#Jewish study

[httpsoftbunni]

The Deception of Metatron and Hidden Dangers

Not all interpretations of Metatron are benevolent. Some traditions of Metatron are benevolent. Some traditions and theological perspectives warn that Metatron may be a deceptive figure, leading seekers away from true divine worship and into forbidden knowledge that distorts spiritual truth. Today, I am to explore the possibility that his influence is not always in alignment with God's will.

Metatron's Possible Usurpation of God's Authority

The Angel Who Sits on the Throne – A False Intermediary?

One of the most controversial aspects of Metatron's identity is the claim that he sits near or even upon the divine throne. In the Babylonian Talmud (Sanhedrin 38b), Rabbi Elisha ben Abuyah encounters Metatron in heaven and mistakenly worships him, believing him to be a second deity. This moment is pivotal, as it suggests Metatron's presence can lead to idolatry–the very sin that monotheism seeks to avoid.

The Talmud further states that Metatron was immediately punished by God for allowing himself to be venerated, implying that his role is not meant to rival God's sovereignty. However, the fact that this misunderstanding could arise suggests that Metatron's influence might mislead worshippers into revering an intermediary rather than the Creator.

Deception or a Test of Faith?

Some interpretations argue that Metatron serves as a test: will seekers remain loyal to God alone, or will they be tempted to elevate an angel to divine status? This parallels the warning in Exodus 20:3, "You shall have no other gods before Me." The New Testament also echoes this in Colossians 2:18, warning against the "worship of angels."

The Problem of an Angel Becoming "Lesser YHWH"

Some texts describe Metatron as "lesser YHWH," a title that dangerously implies he carries divine authority. This contradicts the strict monotheism of Judaism and Christianity, where only God is sovereign. If Metatron were truly obedient to God, why would he be associated with a divine name? Could this indicate a rebellion or an attempt to claim higher status? The Bible warns against such figures.

Isaiah 14:12-15 describes Lucifer's fall due to his pride and desire to ascend to God's throne. If Metatron is depicted as sitting on a throne or carrying divine power, does this not resemble the pride of Lucifer?

[dynamicity-keysmash]

I think people mean well when they insist that America isn't a Christian country but it just obfuscates the situation and makes it more difficult for minorities to frame their experiences. America is a fundamentally, structurally, ideologically Christian country from top to bottom. It's exhausting, it's suffocating, and it's the truth. Nearly all political forces, pop culture phenomena, and major life philosophies here are either built on Christianity or propped up as subverting Christianity in a way that is, of course, still entirely about Christianity. Leftwing movements here that are ostensibly hostile to Christianity still ultimately structure their worldviews around their own versions of salvation, rapture, original sin, eternal judgement, heaven, and hell. Most people here fail to see Christianity all around them, influencing every facet of American life, for the same reason that a fish can't see water.

[kafkaesquetwink]

one of these days im gonna get breslovpilled

[kosher-salt]

Queer religious Jews ily

[disgruntled-detectives]

Jews: “I’m gonna fistfight g-d outside a Denny’s parking lot I swear.”

Also Jews: “gotta put the hyphen in g-d cause it’s respectful.”

[thejewitches]

This post has been in the works for the better part of three years. The language around observance, religiosity, and identity is more important than ever. What it means to be a Jew is more important than ever.

Whether or not Jews are ‘religious’ in a world of non-Jewish religion has always been political: from the public debates Jews were forced into throughout Europe (like the Paris and Barcelona Disputations) to modern alt-right Republicans weaponizing their designation of only right-wing Jews as ‘religious’ enough to be taken seriously, this has always been more than a personal label.

This doesn’t mean you have to change your personal label, but rather it asks that you consider more than how you personally identify when you engage in public discourse. How we understand the unique, multi-faceted aspects of Jewish life is vital: disentangling it from the Christian hegemony that we are both crushed beneath and uphold is important work.

[salvadorbonaparte]

Help save the Yiddish Translation Fellowship Program

I wanted to ask my followers and fellow language enthusiasts to donate to the Yiddish Book Center so that they can continue to train translators and make Yiddish literature accessible (or at least share this post if possible) 🐐

[jewish-joy]

Me, at our torah book club- I really love this passage where Esau and Jacob make tentative peace. It's my favorite, maybe after Isaac and Ishmael burying their father together. Ah, that's such a toss-up.

