Author Topic: Hamas Senior Official Nizar Rayyan Killed (Read 3100 times)

eb22 · « **on:** January 01, 2009, 08:32:09 AM »

Hopefully, many thousands more of these Hamas beasts will be killed soon:

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=a43u8SD46nWk&refer=home

Dan · « **Reply #1 on:** January 01, 2009, 08:37:04 AM »

Already some Great News in 2009!

Ben Yehuda · « **Reply #2 on:** January 01, 2009, 08:38:56 AM »

MasterWolf1 · « **Reply #3 on:** January 01, 2009, 10:02:32 AM »

It is a great way to start off the New Year.

Zelhar · « **Reply #4 on:** January 01, 2009, 11:38:34 AM »

Apparently the the IDF had warned the ~~people~~ Amalekites inhabitants of the house of an impending attack but they refused to leave hoping that the presence of civilians will make the IDF abort its plans.

Lewinsky Stinks, Dr. Brennan Rocks · « **Reply #5 on:** January 01, 2009, 12:56:34 PM »

Absolutely pathetic. Six days and 300 tons worth of bombs and all Israel has to show for it is one dead Hamas commander.

Yeah, like taking out one guy is going to stop the onslaught of rockets and abduction of soldiers. The fact that people continue to call this a "war", let alone a "genocide" (in the eyes of the Jew-hating world) proves just how lost and clueless they are.

Why Israel's people haven't spontaneously risen up and lynched Olmert for this favorite game of make-believe of his is not something I can answer.

Zelhar · « **Reply #6 on:** January 01, 2009, 01:03:22 PM »

Quote from: C.F. on January 01, 2009, 12:56:34 PM

Absolutely pathetic. Six days and 300 tons worth of bombs and all Israel has to show for it is one dead Hamas commander.

Yeah, like taking out one guy is going to stop the onslaught of rockets and abduction of soldiers. The fact that people continue to call this a "war", let alone a "genocide" (in the eyes of the Jew-hating world) proves just how lost and clueless they are.

Why Israel's people haven't spontaneously risen up and lynched Olmert for this favorite game of make-believe of his is not something I can answer.

Because rising up is something that backward people who are used to extreme violence do.

Lewinsky Stinks, Dr. Brennan Rocks · « **Reply #7 on:** January 01, 2009, 02:28:12 PM »

Quote from: Zelhar on January 01, 2009, 01:03:22 PM

Because rising up is something that backward people who are used to extreme violence do.

Newsflash, the Jewish people have been subjected to extreme violence throughout their 4,000-year history. Why there is so much toleration for Judenrat Nazis like Olmert and kin is something I can't understand even factoring in the great secularity and level of brainwashing of Israel. One Judenrat kapo like Kastner, Noam Chomsky, or Olmert (yimach schmam vezichram) is more deadly to Jews than a thousand German or Muslim Nazis.

Zelhar · « **Reply #8 on:** January 01, 2009, 02:40:34 PM »

Quote from: C.F. on January 01, 2009, 02:28:12 PM

Quote from: Zelhar on January 01, 2009, 01:03:22 PM
Because rising up is something that backward people who are used to extreme violence do.
Newsflash, the Jewish people have been subjected to extreme violence throughout their 4,000-year history. Why there is so much toleration for Judenrat Nazis like Olmert and kin is something I can't understand even factoring in the great secularity and level of brainwashing of Israel. One Judenrat kapo like Kastner, Noam Chomsky, or Olmert (yimach schmam vezichram) is more deadly to Jews than a thousand German or Muslim Nazis.

There is a difference between being subjected to violence and being used to applying violence. In my opinion people only rise up when they have nothing to lose, and right now the Jews have something (materialistic) to lose. People have jobs, money, they have order, these are concurrent things while for most people the threats are too abstract (and I mean the real big threats and not the imminent ones like we are facing right now). Of course in the case of the Jews, they might not even rise up against Judenrat traitors even when they have nothing to lose.

