Israpundit Digest

Blog Traffic

Pages

Pages|Hits |Unique

  • Last 24 hours: 28,187
  • Last 7 days: 160,261
  • Last 30 days: 559,105
  • Online now: 54
fabricant de lanterneaux

Chit Chat

Recent Comments

Sponsors

.

Sponsor

.

Dry Bones
Dry Bones

Advertisments

.
”souvenirs”

Monthly Archives

December 2014
S M T W T F S
« Nov    
 123456
78910111213
14151617181920
21222324252627
28293031  

Archives

LIVE HEADLINE NEWS FEEDS
THERE IS NO DIPLOMATIC SOLUTION

SUPPORT ISRAPUNDIT

 Donate USA  Donate
ISL
 Donate
CAN
  • December 21, 2011

    Hanukkah for Dummies Dhimmis

    by Bill Levinson

    Hanukkah is often called “the Jewish Christmas” because it takes place at about the same time of year. There is in fact a very strong connection between the two holidays; had it not been for the events that Hanukkah commemorates, there would be no Christmas. Hanukkah is about standing up to those who menace one’s home, family, or way of life as opposed to singing Kumbaya with them.

    We have often pointed out that science fiction and fantasy societies are based on real human societies, and the one in Battlestar Galactica is no exception. We suspect that it is an alternate history in which Michael Lerner of Tikkun.org and Eric Yoffie of the United “American” “Hebrew” Congregations (now the Union for “Reform Judaism”) were in charge of the Jewish people when the Greeks demanded that the Jews worship the Greek idols. As stated by Yoffie at the Million Mom March rally in 2000,


      We’re going to find out who’s getting NRA funds, and benefiting from NRA ads, and we’re going to vote for the other guy. The American people, I believe, are ready for a leader who will take on the fanatics and support sensible gun control. Controlling guns is not only a political matter, it is a solemn religious obligation. Our gun-flooded society has turned weapons into idols, and the worship of idols must be recognized for what it is-blasphemy.

    With “Jewish” leadership like this, of course, the Maccabees (who would probably have been jailed by the Yoffie-led Hebrews for owning unlicensed and unregistered swords) would have lost the war, and the ex-Jews would then have ended up worshiping genuine honest-to-the-gods graven images. The result would have been a space-faring civilization like that in Battlestar Galactica, where spaceship pilots carry little Greek idols to which they pray on a regular basis. Jesus would then have been an idol-worshiper like everyone else, and the Christian religion would have never existed.

    Hanukkah is therefore about defending one’s home, family, and country: a concept totally repugnant to the Kumbaya-singers. The war between the Maccabees and the Greeks was only the first in which Jews had to fight for their survival.

    Two thousand or so years later, Minutemen used privately-owned firearms in the American War of Independence to create a country with freedom of religion. Many Jews emigrated from Europe and came to America so they could practice Judaism without having to worry about pogroms by Inquisitions, Cossacks, and the like.

    In 1943, Jews in the Warsaw Ghetto revolted against the Nazis. “The first armed resistance occurred when a 17- year-old [idolator and fanatic per Eric Yoffie] named Emily Landau flung a grenade into a cluster of SS men from a rooftop on Gesia Street, killing or wounding a dozen of them. The SS promptly assaulted the building with submachine guns blazing, only to be met by a volley of return fire that felled four or five Germans and drove the rest back in disorder. Emily Landau was bending down to recover a pistol from a slain SS officer when she was struck by a bullet fired by a German rifleman covering his comrades’ retreat. [She died trying to recover an “idol,” which proves her a fanatic, right, Mr. Yoffie?] The first to fight, she was also the first to die” (Jon Guttmann, “Genocide Delayed”).

    In 1947, Jews founded the Nation of Israel in the face of immense hardships. Its Arab neighbors invaded so the “idolators and fanatics” fought back desperately with whatever firearms they could buy, beg, borrow, or steal. If it had been up to Yoffie and the Union of “American” “Hebrew” Congregations, the Arabs would have overrun the Jews and thrown them into the sea. (Recommended viewing: “Cast a Giant Shadow” with Kirk Douglas as Col. Mickey Marcus.)

    Physical cowardice and elitism are the elephants in the gun controllers’ living room, the ones that everyone knows about but no one wants to acknowledge. Ownership of a weapon requires the implicit acceptance of the idea that one may have to fight and possibly die to protect oneself or those for whose safety one is responsible: an idea that is repugnant to the typical gun control supporter or Kumbaya-singer (and the two usually go hand in hand).

