JTF.ORG Forum
General Category => General Discussion => Topic started by: wonga66 on July 06, 2010, 04:15:25 AM
-
The average so-called "vaunted" Israeli soldier is in fact a semi-reluctant, unmotivated, Torah-less, G-d-less, bored out of his chilloni braincell, can't wait to flee Eretz Yisroel to join his criminalised druggie Israeli friends in LA and Katmandu, empty-headed, just-of-school 18 year old unprofessional, grossly overrated, semi-imbecilic, over-merciful to Arabs, typical Israeli dudu tshachtsach, as can be seen from this clip, poor sad sods
http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/138440
(http://img340.imageshack.us/img340/2411/screenhunter01jul061310.jpg)
-
Is this a trolling post or what?
-
Since these poor sod Israeli soldiers are likely to be charged by the over-punctillious Ramatkal Gabby Ashkenazy, for 'dereliction of duty' and spend 3 months of real jail time in the Zahal slammer at Megiddo, next door to real Arab killers, this is not a trolling post, Fan!
-
I would have done it if i knew Israel had my back
-
If you're gona dance in uniform, at least do it like a North Korean!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rPjQeAi9AGQ
-
The average so-called "vaunted" Israeli soldier is in fact a semi-reluctant, unmotivated, Torah-less, G-d-less, bored out of his chilloni braincell, can't wait to flee Eretz Yisroel to join his criminalised druggie Israeli friends in LA and Katmandu, empty-headed, just-of-school 18 year old unprofessional, grossly overrated, semi-imbecilic, over-merciful to Arabs, typical Israeli dudu tshachtsach, as can be seen from this clip, poor sad sods
http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/138440
What you are saying is nonsense. The guys patrolling Hevron are the most serious, highly-trained, physically fit, and competent soldiers. They are NOT the "average" Israeli soldier. What kind of stupidity do you write here? Do you even think before you post ?
-
I don't see what they did wrong. That was hilarious.
-
Wonga66, please show more respect for the Israeli army. Most of these young men and women fulfill their duty very seriously, although it is tedious and dangerous and it takes away a lot of their time.
These young soldiers are just having fun for a short moment, what's wrong with that ? It is actually healthy as it helps relieve the tension.
-
That's embarassing to dance to that filth. Lack of discipline such as this is part of why Israel's military isn't as elite as it used to be.
-
That's embarassing to dance to that filth. Lack of discipline such as this is part of why Israel's military isn't as elite as it used to be.
Lack of discipline? Please. Let's see you patrol there!
Wonga is jealous of these men. That is what drives this entire thread.
-
The prisons are all at military Police bases
-
Megiddo Jail near Yokneam, where the worst Arab killers are housed, also has a separate section for Israeli soldiers who are jailed for things like going AWOL, stealing jeeps, insulting officers etc.
The biggest loss to the Jewish People was when Esav left us. If Esav had remained a loyal Jew, we could have conquered the world.
The Romans and Germans are descendants of Esav. They would have become the Fighting Arm of the Am Yisrael. Soldiers like them didn't dance while on active duty and in uniform......ever!
(http://www.freeimagehosting.net/uploads/fad7d06fe1.jpg) (http://www.freeimagehosting.net/)
As R.Kahane writes, serving in Zahal is as much a mitzva (defending the Am Yisrael positive mitzva number 195) as putting on Tefillin, and is to be viewed with the same reverence and kovod...not irreverent frivolity!
And besides, whilst dancing they were eminently ambushable by a Hebron Fatah terrorist, the same as the 12 poor dozing Israeli soldiers who were gunned down by one arab with a carbine in 2002, or the 6 soldiers who were gunned down in their tent by a hang-glider terrorist in 1986 because the dozy Israeli guard ran off!
-
Megiddo Jail near Yokneam, where the worst Arab killers are housed, also has a separate section for Israeli soldiers who are jailed for things like going AWOL, stealing jeeps, insulting officers etc.
The biggest loss to the Jewish Perople was when Esav left us. If Esav had remained a loyal Jew, we could have conquered the world.
The Romans and Germans are descendants of Esav. They would have become the Fighting Arm of the Am Yisrael. Soldiers like them didn't dance while on active duty and in uniform......ever!
(http://www.freeimagehosting.net/uploads/fad7d06fe1.jpg) (http://www.freeimagehosting.net/)
As R.Kahane writes, serving in Zahal is as much a mitzva (defending the Am Yisrael positive mitzva number 195) as putting on Tefillin, and is to be viewed with the same reverence...not irreverent frivolity!
And besides, whilst dancing they were eminently ambushable by a Fatah terrorist, the same as the 12 poor dizng Israeli soldiers who were gunned down by one arab with a carbine, or the 6 soldiers who were gunned down in their tents by a hang-glider terrorist because the dozy Israeli guard ran off!
I don't think the prison at meggido still houses Phillistines prisoners and if it did why can't soldiers defend themselfs.As far as Esav you know what it says Esav tzonah Yakov,better yet if we still had the 10 tribes
-
Yeah, the germans never rested ::)
especially not when they were operating tanks and being fired on like in the BATTLE scene you depict. ::)
I'm sure if there were gunman running at them or dangerous situation, they would not have danced around in the street.
That you regret that Jews don't have "tough disciplined goyim" to fight for them instead of capable Jewish men is a cowardly woody-allen type self-effacement. You accept the stereotype of Jews as not being fighters, a completely untrue stereotype which people like Rabbi Kahane sought to bury, and you run with it. Maybe it's because you yourself have not fought, so you are threatened by other Jewish men who bear the burden as men of arms, or you are not married and you need to find a woman to end your insecurity regarding other men.
But this video ridicules the arab enemy and shows how subdued they are, at the mercy of the Jewish people. We can even dance while we patrol and they hide inside cowering in fear at the Jewish strength.
You are jealous of these soldiers.
That incident you cite was an exception.
-
The biggest loss to the Jewish People was when Esav left us. If Esav had remained a loyal Jew, we could have conquered the world.
The Romans and Germans are descendants of Esav. They would have become the Fighting Arm of the Am Yisrael. Soldiers like them didn't dance while on active duty and in uniform......ever!
As R.Kahane writes, serving in Zahal is as much a mitzva (defending the Am Yisrael positive mitzva number 195) as putting on Tefillin, and is to be viewed with the same reverence and kovod...not irreverent frivolity!
It is clear from this post and previous ones where you put an equivalence between Jewish concepts and Nazi concepts that you admire Nazis. You wish you were an Aryan. What are you doing here if you admire Nazis ?