Lewinsky Stinks, Dr. Brennan Rocks · « **Reply #9 on:** January 01, 2009, 02:52:10 PM »

Quote from: Zelhar on January 01, 2009, 02:40:34 PM

There is a difference between being subjected to violence and being used to applying violence. In my opinion people only rise up when they have nothing to lose, and right now the Jews have something (materialistic) to lose. People have jobs, money, they have order, these are concurrent things while for most people the threats are too abstract (and I mean the real big threats and not the imminent ones like we are facing right now). Of course in the case of the Jews, they might not even rise up against Judenrat traitors even when they have nothing to lose.

I think that you hit the nail on the head with your last sentence. The problem is secularity, Marxist brainwashing, and postmodernism (which are all related, of course). At one time, Jews were used to applying violence, to their enemies (in the days of the Bible). G-d commanded the Jews to wipe Nazi nations off the face of the earth, like the Canaanites and Philistines, before they were able to perpetrate Shoahs against them. Since most Jews are secular today, they not only reject that, but have bought into society's teachings that "all people have rights" and other such nonsense. Therefore, even though according to every poll the vast majority of Israelis know the Arabs want to murder them all, by pretty overwhelming margins, they still believe the Fakestinians have a "historical claim" to part of Israel.

As for having "something to lose", the Muslim Nazis don't care much about losing their jobs, families, houses, etc. when they do what they do (not that many of them have jobs to begin with, but that is besides the point). The difference between Muslim Nazis and Jews/Christians is that the former are so confident of their beliefs that they are not just willing to die for them, but EAGER to. By contrast, most Jews and Christians are not only unsure of what they believe, but are far from convinced that they are right, and Nazis wrong. This is what postmodernism has done to hundreds of millions of Western minds over the last two generations, and it's why the West is dying.

CorrieDeservedIt · « **Reply #10 on:** January 01, 2009, 04:43:02 PM »

http://news.aol.com/?feature=232890

this article says it has claimed 400 palestinians lives.

as if implying or trying to say how evil Israel is.

Muck DeFuslims · « **Reply #11 on:** January 01, 2009, 04:49:16 PM »

C.F.,

You go too far if you believe that there aren't secular Jews (and Christians) that would like nothing more than to see the utmost (as you term it) 'application of violence' on the koranimal enemy.

Conversely, you'd also be mistaken if you believe that there aren't religious or observant people that would be merciful to the most evil enemy imaginable.

The religious are not all immune from the abhorrent post-modernistic cultural and moral relativism that you rightfully condemn, nor are the secular all infected with this miasma of insanity.

However, as a generality what you say is, in fact, true.

Maybe religious people understand better than their secular counterparts that, at heart, the conflict in Israel (and in many other places around the world) is not solely about land - but is in fact a religious war. Maybe religious people have a better sense of right and wrong, good and evil than secular people do. Maybe religious people, as a rule, are more principled, disciplined and committed than seculars.

I think a good case can be made for all of the above.

So while your premise about secular people isn't universally true - as far as generalizations go - it is a good and accurate one.

muman613 · « **Reply #12 on:** January 01, 2009, 04:56:32 PM »

I have read that at least 300+ terrorists have been killed with only 60 civilians killed. That is fantastic and something to be celebrated. Israel is doing a great job in eliminating those who pose an immediate threat to the stability of the nation. Those killed were involved in launching missiles into Israel each day.

Israel is correct in not trying to kill them all at this time. There will come a time when the arabs will be removed from the land. But I think it is not going to be accomplished by killing them all. C.F. has erred in his understanding of what G-d asked the Children of Israel to do when they entered the promised land. Even the Cannanites were given a chance to leave without having to be killed. G-d doesnt want the Jewish people to go around killing all the nations, that is not our mission.

Anyone who studies the works of the great Torah commentators realizes that the Jewish nation is not implored to kill all transgressors or those who oppose Israel. We have an imperative to serve Hashem in his holy land. We have been promised by Hashem to be kicked out of the land when we don't follow Torah, we are promised we will be powerful and mighty in the world if we follow the Mitzvot.

I think that the problem is that too many Jews have turned their backs on Hashem and as he promised we are beset with beasts in our land. Emmunah, fundamental faith in Hashem, is essential if Israel wants to gain easy entrance to the land.

