Reality-based statement, Number 5. It's an ancient and obvious maxim that if I pay your rent, I have a right to scrutinize your job hunting efforts. Completely overrides the notion that to criticize Israel is to be presumed to hate Jews. 
Posted on 03/20/2003 10:18:51 PM PST by FreeReporting
Want to make yourself really, really unpopular if you’re a Jew? Try saying that the world is witnessing a terrifying firestorm of hatred directed at Israel and the Jewish people, in which the British and Europeans are deeply implicated.
Since it is now a given in many circles that Israel is a threat to the world equal to North Korea, and that Ariel Sharon is a cross between Martin Bormann and Hendrik Verwoerd, you will find yourself accused of using the Holocaust to avoid any criticism of Israel’s behaviour. Because, well, you know, you Jews always stick together and are mighty quick to deal that persecution card.
‘Robin Cook, unfaithful yet again.’
Anyone who holds that view may as well skip what follows. More objective and fair-minded souls, however, might be deeply alarmed to learn of the evidence provided at a recent conference on anti-Semitism and the media at the Vidal Sassoon Centre for the Study of Anti-Semitism in Jerusalem.
This was scarcely a gathering of the Ariel Sharon fan club. Among academics and journalists from Israel, Europe, Britain and America were several left-wingers and liberals who were deeply hostile to Israel’s Likud government, believed that the settlements should be dismantled, and were troubled by the behaviour of some of Israel’s military. ‘There’s no doubt that Israel is committing human-rights violations on the West Bank,’ said Professor Yehuda Bauer, the distinguished Holocaust expert.
But there was equally no doubt, from what he and others said, that anti-Zionism is now being used to cloak a terrifying nexus between genocidal Arab and Islamist hatred of the Jews and deep-seated European prejudices.
Anti-Semitism is protean, mutating over the centuries into new forms. Now it has changed again, into a shape which requires a new way of thinking and a new vocabulary. The new anti-Semitism does not discriminate against Jews as individuals on account of their race. Instead, it is centred on Israel, and the denial to the Jewish people alone of the right of self-determination.
This is nothing to do with the settlements or the West Bank. Indeed, the language being used exposes as a cruel delusion the common belief that the Middle East crisis would be solved by the creation of a Palestinian state.
The key motif is a kind of Holocaust inversion, with the Israelis being demonised as Nazis and the Palestinians being regarded as the new Jews. Israel and the Jews are being systematically delegitimised and dehumanised — a necessary prelude to their destruction — with both Islamists and the Western media using anti-Zionism as a fig-leaf for prejudices rooted in both mediaeval Christian and Nazi demonology.
This has produced an Orwellian situation in which hatred of the Jews now marches behind the Left’s banner of anti-racism and human rights, giving rise not merely to distortions, fabrications and slander about Israel in the media but also to mainstream articles discussing the malign power of the Jews over American and world policy.
The Jerusalem conference heard chilling presentations about a phenomenon barely discussed in Britain: the virulent Arab and Muslim hatred of the Jews. This goes far beyond even the desire to finish off Israel as a Jewish state. Anti-Jewish hatred plays a crucial role in the fanatical jihadism that now threatens all of us in the West, pouring out in television programmes, newspapers and religious sermons throughout the Arab and Muslim world, and amounting to a new warrant for genocide.
The dominant message is that Jewish power amounts to a conspiracy to destroy Islam and take over the whole world. Truly mad theories circulate on Islamist Internet sites which have now convinced untold numbers of Arabs and Muslims that the Jews were behind both 9/11 and the Columbia space-shuttle disaster. Egyptian television transmitted a 41-part series which presented the notorious Tsarist forgery, the Protocols of the Elders of Zion — which purported to be a Jewish plot to control the world — as the truth. (This has prompted some Arab intellectuals to condemn such propaganda as both untrue and a tactical error, but these dissidents remain a small minority.) Meanwhile, Saudi media and religious sermons incite the murder of Jews.
According to the Arabic scholar Professor Menachem Milsom, this Arab and Islamist propaganda persistently dehumanised Jews by representing them as apes and pigs. A preacher at the totemic Haram mosque in Mecca said the Jews were ‘evil offspring’, the ‘destroyers of God’s word’, ‘priest murderers’ and the ‘scum of the human race’. The mediaeval Christian blood libel — the claim that the Jews kill children and drink their blood — has surfaced time and again in prestigious Arab newspapers.
And Zionism was equated with Nazism; just as the Nazis believed in the superiority of the ‘Aryan’ race, so Zionists (sic) believed they were the chosen people, which justified their own military expansion. This equation was not confined to a marginal few. Abu Mazen, said Milsom, the Palestinian Authority intellectual who is being talked about as Yasser Arafat’s prime minister in a ‘reformed’ administration, wrote as much in his doctoral thesis — in which he also said that the Zionists gave the Nazis permission to treat the Jews as they wished so long as this guaranteed their immigration to Palestine.
These sick outpourings are not so much religious or even fundamentalist doctrines as rooted in a fanatical totalitarian ideology. As Professor Bauer observed, the driving aim is the Islamic dictatorship of the world. Realisation of this utopia necessitates the destruction of the foundation creeds of Western culture, Judaism and Christianity — and especially Israel, the supposed personification of Western global power-lust, which was planted as an incubus on Arab soil as a result of the Holocaust.