    This position is reinforced by the fact that some societies (e.g. feudal Japan, Polish Commonwealth) actually required their gentry to carry or at least own weapons, as an explicit symbol of their responsibility to defend that society. We therefore recommend that the gun control movement replace its handgun with a red line through it with a white feather. We recommend, in fact, that gun registration and confiscation advocates send one another white feathers by way of greeting, perhaps on September 30 (the anniversary of Neville Chamberlain’s Munich agreement with Adolf Hitler).

    There is meanwhile a bumper sticker that says, “Free men own weapons, slaves don’t.” It would be more precise to say, “Slaves are ISSUED weapons, free people OWN them.” Many countries with strict gun control laws conscript their subjects into their armies, where they are issued weapons, and this practice dates to antiquity. The ancient Greeks employed Scythian slaves as police, whose tasks included rounding up negligent citizens who failed to show up for a public vote. Turkish Janissaries were the property of the state, albeit sufficiently privileged that many parents hoped their sons would be taken to serve as Janissaries. The Greek citizen, on the other hand, was not only permitted to own weapons but was in fact expected to show up armed with his own weapons during time of war. Service as a hoplite or armored infantryman was therefore the privilege of those who could afford the costly armor; lesser men were slingers, archers, and so on. A Polish szlachta or nobleman was similarly required to present himself along with his personally owned horse and weapons for military service. The government paid only for his lances, which were both expensive and expendable. There was a time in England when it was illegal to practice any sport but archery on Sundays, because the kings wanted a ready supply of longbowmen in case there was a war. The rulers in question obviously did not fear assassination or “voting from the rooftops” because a longbowman was quite capable of taking somebody out at well over 200 paces, and Queen Elizabeth’s speech at Tilbury says emphatically that she did not fear weapons in the hands of her loyal subjects.

    These precedents leave little doubt as to the Founding Fathers’ interpretation of the Second Amendment; the right to keep and bear arms was already, and in countries other than the United States, instrumental to a nation’s possession of a strong militia. It emphatically did not refer to a National Guard (an institution that had yet to be invented) whose members were issued weapons. We are truly amazed that four Supreme Court Justices including Ruth Bader Ginsberg had a problem with this elementary concept that is easily understandable by anybody with even a high school mastery of civics and the English language.

    The bottom line was stated in a movie about the life of Jesus: “Those who live by the sword kill those who have no swords and go on living.” History’s most vicious conquerors and genocidal maniacs have indeed lived quite well by the sword unless and until they picked a fight with the wrong people, who invariably also had swords as opposed to flowers and peace signs.

    Some gun control supporters are, however, former police officers and soldiers; people who are obviously not afraid to bear arms. Their position is apparently that of elitist medieval overlords who wanted a monopoly on the means of violence. There were times when feudal Japan banned commoners from owning even knives. not to control crime, of which there is relatively little in Japanese society, but to prevent the commoners from defending themselves against sword-wielding samurai. Medieval knights similarly hated the crossbow, which allowed a commoner to shoot even the bluest-blooded nobleman from his saddle.

    Finally we have elitist cowards like Rosie O’ Donnell and the late Ted Kennedy. Both employed armed bodyguards while demanding strict gun laws for commoners. Elitists want a monopoly on the means of violence, and cowards are unwilling to bear arms themselves. Niccolo Machievelli wrote a long time ago that you cannot pay a man enough to die for you, but O’ Donnell and Kennedy apparently believe otherwise. (We add in 2011 that former Governor Rod Blagojevich of Illinois is now one more convicted felon who doesn’t want honest people to own guns. We add in 2009 that gun control advocate Bobby Rush, D-IL, also is a common criminal and a former member of an organization, the Black Panthers, that advocated the murder of police officers.)

    On a larger scale, the Kumbaya-singers want to disarm the world’s democracies to avoid threatening tin-pot dictatorships like North Korea and Iran. The Kumbaya-singers think it’s fine and dandy for those dictatorships to have the means of killing millions of innocent people, because they assume that Kim Jong Il and Mahmoud Ahmadinejad are Kumbaya-singers just like Jimmy Carter and themselves. This is of course a manifestation of their personal cowardice, because they are afraid to even think that Kim Jong Il and Mahmoud Ahmadinejad might actually set off a nuclear weapon in New York City or Los Angeles. As Herman Kahn wrote of nuclear war, refusal to think about the unthinkable makes the unthinkable not only thinkable, but likely.

    A large number of Christians are starting to point out that Christmas is not about shopping malls, plastic Santas, and so on. It is past time for Jews to remember what Hanukkah is really about, and it has very little to do with anything the Jewish Left represents.