Lewinsky Stinks, Dr. Brennan Rocks · « **Reply #13 on:** January 01, 2009, 07:33:07 PM »

Quote from: Muck DeFuslims on January 01, 2009, 04:49:16 PM

C.F.,

You go too far if you believe that there aren't secular Jews (and Christians) that would like nothing more than to see the utmost (as you term it) 'application of violence' on the koranimal enemy.

Yeah, but they are few and far between.

Quote

Conversely, you'd also be mistaken if you believe that there aren't religious or observant people that would be merciful to the most evil enemy imaginable.

True, there's the Rabbi Ovadia Yosef-style wing of orthodox Charedi Judaism, that teaches that we must try to spare Arab lives.

Quote

The religious are not all immune from the abhorrent post-modernistic cultural and moral relativism that you rightfully condemn, nor are the secular all infected with this miasma of insanity.

True again, but those who have a solid grounding in the difference between right and wrong are more likely to be able to resist relativism and PC-ness.

Tzvi Ben Roshel1 · « **Reply #14 on:** January 01, 2009, 11:37:48 PM »

cf- "True, there's the Rabbi Ovadia Yosef-style wing of orthodox Charedi Judaism, that teaches that we must try to spare Arab lives."

That is simply not true. Infact the exact opposite. I am happy to see in this conflict many more people and Rabbis saying not to spare even civilians. The whole issue (that took place in the past) with Shas was not having war becuase of Jewish lives and not sparing the Arabs. You know what, I am sick and tired of you, who isn't even Jewish to keep spewing your venim and disrespect to and for Jewish Rabbi's all in the name of "rightious gentile supporting and loving the Jewish people".
Their were problems with Shas in the past, but the way you portray things is incorrect and a lie. Rav Ovadia Yosef Shlita has said in the past that the Arabs are snakes who should be destroyed.
And you know what do me a favor and stop talking about Jewish spiritual leaders( Rabbis). It's not like Jews go around talking about your pastors and child molesting priests.

Mishmaat · « **Reply #15 on:** January 02, 2009, 12:23:43 AM »

Harshly criticizing Rav Ovadia Yosef, shlita, is rather distasteful and lacking in decorum.

EDIT: Comment rescinded.

muman613 · « **Reply #16 on:** January 02, 2009, 12:48:08 AM »

Quote from: Mishmaat on January 02, 2009, 12:23:43 AM

Tzvi, C.F. is an equal opportunity offender. With that said, harshly criticizing Rav Ovadia Yosef, shlita, is rather distasteful and lacking in decorum.

I agree... I really get upset at people who disrespect really pious Rabbis. Especially those who don't know a Rabbi from a rock.

Lewinsky Stinks, Dr. Brennan Rocks · « **Reply #17 on:** January 02, 2009, 12:56:42 AM »

Quote from: Mishmaat on January 02, 2009, 12:23:43 AM

Tzvi, C.F. is an equal opportunity offender. With that said, harshly criticizing Rav Ovadia Yosef, shlita, is rather distasteful and lacking in decorum.

Obviously you guys have not seen what I said about Rick Whoren and Joel Osteen. Then you'd know that I have not singled out ROY.

Criticizing him for saying that it is worth sparing Arab life is not slander. And you can take that to Chaim if you disagree. He has addressed this numerous times and explained that it is NOT sin to criticize mistaken views held by a rabbi.

Lewinsky Stinks, Dr. Brennan Rocks · « **Reply #18 on:** January 02, 2009, 01:01:10 AM »

Quote from: muman613 on January 01, 2009, 04:56:32 PM

C.F. has erred in his understanding of what G-d asked the Children of Israel to do when they entered the promised land. Even the Cannanites were given a chance to leave without having to be killed. G-d doesnt want the Jewish people to go around killing all the nations, that is not our mission.

Please show me where it is stated that Amalek is to be given a chance to leave.

muman613 · « **Reply #19 on:** January 02, 2009, 01:04:53 AM »

Quote from: C.F. on January 02, 2009, 12:56:42 AM

Quote from: Mishmaat on January 02, 2009, 12:23:43 AM
Tzvi, C.F. is an equal opportunity offender. With that said, harshly criticizing Rav Ovadia Yosef, shlita, is rather distasteful and lacking in decorum.
Obviously you guys have not seen what I said about Rick Whoren and Joel Osteen. Then you'd know that I have not singled out ROY.

