"Chaim Ben Pesach laughs at the flotilla killing" - Peace Now smear video

[wonga66]

There is a Torah concept of "quid pro quo" - midda kneged midda - that in the very nature of a punishment itself there is a hint at the reason for the punishment

Rav Elchanan Wasserman stated that because the vast majority of Jews in pre-war Europe totally relinquished Torah, and even became anti-Torah, falling prey to the ideologies of (atheistic secular) Nationalism and Socialism, so too were they punished by the arising of a strange movement that combined these normally antagonistic bedfellows: Nazi = Nazional Sozialist = National Socialist!

To understand the Holocaust you must study "Shoah - A Jewish Perspective on tragedy in the context of the Holocaust" (Artscroll 1990) and "Confronting the Holocaust" (R.Binyomin Zeev Kahane, 2002). in additon to feitman's article. But you of course will read none of them!

[Kahane-Was-Right BT]

There is a Torah concept of "quid pro quo" - midda kneged midda - that in the very nature of a punishment itself there is a hint at the reason for the punishment

Rav Elchanan Wasserman stated that because the vast majority of Jews in pre-war Europe totally relinquished Torah, and even became anti-Torah, falling prey to the ideologies of (atheistic secular) Nationalism and Socialism, so too were they punished by the arising of a strange movement that combined these normally antagonistic bedfellows: Nazi = Nazional Sozialist = National Socialist!

To understand the Holocaust you must study "Shoah - A Jewish Perspective on tragedy in the context of the Holocaust" (Artscroll 1990) and "Confronting the Holocaust" (R.Binyomin Zeev Kahane, 2002). in additon to feitman's article. But you of course will read none of them!

Why would I not read them?

I asked you to quote from the article here.  Why can't you do that?  If you are confident it says what you say it says, then you'll quote it here.   As I don't own copies of these articles, I can't read them!   

But your suggestion that Nazis took from the Amalek of the Bible and treated us based on that "as God planned it," is spurious.  For one, you sound like you're implying that we deserved it for "treating" amalek that way (are you serious?), and 2.  What sense does it make to say "God planned it?"  You have removed free will from the world.  Hitler y''s was not God.

Since you don't reply to direct questions, I'll quote you again:

Remember: the very concept of genocide -the extermination of an entire people - which didn't exist before, is an unnatural G-dly concept and comes straight from the Torah (viz.the genocide of Amolek: men, women, children and animals!). 

This statement remains incoherent.   What sense does it make to say that something "didn't exist before" but then in the same sentence saying it "derives" from the Torah.  Obviously then, if it is true that it derives from there, the notion did exist before.  (But who says there was never genocide before the Torah?   Do the animals in Africa and Darfur exterminating one another look at the Torah for inspiration?  Seems pretty "natural" to those savages to me).

And what sense does it make to call something an "unnatural Godly concept"  "straight from the Torah?"   Is this some kind of oxymoron?    Unnatural Godly?    In what way is it "unnatural" ?   And what do you mean by "Godly?"    Please consider how war was fought in the ancient world before you answer.

[Kahane-Was-Right BT]

With all due respect, it is the most presumptuous approach to try to explain the "reasons" for the Shoah (especially when it consists of blaming the victims rather than the perpetrators), and if you notice, the actual survivors who went through it and lived to talk about it don't engage in such sophistry.

[wonga66]

You haven't read BZK's shiur on the subject?

Just what kind of a Kahanist are you?!



Avail yourself of it. It is required reading, & you are speaking from abysmal ignorance.

[muman613]

wonga,

you are quite disturbed if you think being a nazi is something to be proud of.

In my opinion you are very far from Judaism since you constantly attempt to create baseless hatred amongst the Jewish people and your love of everything nazi.

I do not feel any Ahavat Yisroel for you, like ben, since you have not once spoken words of praise for any Jew or expressed anything positive about Judaism. Every post I have ever witnessed you post is always divisive, abusive, and absolute lashon hara against the Jewish people... Of course you call everyone who doesnt have your bizzare world view an erev rav, but that is part of your disorder..