    Eric Yoffie's Special Torah

    Share Button
  • Posted by Bill Levinson @ 6:58 pm | 21 Comments »

    21 Comments to Hanukkah for Dummies Dhimmis

    1. yamit82 says:

      Leave it to levisnon to turn Chanukah into a Universal justification for pro firearms. You managed to get into the article all of your historical pets, the Christians, the brave American revolutionaries, the stupid polaks and even Eric Yoffie.

      Pls. Note Chanuka victory did not bring Jewish sovereignty but only autonomy and in the end it was those same Maccabees who invited Rome to come to Judea to protect the Jews from the Greeks. They came they saw and they conquered, the rest is history.

      Hostorically you miss the real point and that was that the war was a war against Hellenism by some fantatically religious Jews a 22 year civil war ensured with the Zealots defeating the Jewish Helenists sort of like what we have today. The few against the many and the real Jews against the unJews. The real Jews won and Judaism has survived to this day because of them. The cost was very high in Jewish blood on both sides and that’s why the books of the Maccabees were never canonized by the rabbis. So they invented the oil story to change the significance of the events.

      Down with Chanukka

    2. yamit82 says:

      Levinson: Chanuka is not about anything that is not related to the Jewish people and Judaism. It really pisses me off that you use the sacrifice of heroic Jews who fought a non Jewish culture (Hellenism), gentiles and other Jews to preserve their Jewishness and Judaism itself. It’s not about Christians, poles or even Americans and you demean their acts and Judaism itself by your promoting pro gun laws and Killers of Jews down through the centuries. The Maccabees wars were fought by those like me against those like you and your lot lost and will again when the time comes.

      DOWN WITH CHANUKAH – December 15, 1972 Rabbi Meir Kahane Writings (5732-33) (1971-73)
      If I were a Reform rabbi; if I were a leader of the Establishment whose money and prestige have succeeded in capturing for him the leadership and voice of American Jewry; if I were one of the members of the Israeli Government’s ruling group; if I were an enlightened sophisticated, modern Jewish intellectual, I would climb the barricades and join in battle against the most dangerous of all Jewish holidays – Chanukah.

      It is a measure of the total ignorance of the world Jewish community that there is no holiday that is more universally celebrated than the “Feast of Lights”, and it is an equal measure of the intellectual dishonesty and of Jewish leadership that it plays along with the lie. For if ever there was a holiday that stands for everything that the mass of world Jewry and their leadership has rejected – it is this one. If one would find an event that is truly rooted in everything that Jews of our times and their leaders have rejected and, indeed, attacked – it is this one. If there is any holiday that is more “unJewish” in the sense of our modern beliefs and practices – I do not know of it.

      The Chanukah that has erupted unto the world Jewish scene in all its childishness, asininity, shallowness, ignorance and fraud – is not the Chanukah of reality. The Chanukah that came into vogue because of Jewish parents – in their vapidness – needed something to counteract Christmas; that exploded in a show of “we-can-have-lights-just-as-our-goyish-neighbors” and in an effort to reward our spoiled children with eight gifts instead of the poor Christian one; the Chanukah that the Temple, under its captive rabbi, turned into a school pageant so that the beaming parents might think that the Religious School is really successful instead of the tragic joke and waste that it really is; the Chanukah that speaks of Jewish Patrick Henrys giving-me-liberty-or death and the pictures of Maccabees as great liberal saviors who fought so that the kibbutzim might continue to be free to preach their Marx and eat their ham, that the split-level dwellers of suburbia might be allowed to violate their Sabbath in perfect freedom and the Reform and Conservative Temples continue the fight for civil rights for Blacks, Puerto Ricans and Jane Fonda, is not remotely connected with reality.

      This is NOT the Chanukah of our ancestors, of the generations of Jews of Eastern Europe and Yemen and Morocco and the crusades and Spain and Babylon. It is surely not the Chanukah for which the Maccabees themselves died. Truly, could those whom we honor so munificently, return and see what Chanukah has become, they might very well begin a second Maccabean revolt. For the life that we Jews lead today was the very cause, the REAL reason for the revolt of the Jews “in those days in our times.”

      What happened in that era more than 2000 years ago? What led a handful of Jews to rise up in violence against the enemy? And precisely who WAS the enemy? What were they fighting FOR and who were they fighting AGAINST?

      For years, the people of Judea had been the vassals of Greece. True independence as a state had been unknown for all those decades and, yet, the Jews did not rise up in revolt. It was only when the Greek policy shifted from mere political control to one that attempted to suppress the Jewish religion that the revolt erupted in all its bloodiness. It was not mere liberty that led to the Maccabean uprising that we so passionately applaud. What we are really cheering is a brave group of Jews who fought and plunged Judea into a bloodbath for the right to observe the Sabbath, to follow the laws of kashruth, to obey the laws of the Torah. IN A WORD EVERYTHING ABOUT CHANUKAH THAT WE COMMEMORATE AND TEACH OUR CHILDREN TO COMMEMORATE ARE THINGS WE CONSIDER TO BE OUTMODED, MEDIEVAL AND CHILDISH!