Rav David, off the cuff- Hmm. Into all the parts about familial dysfunction, aren't you?

Me, who's just been read for filth in front of 10 other people- Listen-

[unsolicited-opinions]

this is a genuine question: why do you think the queer community is so bad when it comes to the antisemitism and even the overt Hamas support? I can’t figure it out at all. Jews have always been a huge part of and even pioneers in the community. now we’re banned and harassed and unsafe. I see a pride flag online these days and feel terror because I expect a watermelon or red triangle to be right next to it, it’s happened so often. I’d feel safer in a church than at a pride event. why do they hate us so much now? even those of us who are also part of that community?

I've been trying to figure that out, too.

I was pretty sure that the origin was in postmodern academia, but I didn't know much more.

I have never formally engaged with Queer Studies, nor with Gender and Sexuality Studies,so I had no idea where to start.

Someone on #jumblr (I regret that I don't recall who) pointed out this collection of essays, Poisoning the Wells: Antisemitism in Contemporary America.

Chapter 2 is "Pinkwashing Antisemitism: The Origins of Queer Anti-Israeli Discourse by Dr. R. Amy Elman.

I'm way outside my wheelhouse here, despite holding a degree in one of the social sciences.[1]

I'm going to try to summarize this in a way which is shorter and more digestible than reading the whole thing, but there's a link to the whole thing at the bottom of this Very Long Post.

Disclaimers:

1. Acknowledging the depth of my ignorance:

I don't have the contextual knowledge to know with confidence if this is an intellectually honest argument, or even if the history is fairly presented. If anyone on Jumblr has more experience studying this topic, I'd sure welcome their thoughts.

2. A note to LGBTQ+ readers on "queer":

I understand that some in the LGBTQ+ community don't care for the term "queer," and some regard it as a slur. I have tried, for this reason, to cease using this word in my daily life. Below, I'm going to use the word "queer" a lot here, however, because Elman does and the scholars she discusses do. If you're among those who dislike this term or find it hurtful, I hope that you will not see my doing so as a slur or an insult

3. My editorial comments are in blue.

4. This is long. Not as long as the article itself, but long for Tumblr. You are forewarned.

Got a coffee or an energy drink?

Continue below the break:

Elman says the increasing appeal of queer politics was for specifically millennials, and the BDS movement actively pursued a "queer" plank to broaden its appeal.

This tracks.

She says that Leaders from both movements saw a potential for synergy, with some suggesting queers could transform BDS from a "vanguard movement" to a "popular" movement.

Elman gives a history of the "Queer Movement" in which she argues its adherents are particularly susceptible to BDS's "pinkwashing" accusations.

She says:

- "Queer" is an intentionally broad, deliberately ambiguous term encompassing various sexual and gender minorities who reject traditional LGBT politics as conservative.

- The queer movement emerged in the late 1980s and early 1990s in opposition to both neo-liberalism and feminists who critiqued sadomasochism (S/M) and the sex industry.

- This opposition to feminist critiques of the eroticization of inequality, says Elman, is a crucial factor in understanding queer politics' susceptibility to antisemitism.

- Elman says early queer activists prioritized passion over reason, making them potentially vulnerable to harmful ideologies.

The Feminist Sex Wars

- There was conflict, says Elman, between lesbian feminists and proponents of S/M, arguing that the increasing acceptance of S/M within the lesbian community weakened its ability to resist fascist values.

I don't see the need to politicize whatever one enjoys in private as long as it is safe, sane, and consensual, but okay.

- Elman draws a parallel between the eroticization of fascism in the past (referencing Susan Sontag and Sheila Jeffreys' concerns about Nazi aesthetics in queer subcultures) and the current uncritical embrace of certain radical ideologies.

- Elman says the embrace of "outlaw" identities and the downplaying of the harmful implications of S/M practices (including the use of fascist symbols for parodic purposes) are problematic trends within queer politics.

Which made me think of seeing Queers for Palestine protestors calling Jews "Nazis" and combining the swastika with the mogen David.

- Elman argues that the rise of queer politics led to the silencing and marginalization of lesbian feminists who focused on women's rights and opposed the industrialization of sexuality and S/M.

Like Andrea Dworkin?

- Elman says Queer Theorists have dismissive attitudes towards lesbian feminist concerns and that the once-flourishing spaces and intellectual contributions of lesbian feminists were diminished within the broader "queer" coalition.

