Friday, May 26, 2006

Very Romantic
I remember being totally hell bent against Christianity. I realize now and then that this automatically filed and categorized me as “that sinful Jew” to members of the Christian faith, but my reaction to Christianity, you must see, what quite natural. It is noteworthy that I was not anti-Christian on the basis that, for example, your average American Gentile was. Their hostility towards Christianity is based on a pattern produced by generations of secularism and hatred of things religious; for the irreligious American, Christianity is symbolic of all religion and of G-d. For this reason I say that America is Christian.

I was a Jew that believed in G-d, and the connection that I had with Him, my religion, and my people, was real, but dormant, beaten, and hidden into submission. However, this process did not begin in my lifetime but sometime in the halls of what we call “history.” Jewish distancing from the religion of our fathers is no new thing, and I won’t even go into its origins for it is beyond the scope of this short piece. Suffice it to say that the process of a Jew distancing himself or herself from Judaism rolled with the times into the present and every American Jew removed from his or her tradition is both an old and a new testament to this unfortunate and inhumane “development.”

No, I believed in G-d, I believed in the “Jewish G-d.” However, like many disconnected Jews, my only dose of religion was through Christianity and if this religion was the representation of G-d, tempered by mine and my family’s relative ignorance of true Jewish living, then I wanted nothing to do with G-d. What a sad reason to abandon G-d! This is the unfortunate reality of many Jewish families and individuals in America, and I believe that this is one of the most prominent reasons for a phenomenon known as “secular Judaism.” It is the explicit and intended Jewish distancing from religious elements, although not necessarily from social, cultural, and humanitarian aspects. Nevertheless, we cannot ignore that Jewish distancing, i.e., assimilation, is an old Jewish pattern dating back thousands of years but marked more clearly by “easier to remember” events, such as the French Revolution and the Enlightenment of Europe. We cannot ignore that even though Anti-Semitism, hatred, and oppression were serious factors in these developments, ultimately it was Jewish people and families that made the decisions to leave the religion of their forefathers. The correlation between Anti-Semitism and assimilation is clear, strong, and historic, and wherever Jewish assimilation exists, even if existing in relatively benign forms in contrast to Europe, Anti-Semitism is not far.

Well-to-do Christians who by faith love the Jews and want nothing more than to save us from doom in the Afterlife compound our assimilation by seeking and targeting us for conversion. How are we expected to react to such a thing? Are we supposed to treat it as anything other than a spiritual onslaught, in contrast to the physical onslaughts of Christian Europe? Is it not better to die a physical death than a spiritual death? This is the reason for Jewish resistance, even secular Jewish resistance, towards Christianity. And Christians, at least the ignorant ones, mistake “these Jews” whom resist Christianity as individuals hopelessly closed-minded to the love, grace, and salvation that Jesus “has to offer you.” We have learned quite well what Christianity’s notion of “Jesus’ love” was and we see it all the better as our numbers continue to dwindle in the land of opportunity (to assimilate), in the melting (down) pot, in the land not of freedom of religion, but freedom from religion.

Christianity is a corrosive agent on the body of Judaism, and if Christians really love us, then they need to leave us alone! The youthful Jew that I was, being a male in high school and in emotional turmoil and intellectual confusion, I learned to hate Christianity. A Christian whom “so dearly loved me” spoke to me with a crooked smile as he or she tried to rob me of my identity, repeated angelic verses verbatim in a zombie-like state and referred to me as a “Hebrew” or an “Israelite” as they had the audacity to say that my people “were the chosen ones.” I agree with much of what they said, but on my terms, our terms, not theirs! When I resisted I was likened to the Jews in the Books of the Prophets who were guilty of rebelling from G-d. I was accused of charges two thousand years in the making, first resisting G-d and then His son! G-d had a son?! How could such a pagan tell me this to my face?! How could I not hate Christianity?! The irony of this served magnificently; I was told that Jesus taught forgiveness and that if I accepted him into my heart that my anger would go away – adult Christians told me this when I was as young as fifteen years old, those hate mongers! Every word I said “proved” Christianity’s most rancid stereotypes of Jews, I could not escape until I became educated. Every word in the common media about Judaism and the Torah is expressed with Christian tinting; I had to “sink” into the social “netherworlds” of true Judaism in order to find what it was really about. The pain was healed through my reconnection with my people. In this, without knowing, and later with, I began to fulfill the Torah’s conjunction to be part of the people “holy to G-d,” and would do it from beneath the waves. We are waiting to emerge.

