Israpundit Digest

Support Israpundit


USD

ILS

CAD

Syndication

Blog Traffic

Pages

Pages|Hits |Unique

  • Last 24 hours: 25,180
  • Last 7 days: 25,180
  • Last 30 days: 25,180
  • Online now: 65
Los Angeles SEO
Current Entries

Recent Comments

  • ‘The Temple Mount Has Been Occupied By Hamas’ (90)

    • mar55: @ the phoenix: Something important we could start doing straight away....

    • mar55: @ honeybee: Yo tambien te quiero abejita. Mi mejor amiga. I posted...

    • honeybee: yamit82 Said: I do!!!!! Pheromones , sugar!!!! Leads the Bees to...

    • yamit82: honeybee Said: Yamit82 stinks better then you do, Cutie pie I do? :(...

    • honeybee: dweller Said: . Since when would you ever acknowledge your...

  • The Jewish Question (63)

    • Vinnie: @ honeybee: Ohio.

    • dove: @ M Devolin: Better yet….come join us in Israel. I’ll...

    • M Devolin: Good to hear from you, Yamit. Yes, hope Laura is OK.

    • bernard ross: M Devolin Said: How’s that Yamit fellow? Is he still tougher...

    • yamit82: @ M Devolin: My reply to you in moderation for saying only that I...

  • Can Israel be both Jewish and democratic (272)

    • yamit82: bernard ross Said: (are you being facetious?) Faith is belief that...

    • dove: @ M Devolin: I really missed you too! Almost quit this site a few times!

    • M Devolin: “Because of the golden calf doh doh – ancient...

    • bernard ross: AbbaGuutuu Said: Proof is the evidence of your belief/faith in...

    • dove: @ AbbaGuutuu: Don’t insult my intelligence You seem to totally...

  • ‘For Kerry, Israeli blood is cheaper than American blood’ (4)

    • honeybee: @ bernard ross: Thank you, it is said the are using the incident to...

    • bernard ross: @ honeybee: dont know a lot about this one and nothing about...

    • honeybee: @ bernard ross: You are my “go to guy” on conspiracies....

  • One person can make a difference (11)

    • honeybee: @ Eric R.: I love the manner in which the bureaucratic mind...

    • mickeyobe: Perhaps the Dutch are at last receiving their well deserved just...

Sponsor

Fair Use

This site may contain copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of political, human rights, economic, democracy, and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research, educational, or satirical purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.

LIVE HEADLINE NEWS FEEDS
THERE IS NO DIPLOMATIC SOLUTION

Support Israpundit

USD

ILS

CND

  • October 22, 2012

    A Major Breakthrough at Last with regard to Tenured Treason in Israel

    Breaking News

    By Steven Plaut

    Over this past weekend Israel’s Minister of Education Gideon Saar gave an interview in which he formally called for the firing of Ben Gurion University’s Neve Gordon.  The news story appears in Hebrew in Maariv here:  http://www.nrg.co.il/online/1/ART2/409/939.html and is also in other media.

    Saar is a Minister from the Likud party.  Gordon is the tenured extremist in the Department of Politics at Ben Gurion University who this week is the keynote speaker in a conference in Canada endorsing Arab terrorism against Jews.  Gordon is a vile anti-Semite whose ”academic” career has consisted mainly of churning out Bash-Israel propaganda.  He is the leading voice in Israel calling for a world boycott of Israel.  He regularly denounces Israel as a Nazi-like monstrosity and as an apartheid regime. He writes columns that appear in the Iranian state Holocaust Denying newspaper and on the web sites of Neo-Nazis and Holocaust Deniers.


    In the Maariv report, Saar is cited as mocking the claims by BGU
    president Rivka Carmi that she cannot legally fire Gordon.  Saar, who
    is a lawyer, dismisses the claim.

    The Department of Politics at BGU is an anti-Israel indoctrination and propaganda center which the Israeli Council on Higher Education has called to be closed down.

    This is the first time that an Israeli politician has openly called
    for the firing of an anti-Israel tenured extremist.

    Posted by Ted Belman @ 9:59 pm | 188 Comments »
  • 188 Comments to A Major Breakthrough at Last with regard to Tenured Treason in Israel

    1. yamit82 says:

      @ dweller:

      What is -the purpose of man? “To bend the knee and bow the head and accept the Divine yoke in the way that the Almighty commanded – and then appreciate and hold Him in awe and love (clinging to) Him in a totality of body and soul.

      Berachot 61b: “When Rabbi Akiva was taken out to be executed [for teaching Torah in public, against a Roman decree], it was time to recite the Shema, and as they raked his flesh with iron rakes, he recited it. His students asked him, “Master! Does one’s duty extend that far?” and he responded, “All my life I agonized over the verse, ‘Love the L-rd your G-d… with all your soul’(Deut. 6:5), which means we must love G-d even if He takes our soul. I said, ‘When will I have the opportunity to fulfill this?’ Now that the opportunity has arisen, shall I not fulfill it?”

      (Berachot 33b): “Everything is in G-d’s hands but the fear of G-d: ‘And now, Israel, what does the L-rd your G-d require of you but to fear Him’ (Deut. 10:12).” Without such fear, one cannot possibly achieve holiness, for one’s ego will always take control. Kapish? I doubt it. You are about original sin and Yushka and THE DEVIL!!!

      Without Torah there is no civic order, and without civic order there is no Torah. Without wisdom there is no fear of G-d, and without fear of G-d there is no wisdom. Without knowledge there is no intelligence, and without intelligence there is no knowledge. Without food there is no Torah, and without Torah there is no food. [Mishna Avot 3:20]

      The idea here is that each component of these pairs helps create and completes its counterpart. knowledge is a medium for intelligence in that it makes it possible for us to understand whatever we do understand. It is like saying that if we do not understand the reason, we do not have real knowledge, while, if we have no knowledge, we do not understand the reason, because we understand it only based on our knowledge.

      [Rambam's Commentary on the Mishna], The right path is a knowledge of the whole of intelligence that makes up Torah so that it may be applied through intelligence as knowledge and not as intelligence through knowledge or knowing of it. Torah is a closed system of practical application while at the same time an open ended gateway of knowledge. To choose the right path is to understand this duality as a human misconception of a single divine idea.

