regevdl

Thanks everyone so far! I'll check back on this thread in case there are other suggestions from anyone else.

Yes and no. If they cut aid to Israel they have to cut aid AND arming everyone. That way, Israel's neighbors won't have an advantage and neither will Israel. Then, Israel won't need a $4billion military. It will cost much less and hopefully be able to be funded by the taxpayers actually receiving the 'benefits' of the service of their compulsory military. Or generous donations. Even if they need to give up free and crappy healthcare to do it. My understanding of the aid deal with Israel is that we give a mix of cash and weaponry etc and they have to commit to buying US product. I don't know the specific amounts but it's like I give you $1000 and you have to spend at least $600 at my electronics store. lol So..it's just another Corporate Fascist ploy by the Military Industrialized Complex It will give the US and Israel more credibility and reduce the 'reasons' for the US to be present in the M.E. I think it will bring an overal more stable environment in the ME if we cut all aid and weaponry to these countries. It's a large task. YOu have to overcome the Jewish lobby in the US and the religious fanatics who control part of the gvt in Israel. Israelis have been trying to overthrow these people for a very long time. bascially they are communists, that should't be a shock. it's hard to defeat communists without 'war'. You cannot reason with them, they are violent and manipulative and it only takes a few of them to control everyone. The weird thing is, when I discuss this dynamic with Israelis who agree with the danger of these religious fanatics who are behind the curtains, I am the only one that calls them communists or oligarchs. They condemn them as 'religious fanatics' which might be accurate but I told them, there is still a lot of marxist tactics popping up in Israeli politics that religion is simply a convenient front. LIke in the US they pose as 'capitalists', etc. They are fascinated by this perspective and a little confused, much of what I bring to them is TOTALLY new and I take my time with Israelis. I don't want to startle them because they are VERY tribal and even though I am accepted and respected, I am not Jewish and I'm not Israeli so at times still seen as the 'outsider' or brushed off like' well, you are still naive because you are new here, etc) But, for the most part, with some exceptions, they are far more open to reason and logic than many Americans I have had conversations with. Israel has already admitted it has nukes. I drive past the nuke site on my way to the city. Anyone who still denies it here gets a good lecture from me. lol So those nuke deniers are dwindling fast. But even if people bitch and moan at the hypocrisy of Israeli gvt, the gvt earned and deserve it BUT...they have nukes so it's their protection. that's the name of the statist game. Get nukes, no one touches you. Hell 2 years ago I watched an Israeli documentary on Israeli TV on how Ben Gurion and 2 other people Built the damn things. That's why Iran wants them, to avoid invasion and attack. Now, correct me if I'm inaccurate but part of the recent Iran deal had a clause that stated if Israel attacks Iran, the US is obligated to defend Iran. If that is accurate then this is great. Netanyahu has already shut up about Iran. Israelis hate him. American boot lickers of Israel tell me, 'well if they hate him why is he always re-elected'. I simply reply, 'by that logic Americans love Obama. good to know! I will pass that on to Israelis' (as Israelis loathe obama). BUt even when they loathe him, I share that he's no different. It's not to give him credit but that they are loathing a ghost because on the outside, he appears to have efficacy with the position of a finger wagging disapproval of Israel but he has given more military aid and intervention in the ME that benefits Israel more than the US than BUsh who seen as very pro-Israel. So I never let any of these types of myths go past me when I speak to Israelis. lol They want nothing to do with Iran and are not afraid of Iran/ Ok, so when I say 'no' nothing will change. I don't mean NOTHING will but you have to see Israel in several different lights. On the geopolitical stage and on the stage of their own internal problems with Gaza/Palestine. STopping aid might bring more stability overall in the ME, but won't solve this issue completely. That's probably why the gvt won't even consider it and call it an 'antisemetic' suggestion because they know that if we cut aid and suddenly the ME is far more peaceful....then..... heads will need to roll.... How many generations were conned into believing that this AID feeds orhpans and defends the defenseless and arms the 'good guys'. I mean. the REAL terrorists and axis of evils will be exposed. Palestine also needs to get it's head out of its ass. The occupation is horrendous but there are many and most areas that Israel has nothing to do with. A fraction of the aid reaches Palestine/Gaza so cutting that off will be a short term harm to them but they can recover because they are not wholly dependant on it as much as Israel is, if that makes sense. I'll give a small example. Their agriculture. many countries around the world will not buy Palestinian or many Arab produce. That may seem racist to some, until you have seen their farms. I can only speak for the Palestinian farms. I live on the border with Jordan but their farms are just specks of green against a desert backdrop but, i do know that Israel and Jordan share agriculture technology and education with each other so I am sure their agriculture is a step up in the Arab world compared to most. Witht hat said, I have seen farms in West Bank that are about 90 miles from us. They look like a well manicured garbage dump. They don't clean up the plastics from prior season, they simply 'mulch' them and plant over them. outside of their villages, they leave dead animal carcasses and garbage on the outer edge of the city...not even in one area.... just take it to the village/city edge and dump is sort of the standard. Kids play around it, animals and livestock are roaming around, it's behind homes...it's a disaster. Yet again, Israel is blamed for all of their problems. What in the hell does Israel have to do with their disgusting low standards of agriculture and basic sanitation for that matter? But they keep people in this 'blame israel' so they don't complain to their own gvt and by doing that, Israel actually HAS some amazing ag technology but they refuse to connect in such a way so their produce can at least make it on the global market which would really really HELP Palestinians. We have Gazans who have special permission to come into ISrael and they come to our village to buy our dates because they are the best. I am not just saying that. I have shipped them around the world to various people and I ate California dates in the US and these dates are the best. But anyway, the GAzans even prefer Israeli produce, that's how bad the standards are in Palestine because the gvt refuses to network or improve because they they lose out on the 'blaming/victimization' element that keeps their subjects loyal. Palestine's gvt is very unstable and hamas and the gvt are always at odds and Hamas pretty much runs Gaza against the gvt demands, etc. it's weird and confusing. Most of the Hamas leaders are living large in other countries. But anyway, because they can always use Israel as the boot on their neck, excuse, they dno't have to do jack crap to build their infrastructure. So Palestinians are victimized twice. Once by Israel, twice by their own gvt. So, without the US meddling and Israel having the obvious disproportionate advantage, Palestine is less capable of these arguments that everything is Israel's fault and they need to start answering for themselves. Gaza is another complex issue that I am still trying to wrap my head around and filter propaganda on both sides. It's VERY difficult, even while living here. There were import blockades but prior to that, when there weren't, much of the goods were hoarded by Hamas and not distributed, or, say, concrete that was suppose to be used for infrastructure were used for Hamas terror tunnels or bunkers, etc. I have a few contacts IN Gaza and they confirm this. Hama controls everything and thus controls the people. It's a heartwrenching situation. So, stopping aid won't necessarily fix that issue. so many of these things have to come from within. Even Egypt understands the comlexities of Gaza. During the war last summer, Egypt refused refugees because things are so mangled there. THey know Hamas uses civilians as hostages and terror-assets etc. It's the same tactic as ISIS. so...it's not so simple in that regard. also during last war I think I remember (again, I'm trying to go off memory so if anything is inaccurate I apologize and welcome any corrections) that the Palestinian gvt was at odds with Hamas even during the war! they cut off funding to Hamas in Gaza in order to stave off missile attacks into Israel and by that Hamas was propagandzing that the food/money shortages were because of Israel. The people there have very little way to fact check or question the validity. Even though Hamas in Gaza is against it's own gvt, they still blame Israel. It's such a mind-fuck I cannot even devote enough time or brain capactity to be an expert at it. I find sticking to the larger principles, repeating and using these tragic events as validation to my arguments is the best way I think either Egypt needs to take over Gaza or Israel and be done with it. Offer the people there to become Egyptian citizens or to live in Israel or West Bank. Because it is physically separated from West Bank yet the 'capital' is located in West bank with Israel in the middle. It's a problem wrapped in a problem. But...that'll never happen. lol I do talk about the aid angle with Israelis and they are receptive to it. I also use Socratic method to explain /challenge why Israel isn't the type of democracy they think it is...this is VERY well received. I thought I would be labeld a Nazi and hung but I've only been called a Nazi once in 4 years with these arguments, so not bad! lol There are a lot of peace groups and integration groups (integrated baseball camps ) etc so it's shifting. Most people realize those changes cannot and will not come from politics. Plus Israel has it's own internal conflicts. School system issues of over crowded schools and your run of the mill arguments against he state in general that people are active in. So I'm sorry if that was more than you bargained for but there is so much to think about in this one topic 'aid' that I felt the need to indulge a full wide angle perspective.