[wonga66]

I said that if a true Kahanist like Rav Kahane or Chayim is called by other nominal Jews, "a nazi", then it's a sure sign he's doing something right, and is something to be proud of!

The Rambam says that if a goy insults a Jew, that's a good sign, a sign that he is of the Am Nivchar, and is actually a mark of honor.

To be insulted is excellent!

[muman613]

I said that if a true Kahanist like Rav Kahane or Chayim is called by other nominal Jews, "a nazi", then it's a sure sign he's doing something right, and is something to be proud of!

The Rambam says that if a goy insults a Jew, that's a good sign, a sign that he is of the Am Nivchar, and is actually a mark of honor.

To be insulted is excellent!

Yes, I have heard that... I thought you were saying something else...

Im sorry for misreading that...

I do not want a conflict with you wonga... I am trying to learn from yesterdays Parasha of Korach and what is so sad is that good Jews have fought between themselves since the start of the Jewish nation. We can argue and we can berate till the end of days but I hope that we can work together to see the coming of Moshiach.

I know that the reason we have enemies, enemies we must deal with harshly, is because Hashem is testing us. We must rise to the test and exhibit the trait of Din on our enemies, we must act with absolute justice and withhold the mercy that we desire. Like Abraham was asked to kick Ishmael and Hagar out of the house, and more like how he was asked to take Yitzak as a sacrifice on the altar, sometimes Hashem wants us to act with justice. As you point out 'middah keneged middah' the justice will be deserved and it will be harsh against the enemies.

[Ben m]

I said that if a true Kahanist like Rav Kahane or Chayim is called by other nominal Jews, "a nazi", then it's a sure sign he's doing something right, and is something to be proud of!

The Rambam says that if a goy insults a Jew, that's a good sign, a sign that he is of the Am Nivchar, and is actually a mark of honor.

To be insulted is excellent!

i am agree.if every time that a leftist call me nazi i et so proud beacuse i know i am on the tracks!

[AsheDina]

THEY are the damned Nazis. THEY are the ones that want Israel obliterated

[IsraeliGovtAreKapos]

II. What Does Shemuel Add?

Shemuel's statement is unique among all the other mishnayot in Pirkei Avot in that he merely cites a pasuk from Mishlei, without adding any explanation or commentary. Evidently, he felt that the theme contained in the pasuk was so crucial that it bore constant reiteration, and he would therefore cite this proverb often. The pasuk in Mishlei (24:17-18) reads: "When your enemy falters do not rejoice (bi-nfol oivekha al tismach), and when he stumbles do not feel glee (u-ve-koshlo al yagel libekha), lest Hashem notice and disapprove (pen yireh Hashem ve-ra be-einav), and avert His anger from him (ve-heishiv mei-alav apo)." This pasuk, which warns against triumphant celebration at our enemies' demise, raises numerous moral and theological questions. Perhaps the most famous application of this theme occurs on Pesach, when we refrain from reciting full hallel on the seventh day (and, by extension, during Chol Ha-mo'ed) since the Egyptians drowned on that day. As the gemara in Sanhedrin (39b) narrates, Hashem told the angels who wished to recite hallel at the time of keri'at Yam Suf, "My creatures are drowning at sea, and you will recite hallel to me?" Based on this gemara, the Shulchan Arukh (O.C. 490) rules that only half-hallel is recited after the first day of Pesach. (Recently, with the welcome death of Yasser Arafat - a murderer responsible for the brutal death of thousands of innocent Jews - this question resurfaced.)

This scripture talks about personal enemies, when 2 Jews fight, they shall not be happy with the other's fall. Regarding Israel and their enemies, it's the opposite, we're obligated to rejoice with their fall, because it's sanctifying G-D's Name.