Wednesday, May 24, 2006


If we have learned one thing from history it is that Jews can live as minorities in Muslim populations but that Muslims may not live as minorities in Jewish populations. We can tell this by looking at the many Jewish minorities that have lived (and some still do) in Muslim Arab countries. This explains the "Israeli-Palestinian conflict" quite well, Palestinians, who are Arab Muslims, can simply not come to grips with living under Israeli, which is Jewish, rule. Granted, Israel is partially to blame for this due to its mistake in dealing with the Palestinians during the Six Day War of 1967; instead of granting that population limited autonomy after winning that war of promised destruction, it should have removed the Palestinian population from Israeli territory in one swift gesture. Afterall, Jordan did this in 1979 and today we don't see Palestinian suicide bombings and attacks on Jordanian civilians on Jordanain soil; the Jordanians acted with fortitude and saved themselves (and the Palestinians) many lives. Before this, Yasser Arafat was acting out of Jordan, which he treated as a base by which to attack Israel, and eventually the Jordanian government ordered the slaughter of some 10,000 Palestinians, whom made up 60% of the population of Jordan. King Hussein knew that Arafat was attempting to turn Jordan into a Palestinian state, although rights and "homeland" had nothing to do with it, just sheer desires for power and control. In Israel, although it is disguised under a desire for national independence from Israel, it does not take a genius to understand that the ultimate goal of "Palestinian independence" is actually Palestinian dominance, and many an Israeli official understand this, although there are many in the liberal camps that do not.

When people bring up that life for Jews as non-Muslim minorities in Muslim countries meant lack of civil rights, proponents of the politics of Islam insist that even though life for Jews under Islam was not perfect, it was nowhere near the horrors of life for Jews under Christian Europe. True, perhaps, but nevertheless, life for Palestinians (Muslims) in Israel (Jewish) is far better than life for Jews under Islam. The Palestinian attempts to destroy Israel by way of political manipulation, corruption, and suicide bombings is to blame for the unhappines that ensues there. If we imagine that Jews under Islam murdered Muslims while living in those countries as minorities, we know that the "rebellion" would not last more than one day. The truth is that the Muslim government would likely have ordered the permanent exile or full-scale slaughter of Jews there the second it began. When we look at the way Palestinians behave in Israel, it is a wonder beyond my ability to understand that Israel shows as much restraint as it does. There is simply no sane comparison between Jewish life under Islam and Palestinian life under Israel, even though the point of Palestinian propaganda is to make life in Israel as bleak, oppressive, and morbid as possible in order to properly vent the frustration of Palestinians.

Friday, May 19, 2006

A Misdirected Attack
Los Angeles Times
August 17, 2003

Opposition parties use the Senate confirmation process to block presidential appointments they don't like, but it's a weapon that has to be used reluctantly and in extreme cases.

In filibustering the judicial nomination of Alabama Atty. Gen. William H. Pryor Jr., for instance, Senate Democrats are stopping a far-right extremist from joining a federal appeals court for life. But in trying to prevent Middle East scholar Daniel Pipes from joining the board of the U.S. Institute of Peace, Sens. Edward M. Kennedy (D-Mass.), Christopher J. Dodd (D-Conn.) and Tom Harkin (D-Iowa) are abusing their privilege.

Pipes has a long record of stirring up controversy on Islamic affairs. Long before Sept. 11, 2001, he warned of the danger of Arab terrorists lurking within the United States. He has been a fervent defender of Israel, including its settlement policy. His stands have earned him the enmity of the Council on American-Islamic Relations, which is leading the charge against his nomination.

But however provocative Pipes may be, he is no bigot. In his 2002 book "Militant Islam Reaches America," he states that Muslim immigrants can "bring much of value, including new energy, to their host societies." He has consistently urged Arab Americans to shun radicalism and embrace moderate Islam. Pipes, who earned his doctorate at Harvard and has written 11 books, would bring a lively and inquiring mind to the institute, which is a research organization created by Congress to promote peaceful resolutions of international conflicts.

Pipes would not, in this capacity, have remotely the power of a federal judge. His nomination has been endorsed by a number of distinguished scholars, including Paul Kennedy, Fouad Ajami and John Keegan.

President Bush appointed Pipes to the board April 4 and is reportedly considering a recess appointment, which circumvents the normal Senate approval process. It should not have come to this. Sens. Kennedy, Dodd and Harkin should drop their resistance to Pipes.
A little bit of hilarious blasphemy.

Monday, May 15, 2006

This is NOT a reason for Jews to be liberal, it's a reason for Jews to be RELIGIOUS! Wake up, please!!!