-
People forget that the "soldiers" are just kids and sometimes they just get silly
-
The Nahal Haredi are also "just kids", but considerably more disciplined and motivated!
(http://hamaslovers.files.wordpress.com/2010/01/nahal-haredi11.jpg)
Every Haredi should serve 1 year compulsory in the army - NO exceptions!
Every Chilloni should study 1 year compulsory in yeshivah - NO exceptions!
ONLY then will we have an Am Yisrael worthy of the name!
-
The Nahal Haredi are also "just kids", but considerably more disciplined and motivated!
Every Haredi should serve 1 year compulsory in the army - NO exceptions!
Every Chilloni should study 1 year compulsory in yeshivah - NO exceptions!
ONLY then will we have an Am Yisrael worthy of the name!
These are baseless assertions. There are have been countless "chilloni" soldiers who are excellent soldiers and who do not have less discipline and motivation than the religious ones.
Besides, who are you to give lessons ? Have you fought in the Israeli army ? Were you on the front line, risking your life, when there were wars ? I bet that the answer is no, otherwise you would not talk this way about the army.
-
Fact is the Israeli army is not what it used to be because of the progression of left wing policies in Israel.
Kfir soldiers lose way, fight with Hebron Palestinian residents
http://www.allvoices.com/s/event-5432072/aHR0cDovL3d3dy55bmV0bmV3cy5jb20vYXJ0aWNsZXMvMCw3MzQwLEwtMzg2NDk0OSwwMC5odG1s (http://www.allvoices.com/s/event-5432072/aHR0cDovL3d3dy55bmV0bmV3cy5jb20vYXJ0aWNsZXMvMCw3MzQwLEwtMzg2NDk0OSwwMC5odG1s)
Remember this story from a few months ago.
Kfir soldiers lose way, fight with Hebron Palestinian residents
Published: 03.18.10, 20:07 / Israel News
Share on TwitterShare on Facebook
share
Soldiers from the IDF's Kfir brigade who went out for sports training near Hebron lost their way and, after receiving mistaken information from a Palestinian resident, found themselves in the Palestinian part of the city.
A conflict began between the soldiers and some Palestinians, during which some soldiers were hurt and even hospitalized. Three Palestinians were also hurt. (Shmulik Grossman)
And lets look at the 2006 Lebanon war where Israel ended up losing.
This is not to blame the individual secular troops for everything, but the fact is secular Israelis who fear offending the "international community" more than Hashem are the main reason why Israel is on the decline.
-
That's embarassing to dance to that filth. Lack of discipline such as this is part of why Israel's military isn't as elite as it used to be.
Lack of discipline? Please. Let's see you patrol there!
Wonga is jealous of these men. That is what drives this entire thread.
Oh yah, I'm sure it's such a horrible place to patrol that they can dance in the street like a bunch of jive turkey nigggers. They should act and behave like the vanguard they are supposed to be. That means not dancing around like monkeys to filthy black music.
-
That's embarassing to dance to that filth. Lack of discipline such as this is part of why Israel's military isn't as elite as it used to be.
Lack of discipline? Please. Let's see you patrol there!
Wonga is jealous of these men. That is what drives this entire thread.
Oh yah, I'm sure it's such a horrible place to patrol that they can dance in the street like a bunch of jive turkey nigggers. They should act and behave like the vanguard they are supposed to be. That means not dancing around like monkeys to filthy black music.
So your racism is the first order of business here... If they were dancing to Mozart you would not be concerned?
-
Dance like "jive turkey schvartzas": this is a truism.
Because the Jew has Hamitic (= Negroidal) blood in him from the 1 million Egyptian Erev Rav who left at the time of the Exodus & married in to the Am Yisrael.
The Jew of today, even the palest Ashkenazi, has more Ancient Black yichus in him than any Schvartzer out of darkest M'bongoland!
That's why, as Chaim says, "the Jew is always ready to genuflect & kiss Black tochuss (=buttocks), 'cos the Jew and the Negroe really are blood bros, shame to tell.
But that is Hashem's Plan: to force Kedushah (Holiness) & Tumah (Impurity) in to forced proximity.
http://www.haaretz.com/print-edition/news/soldiers-to-face-punishment-for-youtube-video-of-hebron-boogie-1.300241
-
אהבלים
-
That's embarassing to dance to that filth. Lack of discipline such as this is part of why Israel's military isn't as elite as it used to be.
Lack of discipline? Please. Let's see you patrol there!
Wonga is jealous of these men. That is what drives this entire thread.
Oh yah, I'm sure it's such a horrible place to patrol that they can dance in the street like a bunch of jive turkey nigggers. They should act and behave like the vanguard they are supposed to be. That means not dancing around like monkeys to filthy black music.
LOL, you wouldn't last 5 minutes there. You have no idea what it's like there. You're an armchair warrior.
-
Megiddo Jail near Yokneam, where the worst Arab killers are housed, also has a separate section for Israeli soldiers who are jailed for things like going AWOL, stealing jeeps, insulting officers etc.
The biggest loss to the Jewish People was when Esav left us. If Esav had remained a loyal Jew, we could have conquered the world.
The Romans and Germans are descendants of Esav. They would have become the Fighting Arm of the Am Yisrael. Soldiers like them didn't dance while on active duty and in uniform......ever!
(http://www.freeimagehosting.net/uploads/fad7d06fe1.jpg) (http://www.freeimagehosting.net/)
As R.Kahane writes, serving in Zahal is as much a mitzva (defending the Am Yisrael positive mitzva number 195) as putting on Tefillin, and is to be viewed with the same reverence and kovod...not irreverent frivolity!
And besides, whilst dancing they were eminently ambushable by a Hebron Fatah terrorist, the same as the 12 poor dozing Israeli soldiers who were gunned down by one arab with a carbine in 2002, or the 6 soldiers who were gunned down in their tent by a hang-glider terrorist in 1986 because the dozy Israeli guard ran off!
(http://delmar.moy.su/_nw/1/08826.jpg)
-
This thread just gets nuttier and nuttier.
-
Megiddo Jail near Yokneam, where the worst Arab killers are housed, also has a separate section for Israeli soldiers who are jailed for things like going AWOL, stealing jeeps, insulting officers etc.
The biggest loss to the Jewish People was when Esav left us. If Esav had remained a loyal Jew, we could have conquered the world.
