CSotD: Breaking silence
Skip to comments
Kal Kallaugher confronts a political taboo, and though he does it in the pages of the Economist of London, I haven't heard very many people in the US criticize Israel as being obstructionist in this process either.
There is, of course, the spectre of anyone who criticizes Israel being accused of anti-Semitism, which stems in part from the difficulty in separating the Jewish State from the Jewish People, and in part from the fact that a lot of people who criticize Israel are in fact, anti-Semitic.
This issue has a certain chicken-and-egg aspect, in that, if more people who aren't anti-Semitic would analyze Israel's policies more boldly when bold analysis is called for, then the taint of bigotry in such criticism would at least be greatly diluted.
But there would still be places you couldn't go, that you might go, for instance, in criticizing France for not joining in the Gulf War, or in criticizing Switzerland for secretive financial dealings.
National stereotypes are a mainstay of political cartooning, but, while you can personify Norway as a Viking or the Netherlands in wooden shoes, you get onto thin ice quickly in attempting to come up with graphic shortcuts for Israel, those kibbutzim hats having been more neutral when all the settling was happening within generally accepted borders.
There is also the inconvenient fact that, as they say, just because you're paranoid doesn't mean they aren't after you. And just because Middle Eastern politics in general involve a lot of hyperbolic, blustering, chest-thumping speeches that nobody is supposed to take literally, that doesn't mean Iran doesn't want to see Israel destroyed.
Israel has security issues that deserve respect.
Still, there's a difference between holding onto the West Bank as a buffer zone and building settlements there. If Netanyahu has a deep suspicion about Iran's trustworthiness and the sincerity of their desire for peace, perhaps he should look within.
As for critics on this side of the Atlantic, well, maybe we need to reinstate the draft and drop all the exemptions. I'd like to see this discussion involve the mothers and fathers of the young people who will have to deal with the outcome of any sabre-rattling on the Potomac.
The horror, the horror:
Steve Breen on a truly horrifying prospect. It's not the only cartoon I've seen on this topic and I'm sure there will be others, but I like his tying in of the TSA, the pleasant vacuousness of all the yakkers and the use of color to highlight the focus character. He's got all the pieces here.
I only fly about twice a year, but I'm pretty happy with the opportunity to read or doze or generally have some quiet time, especially when we're increasingly jammed in on top of each other.
I'm willing to admit I'm being misanthropic when I sit there boiling over a couple of passengers having a conversation in the adjoining seats, but this is a different matter entirely. Think of the people who, as soon as the plane touches down, power up their phones like trembling junkies in mid-jones so they can report to everyone that they have arrived.
No, you haven't. You haven't arrived yet. You're out on the tarmac, we aren't at the gate, your carry-on is jammed in the overhead six rows behind you and your luggage has been routed to Cleveland. All of which I'm sure you will explain in the form of a continual play-by-play all the way from here to the cab stand.
There are so many people who can't shut their damn cell phones off long enough to buy a quart of milk and a couple of onions at the grocery store that I cannot imagine having to share two or three hours strapped into a seat surrounded by them.
All is not lost yet. A number of years ago, the FCC asked for public comment on the topic and was inundated with "Oh, no, dear God, no!" responses. The fact that the government finds it technically feasible does not mean that the airlines are going to embrace it from a marketing standpoint.
That's like thinking that a cable channel devoted to science and learning would court ratings with bogus programs about Bigfoot or paranoid theories about the Kennedy assassination.
However, I think the FCC should be consistent in how they balance emerging technical issues with their other established policies: They should allow use of cell phones on airplanes, but only if nobody mentions Janet Jackson's tit.
Sigh.
I remember when airplanes were divided into smoking and non-smoking sections. At least give us the choice of yapping and non-yapping.
Some days, I just need some silly
Today's Reality Check cracked me up. It's a really dumb gag, yes, but the momentary gap between reading it and realizing what Thag hath wrought was enough to make it work really well.
Comments 2
Comments are closed.