250 C.E. Canhage Expulsion
224 C.E. Italy Forced Conversion
325 C.E. Jerusalem Expulsion
351 C.E Persia Book Burning
357 C.E. Italy Property Confiscation
379 C.E. Milan Synagogue Burning
415 C.E. Alexandria Expulsion
418 C.E. Minorca Forced Conversion
469 C.E. Ipahan Holocaust
489 C.E. Antioch Synagogue Burning
506 C.E. Daphne Synagogue Burning
519 C.E. Ravenna Synagogue Burning
554 C.E. Diocese of Clement (France) Expulsion
561 C.E. Diocese of Uzes (France) Expulsion
582 C.E Merovingia Forced Conversion
612 C.E. Visigoth Spain Expulsion
628 C.E. Byzantium Forced Conversion
629 C.E. Merovingia Forced Conversion
633 C.E. Toledo Forced Conversion
638 C.E. Toledo Stake Burnings
642 C.E. Visigothic Empire Expulsion
653 C.E. Toledo Expulsion
681 C.E. Spain Forced Conversion
693 C.E. Toledo Jews Enslaved
722 C.E. Byzantium Judaism Outlawed
855 C.E. Italy Expulsion
876 C.E. Sens Expulsion
897 C.E. Narbonne Land Confiscation
945 C.E. Venice Ban on Sea Travel
1009 C.E. Orleans Massacre
1012 C.E. Rouen, Limoges & Rome Massacre
1012 C.E. Mayence Expulsion
1021 C.E. Rome Jews Burned Alive
1063 C.E. Spain Massacre
1095 C.E. Lorraine Massacre
1096 C.E. Northern France & Germany 1/3 of Jewish Population Massacred
1096 C.E. Hungary Massacre
1096 C.E. Ralisbon Massacre
1099 C.E. Jerusalem Jews Burned Alive
1100 C.E. Kiev Pogrom
1140 C.E. Germany Massacres
1146 C.E. Rhine Valley Massacre
1147 C.E. Wurzburg Massacre
1147 C.E. Belitz (Germany) Jews Burned Alive
1147 C.E. Carenton, Ramenu & Sully (France) Massacres
1171 C.E. Blois Stake Burnings
1181 C.E. France Expulsion
1181 C.E. England Property Confiscation
1188 C.E. London & York Mob Attacks
1190 C.E. Norfolk Jews Burned Alive
1191 C.E. Bray (France) Jews Burned Alive
1195 C.E. France Property Confiscation
1209 C.E. Beziers Massacre
1212 C.E. Spain Rioting and blood bath against the Jews of Toledo.
1215 C.E. Rome Lateran Council of Rome decrees that Jews must wear the "badge of shame" in all Christian countries. Jews are denied all public sector employment, and are burdened with extra taxes.
1215 C.E. Toulouse (France) Mass Arrests
1218 C.E. England Jews Forced to Wear Badges
1231 C.E. Rome Inquisition Established
1236 C.E. France Forced Conversion/Massacre
1239 C.E. London Massacre & Property Confiscation
1240 C.E. Austria Property confiscation. Jews either imprisoned, converted, expelled, or burned.
1240 C.E. France Talmud Confiscated
1240 C.E. England Book Burning
1240 C.E. Spain Forced Conversion
1242 C.E. Paris Talmud Burned
1244 C.E. Oxford Mob Attacks
1255 C.E. England Blood libel in Lincoln results in the burning / torture of many Jews & public hangings.
1261 C.E. Canterbury Mob Attacks
1262 C.E. London Mob Attacks
1264 C.E. London Mob Attacks
1264 C.E. Germany Council of Vienna declares that all Jews must wear a "pointed dunce cap." Thousands murdered.
1267 C.E. Vienna Jews Forced to Wear Horned Hats
1270 C.E. Weissenberg, Magdeburg, Arnstadt, Coblenz, Singzig, and Erfurt Jews Burned Alive
1270 C.E. England The libel of the "counterfeit coins" - all Jewish men, women and children in England imprisoned. Hundreds are hung.
1276 C.E. Bavaria Expulsion
1278 C.E. Genoa (Spain) Mob Attacks
1279 C.E. Hungary & Poland The Council of Offon denies Jews the right to all civic positions. The Jews of Hungary & Poland are forced to wear the "red badge of shame."
1283 C.E. Mayence & Bacharach Mob Attacks
1285 C.E. Munich Jews Burned Alive
1290 C.E. England King Edward I issues an edict banishing all Jews from England. Many drowned.
1291 C.E. France The Jewish refugees from England are promptly expelled from France.
1292 C.E. Italy Forced conversions & expulsion of the Italian Jewish community.
1298 C.E. Germany The libel of the "Desecrated Host" is perpetrated against the Jews of Germany. Approximately 150 Jewish communities undergo forced conversion.
1298 C.E. Franconia, Bavaria & Austria Reindfel's Decree is propagated against the Jews of Franconia and Bavarai. Riots against these Jewish communities, as well as those in Austria, result in the massacre of 100,000 Jews over a six-month period.
1306 C.E. France Expulsion
1308 C.E. Strasbourg Jews Burned Alive
1320 C.E. Toulouse & Perpigon 120 Communities Massacred & Talmud
C.E. Teruel Public Executions
1328 C.E. Estella 5,000 Jews Slaughtered
1348 C.E. France & Spain Jews Burned Alive
1348 C.E. Switzerland Expulsion
1349 C.E. Worms, Strasbourg, Oppenheim, Mayence, Erfurt, Bavaria & Swabia Jews Burned Alive
1349 C.E. Heilbronn (Germany) Expulsion