      Ben Zoma says:
      Who is wise?
      The one who learns from every person…
      Who is brave?
      The one who subdues his negative inclination…
      Who is rich?
      The one who is appreciates what he has…
      Who is honored?
      The one who gives honor to others…
      (Talmud – Avot 4:1)

      Wisdom belongs to someone who, is open to learning from every person he meets. But you have a direct connection to your god and don’t need to learn from others? You and your direct link are your sole authority and your justification for all you claim to believe.

      Who does G-d praise as having the greatest humility? Moses… Moses,who killed the Egyptian beating a Jew, who stood up to Pharaoh in Egypt, secured the release of the Jewish people, scaled Mount Sinai, spoke to G-d face-to-face, and led the Jews through the desert and to the borders of Israel. How could a man who obviously possessed extraordinary qualities of leadership and strength be described as the humblest who ever lived?

      Who did G-d give the covenant of peace to? Pinchas! The Jewish sages compare the offering of sacrifices on the altar which is a symbol of peace — to the killing (Not murdereing!!) of the wicked. “To teach you, that when the blood of the wicked is spilled, it is as if a sacrifice was offered”. (Tanchuma, Pinchas, 1) For these are the two sides to the peace – remove yourself from evil – do good. There is not one without the other.

      You would call it murder and not killing and the Hebrew language differentiates the two and so does Judaism.

      Then, you are more versed in Christian theology more than Jewish concepts. According to Christianity, human beings are, by their very nature, Evil; and such a fatal congenital stain on their souls cannot be expunged except through their acceptance of Jesus as their Savior. As the Christian Bible declares:

      “As it is written, there is none righteous; no, not one.” (Romans 3:10)

      “Wherefore, as Sin came into the World through one man [Adam], and Death through Sin; and so Death spread to all men because all men sinned [through Adam].” (Romans 5:12);

      “For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive.” (1 Corinthians 15:22)

      Judaism days: “Gen 4:5-7 Is it not so that if you improve, it will be forgiven you? If you do not improve, however, at the entrance, sin is lying, and to you is its longing, but you can rule over it.“Rashi: but you can rule over it: If you wish, you will overpower it. — [from Sifrei Ekev 45, Kidd. 30b]”

      That is why Pinchas was worthy of receiving the peace covenant. For when all the leaders, including Moses and Aaron cried (“and they cried”) from the wicked’s threat, hiding themselves in their tents or in their yeshivas, the younger Pinchas arose, and eradicated the evil. (ecumenically fornicating with a shiksa) True, his grandfather Aaron was a symbol of the love and a pursuant of peace, but evidently he was weaker in the area of uprooting evil. And since there is no peace without the purging of evil, Aaron had to leave the peace covenant for his grandson Pinchas, who was able to integrate both sides of the peace.

      “As long as the wicked rule in the world, so to speak, G-d does not sit on his throne.” (Yilkot Shmoney, Tehilim 47)

      “we Jews cannot possibly accept the postulate that the deity depicted in the “New Testament” and the G-d of Israel are one and the same — (even those who do not worship Jesus as a god) nevertheless pray to the G-d of Israel.” (Rosenblit)

      Now I wonder what your god has to say?

    2. Bernard Ross says:

      dweller Said:

      I’ll tell you what I know from watching such persons as you speak of, and also from common sense:
      Anybody who “can be satisfied and excited with the sound of his own words” would have to have some kind of FEEDBACK to energize him to continue — because, unsupported, that sort of thing falls flat rather quickly.

      We wouldn’t want you to fall flat quickly, are you getting enough support?

    3. Bernard Ross says:

      dweller Said:

      …but that you are naive & unsuspecting as to the enormity of the matter of demagogy.

      What incredible pretension from a legend in his own mind.

    4. yamit82 says:

      @ dweller:

      During December 1945, the focus of the Jewish attacks shifted to RAF airfields, police stations and armories. There was frequent exchanges of fire and some loss of life on both sides. The High commissioner, Lord Gort , left Palestine in November 1945 and was replaced by another British general Sir Allan Cunningham. Cunningham decided to mount a major blow against the IZL and on the 28 to June 1946, 17,000 British troops flooded into Jerusalem to carry out Operation Agatha. The Jewish Agency offices were raided, arms found and the agency shut down, with a large number of Jews suspected of terrorism being arrested. Jewish terrorists soon started planning the a reprisal for Operation Agatha and made plans for the bombing attack on the King David hotel.

      The American media were strongly pro Jewish and very anti British. One Hollywood motion picture Mogul declared in the British press that he had a holiday in his heart every time a British soldier was killed in Palestine. and large sections of the American media echoed this sentiment. At one point early in 1945 Winston Churchill became so irritated with continual American shouting about Palestine that he suggested that since the Americans were so unhappy about the way Britain was handling Palestine, “the best solution would be for them to take the job over themselves, I’m not aware that Britain has to vaunt about this painful and thankless task, he said, and someone else should have their turn and the sooner the better”.

      The British response to the King David bombing was another 48 hour cordon and search, code named Operation Shark. This operation was mounted by the men and 6th Airborne division. The aim of Operation shark was to remove the few remaining hard core terrorists left on the scene. British and American press agencies were quick to take the opportunity to sell more newspapers but the result was to place the British Army in a bad light, as in Aden years later, propaganda pictures of British soldiers seemingly being brutal to women and children were splashed in the world newspapers.

      Truck used by Irgun to hide Kidnapped officers On January the 27th 1945 the first kidnapping took place. Judge Windham was kidnapped from his own courtroom in Tel Aviv . Windham was released when the British government gave in to his kidnappers demands, which was the release of Jewish detainees. On the 18th of June 1946 the kidnappers struck again. This time they held up the British Officers Club in Tel Aviv and took five British officers and one one RAF service man and dragged them to get away cars out side. One of the officers had to be clubbed to subdue him. The object of this raid was to obtain hostages to hold against the two Jews who had been captured in a arms raid at Sarafand in March. Four days later two of the kidnapped officer were released. They said that their captors had not been violent towards them, but they had been kept shackled in chains on their hands and feet. The remaining three officers were held captive for another 12 days. They were released after the two condemned Jews had their sentences commuted. Before releasing them the Jews first chloroformed the three officers. The three officers were then unceremoniously dumped still unconscious, on a street corner in Tel Aviv, where passers by took no notice of their predicament.