The Romans and Germans are descendants of Esav. They would have become the Fighting Arm of the Am Yisrael. Soldiers like them didn't dance while on active duty and in uniform......ever!
(http://www.freeimagehosting.net/uploads/fad7d06fe1.jpg) (http://www.freeimagehosting.net/)
As R.Kahane writes, serving in Zahal is as much a mitzva (defending the Am Yisrael positive mitzva number 195) as putting on Tefillin, and is to be viewed with the same reverence and kovod...not irreverent frivolity!
And besides, whilst dancing they were eminently ambushable by a Hebron Fatah terrorist, the same as the 12 poor dozing Israeli soldiers who were gunned down by one arab with a carbine in 2002, or the 6 soldiers who were gunned down in their tent by a hang-glider terrorist in 1986 because the dozy Israeli guard ran off!
(http://delmar.moy.su/_nw/1/08826.jpg)
Indeed that says it all, Ron.
-
And lets look at the 2006 Lebanon war where Israel ended up losing.
This is not to blame the individual secular troops for everything, but the fact is secular Israelis who fear offending the "international community" more than Hashem are the main reason why Israel is on the decline.
The political and military establishment is more to blame for the mistakes that occurred during the 2006 Lebanon war than the troops on the ground.
The "secular troops" do not fight like Arabs : they try to minimize civilian casualties among the ennemy. Are they right or wrong ? This is a big debate. What is certain is that it makes matters more complicated for them, it reduces the effectiveness of some of their operations and, tragically, it sometimes results in unnecessary deaths of Israeli soldiers (there were a lot of these, for example, during the first Lebanon war, but there was no such cause of death during Operation Cast Lead). However I don't believe that this policy of minimizing what is called "collateral damage" comes only or even primarily out of a fear of offending the "international community". It is mainly inspired by the idea that innocent people should not be killed. This principle, in itself, is highly respectable. What is certainly the consequence of a suicidal Israeli habit of yielding to international pressure, especially pressure from the US, are all those insane retreats of the Israelis just when they are winning and when they are in a position to change the equation on the ground in a lasting manner. That phenomeon, unfortunately, was observed in every war fought and won by Israel. But again, the political establishment is the one to blame, not the troops on the ground, who obey orders.
-
And lets look at the 2006 Lebanon war where Israel ended up losing.
This is not to blame the individual secular troops for everything, but the fact is secular Israelis who fear offending the "international community" more than Hashem are the main reason why Israel is on the decline.
The political and military establishment is more to blame for the mistakes that occurred during the 2006 Lebanon war than the troops on the ground.
The "secular troops" do not fight like Arabs : they try to minimize civilian casualties among the ennemy. Are they right or wrong ? This is a big debate. What is certain is that it makes matters more complicated for them, it reduces the effectiveness of some of their operations and, tragically, it sometimes results in unnecessary deaths of Israeli soldiers (there were a lot of these, for example, during the first Lebanon war, but there was no such cause of death during Operation Cast Lead). However I don't believe that this policy of minimizing what is called "collateral damage" comes only or even primarily out of a fear of offending the "international community". It is mainly inspired by the idea that innocent people should not be killed. This principle, in itself, is highly respectable. What is certainly the consequence of a suicidal Israeli habit of yielding to international pressure, especially pressure from the US, are all those insane retreats of the Israelis just when they are winning and when they are in a position to change the equation on the ground in a lasting manner. That phenomeon, unfortunately, was observed in every war fought and won by Israel. But again, the political establishment is the one to blame, not the troops on the ground, who obey orders.
The Israeli establishment does not give a damn about "innocent people". All they care about is securing their seat in the "international community". In a war the only moral obligation the State has is to end it as fast as possible by achieving victory. The fact is there will be another war with Lebanon and more "innocent people" will be killed, because Israel fought with its hands tied behind its back and did not finish the job.
-
The fact is there will be another war with Lebanon and more "innocent people" will be killed, because Israel fought with its hands tied behind its back and did not finish the job.
I agree with that, Maimonides.
-
American soldiers fool around too, what is the problem?
-
That's embarassing to dance to that filth. Lack of discipline such as this is part of why Israel's military isn't as elite as it used to be.
Lack of discipline? Please. Let's see you patrol there!
Wonga is jealous of these men. That is what drives this entire thread.
Oh yah, I'm sure it's such a horrible place to patrol that they can dance in the street like a bunch of jive turkey nigggers. They should act and behave like the vanguard they are supposed to be. That means not dancing around like monkeys to filthy black music.
LOL, you wouldn't last 5 minutes there. You have no idea what it's like there. You're an armchair warrior.
And you're a major moron. You're fine with Israeli soldiers acting like blacks so I'd say you're part of the reason Israel is becoming a weak nation. What would King David do if he saw his soldiers dancing like Philistines? He'd discipline them and tell them to act like soldiers.
You're the one trying to sound like some stupid tough guy. But I forgot, to you Jews can do no wrong, even if they act like black people. How is this an instance of Jews showing strength and being a light unto the nations? What if arabs had attacked them in the middle of the dance? They'd be sitting ducks.
-
That's embarassing to dance to that filth. Lack of discipline such as this is part of why Israel's military isn't as elite as it used to be.
Lack of discipline? Please. Let's see you patrol there!
Wonga is jealous of these men. That is what drives this entire thread.
Oh yah, I'm sure it's such a horrible place to patrol that they can dance in the street like a bunch of jive turkey nigggers. They should act and behave like the vanguard they are supposed to be. That means not dancing around like monkeys to filthy black music.
LOL, you wouldn't last 5 minutes there. You have no idea what it's like there. You're an armchair warrior.
And you're a major moron. You're fine with Israeli soldiers acting like blacks so I'd say you're part of the reason Israel is becoming a weak nation. What would King David do if he saw his soldiers dancing like Philistines? He'd discipline them and tell them to act like soldiers.
You're the one trying to sound like some stupid tough guy. But I forgot, to you Jews can do no wrong, even if they act like black people. How is this an instance of Jews showing strength and being a light unto the nations? What if arabs had attacked them in the middle of the dance? They'd be sitting ducks.
I think you are making some Assumptions here.. With a name like Coon do you really think you should be throwing stones? And are Blacks the only ones who can dance? I think you are digging a hole for yourself to go lay in..
What is the issue to you 'coon'? Is it that they danced, or is it that they danced to music you don't like?
-
Fact is the Israeli army is not what it used to be because of the progression of left wing policies in Israel.