1349 C.E. Hungary Expulsion
1354 C.E. Castile (Spain) 12,000 Jews Slaughtered
1368 C.E. Toledo 8,000 Jews Slaughtered
1370 C.E. Majorca., Penignon & Barcelona Mob Attack
1377 C.E. Huesca (Spain) Jews Burned Alive
1380 C.E. Paris Mob Attack
1384 C.E. Nordlingen Mass Murder
1388 C.E. Strasbourg
C.E. Prague Mass Slaughter & Book Burning
1391 C.E. Castille, Toledo, Madrid, Seville, Cordova, Cuenca & Barcelona Forced Conversions & Mass Murder
1394 C.E. Germany Expulsion
1394 C.E. France Expulsion
1399 C.E. Posen (Poland) Jews Burned Alive
1400 C.E. Prague Stake Burnings
1407 C.E. Cracow Mob Attack
1415 C.E. Rome Talmud Confiscated
1422 C.E. Austria Jews Burned Alive
1422 C.E. Austria Expulsion
1424 C.E. Fribourg & Zurich Expulsion
1426 C.E. Cologne Expulsion
1431 C.E. Southern Germany Jews Burned Alive
1432 C.E. Savory Expulsion
1438 C.E. Mainz Expulsion
1439 C.E. Augsburg Expulsion
1449 C.E. Toledo Public Torture &. Burnings
1456 C.E. Bavaria Expulsion
1453 C.E. Franconia Expulsion
1453 C.E. Breslau Expulsion
1454 C.E. Wurzburg Expulsion
1463 C.E. Cracow Mob Attack
1473 C.E. Andalusia Mob Attack
1480 C.E. Venice Jews Burned Alive
1481 C.E. Seville Stake Burnings
1484 C.E. Cuidad Real, Guadalupe, Saragossa & Teruel Jews Burned Alive
1485 C.E. Vincenza (Italy) Expulsion
1486 C.E. Toledo Jews Burned Alive
1488 C.E. Toledo Stake Burnings
1490 C.E. Toledo Public Executions
1491 C.E. Astorga Public Torture & Execution
1492 C.E. Spain Expulsion
1495 C.E. Lithuania Expulsion
1497 C.E. Portugal Expulsion
1499 C.E. Germany Expulsion
1506 C.E. Lisbon Mob Attack
1510 C.E. Berlin Public Torture & Execution
1514 C.E. Strasbourg Expulsion
1519 C.E. Regensburg Expulsion
1539 C.E. Cracow & Portugal Stake Burnings
1540 C.E. Naples Expulsion
1542 C.E. Bohemia Expulsion
1550 C.E. Genoa Expulsion
1551 C.E. Bavaria Expulsion
1555 C.E. Pesaro Expulsion
1556 C.E. Sokhachev (Poland) Public Torture & Execution
1559 C.E. Austria Expulsion
1561 C.E. Prague Expulsion
1567 C.E. Wurzburg Expulsion
1569 C.E. Papal States Expulsion
1571 C.E. Brandenburg Expulsion
1582 C.E. Netherlands Expulsion
1593 C.E. Brunswick Expulsion
1597 C.E. Cremona, Pavia & Lodi Expulsion
1614 C.E. Frankfort Expulsion
1615 C.E. Worms Expulsion
1619 C.E. Kiev Expulsion
1635 C.E. Vilna Mob Attack
1637 C.E. Cracow Public Torture & Execution
1647 C.E. Lisbon Jews Burned Alive
1648 C.E. Poland 1/3 of Jewry Slaughtered
1649 C.E. Ukraine Expulsion
1649 C.E. Hamburg Expulsion
1652 C.E. Lisbon Stake Burnings
1654 C.E. Little Russia Expulsion
1656 C.E. Lithuania Expulsion
1660 C.E. Seville Jews Burned Alive
1663 C.E Cracow Public Torture &. Execution
1664 C.E. Lemberg Mob Attack
1669 C.E. Oran (North Africa) Expulsion
1670 C.E. Vienna Expulsion
1671 C.E. Minsk Mob Attacks
1681 C.E. Vilna Mob Attacks
1682 C.E. Cracow Mob Attacks
1687 C.E. Posen Mob Attacks
1712 C.E. Sandomir Expulsion
1727 C.E. Russia Expulsion
1738 C.E. Wurtemburg Expulsion
1740 C.E. Liule Russia Expulsion
1744 C.E Bohemia Expulsion
1744 C.E. Livonia Expulsion
1745 C.E. Moravia Expulsion
1753 C.E. Kovad (Lithuania) Expulsion
1757 C.E. Kamenetz Talmud Burning
1761 C.E. Bordeaux Expulsion
1768 C.E. Kiev 3,000 Jews Slaughtered
1772 C.E. Russia
C.E. Warsaw Expulsion
1789 C.E. Alsace Expulsion
1801 C.E. Bucharest Mob Attack
1804 C.E. Russian Villages Expulsion
1808 C.E. Russian Countryside Expulsion
1815 C.E. Lubeck & Bremen Expulsion
1820 C.E. Bremes Expulsion
1843 C.E. Austria & Prussia Expulsion
1850 C.E. New York City 500 People, Led by Police, Attacked & Wrecked Jewish Synagogue
1862 C.E. Area under General Grant's Jurisdiction in the United States Expulsion
1866 C.E Galatz (Romania) Expulsion
1871 C.E. Odena Mob Attack
1887 C.E. Slovakia Mob Attacks
1897 C.E. Kantakuzenka (Russia) Mob Attacks
1898 C.E. Rennes (France) Mob Attack
1899 C.E. Nicholayev Mob Attack
1900 C.E. Konitz (Prussia) Mob Attack
1902 C.E. Poland Widespread Pogroms
1904 C.E. Manchuria, Kiev & Volhynia Widespread Pogroms
1905 C.E. Zhitomir (Yolhynia) Mob Attacks
1919 C.E Bavaria Expulsion
1915 C.E. Georgia (U.S.A.) Leo Frank Lynched
1919 C.E. Prague Wide Spread
1920 C.E. Munich & Breslau Mob Attacks
1922 C.E. Boston, MA Lawrence Lowell, President of Harvard, calls for Quota Restrictions on Jewish Admission
1926 C.E. Uzbekistan Pogrom
1928 C.E. Hungary Widespread Anti-Semitic Riots on University Campuses
1929 C.E. Lemberg (Poland) Mob Attacks
1930 C.E. Berlin Mob Attack
1933 C.E. Bucharest Mob Attacks
1938-45 C.E. Europe Holocaust