Holocaust denial is therefore central to Arab anti-Semitism, the prejudice which such historical falsehood has helped to forge a strategic alliance with Europe. For it absolves Europe of its guilt over the Jews, and replaces it with European guilt towards Arabs displaced as a result of the Holocaust.
Europe has waited for more than half a century for a way to blame the Jews for their own destruction. So instead of sounding the alarm over genocidal Islamist Jew-hatred, Europeans have eagerly embraced the Nazification of the Jews, a process which really got under way with Israel’s disastrous invasion of Lebanon in 1982. This marked the beginning of the media’s systematic inversion of Israeli self-defence as aggression, along with double-standards and malicious fabrications, which have nothing to do with legitimate (and necessary) criticism of Israel and everything to do with delegitimising the Jewish state altogether in readiness for its dismantling.
So the conference heard about German accusations that Israel was using Nazi methods and (repeating a claim by Hamas) that the Monica Lewinsky scandal was a Jewish conspiracy against Bill Clinton. It heard of the Nazification of Israel in Sweden, where there were charges that the Israelis were exterminating the Palestinians, that the media were controlled by Jewish interests to suppress criticism of Israel, and that influential Jewish lobby groups were ‘spraying journalists with poison’.
It heard that in France Jews were vilified and excluded from public debate if they challenged the lies being told about Israel. It was shown a devastating French film Décryptage (Decoding) — which has been playing to packed houses in Paris — about the obsessive malevolence towards Israel displayed by the French media. It was told about the way the British media described Israel’s ‘death squads’, ‘killing fields’ and ‘executioners’ while sanitising Palestinian human bombs as ‘gentle’, ‘religious’ and ‘kind’. It heard about the cartoon in the Italian newspaper La Stampa during the siege of the Church of the Nativity in Bethlehem, depicting an Israeli tank pointing a gun at the baby Jesus who is saying, ‘Surely they are not going to kill me again.’
And of course there was Jenin, the so-called ‘massacre’ or ‘genocide’ reported as such by virtually the entire media, where in fact 52 Palestinians died, of whom more than half were terrorists, while Israel sustained (for it) the huge loss of 45 of its soldiers. This astonishing media distortion was conceded at the conference by the (extraordinarily brave) Palestinian politics professor Mohammad Dajani, who also observed that a distraught Palestinian public was — on this and other occasions — whipped up by biased and emotional Palestinian reporting which showed little concern for the truth. But the big lie of the Jenin massacre is now believed as fact, contributing to the belief that Israel is a criminal state.
Europeans have thus made themselves accomplices to an explicitly genocidal programme. But an even more striking feature is that, while the old anti-Semitism still festers away among neo-Nazis, the new anti-Semitism is a phenomenon of their sworn enemies on the political Left. So, as the Canadian law professor Irwin Cotler observed, we now have the mind-twisting situation where anti-Jewish hatred is harnessed to the cause of anti-racism and human rights, with Israel being compared to both Nazism and apartheid by those who define themselves against these ideologies. Such a travesty of the facts involves, of course, the implicit denial of the truth of those terrible regimes, quite apart from the prelude to annihilation created by such a lethal defamation of Israel. And even more counterintuitively, many Jews and Israelis on the Left also subscribe to this analysis — and even to the demonology of Israeli Nazism and apartheid — handing an effective weapon to those who dismiss the claim of a new anti-Semitism as Jewish paranoia or Islamophobia.
So what is the explanation for the Left’s position? Partly, it’s the old anti-imperialist and anti-West prejudice. Partly, it’s the view that only the powerless can be victims; so Third World people can never be murderers, and any self-defence by Western societies such as Israel must instead be aggression. Partly, it’s the post-modern destruction of objectivity and truth, which has ushered in the hegemony of lies. And partly, as the Left takes an axe to morality and self-restraint, it’s a golden opportunity to pulverise the very people who invented the damn rules in the first place.
A left-wing Polish journalist at the conference, Konstanty Gebert, got the real point. The Left, he said, could not face the fact that they had totally misconstrued the Middle East because this would undermine their whole philosophy. This was founded on the premise that reason could reconcile all differences; all that was needed in Israel was an enlightened government for reason to prevail. The evidence that we are facing a phenomenon which is not susceptible to reason would destroy that world view. It would also give credibility to the hated Sharon, whose demonisation is absolutely vital to the Left as a protection against the implosion of its whole ideological position.
So the evidence is being denied, and truth is being stood on its head. The result is the defamation of a people, the greater prospect of its destruction, and the disastrous failure of the populations of Britain and Europe to understand properly the threat that all free peoples now face.
Melanie Phillips is a Daily Mail columnist. Return to top of page
· Send comment on this article to the editor of the Spectator.co.uk
© 2003 The Spectator.co.uk
The new anti-Semitism
United they fall
Bush makes more sense than Kennedy
Hovering between fact and fantasy
Portrait of the Week
The Leader
Politics
Diary
Another Voice
Feedback
Media Studies
Mind Your Language
Banned Wagon
Ancient and Modern
High Life
Low Life
Singular Life
Maybe it's just late but (even) I find it a little hard to follow the convoluted reasoning by which the author reaches her conclusions.