      In December 1946, a new twist was added to the story of terror in Palestine. A court sentenced two Irgun youths to a long term in prison and 18 strokes of the birch for taking part in bank robberies. In reprisal the Irgun kidnapped four British soldiers and a Major of the 6th Airborne Division and flogged them.

      British courts now started sentencing Jewish prisoners to death for murder or terrorist acts, such as the terrorist bombing of the British Officers club in Haifa where over 30 people were killed and injured. These men were sentenced for murder and bombings and not for the religious or political beliefs, but the Jews refused to accept this, in their eyes these men were martyrs and the hatred of the British and the bloodshed continued.

      Officers club in Jerusalem ,A typical episode occurred on the evening of the 28 to June 1947 in Haifa when the Astoria restaurant in which a number of officers of the 6th Airborne Division were dining was attacked. Two Jewish terrorists in a taxi in drew up opposite the restaurant and fired Thompson sub machine guns through the windows at the Offices inside. Captain Kissane of the 9th parachute battalion was killed and two other officers were wounded. The remaining Officers who escaped injury took up the fight and forced the terrorists to withdraw. The taxi was hit repeatedly as it sped off and was abandoned by the two Jews who ran down a side street. One of them sustained wounds from the barrage that struck the taxi. On March the 1st 1947 the IZL blew up Goldsmith Officers club in Jerusalem, killing 13 and wounding another 18

      One incident that stands out most is the hangings of Sergeants Martin and Paice.

      On the 16th of June 1947, a sentence of death had been passed by the British courts on three Jews who had participated in the attack on Acre prison in which many Jewish prisoners had regained their freedom. Almost a month later in the early hours of the 12th of July, two British field security NCOs Sergeants Paice and Martin were on duty in Nathanya in the company of the Jewish Clerk. They were held up by five armed Jews and driven off to a secret hiding place. For the next two weeks and British security forces diligently searched for the kidnapped sergeants but no trace of them was ever found.

      On the July 29th British authorities, unable to bow to the blackmail of the Irgun, even though British lives were at stake had no alternative but to allow the sentence of death on the three Jews to take it’s course. Two days later, on the 31st to July, the bodies of the two British NCOs were found hanging from a eucalyptus tree one and a half miles from where they had been kidnapped. They had been dead for about two days. The area around the bodies was mined. The bodies had also been booby trapped. As the bodies were being cut down a hidden device on one body exploded. In this explosion a British officer was severely wounded. A few days later the Irgun posted notices in Hebrew on the walls around Haifa which read :

      Announcement

      The two British spies, Martin and Paice, who were under arrest by the underground since the July 12th have been put on trial, following the inquiry into their criminal anti Hebrew activities in. Martin and pace had been accused of the following crimes

      1. Illegal entry into our home land :

      2. Membership of the British criminal terrorist organize Asian known as the British army of occupation in Palestine, which is responsible:

      for depriving our people of the right to live;
      for cruel, oppressive acts;
      for tortures;
      for the murder of men, women and children;
      for the murder of prisoners of war;
      and deportation of Hebrew citizens from their country Homeland.

      3. Illegal possession of arms intended for the enforcement of oppression and despotism :

      4. Anti Jewish spying, disguised in civilian clothes :

      5. Conspiracy against the Hebrew underground, it soldiers, bases and arms, the arms of freedom :

      The court has found two to be guilty of all charges and sentenced them to die by hanging by their necks until their souls would leave them.

      The request of the condemned man for clemency has been rejected.

      The sentence has been carried out.

      The hanging of the two British spies is not a retaliatory act for the murder of Hebrew prisoners-of-war, but it is an ordinary legal action of the court of the Underground which has sentenced will sentence the criminals who belong to the criminal Nazi British army of occupation.

      We shall revenge the blood of the prisoners war who have been murdered by actions of war against the enemy.

      The Court of Irgun Zvai Leumi
      In Eretz Israel.

      dweller again STUFF IT!!!!

    5. Bernard Ross says:

      dweller Said:

      I did not ridicule the approach. I said that, from the standpoint of sheer practicality, mandamus specifically — if the petitioner were denied standing — would NOT facilitate such ‘education’:— because nobody would hear about a matter that was never permitted to be ARGUED in court.
      At least if were argued and lost, it would’ve been HEARD; then there WOULD be something to be ‘educated’ about.
      No standing, however, would mean no hearing & thus no ‘education’ either.

      Why assume with such surety that the Jews would fail to succeed in the pursuit of a principle of Justice. Some pursue goals with difficult odds but you advise the jews of futility(unless its your approach) Your approach is fine and should be pursued however the principle of mandamus specifically deals with compelling a govt to fulfill its legal obligation as opposed to stopping the govt from pursuing and illegal act. this shines a light on the obligation owed to the Jews by the various entities in the treaties and agreements, including Israel. There is no reason to assume that a non national jew would be denied standing in all the courts of the relevant nations and entities. It was global jewry who were were to be “encouraged to settle west of the jordan river” and any member of the class of global jewry would have standing whether a national or not. Are foreign nationals denied standing in courts by dint of their nationality? If the petitioner were denied standing and the case were not heard it would still have great value if the relevant publicity were shone upon it. I believe that such an action would draw the global press through its explosive agenda and unique approach. EG The dismissal of suits against obama due to technicalities often including standing, and not once on the issues, has convinced me of the strength of the case against him. With the right publicity a major case can sway jewish public opinion to the fact that they cannot recive justice under the law and may open those minds to the avenue of extra judicial avenues or to proceed unilaterally to seize their rights and deal with the courts later. It does not matter if the case were not to be heard because it would still demonstrate certain truths to the public: avoidance of the truth and merits of the argument. What if the case were not denied standing and was to be heard, is that not a possibility worthy of the Jews undertaking? frankly I would like to see what arguments are possible that assert that Jews should not reasonably expect the fulfillment of agreements and treaties. The principle is simple and difficult to deny that all the signatories to the various treaties and entities are obligated to an action which is to “..encourage the close settlement of the Jewish people west of the Jordan River” I have yet to hear any reasonable argument rebutting this obligation. I think those words should be hammered and repeated until they are heard and acted upon. If the Jew cannot reasonably rely on this simple agreement then all agreements are suspect.