I didn't punish him. I simply explained to him that before he concluded there was no santa, we took time to talk about it and we should offer the same opportunity for his sister that he can be part of as well. He didn't ruin it for her. she still believes but we talk about it from time to time. She is still young and I respect her viewpoints and challenge them without telling her they are 'wrong'. She remains curious. I don't remember how I worded it but I didn't mean for it to come off as if this was a terrible experience or upsetting experience for any of us. After I discussed this (and I did use a brief assertive tone with him at the beginning but then we calmly went over the details), he perfectly understood and sat with his sister to use Socratic questioning, etc.

More than you know. The conventional war but also war among ourselves...between left and right. THe more extreme he speaks, the more extreme the left speaks. Either way the war in the M.E. wages on, even the left is cool with that. It's to keep the blood thirst going on the right and to get the left to point out what a psychopath he is or appears to be rather than expose the real crimes that we are still decimating actual humans overseas that never posed a threat or attacked the U.S. so, everything in the poltical world is in check.

Gross. Well.... that's pretty much what Israel does. They don't kill the family necessarily but they bulldoze their homes or imprison their families. Seems to be working well for them to stop the conflict (SARCASM FONT). I"m not saying take the ISIS families in and coddle them but not go on the other end of the pendulum either. Neither extreme has proven successful. But we also can't pussyfoot around either. How about.... stop bombing the M.E. Stop meddling in civil wars and in countries that pose no threat, maybe, before saying random, useless crap as a candidate of the POTUS, use your capital intel to build up these countries. It's common knowledge that the best way to deter terrorism is to financially stabilize areas of population. History shows, especially in Iraq these people won't stop fighting with each other. I really hope that changes and evolves to a better, more peaceful future. But He's basically wanting to do the killing for these people. gross.