      At best, then, those who fought and died for Chanukah were naïve and obscurantist. Had we lived in those days we would certainly not have done what they did for everyone knows that the laws of the Torah are not really Divine but only the products of evolution and men (do not the Reform, Reconstructionist and large parts of the Conservative movements write this daily?) Surely we would not have fought for that which we violate every day of our lives! No, at best Chanukah emerges as a needless holiday if not a foolish one. Poor Hannah and her seven children; poor Mattathias and Judah; poor well meaning chaps all but hopelessly backward and utterly unnecessary sacrifices.

      But there is more. Not only is Chanukah really a foolish and unnecessary holiday, it is also one that is dangerously fanatical and illiberal. The first act of rebellion, the first enemy who fell at the hands of the brave Jewish heroes whom our delightful children portray so cleverly in their Sunday and religious school pageants, was NOT a Greek. He was a Jew.

      When the enemy sent its troops into the town of Modin to set up an idol and demand its worship, it was a Jew who decided to exercise his freedom of pagan worship and who approached the altar to worship Zeus (after all, what business was it of anyone what this fellow worshipped?) And it was this Jew, this apostate, this religious traitor who was struck down by the brave, glorious, courageous (are these not the words all our Sunday schools use to describe him?) Mattathias, as he shouted: “Whoever is for G-d, follow me!”

      What have we here? What kind of religious intolerance and bigotry? What kind of a man is this for the anti-religious of Hashomer Hatzair, the graceful temples of suburbia, the sophisticated intellectuals, the liberal open-minded Jews and all the drones who have wearied us unto death with the concept of Judaism as a humanistic, open-minded, undogmatic, liberal, universalistic (if not Marxist) religion, to honor? What kind of nationalism is this for David-Ben-Gurion (he who rejects the Galut and speaks of the proud, free Jew of ancient Judea and Israel)?

      And to crush us even more (we who know that Judaism is a faith of peace which deplores violence), what kind of Jews were these who reacted to oppression with FORCE? Surely we who so properly have deplored Jewish violence as fascistic, immoral and (above all!) UN-JEWISH, stand in horror as we contemplate Jews who declined to picket the Syrian Greeks to death and who rejected quiet diplomacy for the sword, spear and arrow (had there been bombs in those days, who can tell what they might have done?) and “descended to the level of evil,” thus rejecting the ethical and moral concepts of Judaism.

      Is this the kind of a holiday we wish to propagate? Are these the kinds of men we want our moral and humanistic children to honor? Is this the kind of Judaism that we wish to observe and pass on to our children?

      Where shall we find the man of courage the one voice, in the wilderness to cry out against Chanukah and the Judaism that it represents-the Judaism of our grandparents and ancestors? Where shall we find the man of honesty and integrity to attack the Judaism of Medievalism and outdated foolishness; the Judaism of bigotry that strikes down Jews who refuse to observe the law; the Judaism of violence that calls for Jewish force and might against the enemy? When shall we find the courage to proudly eat our Chinese food and violate our Sabbaths and reject all the separateness, nationalism and religious maximalism that Chanukah so ignobly represents? …Down with Chanukah! It is a regressive holiday that merely symbolizes the Judaism that always was; the Judaism that was handed down to us from Sinai; the Judaism that made our ancestors ready to give their lives for the L-rd; the Judaism that young people instinctively know is true and great and real. Such Judaism is dangerous for us and our leaders. We must do all in our power to bury it.

    3. dove says:

      On the second day of Chanukah my true love gave to me …

    4. AreaMan says:

      While Kumbaya is not a Jewish Hanukkah song, it could be. It’s a black American spiritual that means “Come by here” Lord. See what Cecil says about the history of the word…

    5. BlandOatmeal says:

      Wow, Yamit. Is that what they call a rant? There actually is a Jewish Holy Day that’s worse than Chanukkah — Saint Yitzhak’s Week — in honor of Yitzhak Rabin, patron saint of the “Peace Process”.

      I think there’s little hiding the fact, that Chanukkah is a way to give Jewish kids something to do while all their friends are getting Christmas presents. I personally find it convenient, when friends come over and wonder why I don’t have a tree in the house. I pick up my little brass chanukiah, and say, “This is my tree”. That’s really good for re-directing the conversation to sports and the weather.