As a cishet man, I had thought the broadening of the movement, the addition of each letter in LGBTQ+, gave all parts of it more strength, but it seems obvious to me now that lesbian concerns aren't always the same (and may not be aligned with) gay men's concerns, enby concerns, trans concerns, etc.

I can see how being subsumed by a larger movement could dampen the voices of its different component populations and diminish the perceivability of the points on which they don't agree.

Judith Butler features prominently here.

- Elman seems to say Butler's nuanced stance on her lesbian identity is rather different from her non-nuanced Jewish identity, and it is "as a Jew" that she declares her anti-Zionism.

...in 1989, [Butler] was asked to provide a lesbian lecture and responded that she would rather describe herself as "being" homosexual because identifying as lesbian felt "neither true nor false." Yet, she demonstrates no similar reluctance to claim a Jewish identity years later. To the contrary, it is "as a Jew" that she condemns Israel and vows to develop a Jewish opposition to Zionism.

A decade after Butler vacillated over being lesbian, she similarly described her nearly two-decade-long relationship to S/M discourse as "active and complicated," a position in keeping with the tenor of her fourth book, The Psychic Life of Power. In it, Butler speaks of her "paradoxical" embrace of "injurious" names because they "constitute" her "socially."

Huh. Jewish identity without nuance? I'm not sure I've ever seen that...?

- Elman says Butler's engagement with S/M discourse and her concept of erotically embracing oppressive power structures are linked to the potential eroticization of antisemitism and the demonization of Israel.

As Martha Nussbaum explains, the central thesis of The Psychic Life of Power is that “we all eroticize the power structures that oppress us, and can thus find sexual pleasure only within their confines.”

If Nussbaum is correct, there may be no better explanation for the ongoing eroticization of antisemitism and the demonization of Israel.

So concerned was Nussbaum by Butler’s influence on American women’s studies programs in the 1990s that she concluded,

"There is despair at the heart of the cheerful Butlerian enterprise. The big hope, the hope for a world of real justice, where laws and institutions protect the equality and the dignity of all citizens, has been banished, even perhaps mocked as sexually tedious. Judith Butler’s hip quietism is a comprehensible response to the difficulty of realizing justice in America. But it is a bad response. It collaborates with evil. Feminism demands more and women deserve better."

"Hip quietism" makes me want to read more Nussbaum.

Butler was chair of the International Gay and Lesbian Human Rights Commission (later renamed Outright First)...which was a UN recognized organzation. While the name might cause the casual observer to to think it would focus on gays and lesbians, it has seemed to focus on Israel.

Outright First claims it advances LGBT rights through awards consistent with its agenda, yet the first of these was not made until 2005, fifteen years after its founding and the same year that BDS was ostensibly established.

That year, the organization honored Mary Robinson, who decriminalized homosexuality as Ireland’s first woman president (from 1990-1997).

Robinson also served as the UN’s first woman High Commissioner for Human Rights and, in this capacity, Robinson oversaw the 2001 UN World Conference against Racism, Xenophobia and Related Intolerance in Durban, South Africa.

Despite the conference’s noble rhetoric, the antisemitism that it manifest led Robinson to resign in disgrace.

It was in Durban that “anti-racist” organizers revived the scurrilous Soviet charge from decades earlier that Zionism is a form of racism and Israel is an apartheid state. Although Robinson called these allegations inappropriate and unacceptable, she did not reject the conference’s final declaration that contained them.

Ach. The feckin' Irish again.

...in 2008, Desmond Tutu became the second recipient of the organization’s “Outspoken” Award. Tutu, a Nobel prize winning anti-apartheid activist, is also an outspoken critic of Israel for “practicing apartheid” in its policies against the Palestinians. While he too condemned bigotry against gay men and lesbians, like Robinson, Tutu may be better known for his opposition to Israel than for any long-standing and deep defense of LGBT rights. Thus, one wonders whether the “critical partnerships” Outright First fostered were less those that promoted the world’s LGBT communities than those that helped legitimize anti-Israel activism.

This example, it seems to me, is a more appropriate illustration of “pinkwashing”:

that is, pinkwashing may be less about bolstering Israel’s reputation than providing Israel’s sworn enemies a seemingly progressive mask behind which to conceal their animus.