Hello, I am on the hunt for some good critical thinking-for kids sources. Websites, books, whatever you have. My kids are 6 and 8 and I do some of my own but sort of running out of ideas that they can grow into. I recently saw a video (unrelated to this) but a woman suggested a book for kids called I Wonder or Eye Wonder but didn't reference the author, so if anyone has more details on this book, please post. Also, referenced was Camp Quest. I found only websites for an actual camp retreat for kids but I do not live in the US, so I guess that isn't relative unless there is another Camp Quest (like a general website, etc) Thanks FDR community!

I'm 29 minutes in and am loving this! I recently admitted to myself that I am an atheist. I haven't had the conversation with my husband but we have never lived a religious life (he's Jewish I was raised Catholic) so it's not a big deal to talk to him about it, other than for 'formalities' of saying it outloud. So I feel this was a great 'welcome' gift to find after shedding my pseudo-agnostic skin!

Very true. Stefan has had some people on that don't match the same philosophical consistency etc but just for the experience for the listeners to see how to debate people on opposing positions etc. But, and I hate to generalize, People who come on FDR understand it's a debate and even if it's an interview it's still not as cookie cutter format as Mainstream venues. I think Trump is used to dominating discussions and mainstream formats. So again, sorry to always push back on this but Trump's interviews are for one purpose only. To get elected. Not to spread philosophy or long term ideas for humanity, it's to get elected. He probably sees the obvious flaw in that coming on an predominately anarchist show. lol not going to scrounge up new votes blabbing on this venue no matter how many non voters it reaches. lol And Iwouldn't vote for him just BECAUSE he came on the show. ewww. The discussion will not be a give and take 'debate' unless scripted to look like it is. I think he is VERY calculated. Not saying that is necessarily a bad thing but I think he is so comfortable in the lime light that he knows EXACTLY how to make it look like he's speaking off the cuff or spouting things off without thought, that's how good he is. Trump thrives on the scandals and publicity of his alleged 'accidental' faux pas. So in an arena where ANYTHING can be discussed and nothing is taboo, like FDR.... it neuters him and thus by default repels him from entering an arena of such. On Infowars, his 'faux pas' are more accepted by that audience so he gains some unlikely allies and new defenders of him as they love his Alpha persona and on the left he is dominating attention by the same faux pas. He's a force of nature. I am interested in him simply as from a tactical approach to campaigning. It's fascinating to see a fresh and aggressive approach. I couldn't care less if he's prez or not or which evil he is lesser of or whatever. BUt just the process is revealing a lot about the lack of stability ANY parties have...even the libertarian..they are just as easily strayed from their supposed principles when they feel there is someone tough on 'their side'. If Trump came on the show, talked about immigration, is Stef suppose to then discuss a free society with open borders that is in line with his ethical philosophy or step into the ring and debate as a statist and discuss ALTERNATIVE state solutions to borders. Even if Stefan got a few words in about a free society, how long do you think Trump would listen before completely taking over the conversation or ending the interview. That's another clue why he chose Infowars it's mainstream in the world of libertarianism. you can't mill around the Libertarian mediums and NOT find Stefan and see how widespread he is but, it's not all American voters and that's what Trump needs. The last election I took part in was in 2012 and I wrote in Ron Paul. That opened my eyes that voting doesn't matter and led me to FDR...not in a straight line but I found my way. Anyway, this is a slight divergence on the inital topic but I remember back during that campaign debating (or what others thought was a debate) Romney supporters. They thought he was the greatest thing since sliced bread and I remember telling a few people then that the real test is how he is after the campaign if he doesn't win. Will he still use his time to spread his message of 'good' or whatever or just disappear back into the mist? Well, Ron Paul for his strengths and weaknesses at least is still spreading the message he himself believes in. He was the most authentic candidate I think anyone has ever seen in our lifetime. That is quite interesting. But Trump..if he doesn't win, won't spend his time championing irregularities in Gvt or propel his alleged beliefs forward, nor will Bernie Sanders nor Hillary. They will all fall back into their cookie mold like those before them and the tax cattle will await their next demagogue in the next cattle call. And Shirgall is correct on what the first question should be...spot on!

I agree that left unchallenged completely will not give him any 'cracks' to later tear down his crystal view of the world and his place in it. In this particular situation, the father, either in the moment or after would have given him a negative experience to associate with the points I was making. Not that that should stop us from challenging these absolutes people have but since it's also associated with my children, I later felt maybe it was best to leave this opportunity alone and use the next one as my launchpad.