      I never knew until now, though, that it’s really about gun control. Thank you, Bill, for the insight ;)

    6. Stan Revich says:

      Remember, the first thing EVERY tyrant does when he gains power is disarm the populace. The best guarantee against tyranny is an armed citizenship and a free people willing to fight fir that freedom.

    7. Paul Winter says:

      I am surprised the Bill Levinson who thus far I had only seen writing thoughtfully, has submitted such a silly rant. In Australia, our murder rate with fire arms was a tenth of the rate of the USA on a population basis. That ratio went down further after the Port Arthur massacre when automatic weapons were banned and the government bought back automatic weapons which had been legally purchased. And surprise, surprise, we are a still a free nation and so are our Kiwi cousins across on the other side of the ditch, who have even fewer firearms. In a modern society, where there is adequate policing, the back-woods mentality is inappropriate. The problem is that the USA is awash with guns and far too often the criminals and the crazies are the ones who have them. How to sort that out will be a major American effort, but the sooner that happens the better life in the USA will be. Or take another case: Israel. There is far more danger of terror and there are far fewer people with guns. But perhaps the thing to be seriouly concerned about are rabbis whose religion is politics and who press their politics on others in the guise of religion.

    8. The first act of rebellion, the first enemy who fell at the hands of the brave Jewish heroes whom our delightful children portray so cleverly in their Sunday and religious school pageants, was NOT a Greek. He was a Jew.

      When the enemy sent its troops into the town of Modin to set up an idol and demand its worship, it was a Jew who decided to exercise his freedom of pagan worship and who approached the altar to worship Zeus (after all, what business was it of anyone what this fellow worshipped?)

      I think it went beyond an individual Jew who decided to become a Gentile so he could worship Greek idols. He was obviously a stooge and Judas goat for the Greeks. The Greeks could coerce the Jews, e.g. by killing a woman’s sons for refusing to eat pork, but it was probably better to get some Jews–preferably prominent ones–to act as stooges and Judas goats. The individual in question therefore deserved to be killed, not for “apostasy” but for aiding a foreign enemy.

    9. Europe has gun laws that are as strict or even stricter than Australia’s. Militant Islamic rape gangs now roam at large to do whatever they want to any unveiled women they find.

      It is almost impossible to own a gun in England, and its violent crime rate is higher than that of the United States.

      I also heard that there are militant Islamic gangs in Australia that are into “taking turns” with any unveiled women they fancy. Ah, here is an example: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sydney_gang_rapes

      In my country, however, the jihadist savage understands that it is likely to get a bullet through its primitive brain if it engages in this kind of behavior.

      In a modern society, where there is adequate policing, the back-woods mentality is inappropriate.

      Europe blew its rights under the Social Contract long ago, and so did most jurisdictions in the U.S. when they ruled that the police have no duty to protect any individual citizen. That means, in fact, that there are no gun laws in Europe, or New York, or Los Angeles that anybody has a moral obligation to respect or, as a juror, enforce.

    10. Stuart says:

      When shall we find the courage to proudly eat our Chinese food and violate our Sabbaths and reject all the separateness, nationalism and religious maximalism that Chanukah so ignobly represents?

      Ever read “A Modest Proposal” by Jonathan Swift?

      Kahane represented the opposite of this view. The piece is satire. Remember the phrase: “Every Jew a .22?” Remember the Jewish Defense League of the 70’s?

      Chanukah (rebellion against Hellenists), Purim (redemption of Persian Jews given the right of self defense), Chol Hamoed Pessach (the Warsaw Ghetto Uprising), and Chol Hamoed Sukkot (the clouds of protection against the arrows of the Egyptians and Amalek) are prime range days for me.

      Kol hakavod, Bill Levinson.

    11. Dr. Sanford Aranoff says:

      Americans say that Christians have Christmas, and Jews have Hanukah. It is time for Jews to explain what Hanukah is. It is a commemoration of the victory of Israelis against the powers of international government. Jews are a free people, living in a free land. Jews have always refused to accept the dictates of one-world statist governments. The Exodus from ancient Egypt was a bloody rebellion against a one-world statist government. The government gave food to the people, decided where they can live, and ordered people to work on various projects. The Israelis leaving Egypt were fighting for freedom. By the way, Christian translators incorrectly translated the word as Israelites instead of the correct word Israelis, with the purpose of hiding the identity of the ancient Israelis with modern Israelis.

      The Torah is replete with praises for limited government. For example, Samuel the Seer objected to creating a monarchy, saying the king will take power to himself away from the people. Read the story about King Solomon’s son who refused to lower taxes and the great harm it brought, dividing the country. Think about this, when a government tries to raise taxes, people may revolt. Indeed, in ancient Egypt slaves were controlled by “tax masters”.