    6. Bernard Ross says:

      yamit82 Said:

      We shall revenge the blood of the prisoners war who have been murdered by actions of war against the enemy.

      Good post yamit. It is scandalous how Dweller seeks to paint the agents of the murderous british mandate jew killers as innocents. He seeks sympathy for them like those who sympathize with the collaborators with Jew killers the Corries, and those who shine lights on the poor pals. When the Jews demand the bread of justice he says let them eat the cake of christian morality. For him it is not important that the Jews continue to observe hypocritical codes and agreements than receive actual and material justice. Good jews should observe the codes that everyone else breaks. Turn the other cheek!

    7. Bernard Ross says:

      dweller Said:

      what you really ‘prefer’ is to not have to come to grips with the anger that’s eating you up from within.— You’ve persuaded yourself that if you can just give it a seemingly worthy & honorable outlet, you won’t have to consider giving it up. That’s your ego protecting its turf against your better nature.

      Psychoanalytic psychobabble. A desperate attempt to draw the attention from the message to the messenger. Whenever your case is failing you psychoanalyze your opponent. This is not a psychology forum where everyone comes to be analyzed.

    8. Bernard Ross says:

      @ yamit82:Yamit, I made an error in my post to you which should have read

      For him it is more important that the Jews continue to observe hypocritical codes and agreements than receive actual and material justice. Good jews should observe the codes that everyone else breaks.

      One word makes the difference

    9. Bernard Ross says:

      dweller Said:

      — your posts have steadily degenerated into a series of bumper-sticker-type cheap shots & epithets.

      As Yamit says: BINGO!
      Pot, kettle, black?—-
      sow and reap?–
      If you are interested you can go back through your posts and see where you use, and began, this form of “argument” and the many quotes where you employ this “method”, along with psychoanalyzing your opponents with amateur psychobabble.
      Perhaps if you refrained from such methods you would not get them back.

    10. yamit82 says:

      @ Bernard Ross:

      Why assume with such surety that the Jews would fail to succeed in the pursuit of a principle of Justice. Some pursue goals with difficult odds but you advise the jews of futility(unless its your approach)

      dweller is what they used to call “Jailhouse Lawyers” ;)

      The only failure for a Jew is the refusal to act, and the lack of faith that accompanies it. The test of each individual is in the actions he takes, not the momentary success or apparent failure of the endeavor.

      Know that it is the obligation of all men, and in particular the Jew, to strive for knowledge of the truth and to act accordingly.

    11. Michael Devolin says:

      Yamit, could you please help me sort out a discussion about Noachism we’re having on the page ‘The Palestinianization of European Political Discourse’? Thankyou in advance.

    12. David Chase says:

      @ yamit82:
      “Know that it is the obligation of all men, and in particular the Jew, to strive for knowledge of the truth and act accordingly”
      That is so true

    13. yamit82 says:

      @ Bernard Ross:

      Jewish weakness if not defeat validates his turning his back on Judaism and by default the Jews in favor of his adoption of Christianity with or with out claims of J’s divinity which is irrelevant to my point.

    14. dweller says:

      @ yamit82:

      “Certainly you don’t hold with most of them… ”

      I don’t? — who told you THAT?

      — God?

      “…and those you do accept you interpret incorrectly.”

      By whose standard — YOURS?

      “The 6th commandment: Says the Torah (Exodus 20:13): Lo tirtzach!The Hebrew word used has a clear and unequivocal meaning: ‘Do not murder.’ there is a world of difference between killing and murder.”

      Damned right there’s world of difference. But you don’t seem to know what it consists of.

      Paice & Martin were murdered. You can slice it & dice it any way you like, six ways from Sunday. Bottom line is inescapable nonetheless: murder.

      The JPFO drosh is interesting; I’ve been acquainted with their stuff since around 1984, when I first came across them.

      — it’s also irrelevant & off-point to this discussion.

      So also is the Cain & Abel story more generally useless here, as it’s obvious that there are many chapters missing from several stories in the first part of Genesis. WHY they were excised is anybody’s guess, but the resultant disjointedness & discontinuity of the narrative is unmistakable.

      No way you can justify or talk your way around the murder of the sergeants. The dibra does indeed read lo tirtzach — NOT ‘lo taharog.’

      They were murdered.

      Retzach Retzach Retzach.

    15. dweller says:

      @ yamit82:

      “What is -the purpose of man? ‘To bend the knee and bow the head and accept the Divine yoke in the way that the Almighty commanded’…”

      The only bending the knee & bowing the head I see coming from you is clearly directed to MOLOCH.

      (Berachot 33b): “Everything is in G-d’s hands but the fear of G-d: ‘And now, Israel, what does the L-rd your G-d require of you but to fear Him’ (Deut. 10:12).”

      Yes, but YOU, Yamit, are clueless as to the meaning of that kind of ‘fear.’

      “Without such fear, one cannot possibly achieve holiness, for one’s ego will always take control.”

      You don’t see the internal contradiction of this remark. (It’s glaring.)

      The truth is that the very notion that one can “achieve” holiness is a dead giveaway that the ego is involved. The striving for achievement is in its very NATURE the action of the ego, ambition.

      Only God can make a man holy. Man has nothing that of itself has that capability. Any attempt to ‘achieve’ holiness is an act of idolatry.

      “Wisdom belongs to someone who, is open to learning from every person he meets.”

      Quite so, but only if he is prepared to pass it thru the “filter” of awareness that God alone can give a man. Otherwise how can he discern the real from the merely attractive? — he is rudderless & subject to the most powerful forces (physical or intellectual) in his environment.

      “But you have a direct connection to your god and don’t need to learn from others? You and your direct link are your sole authority and your justification for all you claim to believe.”

      This is utter twisted tommyrot; you have no clue as to what I believe — to this day you still don’t even have it clear as to what I claim to believe.

      I’ve told you, dozens of times:
      EVERYBODY (not just YoursTruly) has a direct connection with God (the only God, not ‘mine’ exclusively) — the “connection” at the front end is intuition; at the back end, the same connection is conscience.

      — THAT is the “sole authority & justification.” It is indeed direct, and unerring. And without it, there is no objective standard of judgment.

      Ignore it at your own peril.

    16. yamit82 says:

      @ dweller:
      As ususal you are full of it and cannot admit you are wrong even when I force feed you proof. Say it ain’t so dweller a million and a zillion times but you are still full of it and wrong wrong wrong.