Rabbi Kahane answers this here (hope you understand Hebrew):

http://www.rabbikahane.org/kahane/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=627:-q-18488&catid=45:2008-05-29-08-52-48&Itemid=129

He brings this Talmud (תלמוד מגילה דף טז עמוד את, Masechet Meggilah Daf 16 Page את) here:
 "אמר ליה סק ורכב אמר ליה לא יכילנא דכחישא חילאי מימי תעניתא גחין וסליק כי סליק בעט ביה אמר ליה לא כתיב לכו (משלי כד) בנפל אויבך אל תשמח אמר ליה הני מילי בישראל אבל בדידכו כתיב (דברים לג) ואתה על במותימו תדרוך"

I don't know how to translate it to English though, I think you may have studied it already.

Anyway, in general, we learn from it that after you've already destroyed them, humiliate them, by stepping on their stages (the stages back then were centers of Idol-worshipping and were the cultural symbol of many cultures, including the Persian one).

http://www.jlaw.com/Articles/war3.html

 B. Seeking Peace Prior to Starting War

Two basic texts form Jewish law's understanding of the duties society must undertake before a battle may be fought. The Bible (Deuternomy 20:10) states:

When you approach a city to do battle with it you should call to it in peace. And if they respond in peace and they open the city to you, and all the people in the city shall pay taxes to you and be subservient. And if they do not make peace with you, you shall wage war with them and you may besiege them.

Thus the Bible clearly sets out the obligation to seek peace as a prelude to any military activity; absent the seeking of peace, the use of force in a war violates Jewish law. Although unstated in the text, it is apparent that while one need not engage in negotiations over the legitimacy of one's goals, one must explain what one is seeking through this military action and what military goals are (and are not) sought.35 Before this seeking of peace, battle is prohibited. Rabbi Jesse Hagalili is quoted as stating "How meritorious is peace? Even in a time of war one must initiate all activities with a request for peace"36 This procedural requirement is quite significant: it prevents the escalation of hostilities and allows both sides to rationally plan the cost of war and the virtues of peace.

Rabbi Shlomo Yitzchaki (Rashi), in his commentary on the Bible, indicates that the obligation to seek peace prior to firing the first shot is limited to Authorized wars. However, in Obligatory or Compulsory wars there is no obligation to seek a peaceful solution. Indeed, such a position can be found in the Sifri, one of oldest of the midrashic source books of Jewish law.37 Maimonides, in his classic code of Jewish law disagrees. He states:

One does not wage war with anyone in the world until one seeks peace with him. Thus is true both of authorized and obligatory wars, as it says [in the Bible] "when you approach a city to wage war, you must first call out for peace." If they respond positively and accept the seven Noachide commandments, one may not kill any of them and they shall pay tribute ...

Thus according to Maimonides the obligation to seek peace applies to all circumstances where war is to be waged. Such an approach is also agreed to in principle by Nachmanides.38

It is clear, however, according to both schools of thought, that in Authorized wars one must initially seek a negotiated settlement of the cause of the war (although, it is crucial to add, Jewish law does not require that each side compromise its claim, so as to reach a peaceful solution).39 Ancillary to this obligation is the need that the goal of the war be communicated to one's opponents. One must detail to one enemies the basic goals of the war, and what one seeks as a victory in this conflict.40 This allows one's opponents to evaluate the costs of the war and to seek a rationale peace. Peace must be genuinely sought before war may begin.