By Aharon Feldman(An Address Delivered at the Agudath Israel Convention, November 1999)

This article can be found here ---

Tuesday, May 09, 2006

Liberal Conservative G-d

There is no such thing as exclusive liberalism or conservativism; both are after the same thing – truth. However, each defines truth in a relatively different way, but we can tell that they share in certain essentials when we look at where the extreme polar opposites of each ideology fall on the political spectrum; it is the far left and right extremists that begin to see eye-to-eye on certain issues. For example, an extremist liberal and conservative might both ferociously oppose abortion on grounds that it is murder; the liberal has his secular humanist paradigm and the conservative has his religious sacredness paradigm, but they both agree with absolute conviction that abortion is murder. As they move further down the ends of the political spectrum they believe more strongly that abortion is murder and are less flexible to viewpoints that deem it acceptable. In that, they begin to agree with each other almost completely; that abortion is absolutely intolerable. As they move away from the edges and towards the center, they begin to disagree more and more, until they start to near the center, where they begin to reach neutrality and even apathy. Why does the unseemly occur? Why do people begin to agree on fundamental issues the more they move towards the fringes of the political spectrum and to disagree the more centrist they become? The answer must be that the closer to the center one is, the more he is subject to pulls from both sides, i.e., the more he is influenced by truths upon which each side insists. This leaves him in a state of confusion or flux, moving back and forth around the center area and teetering between both sides of the spectrum and yet feeling pulled further to one edge or the other. The center extremity seems to be the location on the spectrum in which relativism of all types occur – the place where no truth and all confusion exist – it is “tohu vavohu,” chaos. The center extremity is not marked by any specific paradigm, there is nothing, other than a “happy medium,” for which the perfect center can attest, and the “happy medium” usually is marked by a lack of a stance rather than a stance; it is a netherworld of ideology. The closer to the edges that a person gets, the stronger he feels that neutrality and apathy are damaging and the more he feels that absolute truth is a must for society.

But even though a fringe lefty and a fringe righty stand face-to-face at opposite ends of the spectrum (in which the spectrum curves around like a ring and meets, with a space in the middle), they are still on opposite ends of the spectrum; they each stand for entirely different paradigms. How can they possibly agree on an issue? For example, both the fringe liberal and conservative feel with absolute conviction that abortion is murder, but one feels it on the grounds of a rational secular humanism and the other feels it on the grounds of a sacredness essential to G-d; are these not two opposing and contradictory viewpoints? No they are not; the fringe liberal has a solid and unwavering conceptualization of human value and dignity, not to mention a powerful conscious based on these notions, while the fringe conservative has a solid and unwavering conceptualization of the holy and sacred, not to mention also a powerful conscious based on these notions. It is at this point on the spectrum where a truth can be fostered, the type of truth that yields genuine peace, because an unwavering notion of human value and dignity and an unwavering notion of the holy and the sacred are the same thing! The secular humanism of the left reaches so far into the extremities that on its own it idolizes the human being to the status of G-d; it has the notion of human dignity down pat, but it is G-dless and therefore it cannot last and becomes what it detests. The sacred religiosity of the right too reaches so far into the extremities of the right that it stamps out all that is beautiful and harmonious about the sacred and becomes rigid and frozen; it removes the human element from the equation almost entirely – it can last, but only by force. In this spot is where the overt love of the human and his worth meets the overt love of the holy and its worth, and it is here, and only here, where the human being becomes holy. This is “G-d’s Spot,” this is where G-d intends for humanity to reside, and this is the intent of each of the commandments; at once they establish dignity towards human beings (and animals) and to the consciousness of the Divine, which is our G-d. That is why you cannot have a secular form of the Divine commandments and it is why you cannot have a form of religious piety divorced from the human condition. This is the Equilibrium of existence, which is the Torah, which is peace.

Monday, May 08, 2006

Gas Chambers vs. Refugee Camps

Hopefully this post is useless; hopefully the argument can be laid to rest, but just in case it can’t, here goes. The difference between Germany’s treatment of the Jews and Israel’s treatment of the Palestinians is so evident given the scope of history that the contrast doesn’t even need to be made. For the most part, I feel, lots of people already understand that such a comparison is futile and baseless, however, there are always those outspoken and mindless few whom are energetic in making their parallels of the Nazi regime and the Israeli state; some of them are Muslims. I think that to even cover this topic is kin to flogging a dead horse, but certain people never cease to amaze me, and it is to them that I dedicate this piece.