Kfir soldiers lose way, fight with Hebron Palestinian residents
http://www.allvoices.com/s/event-5432072/aHR0cDovL3d3dy55bmV0bmV3cy5jb20vYXJ0aWNsZXMvMCw3MzQwLEwtMzg2NDk0OSwwMC5odG1s (http://www.allvoices.com/s/event-5432072/aHR0cDovL3d3dy55bmV0bmV3cy5jb20vYXJ0aWNsZXMvMCw3MzQwLEwtMzg2NDk0OSwwMC5odG1s)
Remember this story from a few months ago.
Kfir soldiers lose way, fight with Hebron Palestinian residents
Published: 03.18.10, 20:07 / Israel News
Share on TwitterShare on Facebook
share
Soldiers from the IDF's Kfir brigade who went out for sports training near Hebron lost their way and, after receiving mistaken information from a Palestinian resident, found themselves in the Palestinian part of the city.
A conflict began between the soldiers and some Palestinians, during which some soldiers were hurt and even hospitalized. Three Palestinians were also hurt. (Shmulik Grossman)
And lets look at the 2006 Lebanon war where Israel ended up losing.
This is not to blame the individual secular troops for everything, but the fact is secular Israelis who fear offending the "international community" more than Hashem are the main reason why Israel is on the decline.
The IDF has its hands tied when they deal with "civilians" [militants]. The powers that be are so concerned with international opinion that the troops are not even allowed to discharge their weapons in the air to scare off the civilians, much less shoot them if the need arises [even if firebombs are being lobbed at them.].
-
And you're a major moron. You're fine with Israeli soldiers acting like blacks so I'd say you're part of the reason Israel is becoming a weak nation.
On the contrary. By taking on the misswoth and taking practical measures to facilitate making aliyah as a believing Jew with Kahanist principles, and by being part of JTF, I am strengthening Israel. What you said makes absolutely no sense. A handful of elite soldiers having some fun in a very monotonous and non-threatening situation on a routine patrol is not why Israel is weakening.
What would King David do if he saw his soldiers dancing like Philistines? He'd discipline them and tell them to act like soldiers.
LOL, are philistines black now according to you? I thought your problem was that they "danced like blacks." I don't really see dancing like blacks at all, to be honest, I see pop-music dancing that would be standard moves in any pop video, made by white people (ie boy bands) or perhaps black people but not likely unless the background dancers. But even if it was "dancing like blacks" what's the problem? Blacks have some nice dance moves. Break-dancing for instance is very fun and impressive looking. Who cares what color were the people who made up the dance move? Why do you think that every single thing a black person does is by definition wrong or evil? You have problems.
In any case, Daweedh Hamelech danced to show his joy in serving Hashem and it was partly in merit of this that G-d chose him and he became king to replace Shaul.
You're the one trying to sound like some stupid tough guy. But I forgot, to you Jews can do no wrong, even if they act like black people. How is this an instance of Jews showing strength and being a light unto the nations? What if arabs had attacked them in the middle of the dance? They'd be sitting ducks.
What? A dance-routine is doing something wrong? There is nothing morally wrong about dancing. You have a warped sense of reality based on your race-baiting.
I have never said Jews can do no wrong. In fact, I am strongly critical of the Israeli govt which is composed of JEWS, and I am critical of all Jewish traitors like any intellectually honest Kahanist Jew.
It's certainly a light to the nations when we show how subdued our enemies are that we can dance around and embarrass them while they cower in fear in their boarded up houses. Anyone who threatens the Jewish nation will be similarly subdued and humiliated. These soldiers are asserting their dominance and control of the area that they feel free to dance around every once in a while.
"What if" ? They obviously weren't worried about it because they're not cowards. Just like on any day and at any time they do these routine patrols, an arab or multiple arabs COULD come and try something. In that case they are armed and ready to respond. They are not in constant fear of attack like a coward sitting thousands of miles away would be. I'm sure they have been through that same patrol route hundreds of times without incident and I'm sure they also had cover when they did this.
-
The IDF has its hands tied when they deal with "civilians" [militants]. The powers that be are so concerned with international opinion that the troops are not even allowed to discharge their weapons in the air to scare off the civilians, much less shoot them if the need arises [even if firebombs are being lobbed at them.].
And THAT is why Israel is weakening. The establishment has weakened our great nation.
Blaming these dancing soldiers is some kind of detached mystical stupidity that does not have anything to do with the core issues.
-
I think it is a funny video. What's the big deal with it anyway ?
-
Serving in the Jewish army is a mitzva, exactly the same as going to shul on Shabbos i.e. decorum is demanded.
Hashem even made a mitzva that the Jewish soldier in combat has to have a spade with him to cover his feces:
"And thou shalt have a spade among thy weapons; and it shall be, when thou sittest down abroad, thou shalt dig therewith, and shalt turn back and cover that which cometh from thee For the LORD thy G-d walketh in the midst of thy camp, to deliver thee, and to give up thine enemies before thee; therefore shall thy camp be holy; that He see no unseemly thing in thee, and turn away from thee...." (Devarim 23:14).
(http://www.rotter.net/israel/50.jpg)
Holy behaviour and at the same time merciless ruthlessness against our enemies is demanded of the Jewish soldier, especially in Hebron, which is one of the 4 Holy Cities.
These poor sod "dudu" soldiers are the result of the abysmal education in chilloni schools.
And most culpable of all is the Zahal Chief Education Officer. Together with Rabin & Shulamit Aloni, they had all references to the words "Zion", "Judaism", "G-d", "Torah" and "Eretz Yisrael" expunged from the Zahal Code of Ethics in 1992.
Instead the Code preaches how Zahal soldiers should be "merciful", show "restraint", show "purity of arms", and "understand the pain of our enemies"!
The anti-Torah concepts of "havlagah" and "tohar neshek" used to drive R.Kahane spare, as very many Israeli soldiers have died unnecessarily because of them! No army in history held to such insanities except the Israeli one!
-
Serving in the Jewish army is a mitzav exactly the same as going to shul on Shabbos ie decorum is demanded.
And we go to shul on Shabbath b'simha (with happiness) too.
-
If you're gona dance in uniform, at least do it like a North Korean!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rPjQeAi9AGQ
That video was really funny! When that one guy dances on his hands I wondered how he could do it without hurting his wrists! lol
-
I hope you all know thats not real Korean soldiers it's actually very hard to permitted to film there.They are dancers many dancers can dance on their hands
-
I hope you all know thats not real Korean soldiers it's actually very hard to permitted to film there.They are dancers many dancers can dance on their hands
If people were stupid enough to think that was real then they need psychiatric help.