There is a fundamental secondary dispute present in this obligation. Maimonides requires that the peaceful surrender terms offered must include an acknowledgement of and agreement to follow the seven laws of Noah, which (Jewish law asserts) govern all members of the world and form the basic groundwork for moral behavior;41 part and parcel of the peace must be the imposition of ethical values on the defeated society. Nachmanides does not list that requirement as being necessary for the "peaceful" cessation of hostilities.42 He indicates that it is the military goals alone which determine whether peace terms are acceptable. According to Nachmanides, Jewish law would compel the "victor" to accept peace terms which include all of the victors' demands except the imposition of ethical values in the defeated society; Maimonides would reject that rule and permit war in those circumstances purely to impose ethical value in a non-ethical society.43

The Peace (Shalom) we offer is derived from the word "Hashlama" (acceptance) that they accept our rule without war, the peace is actually the surrender conditions (they accept the 7 Noahide laws, and be a tax-slave (I think it's translated to English this way; be a slave to the Kingdom, and pay a special tax, the Rambam explains this in Halachot Melchaim).

If they accept the conditions, there will be peace - and then we're forbbiden to touch the hair on the head. But if they don't accept even one condition, we never hear them until they accept them all. That's actually the Peace we offer, and when we come to a city we offer it to get out, make peace (according to our conditions) or war.

THESE RULES DO NOT APPLY TO SITUATIONS WITH MOAV, AMON (we don't offer them peace) AND AMALEK (the Arabs and the Muslims are Amalekites), with Amalek the very point of fighting them is to ELIMINATE them off the face of the earth in order to Sanctify G-D's Name.

[Kahane-Was-Right BT]

You haven't read BZK's shiur on the subject?

Just what kind of a Kahanist are you?!



Avail yourself of it. It is required reading, & you are speaking from abysmal ignorance.

I'm not speaking from ignorance.  My Talmud rebbe has a similar opinion.  So do lots of survivors.  Notably, Benyamin Zeev Kahane ZT"L was obviously not a survivor himself.   I stand by what I said.

To be a "Kahanist" does not mean I have to agree with every single thing said by a person named Kahane (whether the Rav ZT"L or his son).    To me it is very presumptuous to state "why" the holocaust happened.   No pamphlet will change that.   Rav Yosef Ber Soloveitchik was of similar view to what I am saying.   We can only look at what happened and try to grow from it.   To say "Why" a tragedy happened (why as in why did G-d do it or why were we punished, why did righteous suffer, etc etc) will not get an actual answer and is a vain exercise.

But more than that, I have serious reason to doubt your veracity whenever you claim to present the views of a Rabbi here.   So once I read what it actually says, then I'll respond.   However, posting a picture does not help if I don't have the text available to me.

As to the question "what kind of" Kahanist I am, I am the kind who uses his brain to think with the information I have available to me.   Unfortunately some choose not to do that.

Personally, I'm all for holding the perpetrators responsible, rather than blaming the victims.   As is in line with the existence of free will in the world -a foundational concept that underlies all of Judaism.   

[Kahane-Was-Right BT]

The Rambam says that if a goy insults a Jew, that's a good sign, a sign that he is of the Am Nivchar, and is actually a mark of honor.

Really?  Where?   Please cite the location of the statement.

And what is the translation of Am Nivchar, please?

[IsraeliGovtAreKapos]

And what is the translation of Am Nivchar, please?

It means Chosen people.

[Kahane-Was-Right BT]

II. What Does Shemuel Add?

Shemuel's statement is unique among all the other mishnayot in Pirkei Avot in that he merely cites a pasuk from Mishlei, without adding any explanation or commentary. Evidently, he felt that the theme contained in the pasuk was so crucial that it bore constant reiteration, and he would therefore cite this proverb often. The pasuk in Mishlei (24:17-18) reads: "When your enemy falters do not rejoice (bi-nfol oivekha al tismach), and when he stumbles do not feel glee (u-ve-koshlo al yagel libekha), lest Hashem notice and disapprove (pen yireh Hashem ve-ra be-einav), and avert His anger from him (ve-heishiv mei-alav apo)." This pasuk, which warns against triumphant celebration at our enemies' demise, raises numerous moral and theological questions. Perhaps the most famous application of this theme occurs on Pesach, when we refrain from reciting full hallel on the seventh day (and, by extension, during Chol Ha-mo'ed) since the Egyptians drowned on that day. As the gemara in Sanhedrin (39b) narrates, Hashem told the angels who wished to recite hallel at the time of keri'at Yam Suf, "My creatures are drowning at sea, and you will recite hallel to me?" Based on this gemara, the Shulchan Arukh (O.C. 490) rules that only half-hallel is recited after the first day of Pesach. (Recently, with the welcome death of Yasser Arafat - a murderer responsible for the brutal death of thousands of innocent Jews - this question resurfaced.)