      When you learn Hebrew come back and we will discuss the nuances of the Hebrew language and 3 letter root cells of the Hebrew language:

      The correct approach to understanding the Torah is etymological. As long as the root meaning makes sense, it should be used. Whether the sense derived from the root meaning complies with exegetical requirements is unimportant; exegesis should follow etymology. Whenever several meanings are equally plausible etymologically, the most common meaning should be assumed.
      The common approach to the Torah is to put exegetical requirements first, and then see if the required meaning of a word is plausible, or even remotely possible. Given the scarcity of ancient texts, a wide range of meanings is at least remotely possible, which often allows for wild exegesis. The etymological approach puts a stop to that misreading.

    17. dweller says:

      @ yamit82:

      “Who does G-d praise as having the greatest humility? Moses… Moses,who killed the Egyptian beating a Jew, who stood up to Pharaoh in Egypt, secured the release of the Jewish people, scaled Mount Sinai, spoke to G-d face-to-face, and led the Jews through the desert and to the borders of Israel. How could a man who obviously possessed extraordinary qualities of leadership and strength be described as the humblest who ever lived?

      I know the answer to the question.

      — I seriously doubt that YOU do, however.

      “The Jewish sages compare the offering of sacrifices on the altar which is a symbol of peace — to the killing (Not murdereing!!) of the wicked. ‘To teach you, that when the blood of the wicked is spilled, it is as if a sacrifice was offered’. (Tanchuma, Pinchas, 1) For these are the two sides to the peace – remove yourself from evil – do good. There is not one without the other.”

      You can talk yourself silly and cite yourself blue in the face, Yamit, and try your damnedest to gussie up the grotesque reality

      — but you cannot wiggle yourself around the clear & inescapable, abiding fact that Sgts Martin & Paice were the victims of cold-blooded murder.

      “Then, you are more versed in Christian theology more than Jewish concepts.”

      What a pile of pig plop.

      I am “versed in Christian theology” insofar as it came directly from Jews and Jewish roots.

      As the Christian Bible declares:
      As it is written, there is none righteous; no, not one.” (Romans 3:10)

      Yes, and where did they get a notion like that? — obviously, from WHERE it was written:

      — Ps 53:2; Ps 14:3; Jer 17:9, etc, etc, etc.

      “According to Christianity, human beings are, by their very nature, Evil…”

      Another self-serving distortion. PERSONS cannot be Evil (or Good)

      — only righteous or wicked.

      The former means receptive to God’s moment-to-moment leading; the latter, impervious to that leading (and thus subject to Evil).

      The holding is not that man is ‘evil’; rather, that separated from their Maker, human beings are by their nature SUBJECT to evil.

      “Now I wonder what your [G]od has to say?”

      Why don’t you ask Him?

      — Don’t be scared; He doesn’t bite.

    18. dweller says:

      @ yamit82:

      “…cannot admit you are wrong even when I force feed you proof…”

      What ‘proof’?

      “we will discuss the nuances of the Hebrew language”

      YOU want to discuss ‘nuance’ with ME? — You who have NO respect for nuance anywhere else?

      LOLROF.

      Strictly self-serving poppycock.

      It was murder, Sir

      — and murder most foul.

      And trying to justify it with irrelevant scholarship is the cheapest of the cheap added ON to murder.

    19. dweller says:

      @ Bernard Ross:

      “Anybody who ‘can be satisfied and excited with the sound of his own words’ would have to have some kind of FEEDBACK to energize him to continue — because, unsupported, that sort of thing falls flat rather quickly.”

      “We wouldn’t want you to fall flat quickly, are you getting enough support?”

      You mean you can’t tell?

    20. dweller says:

      @ Bernard Ross:

      “You have no idea what the ambitions of such people are like.”

      “As usual, you are the only one with any ideas…”

      “Grow up, Bernard. The expression, ‘you have no idea,’ is just that — an EXPRESSION. — It’s not about ideas, as such, notwithstanding the inclusion of the actual word. I used it to mean not that you are ‘without ideas’ — but that you are naive & unsuspecting as to the enormity of the matter of demagogy.”

      “What incredible pretension from a legend in his own mind.”

      I see that I was right.

    21. yamit82 says:

      @ dweller:

      You don’t see the internal contradiction of this remark. (It’s glaring.)

      The truth is that the very notion that one can “achieve” holiness is a dead giveaway that the ego is involved. The striving for achievement is in its very NATURE the action of the ego, ambition.

      Only God can make a man holy. Man has nothing that of itself has that capability. Any attempt to ‘achieve’ holiness is an act of idolatry.

      That is Christian bullshit. We got the Users manual you got NADA!

      An atheist who obeys the commandments is by G-d’s definition Holy. Naase v Nishma. We got the books that tell us what and how. You got Touchy feelings and intuition, which count for shit. Everyone has different intuitive capabilities and if tested most intuitions are found N/A. Even a broken clock is correct 50% of the time. Back to Nature-Nurture argument?

      the only God, not ‘mine’ exclusively

      Don’t care what you call him but he is according to your comments and descriptions and stated beliefs, a made up deity with no connection to the G-d of Israel. You can even call him Satan for all I care and probably do. :)

    22. Bernard Ross says:

      dweller Said:

      that Sgts Martin & Paice were the victims of cold-blooded murder.

      The VICTIMS were serving in the forces of jew killers whose goals were not dissimilar to those of the 3rd reich.
      You may repeat the word murder umpteen times and like Jo Goebbels it will still be untrue.

    23. yamit82 says:

      @ dweller:

      I am “versed in Christian theology” insofar as it came directly from Jews and Jewish roots.

      You believe the authors of the gospels were Jews so you are being disingenuous by making a statement hiding the fact. Cute.

      They were not real Jews and they had no real Jewish roots. All A scam and created by Constantine to unify his broken empire.

      It was not murder but they were killed by execution by a lawful Jewish body in conflict with a tyrannical illegal and morally repugnant occupying power. In such a war all enemies are fair game. They could have vacated the Land at any time and avoided conflict, which they were forced to do by those same Jewish patriots and fighters for Jewish Liberty. Next you will say that the American revolutionaries were murderers of the British and the North and South murdered each other in the civil war. War is War and those Jews were fighting a Holy War.