Criticizing him for saying that it is worth sparing Arab life is not slander. And you can take that to Chaim if you disagree. He has addressed this numerous times and explained that it is NOT sin to criticize mistaken views held by a rabbi.

There are some topics the Rabbis know more about than you or I. Sometimes you should listen to what they are saying before you make statements about them. I have listened to many Rabbis and if they are true scholars they should be respected.

I don't want to get in the middle of this problem but in general I believe that Rabbis should not be disrespected, especially in public, unless what they are saying is obviously heretical or heinous.

I also believe there are 'Rabbis' {in quotes} such as 'rabbi' lerner and the 'rabbi' of the LA Kabbalah center. These people should not be respected because they are leading people astray.

PS: Amalek is another story. But as I said before I dont think that the Arabs are Amalek. The last known incarnation of Amalek was Persian {Iranian}. If the Rabbis believed that we knew who Amalek is then it would be obvious what the solution would be.

muman613 · « **Reply #20 on:** January 02, 2009, 01:07:05 AM »

C.F.,

From the page: http://ohr.edu/ask_db/ask_main.php/184/Q3/

Fabian wrote:

Dear Rabbi,

Who is Amalek?

Dear Fabian,

Amalek was the illegitimate son of Elifaz, and the grandson of Esav. (Amalek’s mother was the illegitimate daughter of Amalek’s father).

The progeny of Amalek are the archetypal enemy of the Jewish People. Their very existence is diametrically opposed to the Torah. The Sages describe the people of Amalek as being the essence of all the evil in the world.

Today, we don’t know who is descended from Amalek. Around the year 600 B.C.E., the Assyrian conqueror Sancheriv exiled most of the world’s inhabitants from their homelands and scattered them around the world. Since then, the true national identity of any people (except for the Jews) has become obscure.

The concept of "Amalek" goes a long way in helping us understand the baffling phenomenon of anti-Semitism. Anti-Semitism has no sociological parallel. Even the word is unique: "Anti-Semitism" is the only English word describing hate towards a distinct group of people. There’s no English word for French-hatred, Irish-hatred, or German hatred, even though England fought bitter wars against all these nations.

We are the only people in the world towards whom there exists a unique, distinct hatred. This bears out the Torah’s prediction that until the Mashiach’s days, there will exist a nation, Amalek, with an unexplainable, inborn hatred towards us.

PS: I do believe that the Arabs certainly seem to act like Amalek. Maybe they are but it is not for certain.

More on Amalek @ Torah.org : http://www.torah.org/learning/yomtov/purim/vol5no17.html

Tzvi Ben Roshel1 · « **Reply #21 on:** January 02, 2009, 01:17:36 AM »

Quote from: C.F. on January 02, 2009, 12:56:42 AM

Quote from: Mishmaat on January 02, 2009, 12:23:43 AM
Tzvi, C.F. is an equal opportunity offender. With that said, harshly criticizing Rav Ovadia Yosef, shlita, is rather distasteful and lacking in decorum.

Criticizing him for saying that it is worth sparing Arab life is not slander.

It is not only slander, it is a lie. He never said that. And if he did then please prove it.

This conversation is over.

Lewinsky Stinks, Dr. Brennan Rocks · « **Reply #22 on:** January 02, 2009, 01:20:10 AM »

Quote from: muman613 on January 02, 2009, 01:04:53 AM

There are some topics the Rabbis know more about than you or I. Sometimes you should listen to what they are saying before you make statements about them. I have listened to many Rabbis and if they are true scholars they should be respected.

I don't want to get in the middle of this problem but in general I believe that Rabbis should not be disrespected, especially in public, unless what they are saying is obviously heretical or heinous.

I also believe there are 'Rabbis' {in quotes} such as 'rabbi' lerner and the 'rabbi' of the LA Kabbalah center. These people should not be respected because they are leading people astray.

PS: Amalek is another story. But as I said before I dont think that the Arabs are Amalek. The last known incarnation of Amalek was Persian {Iranian}. If the Rabbis believed that we knew who Amalek is then it would be obvious what the solution would be.