Before I get into the mechanics of the fallacious comparisons between Germany’s gas chambers and the West Bank’s and the Gaza Strip’s refugee camps, I must point out a bias that damages the entire analogical attempt before it is even constructed. There are many, many more numerous and more valid comparisons that a person can make to the Nazi regime’s gas chambers than the State of Israel, but the fact that the mindless individual whom chooses to make the comparison davka (spitefully) chooses to make the analogy to Israel, a Jewish enterprise, shows his eagerness to compare “the Jewish victim” to his aggressors. It is no ironic mistake of history that Israel is similar to Germany, in fact, it is not real at all; the entire comparison is founded simply on a desire to eradicate Jewish dignity and morale by comparing Jews to their worst oppressors and by comparing the Palestinians to Jews. It is a narrative of sorts, a narrative with no basis in reality. If you are a liberal radical Anglo-American, you make this analogy because you want something to strive for and are likely silly; if you are an Arab-American, you make this analogy because you come from a long tradition of Jew-hating, so deal with it.

Having said that, we can now examine the logical reasons as to why the comparison is flimsy. The Nazi’s carried out a vicious and systematic attempt to eradicate the entire Jewish population of Germany (and Europe). If I have to explain further how Germany and Israel are different thus far, I suggest that the reader open up a few history books before even reading on, or you can just take my word for it. Israel is not trying to eradicate the Palestinians by any stretch of the imagination; in fact, and if you like irony, it is the Palestinians that are trying to eradicate Israel -- just consider Hamas’ charter, which calls for, guess what, the eradication of the State of Israel. There are more comparisons between the Nazi Party and Hamas than between Germany and Israel, but cognitive dissonance is a favorite of people with hate in their blood.

There is no reason for the Israeli state to want to eradicate the Palestinians; all of the ideological conundrums of the Nazi war machine, backed by a long tradition of the European Christian anti-Semitic psychosis, simply has no parallel with Israel. The Israeli’s do not believe themselves to be a superior race of people, which they go to great lengths by providing bogus scientific “evidence.” They do not have a campaign in place to ship Palestinians into concentration camps where they can dispose of them in huge bonfires. They do not view them as so inhuman that even when eradicating them they try to save bullets. They do not believe that the Palestinians are vermin that are taking over the world and are by nature despicable mongrels. However, in epileptic pseudo-intellectual outbursts, the Palestinian propaganda machine attempts to mold the Palestinian into the image of the ghettoized Jew of the second World War, an appealing parable for heartless bleeding hearts, yet at the same time it denies that the Holocaust occurred or insists that it was hyped up. What then is the rationale for this comparison? Cognitive dissonance and ignorance, inability to properly process information or to think freely, the deep cultural internalization of propaganda from a very young age – these are the answers. Indeed, all of these are the same telltale forecasts predicting the morbid cloud hanging over Germany in what has become this century’s universal tale of the effective power of mental monopoly. Contrast this to the freedom of thought and speech that exists in the Israeli media circuit and the Israel-Germany analogy dematerializes and is replaced by a “Palestine”-Germany structure.

Further, this propaganda tries to transform the refugee camps into the concentration camps, which acts as fodder driving the Palestinians to "take up arms" against Israel and justifies the wholescale murder that they then take against its citizens. Note that even in the Jewish Ghetto Uprisings of the Holocaust, where the Jews were really being eradicated, resistant Jews did not prey on German civilians; they were so far removed from all civilian life that even had they wanted to kill civilian Germans, they were in totality separated from them and could not reach them. The Palestinians, on the other hand, are a rock's throw away from Israeli civilian society, a testament to the difference between Israel and Germany. It would be more accurate to compare the State of Jordan's 1979 "Black September" slaughter of some 3,000 to 5,000 Palestinians (although the killing was mutual) to Germany's elimination of Jews. Some people term the Jordanian massacre a genocidal attempt. The terrorist group whom kidnapped and murdered the eleven Israeli's during the Munich olympics named their group "Black September" after the Jordanian massacre.

*Note; Jordan's Palestinian population, behind Yasser Arafat's lead, was trying to create a Palestinian state within a Jordanian state, which led Jordan to expel him and according to Wikipedia, "The number of casualties in what resembled a civil war is estimated at tens of thousands, and both sides were involved in intentional killing of civilians. It was a turning point for Jordanian identity, as the kingdom embarked on the program of "Jordanization" of the society." It seems that both Israel and Jordan have had similar problems with the Palestinians, yet Israel acts, and is expected to act, radically different.

Israel’s media’s and liberal intelligentsia’s gravest sin is the guilt-ridden attempt to “prove” that Israel is the polar opposite of Germany, an internalization of all of the worst claims leveled towards it. The relationship between this heaping evidence and the effectiveness in reaching its desired goal is a transverse relationship; the more Israel provides evidence for its innocence of this charge, the more its accusers believe it is guilty. The reason for this is because Israel approaches its “trial” as if it is indeed guilty; you cannot convince others of your innocence if somewhere inside your troubled psyche you believe that you are guilty, and perhaps somehow deserving of such a fate. This particular Israeli (Jewish) ideology needs a whole new paradigm shift.

Sunday, May 07, 2006

Can I Have the "Hate Your Neighbor as Yourself" and Pass the "Love your Enemy!"