Yes I think a few 'speedbumps' even if minor or seemingly unnoticed can help. They sort of 'add up' over time. Someone might not hear them but eventually something else they hear later down the road will tip the scale and then they will remember ALL the little things from the past. This family is keen on turning everything outside of their Judaism as bad and I realize in this case, it may never been a good idea to bring anything up and why I'm glad I don't interact with them anyway. We can't save everyone. lol In my example above, regarding my invitation to our Christmas party years ago, this family declined but still made it a negative experience for the kids and spun their own negative connotation to it to make it seem like they have the moral high ground in the view of the children. 'no...we are protefcting our kids from greed. They are mad now but will thank us later'. etc. (nevermind I donate a LOT to Jewish and non-Jewish organizations throughout the year and especially in Dec). So they don't even have the spine to say, 'no kids, this is not a jewish holiday and we do not want to expose you to anything non jewish'. instead they have to push the rigidity and demonize something else in order to maintain the authority over their kids. it's quite cruel and dimeaning, actually. But the kids will always see how happy we are and nice and helpful so the cognitive dissonance will surely wake them up eventually. probably not to any huge degree but at least allow them to question in silence.

you brought up Christmas and such. I recently made up my mind that I am an atheist but we celebrate Christmas Tradition. I tell the story to the kids about Jesus that no one knows for sure if he existed but it's a good example of morality (choosing the best moral stories of course!) lol We've had Santa...usually a friend from the neighborhood. Bet ya's never had a Moroccon Jewish Santa ! lol My older started asking and I asked him what he thought. I just asked questions until he came up with the conclusion that Santa is not real and it was totally fine. He still enjoys when santa comes to visit and is a good sport about it because it IS fun. My daughter still asks. My son tried to outright tell her and I chastised him explaining it's not fair to just give her the answer. He can also help her find the answer on her own or stay quiet and let me do it. How this ties into the initial situation, My first year here, I invited ALL the children of my kids' classes to celebrate with us. Some were thrilled, some passed and some simply couldn't attend. The ones who passed are the more religious or traditional but aren't assholes about it. This particular family not only declined (as many declined with a 'how thoughtful but we won't be able to attend'..and left the reason unspoken) this family made it a point to tell me, "we aren't allowing our kids to come and they are upset because all of their friends are coming. But we don't want to expose them to all of the greed and spoiling that Christmas teaches.". This was literally my first year here and I had such good feedback from the other families who love seeing the lights and coming to see the tree and even celebrate with us I just brushed it off. NOw, that I have known them a tiny bit better and added this recent experience, I realize they are just people who need to assert their 'better than thou' attitude. Even if I turned back the clock to that past Christmas I wouldn't have wasted my time trying to teach them that Christmas to us and even growing up religious has more to do about giving than receiving. So I don't feel bad for not saying anything then either. So yea, they are shallow people, they want everyone to know they are Jewish, even though they live among Jews, they need to make it a point that everyone knows HOW Jewish they are and anything else is 'bad' or 'lower' or 'unworthy' of them, etc. What I would LOVE to tell them especially in the topic of Christmas is....how detached are your kids from you that you think celebrating one non jewish holiday one night in their life will destroy their entire efficacy of their Jewishness that you have worked their entire life building for them. I mean, I know my kids will live closer to our teachings and may stray from time to time but I expose them to a lot of different things and welcome conversation and explanation.

It's just a move to cast a wider net of voters. don't get your hopes up. Most of the anarchists I know, including myself don't participate in voting. Honestly, if I wanted to hear more of any candidate I would donate to their campaign but I donate to FDR to keep people who are NOT running for office to share their views on how problems should be solved, etc. I think FDR is unique and should stay that way. Sorry, but Infowars is just the 'independent' version of MSM using same tactics. We are trying to win the long con with ethical philosophy, not the short term battle