This scripture talks about personal enemies, when 2 Jews fight, they shall not be happy with the other's fall. Regarding Israel and their enemies, it's the opposite, we're obligated to rejoice with their fall, because it's sanctifying G-D's Name.  

Now that you mention this, I remember Rabbi Bar Hayim's shiur in which he explained that pasuk the same as you do here.  If one is exacting in the language of the pasuk, it's about a personal Jewish enemy, not speaking about a national situation.  

Notice the singular case "him" not plural "them"

[Kahane-Was-Right BT]

And what is the translation of Am Nivchar, please?

It means Chosen people.

Thank you.

[muman613]

The only pleasure one should get from defeating the enemy is the knowledge that doing so is a sancification of Hashems name, no other person reasons. Hashem is the one who defeats our enemies and we should not believe it is from our own doing, and in our own merit.

This is even evident from the Shuir HaYam, when they clearly say "This is our God, let us make him a dwelling...".

I believe that any enjoyment from confrontation with enemies should be only LaShem Shamayin, for the sake of heaven..

[wonga66]

"They shall be for devouring" (Devarim 31:17) - 'whoever is not included in the prophecy of they shall be for devouring is not a Jew' (Chagiga 5).

"It is incumbent for us to rejoice in all that we undergo in misfortunes & loss of property and exile and destruction, for all this is our glory before our Creator and a great honor!" (Rambam, Iggeres l'Teiman).

When a Goy shouts at a Jew "Dirty Yid!", he is thus really exclaiming "Prince!".
When a Jew shouts "Nazi" at a Kahanist, he is thus really exclaiming "Bechir Hashem!".

The Rambam says that if a goy insults a Jew, that's a good sign, a sign that he is of the Am Nivchar, and is actually a mark of honor.

Really?  Where?   Please cite the location of the statement.

[judeanoncapta]

"They shall be for devouring" (Devarim 31:17) - 'whoever is not included in the prophecy of they shall be for devouring is not a Jew' (Chagiga 5).

"It is incumbent for us to rejoice in all that we undergo in misfortunes & loss of property and exile and destruction, for all this is our glory before our Creator and a great honor!" (Rambam, Iggeres l'Teiman).

When a Goy shouts at a Jew "Dirty Yid!", he is thus really exclaiming "Prince!".
When a Jew shouts "Nazi" at a Kahanist, he is thus really exclaiming "Bechir Hashem!".

The Rambam was trying to give chizuk to yemenite Jews undergoing persecution. That does not mean that for all time, exile and destruction should be viewed as a badge of honor.

The Rambam says that if a goy insults a Jew, that's a good sign, a sign that he is of the Am Nivchar, and is actually a mark of honor.

Really?  Where?   Please cite the location of the statement.

[Kahane-Was-Right BT]

"They shall be for devouring" (Devarim 31:17) - 'whoever is not included in the prophecy of they shall be for devouring is not a Jew' (Chagiga 5).

"It is incumbent for us to rejoice in all that we undergo in misfortunes & loss of property and exile and destruction, for all this is our glory before our Creator and a great honor!" (Rambam, Iggeres l'Teiman).

When a Goy shouts at a Jew "Dirty Yid!", he is thus really exclaiming "Prince!".
When a Jew shouts "Nazi" at a Kahanist, he is thus really exclaiming "Bechir Hashem!".

The Rambam says that if a goy insults a Jew, that's a good sign, a sign that he is of the Am Nivchar, and is actually a mark of honor.