      Let us all remember that the American Revolution was based upon these Jewish ideas of freedom from international powers. Benjamin Franklin proposed that the great seal have a picture of the Israelis crossing the Red Sea during the Exodus. The American founding fathers saw the identity of the Jewish struggle against ancient Egypt with their struggle against Great Britain.

      Jews have not always succeeded in their goals for independence. A sad example is the destruction of Israel by the Romans. Hitler understood the Jewish nature of independence, and realized he would not be able to conquer the world as long as Jews were around. The Arabs want to have a one-world government, and know that Jews will not permit it. This is the reason for the hatred.

      In spite of the hardships and deaths, Jews will always light candles for freedom. The menorah is the symbol of Israel. The menorah of Hanukah signifies the desire for freedom will continue and grow. We Jews will never give up our hope and desire for freedom and independence in our country Israel, and will continue to oppose one-world governments that will deny freedom to the people of Israel.

      Happy Hanukah! Think about this when we light the candles. Hanukah is not just songs and gifts of money (Hanukah gelt). It is about freedom from powerful international organizations, with hard cash symbolizing the freedom of the individual.

    12. Dr McCosker says:

      Re the Mohammedan gang rapes in Sydney **seven years ago** (and there have no more such, since [I am Australian, BTW] all those particular perps were caught, and are now in jug), I fail to see how more lenient gun laws could have prevented them. Do 15, 16 or 17 year old girls – that is, girls below the age of legal adulthood, not old enough either to drink or to drive – habitually ‘carry concealed’ in the USA when they go to visit a schoolfriend, or take the train or the bus to or from the malll? Seriously? And although some of these girls were abducted – having been carefully tracked, so as to get hold of them in situations where potential rescuers of any sort, armed or unarmed, were simply *not there* – certain others of these girls were tricked and trapped, under circumstances in which there would have been no heroic Lone Stranger with a gun ready to leap into the fray to defend them. Look carefully at the modus operandi of the Mohammedan rape/ pimp/ ‘grooming’ gangs in the UK. Some of these girls were befriended by Mohammedan girls, and *then* – while visiting their pretty, smiling Muslimah schoolfriends – passed on to the girl’s brothers for further entrapment. How could any ordinary citizen, no matter how well armed, if he happened to pass by, even *know* what was going on when two girls side by side in school uniform go into a house?

      I will add that I grew up in the bush in the 1960s and 1970s. Back then Australian *country* families normally had one or more guns, usually some kind of single-shot rifle, used to control vermin (feral pigs, rabbits) and to put down terminally injured livestock; and potentially capable of being used to defend the household should evil people try to rob or kill. And that is still the case today. Meanwhile, shocking as it may seem to you, many of those of us who live in suburban Australia or in small country towns have never felt any particular *need* to have a gun in the bedside drawer. It just never occurred to us. There was neither an anti-gun nor a pro-gun culture. People in the country had guns because they perceived they needed them – primarily to deal with dangerous critters, not humans. People in the cities and towns – unless they happened to be among the few people who went bush occasionally to hunt duck, or wild pigs, etc (and again, modern Australia doesn’t have a strong ‘gun-hunter’ culture; like my dad and his brothers, most of us seem to prefer to go fishing and this has been the case for a long, long time, it isn’t the result of some insidious propaganda campaign) – just *didn’t feel they needed to have them*.

    13. ArnoldHarris says:

      I’ve always thought a lot better about Chanuka than about Purim.

      Chanuka, according to the ravim, celebrates the miracle of one day’s supply of oil burning continuously for eight days. But what I celebrate it for, in the spirit of the fighting Jewish nation, is that it marks the time when a gang of Jews got together, organized a resistance movement against the Hellenized Syrians who ruled them, and tossed the bastards out on their collective asses. By using armed force; which is something I know, understand and heartily approve of.

      Purim, on the other hand, represents to me just the story of the Persian king’s number one Jewish lover using her influence with her boss-man to hang Haman the Jew-hater and all his sons along with them, and also to provoke a pogrom against Haman’s Jew-hater followers all across the Persian Empire, which was a hell of a lot more significant in about 475 BCE than Ahmedinajad’s present Jew-hating Islamic Republic is today.

      Having some tootsie fuck her way to influence can be useful, I suppose. But it surely doesn’t measure up to the underdog gang beating the shit out of the Capone mob of that era in order to protect their own neighborhood turf.

      You will have to admit that my religious opinions, while not hardly orthodox, at least are original. And if I’m right, maybe haShem sees it the same way I do.