      You say the vietnam war was illegal, immoral and unconstitutional.You were a traitor and an anarchist. The Laws were not changed the constitution not challenged or amended, the war ended because there were too many against the war, it went on too long and was bankrupting the States but subversive groups like SDS were mostly the reason and the USSR was the main backer of dissident groups. Your effort was just moral cowardice wrapped up in the shroud of moral righteousness as a fig leaf for traitorous cowardliness.

      So your characterization of the 2 Brits as being murdered is very much in line with who and what you are. Both a moral and physical coward.

      What did Thoreau say to Emerson? Yeah I am familiar with the American transcendentalists. I never agreed or respected them either.

    24. yamit82 says:

      @ dweller:

      Another self-serving distortion. PERSONS cannot be Evil (or Good)

      — only righteous or wicked.

      Semantic distinction. There is no difference in the context I used.

      The former means receptive to God’s moment-to-moment leading; the latter, impervious to that leading (and thus subject to Evil).

      The holding is not that man is ‘evil’; rather, that separated from their Maker, human beings are by their nature SUBJECT to evil

      You make it up ad hoc as you go along? No they are not. Man was created in G-d’s image meaning he is or has the potential to becoming like G-d

      Every baby is born pure. The rest is Nature and Nurture; No Devils unless you count yourself in drag?

    25. dweller says:

      @ yamit82:

      THIS is what you offer for a reliable narrative? This same webpage which also includes, inter alia, the assertion that “Stern himself was killed in a gunfight with police in early 1942″???

      — Killed. . . in a . . . “gunfight”. . . while shackled & manacled. . . right.

      “Jewish terrorists soon started planning the a reprisal for Operation Agatha and made plans for the bombing attack on the King David hotel.”

      Not so. No plans for KDH were made at the time.

      In fact, when Irgun first DID propose the project later on — after the raids that yielded the docs for the Brits — Ben-Gurion & the Agency at first rejected the idea as too ambitious.

      It was only when B-G realized that Sharrett/Shertok’s planned speech — still in his typewriter (and revealing that the Agency/Haganah were every bit as much into the Resistance as IZL & FFI) — was ALSO among the items swept up with the other docs that the Agency agreed (clearly for its own self-serving reasons) to proceed with the planning to hit KDH.

      “[T]wo British field security NCOs Sergeants Paice and Martin were on duty in Nathanya in the company of the Jewish Clerk.”

      FTR: They were off-duty; weren’t even supposed to be away from their camp at the time (probably bored).

      — After hanging out in a cafe w/ Weinberg till past midnight, they were walking him home as a kindness; it was not required of them, they were clearly on their own time.

      “The court has found two to be guilty of all charges and sentenced them to die by hanging by their necks until their souls would leave them.”

      “The court”? — “guilty of all charges”?

      — so they interrogated them?

      took testimony on oath?

      permitted cross-examination on the record?

      Show me the transcript.

      “The hanging of the two British spies is not a retaliatory act for the murder of Hebrew prisoners-of-war…”

      “Spies”? — 18-year-old spies?

      — Actually, Weinberg was spying on them — for Shai; that’s how they were set up to BE abducted.

      Not a retaliatory act”?

      A retaliatory act is precisely what it WAS. Strictly stink for stink.

      The murder of Mervyn Paice & Cliff Martin (who was Jewish: his mother, an Egyptian Jew) was flat-out retaliation for the murder of Haviv, Weiss & Nakar.

      — The latter were POW’s. So were the former.

      Both sets of murders were War Crimes.

      “The hanging”? — they weren’t hanged. Neck vertebrae not broken.

      — They were throttled to death, suffocated — strangled by the rope’s constriction of the windpipe under the weight of their bodies. Took about a quarter hour for each of them to choke to death.

      “STUFF IT”

      You can take that ‘court’ and stuff it.

      Like I said, it stinks.

    26. dweller says:

      @ Bernard Ross:

      “Some pursue goals with difficult odds but you advise the jews of futility(unless its your approach)…”

      There are more promising legal prospects than those which depend on the discretion of the very bodies which would hear them.

      There are several lawyers out there who frequent this site. Anybody care to comment? — or have we scared you all away with this thread?

      “I believe that such an action would draw the global press through its explosive agenda and unique approach.”

      Sorry, Bernard — I don’t think it would. The global media isn’t with us. Certainly not the MSM — or as Limbaugh calls them, the Driveby Media.

      — I wish it were, God knows. But I have no illusions.

      It’s not 1948, and not 1967.

      “The moving finger writes, and having writ, moves on…”

      “What if the case were not denied standing and was to be heard, is that not a possibility worthy of the Jews undertaking?”

      Given the odds, and the BETTER odds elsewhere — and the fact that time & resources are finite — I’d put my money on a different horse.

      “The principle is simple and difficult to deny that all the signatories to the various treaties and entities are obligated to an action which is to ‘..encourage the close settlement of the Jewish people west of the Jordan River’ I have yet to hear any reasonable argument rebutting this obligation. I think those words should be hammered and repeated until they are heard and acted upon. If the Jew cannot reasonably rely on this simple agreement then all agreements are suspect.”

      Nothing wrong with the principle. Nothing wrong with the obligation. Nothing wrong with the agreement.

      Now all you have to do is find a suitable forum in which the matter must be heard.

      The operative word in that remark, however, is MUST

      — because “may” im place of “must”

      won’t cut it.

    27. dweller says:

      @ Bernard Ross:

      “We shall revenge the blood of the prisoners war who have been murdered by actions of war against the enemy.”

      “The hanging of the two British spies is not a retaliatory act for the murder of Hebrew prisoners-of-war…”

      An interesting juxtaposition. Clearly not Begin’s finest hour.

      A pity too; he’d had so many truly fine ones up until then.

      “Good post yamit.”

      Nothing good about it. As I’ve already shown.

      “It is scandalous how Dweller seeks to paint the agents of the murderous british mandate jew killers as innocents. He seeks sympathy for them…”

      They weren’t out to be “agents of murderous jew killers.” They were a couple of bored kids with their whole lives ahead of them.

      — What is truly scandalous is the ease with which you justify doing to them precisely the same thing the Mandate Authority had done to Jews.

      You have no quarrel with that kind of behavior in & of itself; you just don’t like the fact that it was done to Jews.