Just as we don't have a problem distinguishing between the "regime" in Iraq and the Iraqi people and preferred folks draw some distinction between the US Government (under the Evil Clintonistas) and the American People, I fail to see how it is the State of Israel is somehow exempt from standing on its own merits and gets to play the victim of anti-Semitism without FIRST justifying how its actions are singularly "Jewish" in nature.
Personally, I think the State of Israel accomplishes this defamation more often than not when defending itself -- and its more heinous actions -- as a "Jewish" state.
It's much like our nation's claiming the special protections of the Almighty and calling itself "Christian" even as abortion remains the most common surgical procedure in the land and we yet export our Culture of Death and "saving graces of Western materialism" abroad and seek to "keep up with the Joneses" where the manufacture, sales and intentional destruction of human life for research purposes is concerned.
Given Father Abraham's petitioning the Almighty on behalf of the 50, the 30, the perhaps only 10 good people of Sodom -- and receiving the Almighty's assurance that He would not destroy Sodom if it meant killing even 10 good men in the process -- I don't always understand the "Jewish" nature of some of the State of Israel's actions. In fact, given the profound respect (and love) I have for the Jews as chosen by God to bring forth and recognize the Messiah, I find repugnant the notion that ALL of the State of Israel's actions always somehow equate to "Jewish".
Beginning with the terrorism used to lever the State into being in the first place. It was a bad precedent to set for folks at the I.R.A. and elsewhere. Few realize they don't get to play either the Jewish card or the Holocaust card and tend to get carried away with the efficacy of terrorism.
As a Catholic familiar with the "more Catholic than the Pope concept" ... sometimes I wonder that the State of Israel doesn't consider itself somehow "more Jewish than the Practicing Jews".
How else to explain the Knesset's holding forth on whether or not Orthodox Judaism is essentially equal to Reformed or Conservative Judaism? With events like that, I sometimes wonder that the State of Israel doesn't consider itself a Magisterium of sorts.
It's all very confusing ... particularly given the fact I don't believe any Jew could possibly defend the utterly immoral AND yet be a practicing Jew anymore than I believe there's such a thing as a pro-abort Catholic.
Shocking that our "good friends" the Saudis would encourage such things.
Such a shame is it not that Israelis don't agree to commit national suicide by unilaterally "giving" West Bank and Gaza to the Muslims. Surely this would lead to peace and cessation of Jihad! </sarcasm> And as far as the Christian mumbo jumbo in your post, Israel would not exist today if Jews had not been slaughtered and driven out of a Christian continent during WW2. And I think even you know this.
No ... I don't know that. (And I'd thank you to show some modicum of respect for my "Christian Mumbo Jumbo" as you set about defending the Jews on an "anti-semitism" thread.)
Many have argued that it's God's will that the UN and Britain were doing. In the grand scheme of things, if those two considerations are accepted reasons for the creation of Israel, Hitler's horrifying acts still would run a distant second to God's will in my book.
But you are not Jewish, are you? (Or Christian? I don't really know because it's never come up.)
Perhaps you discount God's will in the matter and believe the State of Israel simply was given to the Jews to help make up for the deaths and suffering of countless individuals during a war in which all sorts of folks -- including the mentally deficient, homosexual, Catholic and others were likewise targeted for concentration camps and "Good Deaths", if not also genocide.
It's not that I would discount this at all, Dennis. I understand the "guilt complex" was a factor where certain of those who had appeased Hitler and looked the other way both before and during the war where his efforts at redistributing and reducing entire populations was concerned.
I'm sure that was part of it. As were the intentions of those -- both communist and fascist -- who funded, organized and trained some of the terrorists involved in pressuring folks to "do the right thing" ... or "God's will" as it were.
My problem, of course, with the admixture is the way it makes it look as if God used the Holocaust of all things to effect Zion. This is absolutely unacceptable to me on purely theological as well as logical bases.
While I remain absolutely confident in God's ability to bring forth good from evil, it's likewise true that I believe He is the ONLY who can do so and I balk at the notion that it's the place of men to perform such alchemy in His name.
Given the utterly demonic way Jews have been targeted, slaughtered and hated subsequent to the creation of Israel ... something just doesn't add up, that's all. It's almost as if this Good Act has served to exacerbate and disseminate worldwide what once was the hatred of a madman and his bent regime.
Again, the fact that many key Jews involved on the terrorist end of the Zionist equation were connected so closely with both communists from the CCCP and fascists from Germany leaves me with the recurring nightmare that this was a two-fer trajectory by which they ensured a perpetuity of their hatred of the Jews AND managed to organize the radical arc of Islam the leninists had envisioned based primarily, if not solely, on the common threat and constant burr that was the newly-created State of Israel.
I can't help wondering, in other words.
As you may know, I'm perfectly acquainted with the efficacy of suffering. I'm not sure it counts as much, however, when you bring it upon yourself. There is a decided difference in Hitler's persecution and slaughter of innocents and acts of violence that, while absolutely evil and inexcusable, are themselves partly in retaliation for equally unjust actions.
Do you mean that the acts against Israel aren't anti-semitic because the Knesset hasn't published a paper defining the term "Jewish" to your satisfaction? The actions of the State of Israel have been in response to aggression and were not the origin of the aggression.