-
It is mainly inspired by the idea that innocent people should not be killed.
This Hellenized concept has absolutely no place in Judaism and it is exactly why thousands of Jews have died needlessly since the creation of Israel. In Islam, everyone is part of the jihad--man, woman, infant. These animals send their toddlers out into battle hoping that they will be martyrs. They put their infants in harm's way so that they can be inadvertently hit by an Israeli bomb or bullet and they can be martyrs for the cause as well. In Islamic philosophy, there is no distinction between combatant and civilian, either on the part of the Muslim nation or the infidels they are trying to exterminate. It is that simple. It is a joke for us to try to pretend otherwise.
This principle, in itself, is highly respectable
How in the world is it "highly respectable"? Both Jewish and Christian theology have no such concept. Both of our religions teach that the evil deserve death, period, end of story. (That is different from Islamic theology, which teaches that all unbelievers deserve to be murdered, but I digress.) This meaningless, secularized, Western BS principle has led to, as I already said, tens of thousands of Jews dying for no reason. As for me personally, I think that one Jewish or Christian finger (assuming they are not self-hating slime like Nellie the Weasel or Jimmy Carter) is worth more than the lives of tens of thousands of Arabs, even women and children.
What is certainly the consequence of a suicidal Israeli habit of yielding to international pressure, especially pressure from the US, are all those insane retreats of the Israelis just when they are winning and when they are in a position to change the equation on the ground in a lasting manner.
You cannot blame the leaders for this, all of secular Israel feels like it has no choice but to cave to the United States and rest of the world.
But again, the political establishment is the one to blame, not the troops on the ground, who obey orders.
The entire secularized, Hellenized mindset is to blame.
-
This Hellenized concept has absolutely no place in Judaism
May I kindly suggest that you take a closer look at what Judaism truly is...
In Islamic philosophy, there is no distinction between combatant and civilian, either on the part of the Muslim nation or the infidels they are trying to exterminate.
Well, precisely, I hate Islamic philosophy and I certainly do not intend to stoop to the moral level of a Muslim. But if you want to act and think like a Muslim, it's your choice...
How in the world is it "highly respectable"?
I hate to see children die when this can be avoided, it is that simple, even when these children are Arabs, it makes no difference to me. I am amazed that you cannot understand this. It is an elementary principle of justice that only the guilty should be punished.
As for me personally, I think that one Jewish or Christian finger (assuming they are not self-hating slime like Nellie the Weasel or Jimmy Carter) is worth more than the lives of tens of thousands of Arabs, even women and children.
As for me, I would cut my Jewish finger if this could avoid the death of ONE good Arab.
The entire secularized, Hellenized mindset is to blame.
I don't think all secularized, Hellenized concepts are bad.
-
May I kindly suggest that you take a closer look at what Judaism truly is...
Where does Judaism tell Jews to have mercy on their Nazi enemies?
Well, precisely, I hate Islamic philosophy and I certainly do not intend to stoop to the moral level of a Muslim. But if you want to act and think like a Muslim, it's your choice...
What does the Bible tell Jews to do to Amalek?
I hate to see children die when this can be avoided, it is that simple, even when these children are Arabs, it makes no difference to me. I am amazed that you cannot understand this. It is an elementary principle of justice that only the guilty should be punished.
These "innocent children" dance around in the streets and throw candy around when Jews get blown up or maimed or when American/British soldiers are dragged through the streets of Iraq and burned alive. As far as I am concerned they deserve the same fate as Adolf Hitler himself.
As for me, I would cut my Jewish finger if this could avoid the death of ONE good Arab.
How many good Arabs are there? Four, five in the whole entire world?
I don't think all secularized, Hellenized concepts are bad.
That is anti-Jewish, anti-Christian, and anti-Noahide. My Holy Bible is the only truth there is and is all the "goodness" I need.
-
Re: "As for me, I would cut my Jewish finger if this could avoid the death of ONE good Arab. "
Cut all of them off.
I want to really help some A-rabs!
:::D
-
This Hellenized concept has absolutely no place in Judaism
May I kindly suggest that you take a closer look at what Judaism truly is...
Huh?
Then what did the Maccabees fight against? They fought against Hellenist Jews and Hellenist Syrian-greek occupiers! I'm not following what you are saying here.
-
How in the world is it "highly respectable"?
I hate to see children die when this can be avoided, it is that simple, even when these children are Arabs, it makes no difference to me. I am amazed that you cannot understand this. It is an elementary principle of justice that only the guilty should be punished.
As for me personally, I think that one Jewish or Christian finger (assuming they are not self-hating slime like Nellie the Weasel or Jimmy Carter) is worth more than the lives of tens of thousands of Arabs, even women and children.
As for me, I would cut my Jewish finger if this could avoid the death of ONE good Arab.
[/quote]
No one is trying to kill children. There is no military mission that says go and kill off as many "good arabs" as you can see and as many women and children as possible. Military missions are necessitated by security needs and objectives. If children die in the process, that is sad (sometimes), however these children are raised and grow up to be our adult enemies, so there is less of a sense of loss involved when they are programmed to hate us, and G-d can reward and punish in the next world those truly deserving. Furthermore, the idea that one would "cut his own finger" or in other words put their own soldiers in increased danger during a military mission in order to go out of the way to avoid the deaths of children or possible good enemies, is completely insane and illogical. Aside from the fact that this is not the way the Torah views warfare, certainly common sense rejects such insanity without any need for scriptural explanation, and the Torah in this regard serves simply as a support for common sense. No military endangers its own soldiers to save the enemy. If that means more of the enemy dying including so-called "non-combatants" so be it.
"Those who are merciful to the cruel eventually come to be cruel to the merciful."
If you know anyone who has served in the US army, they can tell you how they wiped out villages in Iraq and afghanistan without regard to "good enemies" or others that might have gotten in the way "by accident."
Resistance is put down with violence, and there is no other way. If you purposely endanger your own soldiers during this process, you will have less resources with which to put down future resistance in other missions or have less ability even to achieve the objective of the current mission. That is like an assembly line where one guy puts an axl onto a wheel, the next guy takes the axl off and sends the wheel back to the first guy to put an axl on it...
-
If children die in the process, that is sad (sometimes), however these children are raised and grow up to be our adult enemies, so there is less of a sense of loss involved when they are programmed to hate us
Don't forget that Arab spawn hate us just as much as their parents do. As soon as they know what a Jew is, they think "kill, kill, kill". Ten Israeli soldiers were murdered in Jenin in 2002 by a child suicide bomber.