      As I’ve said, your anger makes you Yamit’s possession.

      You’ll never be your own man till you let the anger pass.

    28. dweller says:

      @ Bernard Ross:

      “[W]what you really ‘prefer’ is to not have to come to grips with the anger that’s eating you up from within. You’ve persuaded yourself that if you can just give it a seemingly worthy & honorable outlet, you won’t have to consider giving it up. That’s your ego protecting its turf against your better nature.”

      “A desperate attempt to draw the attention from the message to the messenger.”

      “Desperate”? — not at all; quite relaxed actually.

      “Draw attention”? — only insofar as it puts the ‘message’ in perspective.

      “Whenever your case is failing you psychoanalyze your opponent.”

      I don’t ‘psychoanalyze’ you, Bernard. But I can’t ignore what I see as the ground & motive energy of your discussion.

      And if my case were ‘failing,’ you wouldn’t be whining about my ‘psychoanalyzing’ you.

      — You’d be answering my [above blockquoted] assertion.

      “This is not a psychology forum where everyone comes to be analyzed.”

      That dog won’t hunt. No psychologist or psychiatrist EVER speaks — as I do (and quite shamelessly) — of somebody’s “better nature.”

      They’d regard such an approach as “injecting value judgments,” at best.

    29. dweller says:

      @ yamit82:

      “Without such fear, one cannot possibly achieve holiness, for one’s ego will always take control.”

      “You don’t see the internal contradiction of this remark. (It’s glaring.) The truth is that the very notion that one can ‘achieve’ holiness is a dead giveaway that the ego is involved. The striving for achievement is in its very NATURE the action of the ego, ambition.”

      “That is Christian bullshit.”

      If it’s ‘bullshit’ (it isn’t, but if it WERE) — then it was Jewish ‘bullshit’ well BEFORE it was ‘Christian’ bullshit.

      “We got the Users manual”

      Aye, but you don’t know how to use it.

      — Alotta good that does you.

      What’s more, even before there WAS a User’s Manual, the contradiction between “achieving” & holiness was known by Jews (and others, e.g., Malkitzedek).

      “An atheist who obeys the commandments is by G-d’s definition Holy.”

      Yes, and a Jew who fails to, ISN’T.

      — You don’t obey them.

      “[I]f tested most intuitions are found N/A.”

      Then they aren’t intuition.

      “[T]he only God, not ‘mine’ exclusively…”

      “Don’t care what you call him but he is according to your comments and descriptions and stated beliefs, a made up deity with no connection to the G-d of Israel.”

      He disagrees with you

      — most profoundly.

    30. dweller says:

      @ yamit82:

      “[Y]ou are more versed in Christian theology more than Jewish concepts.”

      “I am ‘versed in Christian theology’ insofar as it came directly from Jews and Jewish roots.”

      “You believe the authors of the gospels were Jews so you are being disingenuous by making a statement hiding the fact.”

      The authors of the gospels WERE Jews — but I ‘hid’ nothing.

      — For one thing, I wasn’t even referring to the gospels (or any other NT literature) in making the statement.

      What YOU call “christian theology” is discoverable from more than the mere printed word.

      “They were not real Jews and they had no real Jewish roots. All A scam and created by Constantine to unify his broken empire.”

      Oh, please. You don’t know this for fact, Yamit. You’ve merely ADOPTED this idea that you read somewhere as a favored hypothesis for you, because it suits your present purposes.

      — So when you assert the hypothesis as if it were (you should excuse the expression:) “gospel” — we both know that the MOST you can say about it is that you HOPE it’s true. (It would be so convenient.)

    31. Michael Devolin says:

      “Malkitzedek”

      Was Malkitzedek a gentile? And wasn’t he connected somehow to Yethro?

    32. dweller says:

      @ yamit82:

      “You can talk yourself silly and cite yourself blue in the face, Yamit, and try your damnedest to gussie up the grotesque reality — but you cannot wiggle yourself around the clear & inescapable, abiding fact that Sgts Martin & Paice were the victims of cold-blooded murder.”

      “It was not murder but they were killed by execution by a lawful Jewish body in conflict with a tyrannical illegal and morally repugnant occupying power.”

      “Lawful” as to what?

      It may be lawful for me to mow the lawn in my back yard — yet not lawful for me to deliver the U.S. Mail.

      Irgun was a militia; it was not a properly constituted court. The claim that they were is laughable.

      And besides, notwithstanding that hokey bill of particulars they hastily drew up, the Irgun weren’t the least bit interested in law in re those boys.

      Once it was clear that Haviv, Weiss & Nakar were dead, IZL were interested in retaliation, pure & simple — and retaliation explicitly intended to mock the Brit policy of executing insurgents; don’t conflate the issues, this doesn’t help your case.

      It was kidnap, hostage holding, and — upon the failure to prevent the execution of comrades — murder.

      No objective observer will buy the assertion of “trial & execution.” Don’t embarrass yourself with such a lame claim.

      If a dissatisfied Hamas had beheaded Gilad Shalit, you’d have had NO trouble seeing it for the murder it most surely would have been.

      “In such a war all enemies are fair game.”

      Define: “fair game.”

      — Does this mean you can cut off their extremities, a joint at a time?

      How about their kids? — flay them alive? — in front of the parents? Pluck out their eyes maybe?

      And their wives? — you know where I’m going next, but I’ll spare the readers. . . .

      The question is, Yamit, when you say they’re “fair game,” are there no limits that you’ll put on yourself?

    33. dweller says:

      @ Michael Devolin:

      “Was Malkitzedek a gentile?”

      Well, yes, Michael, but then, in those days, there weren’t yet any Jews — except Abram, Sarai, Lot.

      “And wasn’t he connected somehow to Yethro?”

      Yitro was a contemporary of Moses [father-in-law].

      Malkitzedek was a contemporary of Abram, while Abram was still new to Canaan, and not yet “Abraham.”

      He’s mentioned again HERE.

      (Also in the Letter to the Hebrews, as I recall.)

      Yitro would’ve lived 6 or 7 centuries later.

    34. dweller says:

      @ yamit82:

      “Next you will say that the American revolutionaries were murderers of the British and the North and South murdered each other in the civil war. War is War and those Jews were fighting a Holy War.”