oh gosh. I know. This is more on the gossip side but the father, about 2 years ago was going on about being in a McDonalds in Israel and they asked him if he wanted cheese on his hamburger. I have to fill you in on a detail: There are several ways or variations Jews keep 'kosher'. Not mixing meat with cheese is one. Not eating pork, shellfish and certain birds is another,etc and of course eating only food that has a rabbi stamp of approval of KOSHER. lol So some mix and match these standards to their lifestyle and some go all out. Some even have seperate dinnerware for meals served with meat and if you have meals served with cheese. Some don't eat cheese for 6 hours after they have eaten meat (not even milk in coffee) or vice versa (won't eat meat for 6 hours after eating cheese) and of course.... this is all changing every few years because the high rabbis change it for a LOT of money. it's stupid and trivial but..the meat and cheese thing is in their bible so many people follow it. Most of the people I hang around it eat like a normal human being and not like an OCD idiot. If you can afford it, some will have 2 kitchens or a huge kitchen with seperate everything. 2 refrigerators...one for meats and the others for milk items, 2 sets of diningware stored in separate cabinets, etc. So if you have a kosher restaurant you either don't serve meat or you don't serve cheese (never together) or you have the 2-kitchen open. It's bonkers. Anyway, the wife shared how they switched their dining ware at home to glass because the rabbis now 'approve' that glass can be for both because you can see if it's dirty (in case there is a spec of meat when you want to serve cheese for the next meal) and it's more sterile than ceramic or whatever. Now I am sure when things like the Plague were killing off Europe, this type of sanitary OCD helped save a LOT of people's lives....especially the Jews but people do it like robots now without any practicality to it. So, with all of that in mind, the hubby went to a McDonalds in ISrael and was offered cheese. So, there ARE Kosher McDonalds in Israel and non-kosher. Kosher would mean they don't serve dairy or, they have a separate kitchen to serve icecream and what-not or their cheese is a non-dairy based substance that resembles cheese. (fucking confused yet? ) lol The nonkosher are like normal but still is'nt the same menu as the US but the Arabs usually go to this McDonalds since they don't have this meat/dairy complex. He is telling me this story and freaking about about how DARE this employee ask him about the cheese and bla bla bla. I stood there wondering if I was being punked because I was still waiting for the punchline or to be punched in the face which would have probably felt better than listening to his rant. He told me how to demanded to speak ot the manager about this violation and how dare a McDonalds employee IN ISRAEL, mind you, think to even ask someone if they want cheese on their hamburger...ON THEIR HAMBURGER! Are we men or are we beasts!!!!?? lol I had to stop him and told him, "you know, I sort of get where you are coming from but wasn't he honoring your unspecified preference as a stranger by asking you before he slaps on a slimy peace of cheese?" He totally went on as if I didn't make a statement. He was ranting about this as if someone stole his firstborn. I finally asked him which McDonalds he was referring to (because there aren't many) and the one he was referring to wasn't even kosher but this is how self-entitled this guy is. I hate that he's American too because no one in the villages take him seriously. he gives AMericans AND Jews a bad name. gawd. he's awful. Now, when all of this stuff came up with his son, it brought this story back to my mind and why I'm sort of glad I didn't touch it this time. I will next time if need be. But it made me realize that the dad told me that story specifically for a reason. He didn't tell that story to the Israelis /Jews that were around us. He only told me, it's because I am not Jewish. It was an 'assertion' tactic. So I sort of connected the dots of how his son has this 'cluelessness' that there may actually be non-Jews amongst them and even if...no sensitivity or forethought is needed because their preferences come first. IN his mind. Again....this guy and their extremists ally has shown me everything I need to know. I have already cut off the other family with a formal discussion of my inentions and boundaries. It may come to that with this family if any more of these instances occur. ok sorry for the ramble, just wanted to share to vent and sort of bring context.

FYI I tried to vote UP on all of your responses but the daily quota for positive votes is like 2 lol so... anyway, thank you all for your feedback. I do agree kids are sponges in a nurturing environment. I feel like, after going through in my head and reading some of this feedback, if I would have approached it in the 'against me' argument, it would have triggered panic in the parents and even if I would have been able to get some good philosophical points out, it would have been a stressful situation on the kids which would inhibit (not totally block) but inhibit them from absorbing it. That's the tricky thing, I feel is that if bringing philosophy to other people's kids creates a BAD or stressful experience to them, then they will naturally turn away from it in the future. I would rather pass on an opportunity rather than it be used and the kid rejects it because daddy's bothered, etc. I hope that makes sense. I have a good sense about people and I know the mother would talk over the boy in order to 'save face' and back peddle and the father would have made condescending remarks and sort of 'escalate' which would stress me out but would have stressed his kids (and mine) out and then I feel philosphy would be seen as the demon by the kids who need to hear it the most. However I am very confident if it occurs again in a different context with the same family or a stranger, I feel more prepared and grounded to field the situation effortlessly.

Thanks. your perspective seems right on the money. I like how you said since he blurted it out it sort of seems like this is not controversial or has ever been challenged to him. That is right on the money of how I felt in the moment. He represents a minority of 2 families in our area, literally but it's still sad that people still behave like that. I liked your suggestion of just sort of asking questions like, 'how do you know if he's a bad man'. I think my hypothetical conversation in my head would have made it too 'personal' which would put the parents on the defensive. I also assessed the risk of being ostrasized as a result of this. honestly, if these people are good friends with the absolute extremists who are banned frrom everyone else, I think I'm safe. I have a LOT of allies in our area and have earned a lot of respect in my few years living/working here. I do a lot for and with the community, especially the children so even if I'm at odds with this family, I don't feel it's any lost or risk to me and definintely not my children. People ADORE my kids (peaceful parenting baby!!!! YAY!!!) I did think about confronting the parents at a later time, away from the kids to at least express my experience of the conversation. Right now it's been a long holiday (Hanukkah) and it's sort of like the more time that passes, the pettier it may come off, not saying my grief is petty or anything. The father (American) will be a douche about it. This I can guarantee. The mother will be empathetic but not sure it would result in any action. AGain, in any case I barely have interaction with them. So it it worth causing a fuss when I already don't see them, you know? That's why I'm always torn. But, I do feel more prepared for next time, in case. I think I will go with your approach and help him think. Thanks so much!