I don't feel sorry for any of them, infants on up.
-
May I kindly suggest that you take a closer look at what Judaism truly is...
Then who and what were the Maccabees fighting against if not Hellenism (Western ideas and cullture)?
Well, precisely, I hate Islamic philosophy and I certainly do not intend to stoop to the moral level of a Muslim. But if you want to act and think like a Muslim, it's your choice...
That's great. We do not stoop to their level - they murder us and we bury our dead because we care more about non-existent so-called "good" ( what a great contempt you have for Arabs) Arab more than we do about ourselves.
I hate to see children die when this can be avoided, it is that simple, even when these children are Arabs, it makes no difference to me.
So you can't differentiate between these children:
(http://mezuzahstore.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2008/07/pal-children-w-ak46-rifles.jpg)
and these children:
(http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/2007/06/28/nyregion/hasidim.span_cityroom.jpg)
I am amazed that you cannot understand this. It is an elementary principle of justice that only the guilty should be punished.
Maybe he's amazed to see a Jew who accepts un-Jewish and anti-Jewish "morals" that certaintly fit to Thomas Jefferson morals and not Torahnic morals?!
It's an elementary Jewish principle - "those who are merciful to the cruel, will eventually be cruel to the merciful" - the very fact that these people belongs to a hostile civilizations makes them enemies, and even if they've left this civilization, it makes NO sense to any human being (besides to Jews, sady) that the lives of our own worths 2 billion times more than the lives of others.
As for me, I would cut my Jewish finger if this could avoid the death of ONE good Arab.
Yes, same Altruist BS. Your Jewish finger is G-D given Holy figure that if you'd cut it off for a dirty Ishmaelite ("good" or bad) that would be treason.
I don't think all secularized, Hellenized concepts are bad.
Then no wonder you don't think like a Jew but like an American. Hellenized, Western concepts are alien to Judaism and contradicts basic elements of our faith.
-
No one is trying to kill children. There is no military mission that says go and kill off as many "good arabs" as you can see and as many women and children as possible. Military missions are necessitated by security needs and objectives. If children die in the process, that is sad (sometimes), however these children are raised and grow up to be our adult enemies, so there is less of a sense of loss involved when they are programmed to hate us, and G-d can reward and punish in the next world those truly deserving. Furthermore, the idea that one would "cut his own finger" or in other words put their own soldiers in increased danger during a military mission in order to go out of the way to avoid the deaths of children or possible good enemies, is completely insane and illogical. Aside from the fact that this is not the way the Torah views warfare, certainly common sense rejects such insanity without any need for scriptural explanation, and the Torah in this regard serves simply as a support for common sense. No military endangers its own soldiers to save the enemy. If that means more of the enemy dying including so-called "non-combatants" so be it.
"Those who are merciful to the cruel eventually come to be cruel to the merciful."
If you know anyone who has served in the US army, they can tell you how they wiped out villages in Iraq and afghanistan without regard to "good enemies" or others that might have gotten in the way "by accident."
Resistance is put down with violence, and there is no other way. If you purposely endanger your own soldiers during this process, you will have less resources with which to put down future resistance in other missions or have less ability even to achieve the objective of the current mission. That is like an assembly line where one guy puts an axl onto a wheel, the next guy takes the axl off and sends the wheel back to the first guy to put an axl on it...
I basically agree with what you write. All I am saying is that, as a general rule, military operations should target military objectives, not civilian objectives, and I find it honourable that the Israeli army takes care to minimize civilian casualties, as long as this does not unduly endanger her own soldiers. I never said that Israeli soldiers should be sacrificed in order to save Arabs.
-
I find it honourable that the Israeli army takes care to minimize civilian casualties
I find it disgusting. G-d commanded the Jews to wipe out Nazi scum without mercy--every single last one. It is revolting that the lives of Nazis matter more than the lives of Jews in the minds of Israelis.
as long as this does not unduly endanger her own soldiers. I never said that Israeli soldiers should be sacrificed in order to save Arabs.
But there is no way to spare Muslim "civilians" (an oxymoron) without endangering Israeli soldiers.
-
That's great. We do not stoop to their level - they murder us and we bury our dead because we care more about non-existent so-called "good" ( what a great contempt you have for Arabs) Arab more than we do about ourselves.
I never said that we should let Muslim Nazis murder us !
What I meant is that the worst thing my ennemy can do to me is not to take away my body but to take away my soul, that is, to have me renege on all the principles I stand for. We will not defeat Nazis by becoming Nazis ourselves. Quite the opposite, that would mean they have won.
So you can't differentiate between these children:
(http://mezuzahstore.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2008/07/pal-children-w-ak46-rifles.jpg)
and these children:
(http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/2007/06/28/nyregion/hasidim.span_cityroom.jpg)
.
I do not respond to insults.
Maybe he's amazed to see a Jew who accepts un-Jewish and anti-Jewish "morals" that certaintly fit to Thomas Jefferson morals and not Torahnic morals?!
It's an elementary Jewish principle - "those who are merciful to the cruel, will eventually be cruel to the merciful" - the very fact that these people belongs to a hostile civilizations makes them enemies, and even if they've left this civilization, it makes NO sense to any human being (besides to Jews, sady) that the lives of our own worths 2 billion times more than the lives of others.
Be kind to the kind and cruel to the cruel - that is judaism.
I can only repeat myself : it is an elementary principle of justice that those who should be punished are those who are guilty. All-out indiscriminate revenge is not justice.
Yes, same Altruist BS. Your Jewish finger is G-D given Holy figure that if you'd cut it off for a dirty Ishmaelite ("good" or bad) that would be treason.
I can live without a finger. If that could allow to save the life of someone who does not deserve to die, I have no problem with that, even if he is an Arab.
Then no wonder you don't think like a Jew but like an American. Hellenized, Western concepts are alien to Judaism and contradicts basic elements of our faith.
I am not a bigot, that's all.
-
i would post a JTF video with that dancing video since that video ended up going viral and on the news...we need to look for popular to be videos and attach JTF videos to them.
-
May I kindly suggest that you take a closer look at what Judaism truly is...
Then who and what were the Maccabees fighting against if not Hellenism (Western ideas and cullture)?
You know what they say, Ron, Great minds think alike. (even though that was a really obvious point we both made).
-
All-out indiscriminate revenge is not justice.