      If you’re saying there’s “no such a thing as murder in a just war or a ‘Holy War’ (whatever)” — then you’re fullovit:

      “[Proscription of] ‘categorically illegal orders’ [is] a modern version of the Sixth Commandment, ‘Thou shalt not murder.’ [Israeli] soldiers are expressly forbidden to murder, even if ordered to do so on the field of battle; if they do, they will be court-martialed. The order they were given will not be relevant to their defense, since their moral duty as human beings supercedes their duty as soldiers. Such a ruling can be applied only rarely: a merely ‘illegal order’ must be obeyed; the ‘categorically illegal orders’ must be dis-obeyed.

      “The definition given by the Court was hardly helpful, unless you come from a tradition that has been [applying] the distinction between KILLING and MURDER for 3000 years: a categorically illegal act is one above which a black flag flutters.

      “With such a literary metaphor, eighteen- and twenty-year-olds are armed and sent into battle. They must obey the orders of their commanders, under threat of court-martical, because otherwise an army cannot function; but they must not obey when they see the black flag, [this too] under the threat of court-martial, because otherwise the society they defend with their lives may not be worthy of the sacrifice. This is the Israeli definition of jus in bello. It is not a philosophical construct for academic seminars, but a component of training for war…”

      [Ya'acov Lozowick, Right to Exist: a moral defense of Israel's wars (NY, Doubleday, 2003), pp 123-124]

    35. dweller says:

      @ yamit82:

      “[Righteous] means receptive to God’s moment-to-moment leading; [wicked means], impervious to that leading (and thus subject to Evil). The holding is not that man is ‘evil’; rather, that separated from their Maker, human beings are by their nature SUBJECT to evil…”

      “You make it up ad hoc as you go along?”

      Short answer: No, it’s always been there — and is still waiting for you to discover it.

      “Man was created in G-d’s image meaning he is or has the potential to becoming like G-d…”

      Moses disagrees: Mi camokha bo’elim adonai? — “Who is like unto Thee, O LORD, among the mighty?” (Or didn’t you notice the question was rhetorical. . . .)

      And God Himself disagreed: when he gave the archangel Michael his name.

      “Every baby is born pure.”

      If that were true, the vidui in the Yom Kippur service wouldn’t incorporate language from Tehillim 51.

    36. Michael Devolin says:

      “Well, yes, Michael, but then, in those days, there weren’t yet any Jews — except Abram, Sar”

      That’s right! Thankyou, Dweller. Time to brush up on my Torah. I’d forgotten the time lines.

    37. Bernard Ross says:

      dweller Said:

      Given the odds, and the BETTER odds elsewhere — and the fact that time & resources are finite — I’d put my money on a different horse.

      What horse is that which invokes the legal obligation of the signatories? I see no horses running for the Jewish people, only that running for the state of Israel. Matters not raised because they are considered futile cannot be heard. You must buy a ticket to even win the lottery.
      dweller Said:

      Nothing wrong with the principle. Nothing wrong with the obligation. Nothing wrong with the agreement. Now all you have to do is find a suitable forum in which the matter must be heard.
      The operative word in that remark, however, is MUST— because “may” im place of “must”won’t cut it.

      Apparently the Lord has spoken through you, O most knowledgeable one.—
      you appear to be saying that unless one is guaranteed of winning the legal motion the jews should not undertake to claim rights and obligations clearly owed to them. With your advice there would never have been a state of Israel.
      Global Jewry has a reasonable expectation in Law that the obligation to “..encourage the settlement of Jews west of the Jordan river” are fulfilled by the parties to the agreements. This obligation is nowhere being sought. If this agreement continues to be dishonored after being raised it is my view that there can be no agreements to be relied upon with any of the parties as would obtain in normal agreements. In spite of your admonitions as to the futility of seeking the fulfillment of the obligation I shall continue to encourage it. Non state jewish groups should be formed to demand the fulfillment of this obligation in the courts of the relevant parties beginning with the state of Israel. It is not enough to demand the end of obstruction to settlement as the agreements spcifically refer to the action of encouraging settlement. Nothing ventured, nothing gained.

    38. Bernard Ross says:

      dweller Said:

      They were off-duty; weren’t even supposed to be away from their camp at the time (probably bored).

      your energy is spent in conjuring up sympathy for those who served in the forces repressing, killing and swindling jews. Off duty is a ludicrous argument as even Hitler may have been considered to be off duty in his sleep.
      dweller Said:

      A retaliatory act is precisely what it WAS. Strictly stink for stink. The murder of Mervyn Paice & Cliff Martin (who was Jewish: his mother, an Egyptian Jew) was flat-out retaliation for the murder of Haviv, Weiss & Nakar.

      Stink for stink, blood for blood, fire for fire. I have no problem with the retaliatory act. Those like you will always conjure up reasons for why the jews should not fight terror with terror. In my opinion this is BS. Terror is one of the many extra judicial avenues open to correct injustice. The British terrorized the jewish remnants who had just escaped the holocaust it should be no surprise if terror was returned to them. There is a population in gaza who has democratically elected a government whose purpose is to eradicate the Jews. That population in its entrety is responsible for the death of every single jew.
      dweller Said:

      Both sets of murders were War Crimes.

      What makes them war crimes? Is it the geneva conventions which arises from the same parties and institutions who guaranteed the obligation to “..encourage the settlement of Jews west of the Jordan river”. Why should agreements be honored with parties who break their agreements. Why should the Jews only comply with one sided agreements? These are the arguments of those who wish to keep the Jews in a hostage situation in order to perpetuate the current ongoing Jewish stockholm syndrome. The jews need to wake up and when they see the utter futility, which you describe, of trust in international agreements and intentions they may be able to act “extra judicially”.

    Site Membership



    Google Site Search

    Editor

      Ted Belman

      tbelman3-at-gmail.com

    Mission

      News and Views on Israel, the Middle East, the war on terror and the clash of civilizations.

    Polls

    Will Israel attack Iran

    View Results

    Loading ... Loading ...

    RECOMMENDED BOOKS




    Tolerism2

    Iran islam

    Sharing

    mandate4

    Daily Archives

    April 2014
    S M T W T F S
    « Mar    
     12345
    6789101112
    13141516171819
    20212223242526
    27282930  

    Selected Israpundit Articles

    Sponsors

    Miscellaneous Info

      All Politic Sites