Pinkwashing, Triangles, and Softcore Holocaust Denial

The term "pinkwashing" initially referred to corporate profiteering from pink-themed breast cancer awareness campaigns.

Elman contrasts this with the reclamation of the pink triangle by gay activists as a symbol of defiance after the Stonewall riots, noting that this is a "disturbing" appropriation of a Nazi symbol.

Years before American corporate executives bolstered sales through gender-conforming pink promotionals to women, American gay male activists openly embraced pink to signify their gendered defiance after the Stonewall riots of 1969.

This political reclamation manifested itself in their adoption of the pink triangle Nazis used to denote and facilitate the destruction of those men they identified as homosexual. That this exclusively male Nazi symbol came to signify LGBT rights is disturbing and reveals a movement that, whether through ignorance or choice, embraced a fascist aesthetic

Is that fair? The idea of reclaiming is to take the symbol away from the oppressor and redefine it, right?

ACT UP's use of the pink triangle and its analogies between the AIDS crisis and the Holocaust are presented as examples of "softcore" Holocaust denial that paved the way for later strained comparisons.

By 1987, the Nazi pink symbol gained American prominence when the AIDS Coalition to Unleash Power (ACT UP) used it for its logo, which also read “Silence Equals Death.”

Founded by Larry Kramer, ACT UP’s mission involved combating the public’s indifference to “the AIDS Holocaust.” Equating the epidemic with Jewish genocide, ACT UP’s gay pride float that year depicted a concentration camp within which activists posed behind barbed wire. Kramer’s book, Reports from the Holocaust: The Making of an AIDS Activist, further popularized this agitprop and the pink triangle marked its cover. As the HIV death toll mounted across the globe, ACT UP’s rhetoric and the Nazi triangle became internationally ubiquitous

So Elman believes this was softcore Holocaust denial through universalization/appropriation by the queer movement.

Holocaust images...absent the Jews. We see a lot of that on social media from the LGBTQ+ community right now.

BDS and "pinkwashing"

Sarah Schulman, an ACT UP alum, was as a key figure in popularizing the "pinkwashing" accusation against Israel. Here's an inside look at how that happened:

And here's Schulman's 2011 NYT piece:

If you need to get past the paywall, use this link.

Schulman's argument is that Israel's promotion of its LGBTQ+ rights is a cynical tactic to conceal human rights violations against Palestinians.

It couldn't be a natural outcome of an electorate with a majority which is socially liberal enough to not want to persecute their LGBTQ+ family members? Why not?

Oh, it's because Jews are sneaky and devious /s

Elman critiques Schulman's anti-racist pretense, arguing it invisibilizes Israel's diverse population and misrepresents the motivations behind Israel's LGBTQ+ initiatives.

The investment in Tel Aviv as a gay vacation destination is acknowledged, but its negative framing by BDS as "pinkwashing," says Elman, creates not just an entry point for antisemitism, but also a permission structure.

Soon "pinkwashing" took on a different meaning from the one intended by the women who originally coined it.

When applied by "pinkwatchers" whose sights are trained exclusively on Israel, the accusation became an entry point for antisemitism.

According to Wikipedia, it now describes "a variety of marketing and political strategies aimed at promoting products, countries, people or entities through an appeal to gay-friendliness in order to be perceived as progressive, modern and tolerant."

As Cary Nelson observed, "the pinkwashing accusation gives license" to condemn Israel, while discounting all of its achievements (e.g. legal protection against sexual orientation discrimination, recognition of same sex marriages, joint adoption, and open military service) without any reservation.

Want to know the first thing Sarah Schulman posted to Twitter on 10/7/23?

Here's Canary Mission's page about Schulman.

Elman continues:

There may be no better way to simultaneously encourage antisemitism and dismiss Israel’s LGBT initiatives (whatever their shortcomings) than to insist those efforts undermine the rights of Palestinians.

Were it not for BDS double-speak, Schulman could not maintain that she “never” betrayed queer people, despite her having acted in “solidarity” with “presumably straight Palestinians” to oppose Israel’s LGBT community.

Like countless other “queers” who take “pride” in being “ashamed” Jews, she received political “guidance” from “presumably straight” folks like Omar Barghouti, the purported founder of BDS.

Known for his explicit desire to “euthanize” the “Zionist project” and his vocal opposition to the two-state solution, Barghouti insists that not even “the end of occupation” will end his struggle.

