. Even after her lack of concern the jury concluded that she had been a good mother. They had been sequestered for six weeks and obviously didn't want to do the hard job of going through all the evidence. They were tired and probably wanted to go home. One is rumoured to have had a cruise booked for today. And if you learn what little you know about the law from shows like CSI then it"s easy to use that catch phrase "reasonable doubt" to hang your hat on even though the "doubt" is based on fiction.
How could that jury look at pictures of this beautiful child and not value her life enough to see that justice be done. Can anyone imagine the horror of her last few moments at the hands of the person who was supposed to love and protect her but instead turned on her. What kind of a society turns its back on its most vulnerable?
Monday, June 27, 2011
I'm Back Again
I noticed from the date of my last blog that it's been quite a while since I entered anything. Sheer laziness is at fault but time does not stand still especially if you are no longer a spring chicken like myself and still have plenty to say.
Most people are creatures of habit and I am no exception. As usual I started off today with a cup of coffee and a copy of the New York Post. Why the New York Post? Why not. It's news reporting may be just one level above a tabloid, and I've noticed that on more than one occasion it has lifted stories right out of the National Enquirer, (yes I confess, I read the National Enquirer) but at least it's editorial policy is not tainted by "political correctness" and more often than not makes sense. Unfortunately there seems to be a disconnect between the news and editorial. In the news pages prominence is given to the most sensational and frivolous stories especially when celebrities and half-naked woman are involved. The childish headlines must be written by half-educated college frat boys, never clever or funny just stupid and in bad taste. For serious news you have to read the op-ed section.
The first story that caught my eye today was about the legislation allowing gay marriage in New York. How could it not, it was splashed across two pages. There it was in living colour, all the state and city officials celebrating their victory over their backward foes who refuse to admit that homosexuality is just as normal as the other. You know, the one between a male and a female. Looking at the picture it reminded me of that old fable about the half witted emperor who is parading stark naked before his cheering subjects who are afraid to tell him the truth and only a small boy in the crowd has the nerve to shout,"the emperor has no clothes on", or words to that effect. I can't remember the rest of the story but it seems to me that most people today are as afraid to tell truth as the emperor's subjects for fear of being punished and there are not enough brave little and perhaps naive boys willing to say what they really think. Certainly Bloomberg' whose facial expression says 'what am I doing here?' has no backbone and the divorced and living in sin with his girlfriend Cuomo fits right in.
The crowd in the New York Post photo is just like that crowd in the make believe story. They are trying to make a truth out of a meaningless farce, a ridiculous sham. If homosexuals and lesbians wish to live together and create rights and obligations between themselves, that's their business. They should have the same protection before the law as any other law abiding citizen as well as the same responsibilties. But that doesn't mean that they can force their dysfunction on the rest of society, especially its innocent children, and tell us it's normal. Most marital laws were created for the protection of the children of the union, so why do homosexuals need these same safeguards since for the majority of them they are irrelevant. Once again it's a means of establishing some equivalency between themselves and a male-female relationship something that until our amoral times has never been accepted by society even those where homosexuality was not frowned upon.
They reject referenda by the people because they realize that when your average citizen steps into the anonymity of the voting booth and doesn't have to fear being called a "bigot", he will become that little boy and cast his ballot for what he really thinks. That is if he's rational.
I have to end with Franklin Roosevelt's famous quote because it truly fits the crazy times we live in. "The only thing we have to fear, is fear itself", fear of "Big Brother" who will somehow punish us if we don't follow the Politically Correct dogma. Really, if you think about it what can he do?
J
Most people are creatures of habit and I am no exception. As usual I started off today with a cup of coffee and a copy of the New York Post. Why the New York Post? Why not. It's news reporting may be just one level above a tabloid, and I've noticed that on more than one occasion it has lifted stories right out of the National Enquirer, (yes I confess, I read the National Enquirer) but at least it's editorial policy is not tainted by "political correctness" and more often than not makes sense. Unfortunately there seems to be a disconnect between the news and editorial. In the news pages prominence is given to the most sensational and frivolous stories especially when celebrities and half-naked woman are involved. The childish headlines must be written by half-educated college frat boys, never clever or funny just stupid and in bad taste. For serious news you have to read the op-ed section.
The first story that caught my eye today was about the legislation allowing gay marriage in New York. How could it not, it was splashed across two pages. There it was in living colour, all the state and city officials celebrating their victory over their backward foes who refuse to admit that homosexuality is just as normal as the other. You know, the one between a male and a female. Looking at the picture it reminded me of that old fable about the half witted emperor who is parading stark naked before his cheering subjects who are afraid to tell him the truth and only a small boy in the crowd has the nerve to shout,"the emperor has no clothes on", or words to that effect. I can't remember the rest of the story but it seems to me that most people today are as afraid to tell truth as the emperor's subjects for fear of being punished and there are not enough brave little and perhaps naive boys willing to say what they really think. Certainly Bloomberg' whose facial expression says 'what am I doing here?' has no backbone and the divorced and living in sin with his girlfriend Cuomo fits right in.
The crowd in the New York Post photo is just like that crowd in the make believe story. They are trying to make a truth out of a meaningless farce, a ridiculous sham. If homosexuals and lesbians wish to live together and create rights and obligations between themselves, that's their business. They should have the same protection before the law as any other law abiding citizen as well as the same responsibilties. But that doesn't mean that they can force their dysfunction on the rest of society, especially its innocent children, and tell us it's normal. Most marital laws were created for the protection of the children of the union, so why do homosexuals need these same safeguards since for the majority of them they are irrelevant. Once again it's a means of establishing some equivalency between themselves and a male-female relationship something that until our amoral times has never been accepted by society even those where homosexuality was not frowned upon.
They reject referenda by the people because they realize that when your average citizen steps into the anonymity of the voting booth and doesn't have to fear being called a "bigot", he will become that little boy and cast his ballot for what he really thinks. That is if he's rational.
I have to end with Franklin Roosevelt's famous quote because it truly fits the crazy times we live in. "The only thing we have to fear, is fear itself", fear of "Big Brother" who will somehow punish us if we don't follow the Politically Correct dogma. Really, if you think about it what can he do?
J
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)