He is an “older Jew,” coming from a pre-State of Israel world, and like all Jews, lives in a post-Land of Israel world. He is one of the Jewry’s responses to and products of thousands of years of Exile, as we all are. I say this as an Orthodox Jew myself; he is a Chassidic Jew from Europe awaiting Messianic Redemption of the Land of Israel, and in 1948 we got (some of) the actual land back, but the Redemption was not there. Therefore, to some degree, his response is that of sharp honesty, a view of the bigger picture, that much is to be improved when it comes to Jewry, independent of the fact that we have established a (relatively) sovereign state in some of the borders of the land that belongs to us. In his mind, he is making the sharp contrast between the Land of Israel as the place that G-d delivered to the Jewish people to live out their lives in accordance with the commandments, and the State of Israel that was a response to the German Holocaust, and even though many religious Jews came there with the waves, there was a right of return, but no religious return. Their central thesis is that Zionism, a modernized (and thoroughly secular) conceptualization in its original form in the late 1800’s, is a bastardization of the real reason to return to the Land, real Torah living, real Judaism. The view is that G-d has not yet decided to return the exiled to their Land, and even though they may perhaps come on their own accord, they must come for reasons of Torah, not for reasons of escaping oppression. To some degree, Israel was erected as a safe haven for Jews to live freely, and there was no other place in the world where this could have been done, but years of the accumulation of other societies’ cultures, philosophies, and ways of life were superimposed on many of those same Jewish people and the State of Israel became a manifestation of those two things; safe haven and internalization of ways of life adopted in Exile. Any sort of awakening will be to begin touching on what it really means to be a Jew, the task of trying to remember what it was like before the thousands of years of Exile in which we’ve been, the fog that has haunted our memory, obstructed our knowledge of self, and is keeping us from the righteous living of the Torah.

But it also ignores the situation at hand and refuses to understand it. The creation of the State of Israel in 1948 was no Messianic Redemption, although it was miraculous and definitely implicative of G-d’s Hand behind the scene. It is true that G-d desires effort before perfection, and Israel, the State, seems to be one of those generational tests that the Jews receive; how will we respond to the next fork in the road? Will we take the right path or the wrong path? There has been a mixed response thus far. Other religious Jews, no less devout and committed to the Torah life than others, while understanding the shortcomings of the State notion, see the significance and potentiality of the State of Israel. Large groups of Jews congregating and creating their lives in (some of) the borders of the Land of Israel, reviving the language into spoken form (what did our sovereign ancestors speak on the soil of the Land?), and having at least some sovereignty, although making many concessions to the neighbors. The scenario is not as good as it should be and seems like a page right out of history, but the ability for growth is there, in the face of institutionalized secularism. We see that it is imperfect, but we cannot ignore the signs, we do not have the luxury to do so; we are less than halfway there and it is time for the people to speak – we want what is ours, we want to live right, we want to say what will we do and what we will not do – why is it acceptable to speak up for any ideal except the religious ideal? What makes any one ideal inherently better than another, or than the religious ideal then? Why can we not see that a wise return to proper living will provide equilibrium for us, give us our compass, and orientate us to our path? Why have we rejected such notions as the very existence of a compass; if we do not believe that we are lost then we do not need to be found – but our primal nature as human beings screams it, “We are lost!” We fear being like our neighbors in their religious extremism, and fear being like our own religious extremists. However, the cognitive dissonance here is astounding, for those secular Israeli’s that spurn the religious right, those who dream of a Greater Israel, completely and thoroughly ignore the religious kaleidoscope, that is, the segments of honest-to-Torah and G-d that radically reject the State. It is acceptable to reject the State in the most vociferous of forms as long as you are an atheist or an agnostic, but the secular Torah-spurning Israeli Jew that hates his country’s policies will never align himself with his “religious counterpart” because he just can’t stand how he looks. What is the difference between a secular anti-Israel Jew and a religious anti-Israel Jew, and if “anti-Israelism” is so the motivating factor of these two ideologies, why cannot they find room for alignment? The strangest truth is that each finds it more viable to align themselves with anti-Israel Palestinian groups than anti-Israel Jewish groups; each rather don the red, black, white, and green and stand at a pro-Palestinian rally than with each other. Each rather align with the enemy than with the friend, of whom the enemy they each see as a tool in our destruction (like Babylon or Assyria), a mark that we are giving ourselves to defeatism, that we embrace our enemies and spurn our friends; we love the enemy and hate our neighbors as ourselves.

Note: what the heck?

These Jews are real juicy nuggets for Palestinians, affirmations of all the propaganda they’ve been screaming for thirty eight years, but they have no clue as to the internal workings of the Jewish mind. This works to affirm the Muslim concept of triumphalism; the belief that Islam has replaced Judaism, which for the Muslim is the basis of such an allegiance. However, in this picture, we see a man standing in the name of what he deems to be authentic Judaism and a man that Muslims can’t even privately support as an authentic Muslim.

* I'll add some pictures later.
I am in correspondence (kind of) with this Muslim student in Chicago. She sent me a video of Yosef Cohen, the Jew that converted to Islam (known now by 'Yusuf Khattab'), I responded with this -- -- and she responded with this -- Occupation is a crime, from Israel to Palestine! -- and then I responded with this.