I want to briefly share a little background and a recent experience and get your thought. I live in a very VERY tiny village in Israel. There are maybe 200 people in my village. 1 mile away there is another village with even fewer people. Beyond that, there is no one for about a 40 mile radius. So.... we are in a bubble. It's tight nit, no police, self-governed for the most part but there are families who don't get along and such but it's a bonded community as well. There is 1 family who has been ostracized by most because of their extremist views and behavior. This extremists family has only 1 ally. The 'ally' is a family with an American husband and an Israeli-British wife. I am not only non Jew in the community, besides my kids. There were a few other non-Jews who came decades ago but they converted to reform Judiasim just to speed up their immigration process. Concidentally I don't know the 'ally' family very well but over time I sort of got the feeling they were on the very conservative/extreme side (conservative does not necessarily equate to American political definitions...some yes and some no). Anyway, last weekend, out of the blue they invited us for dinner at their house. We graciously accepted. I have never had a bad encounter with them so I don't mind getting to know people better until they show me a reason not to (case in point their 'ally the extremists'). The night was going very well, dinner was exceptional and it was enjoyable. The kids were playing well together, etc. The dad (the American) is apparently an exceptional cook so he was discussing particular cooking shows that he enjoys watching. The son chimed in providing more details about one particular show his father likes the best. I was not familiar with the show but listened to his opinion. The boy said in the end, "but he's a bad man.". I was stunned by this especially after they praised his cooking show etc. I asked why is he a bad man. The boy (who is 11 years old BTW), said, "he cooks with bacon and that makes him a very bad man." I am not one to hold my tongue but this was quite startling to me in terms of how to handle it. I swallowed my tongue and it's been bugging me since because it was a missed opportunity. In my mind, I replay it like this: Boy: he's a bad man because he cooks with bacon." me: is he Jewish? boy: No. Me: So anyone who eats bacon is bad? boy: Yes. Me: I am not Jewish and I eat bacon. My husband is Jewish and he eats bacon, our children are not jewish and they have tried bacon. Are you saying we too are bad? At this point I would assume the parents (or the mother) would have chimed in to speak 'for' her son to diffuse the awkwardness to which I would have said, "Well, he seems old enough to have this opinion for himself or learned from you. Even if it were learned from another, no one challenged it when he said it which is passive permission/acceptance." I know if that would have went down, I would have had to leave immeidately. Not because they would have asked me but because that level of teaching of intolerance and not judging ppl by their character to kids turns my stomach and I could no longer be in their presence. But that's not what happened. I kept my mouth shut because I couldn't decide in such a short spontaneous moment if it would have been helpful to anyone to challenge an 11 year old in front of his entire family and mine. Thoughts?

I am perplexed how one can circle the square of I'm voting and against the initiation of force. When you cast your ballot it is for someone who, if they win, will require taxes from the masses and force to uphold the existing laws and standards plus any new ones. Now, if I do not vote, that will happen anyway but at least I am not voluntarily participating in the charade as if any candidate can take away the use of force. Not even if Ron Paul or Rand Paul was president. They STILL need force via taxation and military and private schools etc for there to be an election and presidency and they need people to vote to keep the force machine working non-stop, 24/7/365. How does voting take away force exactly?

And again. I moved overseas and had to start all over in the friend category. 4 years in and i'm still lonely. I get along with alot of people and enjoy their company but to date no real 'friends' I feel I can trust or rely on . Still keeping my options open and hope alive. With that said, you and your husband haven't been good friends to one another so it's unrealistic that you will find any quality friends before you and your hubby sort this out. Focus on your marriage. Remember how to make each other laugh again and connect even in small ways and then you will have the standard to which to measure up any new potential friend matches. Because any friend you seek out now or meet now will only fill superficial voids of emotional connection from the person you are suppose to be the MOST connected to. So....marriage first, friends later. Don't do what you say your hubby did to you by putting his mother above all. don't put the pressure of an outside person (male friend or future potential friend) ahead of fixing your marriage. correction: I posted a prior message with more details and it wasn't immediately posted because it needed to be reviewed (don't worry.. .I have a good reputation!) lol And then this one posted immediately which was supposed to be after the prior message. So....if that caused any confusion, you know why.