Perhaps you feel that in the light of the persecution of the Jews and the annihilation of whole Jewish communities throughout history, it would be considered more "Jewish" for the state of Israel to lay down arms and allow itself to be led like lambs to the slaughter by its enemies, which would doubtless cause you great sorrow in the light of the profound respect (and love) that you have for the Jews.
There is nothing "immoral" about preserving your own life under attack and in fact Pikuah nefesh (saving life) is one of the pillars of Judaism.
(I'd forgotten the point of her article ... sorry.)
In terms of the article, I think that the left treats everyone the way that the author describes them treating the Jews. No matter who you are, if they don't see you as one of them, they try to demonize you in everyone else's eyes so that any act of self-defense is seen as an act of aggression.
I also find the situation interesting in light of the left's support for hate crimes laws. They don't think anyone, Jewish or otherwise, should have to live in fear because of a racial or religious difference. If a Jewish person moved into an entirely Christian neighborhood and were bothered by the neighbors, they would want the neighbors punished. However, they have no sympathy for Israel even though the nation of Israel is basically dealing with a bunch of countries that just can't stand the fact that a Jewish nation exists in the "neighborhood."
No ... I don't know that.
I do! So do many others. Even Arabs have complained about Christian Europe thrusting it's "Jewish problem" onto them. Europe's Jews being run out of Europe and into Palestine. This was also going on prior to WW2. All the time I thank and compliment Christians who support Israel. I rarely post on Christian topics here. I must have posted twice to the priest scandal threads. But I speak objectively about WW2 and the crimes against Jews.
(And I'd thank you to show some modicum of respect for my "Christian Mumbo Jumbo" as you set about defending the Jews on an "anti-semitism" thread.)
I've have never understood any of your posts that bring in Christianity. I'm not the only one who finds such posts confusing. But these posts are scarce these days as you hang out at LF. Good night.
What exactly is the relationship of the Knesset to Judaism? I would very much like to understand. Have they authority to make pronouncements on the relative substance of the difference Jewish practices? Is the State of Israel a "religious" as well as secular authority?The actions of the State of Israel have been in response to aggression and were not the origin of the aggression.For it seems to me that a pronouncement on the relative validity of Orthodox, Reform and Conservative would have ramifications outside the State of Israel were practicing Jews actually citizens of Israel to recognize such edicts as binding somehow.
(The weight given to the State of Israel and Israelis where all things "Jewish" are concerned these days being EXACTLY the point of your article, of course.)
I don't know ... I'm asking you.
A nation born in part of political murder is not entirely blameless from the get-go.Additionally, if DennisW is correct and the State of Israel was confected out of the blue in reparation for Hitler's sins, I don't much understand why those actually living on the land at the time had to pay the price that was summary eviction. These all are troubling questions and I don't think there are any easy answers. It's certainly not as black and white as you're making it out to be.
There is nothing "immoral" about preserving your own life under attack and in fact Pikuah nefesh (saving life) is one of the pillars of Judaism.
Believe it or not, the "right to life" on which is premised all notions of self-defense and just war is a self-evident concept.(All evidence to the contrary as Christian and Jew alike embrace the Culture of Death which has killed tens upon tens as many unborn in the womb as Hitler killed in the concentration camps.)
But I'm glad you bring that up. Off-topic, I know, but it's my understanding, though, that -- as at Masada -- sometimes suicide is a viable option as opposed to Christianity where it's an absolute moral evil always.
Is that true or have I misunderstood somehow?
"Christian" Europe ... that would explain the CCCP's being loathe to let them go, I guess.
All the time I thank and compliment Christians who support Israel
But are you a Christian? I'm just curious. I never thought to ask before.I've have never understood any of your posts that bring in Christianity. I'm not the only one who finds such posts confusing.
Let me know what it is you don't understand and I'll be happy to try and make it more clear.But these posts are scarce these days as you hang out at LF.
Many of my favorite posters hang out at LF. They follow the stories I like to follow and are able to post sources there that are not allowed here anymore. Over there, folks still are able to canvas the gamut of sources in an effort to sift fact from fiction without worrying that someone is going to take an Onion article seriously or anything.Also, as you know, I'm not a single-topic poster like you. (Even if nearly every single one of my posts will sound a note on the Sanctity of ALL Human Life.)
In addition to the Blood Trail, Balkans, Baku-Ceyhan, "former Soviets", Catholicism, the homosexual agenda, etc. etc. ... lots of those zany atheist libertarians were folks I loved to argue with for the last five years. Just as they kept me around this place more often than not, they keep me around that place arguing about social issues, "rights" and the existence of God.
I may think they're dead wrong but I find their posts provocative and interesting. I like trying to understand better the Age of Atheism in which we live and -- it's not secret -- see if I can't bring them round to my way of thinking on occasion.
It's exactly such sophmoric comments as that which have dulled the attraction this place once had for me though I'm still attached to this place and follow folks I love over here as well.
I fail to see what my hanging out at LF has to do with my posts on this thread and -- given the fact you must spend an inordinate amount of time over there -- it's curious the way you seek to impugn folks by association with the place.
It's still a kinda free country, DennisW. Your style is not so very different sometimes from the sort of "CommieNazi" mentality you allege to recognize as evil.