Elman wraps up:

Like “Islamophobia,” “pinkwashing” and its corollary “homonationalism” are accusations often employed to silence critics while simultaneously providing those who issue them the appearance of being concerned about LGBT people and other minorities. Yet, this posturing offers little in return.

In fact, these denunciations are in keeping with the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation’s longstanding assault on homosexual conduct, gender equality, and universal human rights at myriad UN fora under the insidious cover of anti-racism and anti-imperialism.

You can grab a PDF of the whole book here.

That BDS similarly promotes itself through the cynical appropriation of social movements and ostensibly progressive claims that vilify the Jewish state represents a consummate act of public diplomacy in which anti-semitism itself has been pinkwashed.

_________

You read the whole thing, so have a cookie: 🍪

[1] I agree with Neil Postman that the social sciences would more accurately be called moral theologies...and are not sciences.

You can read more about Postman's point here if you want to know what I mean by that..

[utilitycaster]

[smile-files]

there's nobody nerdier than an archeologist... except for a jewish archeologist

[germiyahu]

Actually don't listen to me. I'm an impulse buyer with credit cards. You want a nice looking pitcher and basin to perform the hand washing mitzvot? That's an excellent opportunity to go thrifting! You might even find Judaica there, like a Chanukkiyya perhaps?

You don't want to wait 8 years for Shabbat candles to arrive from Israel? Ask your rabbi! When I asked her if you can reuse a Havdalah candle, she sensed I was worried about the cost of buying all these candles and said her shul has tons of extras.

You absolutely do need a Chumash, a Tanakh, and probably a study Bible too... but Sefaria has all that and more! Especially the Talmud and other Rabbinic sources! It literally blows my mind that this site exists and is free.

But what about all the books on Jewish history and philosophy? What about textbooks for Modern and Biblical Hebrew? See if there are scanned versions online, or go to your local library. Invest in notecards, you're going to want to write down prayers and such, this will especially help if you don't own the books you're studying from.

It's a good idea to have a Siddur, but your shul will most definitely have their own, and as others have told me, you can ask your Rabbi if you can borrow one to take home (make sure to treat it with reverence).

If you want to start baking Challah and are living on your own, or maybe in a dorm room, see if there are community cooking spaces so you don't have to buy your own materials, or just ask your parents if they can gift you some kitchenware because "You want to get into baking."

You literally don't need anything other than a cup that you think is pretty and has meaning to you for the Kiddush. And don't splurge, I've seen hundreds of very attractive Kiddush sets and candle holders and all that for modest prices.

And take it slowly! Don't buy everything at once. We're nowhere near close to Chanukka right now, so don't even put that in your mind. If you want to acquire holiday items, focus on Pesach and worry about other festivals in their due time, let your wallet recover a little. This also goes for Shabbat! You don't need a pristine set of everything all at once, I'm just an idiot. You can slowly build up your perfect beautiful intricate table as the months go by.

[penguicorns-are-cool]

I'm pretty sure Avraham failed the test

like if I was given a test and the person giving the test very obviously told me that I was wrong and not to actually do the thing, I would assume I failed the test

also, that's about where the torah switches focus from Avraham to Yitzchak. There were no more tests after that, his story just kind of ends. His next big task is to just marry off his son and that's it he's done.

Like, I really don't think he passed that test I think he failed for refusing to question God for giving him a very unreasonable task.

And it's not like others haven't been rewarded for questioning or even fighting authority

like Yaakov is very definitely rewarding for tricking his Dad cause like right after it says he has a dream where God basically told him good job you will have many descendents. Then later on he literally fights an angel and it's a good thing cause he got renamed Israel as part of a blessing and now we're B'nei Israel

And Moshe definitely questioned authority that was like his whole thing. And even beyond Pharoah, he also had to reason with God to get them to not kill everyone.

Even Avraham that time he convinces God to not kill everyone in Sodom and Gomorrah if there are ten good people. There aren't but Avraham's questioning and reasoning with God is portrayed as a good thing.

Also, Judaism is generally very supportive of questioning authority and child sacrifices are very specifically banned in the torah, so It makes no sense that Avraham passed the test because he would've obeyed God even to kill his child. Like that moral is pretty inconsistent with the rest of the Torah.

so I definitely think Avraham failed that test.