I am very sorry to hear about your challenges. I am very happy that you are both in counseling! I can relate to some as I also moved overseas back to my husband's homeland. If you don't mind I'll just sort of point out some 'knee jerk' items that popped out on me and then put more thought. I hope that doesn't sound attacking but I noticed with my friends, when we have open and honest conversation, to try to be objective, we point out which parts of the story 'hit' us first when hearing it and then work from there. So, let's give it a go. The part where you explained that your husband is jealous of you and your male friend's relationship. I can totally understand that you have an emotional connection with the friend and cannot blame your husband for those feelings. There is such a thing as an emotional affair and it's equally destructive, if not voiced openly and honestly with your spouse. Your 'friend', I'm afraid is not a friend if he is encouraging you to get a divorce. Look, I am a happily married woman with 2 children, so I think it's safe to say that I have no desire nor chance to have sex with you. (ok..stop laughing..I'm serious!) and I don't know you personally nor have established a deep emotional connection to you as you have with your male friend but hear me out..... I would never encourage you to get a divorce until you have both put in the serious effort of counseling and self awareness your marriage, you both as individuals deserve. The fact that this man you call a 'friend' is jumping to the 'result' of a divorce is for HIS self interest. He may have some valid and true points about your husband but, you may not be a saint either. AGain, maybe you are an usually these situations have 2 guilty parties. I have some questions....they are more for you to answer for yourself but feel free to share as much as you feel comfortable with. You stated that your MIL (mother in law) came to you and your husband put her before you and the marriage. If she is in dire need, I can imagine he was also putting her above himself? Was the marriage already in trouble or showing signs of weakness before/during the care of his mother? Did you offer to lighten the load of caring for his mother? Helping him help her? Was the decision to take her in and care for her discussed prior, was a mutual agreement or a 'we are married, she's my mother, there's no discussion' type situation? When you sought out the male friend, did you express that to your husband? Were you upfront from the beginning about your needs and desires? 'Honey, I feel lonely, i need friends, this man feels like a friend and listens to me...etc" Not syaing he would have been like, 'GREAT! carry on then good wife." but at least it would have been an opportunity for expressing your feelings and concerns and an opportunity for him to take them seriously or dismiss them. My suggestion...at the very LEAST, while you are working on your marriage and in counseling, STOP ALL contact with the male friend. I'm sorry, I nkow you still think he's your friend and this will be the test. Tell him, "Friend, I am trying to work on my marriage. My hubby has flaws, I have flaws. you only point out my hubby's flaws and it's creating a lot of stress and anxiety in me. I don't want that to create resentment in me towards you and if my husband has at least taken the biggest step he could in finally agreeing to see counseling, that I have been asking him to do, then I and he deserve my full, our full attention on the matter and our connection at the time being is a huge distraction and source of confusion and stress. I don't know what the result will be but when I feel I can contact you again I will only if you can focus on me and my LIFE and all the good and bad in it and not just what you perceive as bad." If he says, 'wow..that is difficult to hear but you are a dear friend and I would never want to impose any negative feelings or experiences on you, etc, etc, etc" then he is truly a friend. If he says, "what? you have got to be kidding me. What a jerk. I can't believe you would give in to that fake, lying, bastard, etc etc etc." then you know he is just trying to get the satisfaction of stealing you away from another male before your hubby puts his seed in you and have you all to himself which shows what a selfish, egotistical jerk your 'friend' is. I say ALL of this having gone through something very similar but in reverse. It was my husband having emotional affairs and me becoming more cold and distant and resentful. It also took a terrible thing to happen before my husband snapped out of it enough to agree to therapy. We went, and were more honest with each other and things have turned around and gotten better for us in the past year. I breath a sigh of relieve everyday I wake up with him. I was ready to go back to the US with my kids and never look back. What a terrible mistake that would have been for all of us. Anyway but you cannot have ANY distractions or temptations during this process. NONE. A good friend will absolutely understand that. A manipulator will not. Best of luck and success however that will look in the end.

Me too. Alex Jones is an Obvious gate-keeper. Same with (or was) John Stewart for the left and Bill Maher. for the pundits and comedians they laugh and jest at issues until the masters say it's 'ok' to take it seriously and then they do...after it's too late to do anything about it in any significant way. I suspect Adam Kokesh is also controlled opposition or just a gate keeper by accident, he's a hard one to pin down. Either way I find him a TERRIBLE representative of any liberty movement because he uses provocation. What I like about the ethical philosophical approach is that Stefan demostrates understanding and empathy of human behavior...even the neurotic mind puzzles we are conditioned into. But knowing that, helps in approach to discussing difficult issues. Adam Kokesh has a habit of just 'shocking' and startling people which is really twisted and counter productive to bringing in fresh minds of reason. People like these only appease those who already agree with them. Alex uses MSM tactics and slaps on a 'indy' label. He is also skillful in his craft. My problem with the libertarian movement and those like it is they wrap themselves in the 'we are on the sidelines watching the game' and laughing at the left and right as if they are a part from it. They pride on being objective and factual etc and they get stuck in this and Alex is the perfect 'icon' to keep them lured and attached. I got so tired of his hypersensationalism that I started searching elsewhere and thank god because it was exhausting and repetitive but it keeps some in a confirmation bias and stops their rational thinking but coaxes them into believing they are still thinking.

Gross. This could not be more collectivist. Get YOUR people. Um...I thought we were a family of one, so if we say the tribe of 'Americans'...then it is responsibility of Americans. If its violence in the tribe of 'California' then those people need to deal with their violence. If it's the tribe of San Bernadino...so on and so forth. I get that people in their own 'group' have a better chance of solving problems within that group but that doesn't automatically exempt so-called outsiders from taking part in healing, educating, etc. Have people forgotten the DC Sniper? Black Muslim & Son? Have people forgotten the Live TV shooter? (I forgot his name)...a black man. Ohhhhh..that's right. I forgot. It's white people fault when white people shoot up others AND it's white people's fault when black people shoot up others, because RACISM. All the shootings and murders in S. Chicago and Detroit.... yeah....get it together white folk! smh. I can't even....