Muman, you have to distinguish your own sensibilities from what is permissible on the forum. Disagreeing with someone is different from slandering them. The latter is not permitted on this forum. The former is. Chaim, and most members of this forum, would agree that Rabbi Ovadia Yosef was mistaken when he ruled at one time that Arabs are the brothers of Jews and that Jews should make an effort to spare their lives if it is at all possible. That is Chaim's opinion. If you disagree with it, bring it up to him on Ask JTF and tell him why he should change his mind.

I happen to be extremely familiar with what Chaim's position on Rabbi Ovadia Yosef and other Torah scholars and how far we are allowed to go in criticizing or refuting them is because he addressed this many times a year and a half ago on our forum, before you arrived.

As for the question of who is considered Amalek, as far as I know at least many rabbis do believe that Arabs, Germans, etc. and other enemies of the Jews in modern times are. If leading rabbinical scholars disagree on an issue, that is proof that not all Torah Scholars can be right at the same time on all issues. If you are seriously asserting that no rabbinical scholar can ever be wrong on anything, then I do think you are mistaken. Chaim has never even called HaRav Meir David Kahane zt"l infallible (not that he was ever wrong). No human being is infallible. That would be making a human being out to be G-d.

Tzvi Ben Roshel1 · « **Reply #23 on:** January 02, 2009, 01:36:20 AM »

"Chaim, and most members of this forum, would agree that Rabbi Ovadia Yosef was mistaken when he ruled at one time that Arabs are the brothers of Jews and that Jews should make an effort to spare their lives if it is at all possible."

Once again you are wrong. That is not and was not the opinion of Rav Ovadia Yosef Shlita. The ruling was different (and with that ruling their was disagreement), but it did not involve taking the concideration of Arab lives. It was more involved in sparing Jewish lives by avoiding a war (and that was debateable and that was the argument agains't his position at that time). It was never about sparing Arabs or saying they are our brothers as you are presenting.

muman613 · « **Reply #24 on:** January 02, 2009, 01:43:36 AM »

Quote from: C.F. on January 02, 2009, 01:20:10 AM

Quote from: muman613 on January 02, 2009, 01:04:53 AM
There are some topics the Rabbis know more about than you or I. Sometimes you should listen to what they are saying before you make statements about them. I have listened to many Rabbis and if they are true scholars they should be respected.

I don't want to get in the middle of this problem but in general I believe that Rabbis should not be disrespected, especially in public, unless what they are saying is obviously heretical or heinous.

I also believe there are 'Rabbis' {in quotes} such as 'rabbi' lerner and the 'rabbi' of the LA Kabbalah center. These people should not be respected because they are leading people astray.

PS: Amalek is another story. But as I said before I dont think that the Arabs are Amalek. The last known incarnation of Amalek was Persian {Iranian}. If the Rabbis believed that we knew who Amalek is then it would be obvious what the solution would be.

Muman, you have to distinguish your own sensibilities from what is permissible on the forum. Disagreeing with someone is different from slandering them. The latter is not permitted on this forum. The former is. Chaim, and most members of this forum, would agree that Rabbi Ovadia Yosef was mistaken when he ruled at one time that Arabs are the brothers of Jews and that Jews should make an effort to spare their lives if it is at all possible. That is Chaim's opinion. If you disagree with it, bring it up to him on Ask JTF and tell him why he should change his mind.

I happen to be extremely familiar with what Chaim's position on Rabbi Ovadia Yosef and other Torah scholars and how far we are allowed to go in criticizing or refuting them is because he addressed this many times a year and a half ago on our forum, before you arrived.

As for the question of who is considered Amalek, as far as I know at least many rabbis do believe that Arabs, Germans, etc. and other enemies of the Jews in modern times are. If leading rabbinical scholars disagree on an issue, that is proof that not all Torah Scholars can be right at the same time on all issues. If you are seriously asserting that no rabbinical scholar can ever be wrong on anything, then I do think you are mistaken. Chaim has never even called HaRav Meir David Kahane zt"l infallible (not that he was ever wrong). No human being is infallible. That would be making a human being out to be G-d.

C.F.,

I never said anyone is infallible. I am simply asking for respect for Torah scholars.