As you mentioned in an earlier posting Jews are continually redefining attitudes and interpretations of holy writings even within sects are common and acceptable and the subject of continuing debate. Agreeing on a single "Judaism" is as impossible at this stage as deciding on a single "Christian church".
The Knesset is a political and not religious body.
Your talk of "summary eviction" I presume was intended to describe Arab evictions? As far as I know properties were purchased from Arab owners legally according to the laws of the land at the time. When the State of Israel was declared there were Arabs who left the country on the advice of the Mufti who promised that they could return after the conquest of the Jews to land and houses that had been improved. The same situation probably applies to Jews from Arab countries who left properties behind them when they were airlifted to Israel to escape prosecution.
The Bible?
The Bible which consists not only of the Old Testament but also the New Testament in which Christ proclaimed a New Covenant in which all men -- all human beings -- could participate?
I understand the concept of "chosen". No question but what Abraham's willingness to give his beloved son in sacrifice evidenced his being one of God's own. It is little wonder -- particularly when you read the Psalms -- that it's the Jews who were chosen to bring forth and recognize the Messiah who rode an ass into Jerusalem.
Well, I guess in a way I keep thinking that it was trust in God or death at the hands of the Romans that were the only two alternatives. I still can't justify suicide even if I can relate absolutely to the way folks in Rwanda were BEGGING the Belgian UN troops to machine gun them to death rather than leave them to be hacked to pieces instead.As you mentioned in an earlier posting Jews are continually redefining attitudes and interpretations of holy writings even within sects are common and acceptable and the subject of continuing debate. Agreeing on a single "Judaism" is as impossible at this stage as deciding on a single "Christian church".Agreed on the absolute rarity of suicide. It's just that I came across some reference once to a justification of suicide from the Jewish perspective which alluded to Masada as example. I'll do some more digging. It's an interesting question for me because I can't conceive of a God -- even Allah -- who could justify, much less require, suicide.
I do believe there is a decided difference between being martyred and committing suicide and I think it points to a definite lack of moral justification for Muslim suicide bombers.
I'd just like to make that distinction more clearcut if I can.
Well, not quite. Catch me on a Catholic thread for more on the difference between the Church and protestants.
The Knesset is a political and not religious body.
That was my understanding. I just don't understand why the pronouncement was necessary in the first place. Had the State of Israel been making a distinction somehow between Orthodox, Reformed and Conservative which needed remedying? I tried to understand this at the time but didn't get very far and it's still a puzzle to me.
Your talk of "summary eviction" I presume was intended to describe Arab evictions? As far as I know properties were purchased from Arab owners legally according to the laws of the land at the time. When the State of Israel was declared there were Arabs who left the country on the advice of the Mufti who promised that they could return after the conquest of the Jews to land and houses that had been improved. The same situation probably applies to Jews from Arab countries who left properties behind them when they were airlifted to Israel to escape prosecution.
It does appear to have been one big mess and plenty of broken promises from the very beginning. I know the perverse actions of radical Arabs only serve to exacerbate the situation ... leaving plenty of otherwise innocent folks caught in the middle and losing both property and life. I don't see how the situation ever will be resolved.If there were a blueprint for the "perpetual conflict" that is the ideal of all revolutionaries, I guess this would have to be it.
Nice use of a conjunction. They are two separate things, after all.
Then one could argue that the "two-fer" as you describe it, where socialist, atheist Jews meant the creation of Israel for evil, God also meant for good.
The problem in the Middle East is not just Jews, it is Christians as well, as the destruction of Christian dominated Lebanon shows.
Yes, there is a problem of evil in the Middle East, but its roots lie in the twisted religion of Islam and the literal mental instability that it nurtures in its civilization.
And the problem of evil in Europe derives from the fact that, as a civilization, they have substituted the State for God, and thus have no inclination to wisdom, playing to politics instead of the truth.
I know this may not be a popular view among some Christians, since I think many people have the misperception that when Christ spoke it all pertained to Christians.... but that is not the case. Paul's messsage of God's grace and reconciliation was for all, but Christ spent most of His ministry preaching the Kingdom to the Jews, the promised Kingdom he will establish when he returns at the end of this age and where he would rule for a 1000 year reign of peace. Many of Christ's parables were targeted to the Jews... many specifically to the Pharisees. (Most notably the parable of the rich man and lazarus.)
You might also find it interesting to read Barbara Tuchman's "Bible and Sword" where she explores the forces that led up to the Balfour and creation of Israel. Those forces were at work long before Hitler and the Holocaust.
Well, that's my point, actually. God can bring forth good from an act of evil but cannot purpose the evil act himself. No way he "meant" for the terrorists to kill anyone nor intended this ongoing bloodbath and lightning rod of suffering, intrigue, intimidation and mistrust for "good". In any case ... I fail to see how we can conceive of that notion, even, until some good does come of the situation. So far, thinking in those terms makes God look downright impotent.they have substituted the State for God, and thus have no inclination to wisdom, playing to politics instead of the truth.Also, I can't reconcile the notion of "atheist Jew". I think once you're an atheist, you are an atheist Soviet, an atheist American, an Atheist Englishman or atheist Israeli but you can no longer call yourself a Jew.