You never answered my question. What did the L-rd tell the Israelites to do to Amalek?
I am not a bigot, that's all.
Excuse me? It's being a "bigot" to hate the Nazis who want to kill us all? It's not bigotry for them to want to murder all non-Muslims???
-
And what has all this to do with the original posting?
I don't think that it was wrong for them to do this... Unfortunately, once again the timing is terrible. I think it is funny...
Regarding the argument above, Judaism requires us to very strongly oppose the enemies of the Jewish people. The issue is to determine who the enemy is. Sure the commandment to remember Amalek is important, but we cannot assume just because someone is fighting against us that they are Amalek. We are faced with a variety of enemies each and every day, in our personal lives and in our public lives. Torah teaches us to treat others with kindness through our actions, and our speech.
But Torah also is clear that when one violates the law he is liable for punishment, up to and including death.
National enemies must be dealt with through military action. There are a number of mitzvot concerning going to war against an enemy. For instance there is a law that trees cannot be destroyed during a war... There is also the law of the beautiful captive... And there is the admonition that the Kohein gives to the troops before they enter battle.
As I said before, it is not an easy matter to determine how to deal with our enemies. The issue can only be understood through how we define our enemies.
http://www.chabad.org/library/article_cdo/aid/961313/jewish/Cutting-Down-Fruit-Trees.htm
"When you besiege a city for many days to wage war against it to capture it, you shall not destroy its trees by wielding an ax against them, for you may eat from them, but you shall not cut them down. Is the tree of the field a man, to go into the siege before you? However, a tree you know is not a food tree, you may destroy and cut down, and you shall build bulwarks against the city that makes war with you, until its submission." - Deut. 20:19-20.
http://www.vbm-torah.org/parsha.60/48kitetz.htm
a. A TIME FOR WAR AND A TIME FOR PEACE
"Inter arma silent leges," says the Latin proverb – "During war the law is silent." This proverb expresses the view that war is not part of civilized human life, subject to the rules of morality. Rather, war represents an outburst of primordial instincts of aggression and survival, and is therefore not subject to any legal system. War strips man of all garments of human civilization and returns him to his original primitive state.
As a description of the horrible reality of the wars conducted throughout human history, this view has – unfortunately - a firm factual basis. But if it is meant to express a world view which surrenders in advance any demand for lawful and moral behavior during war, then it is perverted and dangerous. The Torah certainly disagrees with the Latin proverb quoted above. Several laws are laid down pertaining to the conduct of war, and these are concentrated mainly in two parashot of Sefer Devarim: Shoftim and Ki-Tetze.
The fundamental aim of war is obviously to conquer the enemy, and the Torah's regulations pertaining to warfare are certainly meant to help realize this aim. But on the other hand, owing to the potentially corrupting nature of war, it requires boundaries and restraints in various spheres, and the laws of warfare are meant to achieve this, too. The question we shall address here is to what extent we may deduce from these laws the Torah's fundamental attitude towards the problematic human phenomenon of war.
Clearly, the ultimate vision of the Israelite prophets is one of peace – "And they shall beat their swords into plowshares and their spears into pruning hooks; nation shall not lift up sword against nation, nor shall they learn war any more" (Mikha 4:3). However, it goes without saying that this vision cannot serve as an operative principle for Israel at a time when the nations of the world wage war with one another and when Israel too must defend itself. The same prophet quoted above – Mikha – also describes a different vision: "Arise and thresh, daughter of Tzion, for I will make your horn iron and I will make your hoofs brass, and you shall beat many nations into pieces..." (4:13). There is no contradiction between these two prophecies, for each is appropriate for its own time: "a time of war" – in the present reality, and "a time of peace" – at the end of days, when "the mountain of God's house is re-established at the head of all mountains and the nations stream to it," as Mikha himself describes in the same prophecy.
The laws of warfare in Sefer Devarim apply to a period that belongs to the category of the second prophecy above. Do they contain any hint at the first prophecy?
...
-
i would post a JTF video with that dancing video since that video ended up going viral and on the news...we need to look for popular to be videos and attach JTF videos to them.
Yes great idea, I suggest we use one of AsheDina's songs and make them dance to her JTF song instead of the pop song.
-
Look at the seriousness, intensity and no mucking around of even paltry young Kahanists with no military training from 1993 at "Camp Meir" under Mike Guzofsky in this clip
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=miLk32l_4VU
The dancing, over relaxed, uninhibited poor empty-headed Israeli 'dib' 'elite' overrated zomboid dudu Zahal soldiers are a travesty, especially jiving to Black coon music whilst in uniform. Zahal stands for "Zava Hagana L'Israel", and it is emblazoned on every Israeli soldier's shirt pocket. Israel" contains Hashem's Name in it, & they should act accordingly, & not 'let off steam' for puplic Youtube consumption. They wouldn't dance like that in the other Holy cities of Jerusalem, Tiberias or Safed. Hebron is where the Avos are buried, a special locale where "Heaven & Earth meet", unlike the other 3 cities, and where the Resurrection of the Dead will first occur, even before Jerusalem.
-
Look at the seriousness, intensity and no mucking around of even paltry young Kahanists with no military training from 1993 at "Camp Meir" under Mike Guzofsky in this clip
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=miLk32l_4VU
The dancing, over relaxed, uninhibited poor empty-headed Israeli 'dib' 'elite' overrated zomboid dudu Zahal soldiers are a travesty, especially jiving to Black music.
lol. You're not serious.
-
Camp Meir was great, even under Guzofsky.
Can you imagine a camp under Chaim?! Even better!
-
Camp Meir was great, even under Guzofsky.
Can you imagine a camp under Chaim?! Even better!
Ok, but have you seen the kind of soldiers that are guarding Hevron?
-
If you're gona dance in uniform, at least do it like a North Korean!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rPjQeAi9AGQ
That was funny.
-
You never answered my question. What did the L-rd tell the Israelites to do to Amalek?
Oh I am so sorry I forgot to answer that question... My answer to that is two-fold. First, I am not so arrogant as to be certain to know who Amalek is. Judaism teaches me to be humble. Second, I would never embark on a campaign of extermination of any given group of people based on a doubtful interpretation of the Bible. Judaism teaches me to be fair and critical.
-
You never answered my question. What did the L-rd tell the Israelites to do to Amalek?
Oh I am so sorry I forgot to answer that question... My answer to that is two-fold. First, I am not so arrogant as to be certain to know who Amalek is. Judaism teaches me to be humble. Second, I would never embark on a campaign of extermination of any given group of people based on a doubtful interpretation of the Bible. Judaism teaches me to be fair and critical.