      ——-

      As for Bill Levinson’s take on American gun rights, my response is “amen, brother, all the way”. First off, I’m part of the American gun culture, and I’m damned proud of that. I not only own an AR-15 .223 caliber rifle, two Browning Hi-Power 9mm and one GI Model M1A1 Colt Automatic Pistol, Caliber .45; but I also own two genuine Thompson submachine guns under license of the US Treasury Department. These are Model M1s of the type used in the latter part of World War II, and not the 1922 Thompsons associated with the warring Chicago beer barons of the 1920s and the backwater bank bandits of the 1930s. I get great naches out of shooting these these in the nearby countryside gun-ranges, and I’ve fired off more than 20,000 rounds since the mid 1990s. Moreover, I’m a trained gun-range safety officer, so I know exactly how to handle them safely and shoot them accurately.

      Moreover, I treat gun ownership as a serious political issue concerning citizen rights as part of my American national heritage, which is as important to me as my Jewish national heritage. For many years now, I have served as the election volunteer coordinator (EVC) for the National Rifle Association in the 2nd US Congressional District. Meaning that I help get pro-gun candidates elected and anti-gun candidates run out of office.

      Anybody here who doesn’t like guns? Fine. Just don’t own or carry one. But don’t even try to tell me I can’t have my guns and that I can’t use them for purposes of sports shooting, or if the situation requires, personal protection against anyone who makes the fatal mistake of trying to break into my house.

      Should Jews own guns? You would be the world’s biggest fools if you did otherwise.

      Arnold Harris
      Mount Horeb WI

    14. ArnoldHarris says:

      Bill,

      I never ever have heard of this worm Yaffe. But then, I never have had anything to do with the liberal Jewish synagogs or social groups. When I practice Judaism — which I work at occasionally — its strictly the Orthodox Jewish Lubavichers who attract me to help make a Shabat morning minyan in their local shtiebl in nearby Madison. Matter of fact, on occasion I have loaned one or another of my Browning 9 mm pistols to a couple of the young guys who go to the local Chabad House. One of them proved to be a pretty good shot.

      Don’t let the liberals put you down.

      Arnold Harris
      Mount Horeb WI

    15. yamit82 says:

      Levinson I have demonstrated on other threads to you that no country has statistically more rapes per capita than America and with all those guns in the hands of the public it can’t be demonstrated that they have prevented rapes. If anything a case can be made than many of the rapists used guns to threaten their victims.

      I can see only one ideological reason to allow firearms in the hands of the public and that is to a very small extent it is a check on the power of government. I reiterate a very small extent.

    16. yamit82 says:

      I think it went beyond an individual Jew who decided to become a Gentile so he could worship Greek idols. He was obviously a stooge and Judas goat for the Greeks.

      Ted called you a historian not a fantasizer. The Jew in question based on the historical record was typical and not atypical. Therefore there is no reason to question the text as is from the Book of Maccabees. I realize it conflicts with your world view and as a totally assimilated Jew you would come up with such conspiracy theory Humbug!

      The Greeks could coerce the Jews, e.g. by killing a woman’s sons for refusing to eat pork, but it was probably better to get some Jews–preferably prominent ones–to act as stooges and Judas goats.

      When you had Jews performing very painful and dangerous operations to reverse their circumcisions; I think speaks for itself.

      As I said there was a long bloody civil war that might have cost upwards of a million Jewish lives on all sides, so stuff your theories, the facts are damning enough.

      The individual in question therefore deserved to be killed, not for “apostasy” but for aiding a foreign enemy.

      He deserved to be killed for both reasons as his apostasy led him to aid a foreign enemy. You can’t separate the two in the final analysis as the first always leads to the second. I am for preemption wherever possible. Think of it like preventative medicine. There is in this context national inoculation, ideological spring cleaning, a national cleansing.

      In the end it saved and preserved Judaism.

    17. yamit82 says:

      The war against the Geeks was not fought over mundane rights of personal freedoms or Jeffersonian Democracy (Greek). It was fought to preserve Jewish custom and the rights to be different than the majority culture, to which a majority of Jews had not only adopted but favored over anything particularly Jewish. They even pushed the Greeks to impose by force their culture by way of suppressing Judaism and its practitioners.

      There is some parallels today between the secular and ultra religious in Israel today as well as the almost total assimilation of diaspora Jews.