Agreed absolutely.I don't buy the connection between Islam and literal mental instability, however. If, for no other reason, than it's the Muslim nations who yet resist most strongly the strongarming of the UN and the United States where birth control and abortion are concerned.As a Catholic, I can assure you that the politicization of the Gospel is always a deadly endeavor ... measured in both lost souls and dead bodies.
Many Muslims are staunch defenders of life.
A perfectly cynical person (particularly one who has been bent and twisted by decadent post-Christian eugenics and the scare-tactics of population control) might argue they are simply trying to "outbreed" us by retaining archaic laws on the defense of life.
I might argue that any nation or faith which remains true to natural law and respects the work of the Author of Life, can't help but be strong.
That said ...
Islam is at heart a Christian heresy.
Like any heresy, it it decays and results in real injustices and even evil. No question but what Islam is not exactly a religion of peace and indeed has tried more than once to destroy Christianity. (The Crusades make more sense all the time, no?)
But again, like any heresy, it yet retains certain Goods of Christianity which account for its ease of adoption and even attractiveness.
I don't think any objective invetory of the Muslim world fail to note the many real contributions many Muslims have made to mathematics, architecture and philosophy. To write Islam off as mentally unstable is a bit superficial, I think ... as is equating radical Islam with devout and peaceful Muslims. They do exist.
This substituting of the State for God is something we're all tempted to do, I guess. I'm thinking not only of your comments on Europe (many Enlightened having mistaken Europe for Christendom and failed to build their subsequent utopias on solid ground as a result) but also the way our own nation is conning us into tradiing liberty for "security".
It's possible we are placing too much trust in a government which consistently seeks to ban God from the public square (save for when rationalizing a decision to use already-been-killed human life as mulch, perhaps) even as it extends special protections of Free Speech to for-profit pornography -- even Cyber childsex ... so long as it's "faked".
I don't think a Supreme Court which can't tell when a human life begins has any business pretending it has the discerning to differentiate between obscenity and Free Speech.
Bottom line ... I believe we're seeing the Triangulation of the People of the Book by illumined or enlightened atheists -- both avowed and still calling themselves Jew, Christian or Muslim.
... heretofore Christian soldiers being turned into either peace and justice pansies or taking God's name in vain as they stamp his name on less than just wars.
... Muslims being radicalized into militance and turned into terror machines for purely political purpose (CCCP and China worked long and hard at this)
... Jews being co-opted by the State of Israel as authority and arbiter of all things "Jewish" -- rather than obedience to God or faithfulness to the law of their fathers -- and being used to crank the hostilities somehow.
I think there are those who have found it more expedient to use religion for purposes of engendering hate and discord such that the State ends up the Grand Inquisitor and authority over all.
Indeed, the forces were at work for a couple centuries in advance. I will definitely look for her book, thanks!
You know ... a priest I heard speak recently mentioned that one reason the early Christians were so hard on the Pharisee was because many had been Pharisees themselves. A sort of distancing from or repudiation of their past.
And I suspect more than a few of the early Christians -- many of whom yet practiced Judaism as well -- had to remember that indeed Gentiles were every bit the "target audience" that their fellow Jews were. Only natural it would be that way, I suppose.
I have not doubt that the Bible is responsible for very much in this world today. Morality, AngloSaxon Rule of Law, and 91% of the world's conflicts are rooted in the Holy Book's teachings.
I for one beleive what the Bible states in the Old Testament, and understand the different/influence/change to the New Testament. Much of what these writings reveal were written before the current state of affairs in the Arab World or the arrival Allah.
I know I'm not much help. I did study about 24 hours of religions in school, but totally missed the Islamic one for which I did not have an interest due to my perception that it was unimportant (Boy, was I ever wrong)!
Well now, that sort of says it all.
Let me lay my cards on the table first: I am a believing, practicing and loyal Roman Catholic.
I also believe that the State of Israel is showing remarkable restraint toards the enemies that are trying to destroy it. I believe that the Palestinians have no legitimate grievances of any kind against either the State of Israel or against individual Jews. I believe that there should be no Palestinian state in the land of Israel.
But I take issue with the demonization of Christianity for two reasons: (1) it is grossly exaggerated and (2) it serves no tactical purpose.
The blood libel was invented as a slander against the Jews in ancient Egypt by the pagan priest Manetho before Christianity was ever heard of - and the blood libel exists nowhere in early Christian literature. It only became current in Europe after Europeans returned from the Crusades in the Middle East.
The Europe from which the Jews were driven was certainly not a Europe which still practiced Christianity as a daily faith - one-half of the voting population of 1930s Europe was affiliated with militant atheism of either the Communist, Syndicalist or Socialist variety.
Fascism was an openly pagan movement, with Mussolini calling for the restoration of the ancient Roman Empire and Hitler extolling the virtues of a nature religion reminiscent of the ancient Canaanites.
Did millions of Christians fail in their moral responsibilities toward their Jewish neighbors? Undoubtedly. My great uncle did not - he died at the Nazi camp in Gusen for hiding undesirables in his rectory.
But the fact today is clear: the vast majority of devout, practicing Christians support the State of Israel and the struggle of the Jewish people for self-determination.
Badmouthing Christians and Christianity serves absolutely no purpose.