There are often many opinions on a topic and Rabbis have disagreed since the beginning of our Oral Tradition. But those great scholars Hillel and Shammi disagreed without cursing or insulting each other.

If you have proof that this Rabbi said something heretical please post a link to it. Saying that the Arabs are our brothers is no big news. Even our Torah links Yishmael as the progenitor of the Arabs and we all know that Yishmael was Yitzaks half-brother {son of Abraham through the egyptian Hagar}.

And whether we all have to agree with Chaims view is debatable. I listen to Chaims view and I learn. I form my decision based on A) Life Experience, B) Listening to wisdom from Rabbis, C) Listening and learning from those around me. I believe Chaim is certainly a force for good in the movement to make Israel and the Jewish people strong.

I know you are also a force for good and I would like to not have to argue with you about this. I have just found that it is best to live by the wisdom of our fathers.

Here is an interesting article with this idea:
http://www.jewishmag.com/109mag/yehudabariloy/yehudabariloy.htm

Quote

Arguing and Respect, Jewish Style

By Larry Fine

The Talmud (Tractate of Shabbat) relates that on Friday afternoon Rabbi Yehuda bar Iloy would wash his face, hands, and feet from a basin of hot water that was brought to him. Afterwards he would put on his four cornered linen garment that had tzitzis (the strings that hang down from the talit) attached and he would look like an angel of G-d.

His students would come to him but they would hide the corners of their linen garments so their teacher would not see that they did not have tzitzis on them. He detected their concealment and told them, "Did I not teach you regarding a linen garment that the Academy of Shamai says tzitzis are not required and the Academy of Hillel says they are required? The ruling is like the Academy of Hillel and not like the Academy of Shamai!"

Rashi, the 12th century scholar and major commentator on the Talmud, explains that the linen garments referred to had woolen tzitzis. The mixing of wool and linen in a single garment is a prohibition from the Torah called shatnez. The Academy of Hillel taught that the reason that the Torah wrote first the prohibition against mixing linen and wool and then immediately afterward wrote about the mitzvah of making tzitzis on a garment is to teach us that woolen tzitzis may be tied onto a linen garment. This is called learning from two passages in the Torah that are written one after the other. However, the Academy of Shamai did not accept this as a valid method of learning. They taught that tying woolen tzitzis on a linen garment falls under the prohibition of shatnez.

Rabbi Yehuda bar Iloy thought that his pupils were following the rule of the Academy of Shamai. Really, they agreed with their teacher regarding the ruling of the Academy of Hillel but they were obeying the ban that later rabbis had instituted against wearing woolen tzitzis on a linen garment because of the fear of someone making a mistake. The rabbis feared that people would see others wearing a linen garment with woolen tzitzis during the day and think that it is permitted all the time. They would not realize that this is only permitted by day, since the Torah says regarding the mitzvah of tzitzis, "and you shall see them" to include only a garment that can be seen by daylight. They might mistakenly come to put tzitzis also on a garment that is worn at night and thereby unintentionally do a sin. Rabbi Yehuda bar Iloy disagreed with this ban and permitted wearing a linen garment with wool tzitzis.

* * *

This story from the Talmud illustrates an interesting facet in the relationship between a rabbi and his students. The students had the right to disagree with their teacher but they were careful to show respect for his opinion by hiding the corners of their garments. They did not want to insult him by flaunting their disagreement.

* * *

When we argue with someone we sometimes take a rejection as a personal attack. Like Rabbi Yehuda bar Iloy and his students, we should separate the issue from the person. Many differences arise between people. One person may believe that a particular action is the best thing to do. His friend may believe just the opposite - that this is the worst thing to do. If the argument remains as an intellectual disagreement, there is a good chance that they will remain friends. However when one cannot disprove the other, he may begin to attack the personality of the person. This only creates hatred and disharmony.

When we have our disagreements, we should be careful to stick to the point of disagreement and keep personality out of the argument. This shows respect for the other even though there is a rejection of the idea that he is presenting.

It is hard for most people to take rejection of their ideas, but when it is coupled with personal insult it become unbearable. Curb your desire to belittle the other and maintain respect for their person. You may not win the argument, but you will not make a friend into an enemy.