      Purim a diaspora story, ended with the Jews wiping out some 75 thousand of Haman’s supporters who were to execute his orders against the Jews.

      if the Book of Esther says that he killed seventy-five thousand men that day it means that Haman has a whole party behind him a kind of Persian SS or El Fatah, through which he had intended to implement his final solution. On them Mordechai took his revenge.
      This is a good thing to keep in mind. For, of course, there were people in the ghettoes and in the forests who fought back and took their vengeance. But they came too late. Most of the Jews of Europe were exterminated. This is a good thing to remember — lest once again we be too late. What Mordechai did in Shushan was to set up a Jewish Defense — and Revenge — League. The Book of Esther, which was compiled in Persia, says that he did so with King Ahasuerus’ consent. But who can tell. Queen Esther certainly could not tell the whole truth, how Mordechai had set up this organization long before he got official permission for it, so that it was ready when he needed it. Certainly no democratic regime can suffer in it midst an illegal organization for armed defense. On the other hand — one cannot always rely on the “establishment” and on the police. Sometimes they come too late. Nor can one always rely on the democracy of a city like Shushan.

      Yes every Jew a .22 or better yet an M-16 or Ak-47. They won’t so there will be another repeat of what was. The days of the Jewish diaspora in any event are numbered one way or another. No matter how well armed you might be in the end you will be out manned and out gunned.

    18. yamit82 says:

      But perhaps the thing to be seriouly concerned about are rabbis whose religion is politics and who press their politics on others in the guise of religion.

      Explain what you mean.

    19. I can see only one ideological reason to allow firearms in the hands of the public and that is to a very small extent it is a check on the power of government.

      Here is somebody who agreed with the position you just stated.

      http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Heinrich_Himmler

      Germans who wish to use firearms should join the SS or the SA — ordinary citizens don’t need guns, as their having guns doesn’t serve the State.

      It was of course especially important to this guy that Jews not have guns, a law which was in fact enacted in 1938.

      The purpose of citizens having guns is emphatically not to serve the State (although an armed populace might be useful in helping to deal with foreign or domestic enemies, if the police or army are not immediately available). They are meanwhile quite useful for blowing the heads off Nazis who try to put you into cattle cars, or shooting Musloids who say on the day you declare independence that they are going to drive you into the sea.

    20. yamit82 says:

      Here is somebody who agreed with the position you just stated.

      http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Heinrich_Himmler

      Comparing me to Himmler is demagogic and disingenuous as every country except the USA more or less agrees with me and every government democratic or other is solidly against the proliferation of firearms among the general populations of their respective countries. All countries including the USA regulate personal firearms ownerships and their use. I do not agree that the right to own firearms is a right granted under the 2nd amendment and I submit that were there not such a strong gun Lobby in America personal firearms would have been banned in every state with some exceptions based on demonstrated need. I no longer consider large non military guns of all types a challenge to the authority of the constituted government. I do see guns as a potential danger to the general public and in the hands of the untrained and irresponsible and mentally ill; even 1% of gun owners who may be nuts is a potential if not actual threat to common order, public safety and Law.

      Since I am ideologically and religiously against hunting denying hunters the weapons of the hunt would save millions of animals from a cruel and inhumane death.

      Sport shooting should be confined to clubs where the weapons remain on site at all times.

      Potentially 100-200 thousand crazies running around your country armed is every bit as dangerous to the general society as any Muslim terrorist, and cumulatively possibly even greater.

      I do agree that the public has the right of insurrection and illegal weapons can always be gotten for such a purpose as we see how many are already in the hands of active criminals.

    21. yamit82 says:

      It was of course especially important to this guy that Jews not have guns, a law which was in fact enacted in 1938.

      I doubt seriously he was concerned with Jewish insurrection nor worried about Jews with guns ( an oxymoron ). They self deluded themselves in believing what the Germans told them, many right into the ovens. Thousands of Jews marched to annihilation even when they were guarded by hapless German police and always drunken Ukrainians. The real ugly truth is that those diaspora Jews allowed themselves to be slaughtered like sheep rather than die as humans fighting and taking as many Germans with them as possible.

      The purpose of citizens having guns is emphatically not to serve the State (although an armed populace might be useful in helping to deal with foreign or domestic enemies, if the police or army are not immediately available). They are meanwhile quite useful for blowing the heads off Nazis who try to put you into cattle cars, or shooting Musloids who say on the day you declare independence that they are going to drive you into the sea.

      In the first instance the Nazis had little or no opposition from Poles or other Slaves that were under their control. Most behaved in a similar manner and many of them had personal weapons or access to them unlike the Jews.

      It was the Jews primarily that were the least likely to oppose the Germans with and certainly without firearms. Many if not most of the exceptions survived the Nazis

    Site Membership



    Editor


      Ted Belman

      tbelman3- at- gmail.com

    Search

    Polls

    Why doesn't Bibi want to go "all the way"

    View Results

    Loading ... Loading ...

    MANTUA BOOKS (recommended)




    Tolerism2

    RECOMMENDED BOOKS


    Iran islam


    apes

    LOVE


    Sharing

    mandate4

    Selected Israpundit Articles

    Miscellaneous Info

      All Politic Sites