If anything we are a Meta-Christian Nation, where the "Meta " includes all the Christian Sects, Diests, Jews, Muslims, occasionaly G-d Fearing agnostics, and utopians of various exotic stripes,
The US has always been a "religious" state. It is impossible NOT to a religious state. The only real question is what "religion"?
Israel is a JEWISH PLACE. Note I said PLACE.
As the Creator mapped and set the world, that is the way the is.
What can I say but that in 1938 Europe was considered a Christian continent with a Jewish minority. The Middle East was considered Muslim turf (territory) with a minority of Christians and Jews. People took their religions more seriously back then. Religions permeated the social and cultural life more so than today. There wasn't TV, video games, computers etc. to clutter one's mind with images, distractions. Yes, the nazis were pagans and so were many (but far from all) of their followers.
The Europe of June 1945 found 60%-65% of European Jews killed or having fled. 60%-65% is my quick estimate based on numbers below. The 3 URLs below give Jewish population estimates. Percentage killed by Nazis in WW2.
http://www.holocaustchronicle.org/HolocaustAppendices.html
http://www.nizkor.org/qar-complete.cgi
http://www.us-israel.org/jsource/Holocaust/36quest1.html#5
How many Jews were murdered in each country and what percentage of the pre-war Jewish population did they constitute?
- Answer: (Source: Encyclopedia of the Holocaust)
Austria 50,000 -- 27.0%
Italy 7,680 -- 17.3%
Belgium 28,900 -- 44.0%
Latvia 71,500 -- 78.1%
Bohemia/Moravia 78,150 -- 66.1%
Lithuania 143,000 -- 85.1%
Bulgaria 0 -- 0.0%
Luxembourg 1,950 -- 55.7%
Denmark 60 -- 0.7%
Netherlands 100,000 -- 71.4%
Estonia 2,000 -- 44.4%
Norway 762 -- 44.8%
Finland 7 -- 0.3%
Poland 3,000,000 -- 90.9%
France 77,320 -- 22.1%
Romania 287,000 -- 47.1%
Germany 141,500 -- 25.0%
Slovakia 71,000 -- 79.8%
Greece 67,000 -- 86.6%
Soviet Union 1,100,000 -- 36.4%
Hungary 569,000 -- 69.0%
Yugoslavia 63,300 -- 81.2%
In 1923 he incurred a latae sententiae excommunication by joining a proscribed anti-Catholic secret society. That excommunication was never lifted or absolved in any way.
Hitler never said that he was on a "mission for Christ." Please produce your evidence for this absurd claim, referencing the date and primary source.
Your post implies that you have an extremly immature worldview, don't know very much about history or the Catholic Church and that you have absolutely no courtesy or respect for others.
I will pray for you.
I never badmouth Christianity in general. Israel has many Christian friends and many more Christians who don't buy into the Muslim Jihad lies about Israel. But I do speak about the specifics of the Europe of 1930-1950. This was a Christian continent than drove out it's Jews. Even after 1945 Jews were driven out and many just fled from despair and poverty. Many non Jews also wanted out of post war Europe. To be fair: Not all European Jews were driven out and killed. Roughly 65% were.
The numbers shows the Nazi machine killing far more Jews in Eastern Europe than in Western Europe. Most of the death camps, extermination camps were in Poland.
If Israel expelled their 1,100,000 Palestinians tomorrow, the comments would be the Jews drove out their Muslim population. Others would say the Israelis drove out their Arab minority.
I think two important historical phenomena disprove that: (1) the Holocaust, (2) the almost complete and utter dominance of openly anti-Christian and anticlerical Socialist and Communist parties in every major European country except Spain.
The fact that the largest cohort of Jews in Europe lived in Catholic Poland for centuries with minimal social friction, and then the fact that after barely three years of Nazi rule more than 3 million Polish Jews were murdered shows the difference.
Two groups were systematic targets of the Nazi persecution in Poland: first and foremost the Jewish people in general (men, women and children) and secondarily, the Catholic clergy.
If Christians were truly allies or architects of anti-Semitic persecution then one would expect the Polish clergy to have occupied a place of honor among the Nazi conquerors. Instead, they were almost eliminated. 7,000 of them were killed, including 1,500 at Auschwitz. About one-third of the Polish clergy were killed, about one-third were imprisoned and about one-third went into hiding.
I don't cite these stats as a comparison, since nothing can compare to the suffering of Polish Jewry - but as an illustration of the fact that Nazism had very little to do ideologically with Christianity.
Apology accepted.
By the way, true study of God's Holy Word is based not upon the cutting-and-pasting of the eisegesis of others, but by careful and prayerful study of the Word itself - preferably in the original languages.
I highly recommend this approach.
Many of my favorite posters hang out at LF. They follow the stories I like to follow and are able to post sources there that are not allowed here anymore.Not really. But I've no doubt that your and Dennisw's constant harping on the place (as if you yourselves spend a great deal of time there) only piques the curiosity of folks. For those interested in the sorts of "Pursuit of Liberty" symposium threads that used to take place here or the gamut of research-provoking disinfo once picked apart here in a quest for the truth of events as well as the desires of those shaping events, it can be an interesting read.Well now, that sort of says it all.
The sites are not so very different in substance and style where your primary subject of interest is concerned:
This is exactly the sort of garbage which does take the shine off LF as well as Free Republic. It's just less one-sided over there, that's all.