[httpsoftbunni]

[ceaseless-exhauster]

I was scrolling way back on my own blog to look for an old specific post, and I could see the progression of my unending joy and fervor for Judaism morph into fear and anger and defensiveness as things have gotten worse and harder, and, crucially, as I have become a more solidified and educated member of the community. This makes me deeply sad, so I’m going to fight it actively.

All that to say: Torah study last night was delightful. It was a small group this week, just four of us, but not only did we laugh much and do a lot of Hebrew decoding exploration (which is my 🎶faaaaaavoriiiiite🎵), but we ended up talking at great length about the relationship between HaShem and Moses.

We did this in the context of HaShem getting super into wrath and retribution, as they are wont to do, and Moses’s reaction is to basically say “okay, but like, if you kill your own people, everyone else is gonna think you’re a loser who couldn’t defend this people you promised to protect.” And it WORKS!!

So we were talking about how interesting it is that not only is Moses of course the only prophet in the Torah to whom G-d appears in person, but how much more of an equal footing they appear to be on, more of a partnership than anything else. Look at Avraham when he bargained for Sodom and Gomorrah: “yes HaShem you are great and powerful but I also believe you are merciful please let me search for one righteous person there.” Yaakov literally wrestled an angel. Joseph received dreams and had very earthly concerns about them.

Meanwhile, we have Moses - this man who, despite being raised as a prince of Egypt, is by all accounts a pretty terrible social leader whose little brother has to do most of the logistical stuff. And yet, he perhaps has the deepest relationship with HaShem. He has the kind of relationship where G-d can appear right in the Tent for the sole purpose of looking Moses in the eye to proclaim “I am deeply hurt and angry!!” and Moses has the standing to say “I understand that, but you have a bad plan about it.” Isn’t that wild??

I’m glad this week was Sh’lach L’cha, there was so much in there to talk about and explore and it did so much to remind me of the simple fact that I LOVE Judaism!!! I’m gonna do my best to continue to embrace that more often even in the face of everything. I hope everyone is having a restful Shabbos 💙

[historicity-was-already-taken]

re: October 7

Regardless of what idiots who think Hamas is a fun progressive resistance org have to say, the fact is that the October 7 massacre is going to be something Jews talk about, mourn, and commemorate for the next X,000 years. Long after there is a place called Israel, and a group called Hamas--and frankly, anything resembling the world as we know it today--there will be Jews taking a moment to commemorate the events of October 7, 2023.

And that's not even a FUCK THE HATERS AM YISRAEL CHAI statement. It's not a pro-Israel statement or an anti-Israel statement or a pro-Palestine statement or an anti-Palestine statement or a Whatever Simplistic Binaries We've Tried to Impose on This Situation statement. It's not even a political statement.

Speaking as a Jewish Historian, the Jews are a people with a long memory. We still commemorate revolts and massacres and attempted massacres of the Jewish people that went down over 2500 years ago like they happened yesterday. It's not an accident that, when the Warsaw Ghetto Uprising went down, the Zionist participants* immediately drew parallels between themselves and the crazy fucking patriarchal spouse and child-murdering zealots who held out against the Romans at Masada in 74 CE. Jews forget nothing, from the Babylonian Exile, to the Crusade-era massacres, to Jednabwe.

Jewish memory is hardly an impeccable source of historical knowledge (see Yerushalmi's Zakhor: Jewish History and Jewish Memory); but we forget nothing. We will remember October 7, and some day we’ll probably have a commemorative cookie about it. It will be the subject of books and dissertations, and studies of post-Holocaust and post-modern anti-Semitism. The Jews will insist on learning from this, about this, and re-interpreting this. Forever.

Civilizations, groups, nations; they can keep hating and trying to destroy the Jewish people; but 2000, 3000 years from now, it will be by the grace of Jewish ethnoreligious memory traditions that anyone will remember their names.

*it was staged and carried out by the Jewish Fighting Organization, which was a politically pluralistic org. Everyone from the anti-Zionist Bund to the centrist General Zionists belong to it. Except for the Revisionists lol

ETA: This post is not a secret rhetorical tool to express stealth support for Israeli war crimes in Gaza. Or any level of support for violence against Palestinians. Ever. I hate that I even have to add that; but like I said: anti-Semitism's gone pomo.

Also, my mental soundtrack while writing this post.