If you have the time, grab a map and help me find Palestine. If you knew your history, you'd know where that term comes from and to whom it was applied. And if you knew your Middle East history you'd know how the term came to usage and who coined it and why, but you don't, and like all other Muslims suffering from cognitive dissonance and an intellectual lack of honesty, you like to make "the Palestinian cause" out as if it has something to do with Islam, or something horribly false and insulting like that. There are Orthodox Jews today that stand against the State of Israel, and not on any moral basis, for morally they think that all the Arabs should leave Israel. Rather, they base their views on the fact that Israel is not a religious state and therefore not only do they view it as an insignificant harbinger of the Torah's Messianic expectations, they believe with all of their hearts and souls that it is pushing his coming away. I do not completely agree with them, but I have yet to find a Muslim so noble and honest as to be in utter rejection to the "State of Palestine" lie, which goes against the essentials of Islam in every fiber of its being. Muhammad didn't want states, i.e., countries, he envisioned a vast empire (Umma) where Sharia Law ran every aspect of life (as you probably know), this notion of "Palestine" that you hold in your head makes a mockery of his expectations and if any "real Muslims" had the guts to stand up and speak out for what was right, they would talk. What about the some twenty two Muslim majority countries of the Umma (or is it more?), surely those should be "Islamically" improved before "ya Falesteen" reaches the Islamic ideal? Yes? No? Please respond. Yaniv...

Thursday, May 04, 2006

For some the truth is an enemy - they spurn his presence - he is an unwelcome guest, an unwanted visitor - his voice is annoying - his appearnce is improper - they do not want him in their midst

For some the truth is a friend - they welcome his presence - he is a dear friend - his voice is melodious to the ear and calming to the eye - he gives them a feeling of propriety - his stay is welcome - they have missed him

For some the truth is a stranger - they feel neither joy nor irritation at his presence - they look at him with a blank face, not speaking to him, not looking at him, hearing nothing from his mouth, throwing him the smiles and frowns of a friend's guest, but ultimately asking him to leave, for he is a stranger

Tuesday, May 02, 2006

Either G-d exists or He does not.

When one is searching for an answer to a perplexing question, he can be led in the right direction in order to find the answer.

Sometimes this occurs to a person; he is led to a specific scenario in which he finds his answer. "Ha-mechin mitzadey gaver," "He (G-d) prepares the steps of man."

But what if a person uses G-d as a "tool" by which to calm his nerves when he is perplexed by a matter? He might say, "I do not know the answer now, but G-d will help me find it."

What if we were to imagine G-d as a mental structure existing in our minds to help us with this anxiety, but not a real Being (G-d forbid)?

If this were true, how could a mental structure "prepare the steps of man?"

If it were true, it would mean that the brain, somehow, has access to all information, that it knows everything.

However, if the brain knows everything, why is it that the person whom possesses the brain in his head does not know everything?

Does the brain know everything but also create a barrier to keep information away from our consciousness?

If so, then the brain is not "our brain," it is a living being with its own consciousness!

Either way, it is either the brain or G-d that has access to all information and "leaks" it to us; do we really believe that the brain is its own entity?

There is evidence for this, for the brain controls many human bodily functions without our control, permission, or authority; is this not fascinating?! Nothing a human being does is reason for the brain's behavior as such.

If we can concede that the brain controls our body (digestion, reaction, etc...), why do we vociferously reject that it can control our thoughts, or mental functions?

The brain is an outside actor planted in our head; why can we not believe that there is an outsider Actor Whom acts upon our brain?

If we reject both propositions, that the brain controls itself (and us) and that G-d leads the brain to information, then we are left with an unanswered proposal, that there is nothing.
Sin of Omission II

There are sections of Biblical history which the Q'uran must re-interpret. For example, the Q'uran is content enough leaving much of the Tanakh as it is, but if we do a side-by-side comparison of occurences recorded both in the Tanakh and the Q'uran, we see minor and major differences in the was those occurences were recorded. For example, the Q'uran has Moses saying saying things in a different manner than the Tanakh has him saying them. Which theory is more credible; that Moses said something and the Q'uran records it differently, or that the Q'uran's record is the genuine record and the Torah's account is the falsified version of the "original?" Keeping in mind that the Q'uran (and Islam) appeared in 722 CE and Moses lived some 3,000 years before this, I have never heard of a claim declaring that the newer document is original and the older document is the falsified version. Apparently, for Muslims, time travels in the other direction. The only sections which Muslim tradition claims the Jews falsified are sections that, if they were true, would validate Judaism, so they must be false if Islam is to command any credibility. Other than these sections, the Q'uran accepts the validity of the Tanakh's writings. It must because from where else would the Q'uran gain information about the figures and events of the Tanakh? It is not the Torah which has falsified the "original text," but the original text is the Torah and the Q'uran records what it needs how it needs in order to create a Muslim narrative. This had (and has) implications for Jews, otherwise I would say that Muslims can believe whatever they want. You cannot change a person's past into yours by chopping it up like a series of newspaper clippings. When I read the Q'uran, I realize that most of it is new material, save for some parts, which are altered sections of text from the Tanakh. These sections are "quotes" from the Tanakh, but they have been slightly altered and interjected with the new material, and this is the Q'uran, a relatively simple text, exluding the fact that it brought monotheism to the Arab world.