lol. I wouldn't be too hard on Will torbad. I sort of get what he is saying....not to put words in his mouth, so tell me if I am off base, please, Will. But I've gone through so many 'transitions' in my life and shed so many ideologies etc that I have found my peace with anarco-capitalism but still find it hard to 'settle in' if that makes sense. I've been on the 'mental move' for so long it feels unnatural to sort of found the sweet spot...ethical philosophy but it's nice. With THAT being said, one of the symptoms I have and have always had is this hyper-sensitivity to collectivism. Even 'line dancing' or those group dancing things you see at weddings and parties gives me the creeps. Mass groups standing for the national anthem makes me VERY uneasy if I am among it. Maybe it's me or maybe there is something too it of how the small things add up to the larger collectivist tragedies. From the Macarena to Mass murder the collectivists' leap. lol Anyway, I would also love the chance to meet anyone but I would never participate in a 'convention'. I like things to happen more organic/ Meaning, connect one on one and meet people that way. I know some people are the opposite and there is no right or wrong about it. I steer away from mass organized group meetings of sorts. So again, this is not a judgement on the idea, of course people are free to associate how and when and with whom they want, I just wanted to give more depth to why I can resonate with Will's brief comment.

And who is to say that the Jihadists are true believers? I could go around leaving a bloody trail behind me and claim I am the most purest form of Belief XYZ and everyone would take my word for it? I know this is a teeter-totter thought and I am trying to work through the logic of it but we have all heard that not all Muslims are terrorists. And that is a true statement. But currently, all conventional terrorists are Muslim. Now, I live in the Middle East and one event that occurred just over a year ago really stuck out in terms of this 'they are true believers'. That is: In Palestine, a young man devoted his life to studying the Koran. He was devoted to his congregation, etc. His community and religious community noticed he was becoming more and more extreme and they ostracized him. They kicked him out of the congregation, his family denounced him, etc. And in their culture..when you are ostracized...YOU ARE OSTRACIZED...this is not just 'unfriending' on FB. lol After that he went out and killed a bunch of Jews in the name of his 'devotion to his religion'. Now..... who was more Muslim? Who was the better believer? Him or his congregation? And of course it's never news when a congregation does this...only when one of them goes out and murders a bunch of people. So it's hard to know how often this actually occurs. My concern is the same concern when say, when kids act out and people say.... 'oh they are just being kids...' or 'oh...that's just the age'. And My reply is, no...it's because everyone walks around with that excuse and doesn't teach them otherwise. If we go around saying...oh...that's just their belief...it's borderline deterministic. I think that's why we should ask more.. ok, the guy who kills and the guy who rejects those who kill...who is being more true to Islam?

Hello all! I have listened to the podcasts about the Paris attacks and immigration etc. I remember Stefan pointed out that refugees, by very definition must relocate to the nearest safe zone and must return when stability is established. I wanted to go back and find the source for that can can't remember which podcast this was in. If anyone has sources on this, I would be grateful to have. With that said, is this the 'international community' definition and terms/legal language? Are their caveats of countries receiving refugees/migrants from countries they are currently at war with? or is that sort of an optional preference? Thanks!

I too get annoyed by the 'religion of peace', regardless of which religion claims it. I will say this. If we look at the geopolitical canvas and the US foreign policy, you and I see that subjectively, from 'within'. We have a lot of the caveats and contexts and objections etc regarding these policies and actions. How does the Muslim 'religion of peace see it? Well it IS an important question because they are on the receiving/working end of our foreign policy. They don't see US Military. They see Christian-nation supporting a Christian president supporting a Christian military. Because they live in religious-states they only see the world as a religious spectrum. I JUST had this conversation with someone this morning, so it's interesting you posted this. Anyway, Christians speak about peace and the more you follow the bible in Christianity the more peaceful you become and the more you follow the bible in Islam the more violent you becomes, etc. I am sure there is truth to that but again, in geo political terms, if you look at our forieign policy and how the 'outside word' receives it, it looks VERY violent, of course. And the same with Muslims. To them, preaching to their own choir is a lot of peaceful, bonding, tribal stuff. but on the outside there is a lot of deadly bloodshed. So it'sa matter of how much people are willing to hold their nose or look away. I think my compassion in the Muslim plight comes with their own hopelessness of the situation. As someone pointed out it's death if they leave their religion. Can I really judge someone for not taking the 'leap of faith' when literally their life is at stake? I get it...in our history many DID take that leap and each death moved the needle closer to religious freedom and there are those who have sacraficed their life in Islam (not bombers) who stood up for human rights, etc. But If I am going to hold each Muslim accountable for not risking death then I too need to hold myself accountable on what I am willing to sacrafice for what is right. I mean, getting into philosophy and such has done a lot of good but it's not life threatening. It has caused some discomforts along the way the quickly turned into rewards in the long run. But what in the world can I do that would putmyself at EQUAL risk with less immediate results as a Muslim would have to go through to leave and outright denounce their religion etc. Again, this doesn't mean they should get a free pass. I put pressure on Muslims all of the time (I live in the Middle East and connect with people around the world on these topics) But I think the quicker we remove the 'religous' element when violent acts occur (you forfeit your religion, depsite what you claim, as soon as you commit a violent crime against another) the quicker we can sort this out. It's a step towards ostriscism. In Palestine a man was getting into extremism and was ostracised by his Mosque and Muslim community. After they tossed him out he committed a terror act that killed some jews. Who acted more Muslim in that scenario? The Mosque community or the terrorists?