Really?  Where?   Please cite the location of the statement.

You have distorted and misrepresented the Rambam's statement, as is clear from what you wrote here.   If this was intentional, shame on you.

[Ben m]

"They shall be for devouring" (Devarim 31:17) - 'whoever is not included in the prophecy of they shall be for devouring is not a Jew' (Chagiga 5).

"It is incumbent for us to rejoice in all that we undergo in misfortunes & loss of property and exile and destruction, for all this is our glory before our Creator and a great honor!" (Rambam, Iggeres l'Teiman).

When a Goy shouts at a Jew "Dirty Yid!", he is thus really exclaiming "Prince!".
When a Jew shouts "Nazi" at a Kahanist, he is thus really exclaiming "Bechir Hashem!".

The Rambam says that if a goy insults a Jew, that's a good sign, a sign that he is of the Am Nivchar, and is actually a mark of honor.

Really?  Where?   Please cite the location of the statement.

You have distorted and misrepresented the Rambam's statement, as is clear from what you wrote here.   If this was intentional, shame on you.

he gave us the exact quote.he can't distorte this.

[Kahane-Was-Right BT]

"They shall be for devouring" (Devarim 31:17) - 'whoever is not included in the prophecy of they shall be for devouring is not a Jew' (Chagiga 5).

"It is incumbent for us to rejoice in all that we undergo in misfortunes & loss of property and exile and destruction, for all this is our glory before our Creator and a great honor!" (Rambam, Iggeres l'Teiman).

When a Goy shouts at a Jew "Dirty Yid!", he is thus really exclaiming "Prince!".
When a Jew shouts "Nazi" at a Kahanist, he is thus really exclaiming "Bechir Hashem!".

The Rambam says that if a goy insults a Jew, that's a good sign, a sign that he is of the Am Nivchar, and is actually a mark of honor.

Really?  Where?   Please cite the location of the statement.

You have distorted and misrepresented the Rambam's statement, as is clear from what you wrote here.   If this was intentional, shame on you.

he gave us the exact quote.he can't distorte this.

Understanding a quote requires reading comprehension.   What he said originally is NOT what the Rambam says in the quote.

And the part added in red was obviously his own addition, which tried to make the two things (ie, what he said vs what Rambam said) seem more commensurable when they really are not.   Maybe he sincerely thought they were, but I disagree and think anyone who understands English can see this.

[MasterWolf1]

The way I see it, these morons are actually giving us such a great gift by making us so public. Call em by the name I gave em "Piss Now"

[Hyades]

Maybe these evil peace now idiots can join the Arab cartoonists:
http://www.adl.org/main_Arab_World/The+Arab+Medias+Response+to+the+Gaza+Flotilla.htm

[wonga66]

Mike Wallace vs Meir Kahane on this clip


Mike Wallace: "You proposed a law for the Kneset to pass that's really astonishingly identical to the Nuremburg laws of the Nazis under Adolf Hitler!

R.Kahane: "One of the problems of Jews is that they wouldn't know a Jewish concept if they tripped over one. I merely quoted from the Talmud. Most Jews think that Judaism is Thomas Jefferson: It's not!"

see the article "The Master Race and the Chosen People" (Rabbi Yaakov Feitman, "A Path Through the Ashes", p 109, Artscroll)

[wonga66]

"Thus when a gentile cries 'Jew!' he is saying 'Prince!'.

When Montefiore travelled through Wasaw in his baronial coach, accompanied by liveried footmen and a lordly equipage, a Polish streetboy ran after the carriage and shouted 'Zhid!'. The Jewish lord had the boy brought before him, and he gave him a shilling, saying "In England I am called the Lord Mayor of London, Sir Montefiore and other titles. But above all my honors, I cherish the title which you have called me: Jew!"."

(Sing You Righteous 1973, Rabbi Avigdor Miller p281).