And while I do not "filter" posts out of principle there, it's true that one has the option of being subjected to such mindless tripe thanks to the post rating system which -- though a subject of controversey itself -- alleviates both the waste of time that is repeated banning of disruptors and helps to keep the single identities of posters a constant. The fact that posters from both sides of the argument end up "below ground" suggests that there is some parity to the system.
Each place has its own good and bad qualities. I think you do this place a disservice, actually, by constantly inviting comparison to other sites and speaking as if a poster's participation elsewhere is somehow grounds to impugn their posts here.
Of late, I've spent most of my time at LF criticizing masturbation, asking atheists whether or not human nature is permanent, learning more about Japan's attempts to surrender in WWII and wondering why we did bomb Nagasaki and Dresden absent any particular strategic necessity. Additionally, I'm keeping tabs on the Balkans, Baku-Ceyhan, the "journalists as terrorists" Richard Perle saga and the actions of other possibly comprimised Interested Parties as well as Blood Trail stuff and the continuing use of sexual perversion as means of control by globalists.
I fail to see how any of that has any bearing on this thread and your "guilt by association" thoughtpolice tactics seem awfully idiotic and downright paranoid as a result.
I realize you may wish it did -- and in many respects, it does, does it not? -- but the world doesn't really revolve around Israel.
Really thought-provoking post, bvw. I'm going to give your "Jewish place" a little more consideration. Jerusalem's certainly a nexus, no doubt, recognized first by the Jews to whom God did give that and many other places as they annihilated their enemies and took the spoils, "killing all that breathed" ... all with the confidence that is knowing these acts were ordained by God.
Meta-Christian ... still bugs me somewhat given the fact that we are denying absolutely the peculiarly Christian discernment by which respect for life (particularly the weak), the institution of holy matrimony (which actually liberated women and children thanks to patriarchy) and the ability to objectively distinguish among other cultures (as good or bad) without losing respect for the individuals a part of that culture (each of whom was deserving of the genuine liberation that was the Word).
I think we've become an meta Anti-Christian nation in many respects. Our deconstruction of it in the name of "tolerance" and such being the far more deadly attack on it than the overt targeting of Christianity by the courts.
Once again, Israel is subjected to the criticisms of "true conservatives" while Rhodesia and South Africa were considered beyond reproach for doing the very same things (indeed, anyone who criticized them was a "commie").
You have obviously never read your Bible (at least the front part of it). Do you want to know what a truly Jewish state would do? I'll tell you.
It would expel the entire non-Jewish population and allow non-Jews to live there only if they were practicing Noachides and even then only during periods when the yovel ("jubilee") year was in effect.
It would destroy all non-Jewish places of worship just as they were to have destroyed the high places of pagan "gxds" in the Biblical era.
Perhaps you are unfamiliar with the Biblically-mandated wars of annihilation against the Canaanites and `Amaleq, in which every man, woman, child, and even animal was to be put to the sword? Perhaps you are unaware that in the case of an `ir niddachat (a Jewish city that had strayed after idolatry) not only was it to be treated the same way but destroyed and never again rebuilt?
It is amazing how ignorant so many chr*stians are of "their own" Bible. Doubtless you find all this quite crude and horrific by chr*stianity's more liberal standards, but unless you are a religious liberal who believes the Bible is the work of men you're stuck with all this (even if you believe the rules changed two thousand years ago, which is hardly a conservative position).
It's no longer my job to "look busy" at some sinecure.
I've been taking care of family for a few months and do not have the time I used to.
I'm around, it's just that my posts reflect the same proportion of interest in all things Zionist as they always did and so have dropped off to nearly zero, as a result.
Perhaps this is one reason I've yet to be "recruited" by Stormfront at LF.
You never did answer my question ... have you any religious affiliation yourself?
Well, actually no. If you keep reading, you'll find I get to that eventually.
Thank you for your insights on the fact that Israel is not a strictly "Jewish" state. How would you describe it instead? "Democratized", or what?
Assuming the same realities where God's will is concerned yet apply to the Jews, I guess I don't understand what has changed.
I agree with you, actually, that we should employ more consistency in both our criticism and support of other nations. I never understood why -- despite the bodies floating down bloody rivers like logs -- Rwanda was dismissed as some "internal conflict into which we cannot intervene" while the alleged genocide in Serbia mandated military intervention.
If it's any consolation, perhaps Israel receive more than its share of scrutiny and criticism in direct proportion to its receiving more than its share of aid and diplomatic concessions. One must admit there is no real parity on that score either, regardless whether or not one supports our special relationship with the State of Israel.
Really? One would never know that looking at LF, where Israel and Jews are all that is "debated". So what do you like best about that sinkhole? The Jewhating, the America hating, the bashing of FR, or the Holocaust denial?
Reality-based statement, Number 5. It's an ancient and obvious maxim that if I pay your rent, I have a right to scrutinize your job hunting efforts. Completely overrides the notion that to criticize Israel is to be presumed to hate Jews.
Okay, give me the history of the country of Palestine. Who were it's Presidents/Kings or whatever? When was it established as a nation? What form of government did it have? What was its currency.
Oh, there was no nation of Palestine?
Just as I thought.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.