This article is interesting in its discussion of Amalek...
http://www.aish.com/tp/i/moha/48939037.html
...
MAIMONIDES SAYS
A careful reading of Maimonides' "Mishna Torah," indicates that Maimonides was of the opinion that a person from Amalek may, in fact, convert to Judaism. Apparently, he preferred the tradition recorded in the Babylonian Talmud to the explicit dictum in the Mechilta. Maimonides writes:
All non-Jews when they convert and accept all the commandments ... are like Jews for all matters ... except the four nations exclusively (who cannot convert) and they are Amon, Moab, Egypt, and Edom. These nations, when they convert, are Jews for all matters with the exception of joining the community in marriage. (Mishna Torah Issuri Biah 12:17).
The inference seems quite clear: the option of conversion is open to the erstwhile Amalekite. Furthermore, Maimonides mentions a second possibility for an Amalekite to lose the status of Amalek without entering the fold of Judaism.
Maimonides (in "Laws of Kings" 6:4) describes the etiquette of war, and says that prior to battle the opposing side should be offered the possibility to accept the commandments and subjugation. This offer is also extended to Amalek. Apparently, when Amalekites accept the seven Noachide laws, they lose the status of Amalek and must no longer be obliterated. In other words, there are three possibilities for an individual born of Amalekian blood:
1. Maintaining his initial status of Amalekite and thus being slated for obliteration.
2. Accepting the seven Noachide laws, at which point his status becomes that of a righteous gentile.
3. Full-fledged conversion.
It is important to consider the other side of this coin: Can a person become an "Amalakite"?
* * *
HOW TO BECOME "AMALEK"
According to Rav Chaim Solovietchik's understanding of Maimonides, the answer is affirmative. When describing the obligation to eradicate the seven nations who occupied the Land of Israel at the time of Joshua's conquest, Maimonides writes that by his time they had already assimilated among the nations, and therefore this commandment cannot be fulfilled. The source for this teaching is a tradition cited in the Talmud:
Said Rabban Gamaliel to him: "Is it not already laid down, 'An Ammonite or a Moabite shall not enter into the assembly of the Lord'?"
Rabbi Joshua replied to him: "Do Ammon and Moab still reside in their original homes? Sancherev King of Assyria long ago went up and mixed up all the nations, as it says, 'I have removed the bounds of the peoples and have robbed their treasures and have brought down as a mighty one their inhabitants.' And whatever strays [from a group] is assumed to belong to the larger section of the group." (Brachot 28a)
On the other hand, in the very next law, Maimonides writes of the obligation to destroy Amalek. Here he leaves out this important caveat. For some reason Maimonides believes that the identities of the seven nations have disappeared due to the policy of massive population transfers employed by Sancherev, yet Amalek lives as a distinct, identifiable entity!
Rav Chaim explained that Amalek is therefore a conceptual category and not merely an historical reality. One who behaves as an Amalekite can achieve the status of Amalek. Rav Chaim's grandson, Rav Yosef Dov Soloveitchik, applied this teaching to the Nazis who adopted an Amalakian worldview, unfortunately with more success than the historical Amalekites.
-
We should do unto Nazis and anti-semites what they want to do to us...and if it means they want to throw us in ovens, we should throw them instead in the ovens... Don't forget what happened to Haman and his henchmen on Purim when he planned to murder 100's of thousands of Persian Jews...they reversed the very thing he wanted to do to them on himself....
THe same go with the Arab Muslim Nazis. While I might have some personal issues to go blow up arab muslim villages unprovoked, I wouldn't feel bad if it happened. Furthermore, during war and fighting, I wouldn't care if an arab muslim school were blown up if terrorists were hiding inside of them. Finally, if the arab muslims hurt a single Jew or planned on it, I would have no problem with sieges being laid on these villages even if it ends up killing non combat civilians. If Israel sent a true message, our enemies would think twice about hurting a single Jew...and we need to react harshly and brutally to our enemies who want to do brutal things to us.
That's great. We do not stoop to their level - they murder us and we bury our dead because we care more about non-existent so-called "good" ( what a great contempt you have for Arabs) Arab more than we do about ourselves.
I never said that we should let Muslim Nazis murder us !
What I meant is that the worst thing my ennemy can do to me is not to take away my body but to take away my soul, that is, to have me renege on all the principles I stand for. We will not defeat Nazis by becoming Nazis ourselves. Quite the opposite, that would mean they have won.
So you can't differentiate between these children:
(http://mezuzahstore.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2008/07/pal-children-w-ak46-rifles.jpg)
and these children:
(http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/2007/06/28/nyregion/hasidim.span_cityroom.jpg)
.
I do not respond to insults.
Maybe he's amazed to see a Jew who accepts un-Jewish and anti-Jewish "morals" that certaintly fit to Thomas Jefferson morals and not Torahnic morals?!
It's an elementary Jewish principle - "those who are merciful to the cruel, will eventually be cruel to the merciful" - the very fact that these people belongs to a hostile civilizations makes them enemies, and even if they've left this civilization, it makes NO sense to any human being (besides to Jews, sady) that the lives of our own worths 2 billion times more than the lives of others.
Be kind to the kind and cruel to the cruel - that is judaism.
I can only repeat myself : it is an elementary principle of justice that those who should be punished are those who are guilty. All-out indiscriminate revenge is not justice.
Yes, same Altruist BS. Your Jewish finger is G-D given Holy figure that if you'd cut it off for a dirty Ishmaelite ("good" or bad) that would be treason.
I can live without a finger. If that could allow to save the life of someone who does not deserve to die, I have no problem with that, even if he is an Arab.
Then no wonder you don't think like a Jew but like an American. Hellenized, Western concepts are alien to Judaism and contradicts basic elements of our faith.
I am not a bigot, that's all.
-
Dan,
Do you know who 'The King'/HaMelech is in the Megillah Esther? It is not just Achashveros, the king is a metaphor for Hashem... To teach us that only Hashem controls all of the world, and sometimes he sends us an evil decree/gazera.
http://www.beingjewish.com/yomtov/purim/hidden.html
Overall I agree that those who seek to destroy the Jewish people will themselves be utterly destroyed. We have witnessed this with the Ancient Egyptians, the ancient Greek & Roman civilizations, and most recently with Nazi Germany {although there are remnants in this world}...
May Hashem grant us the strength to overthrow his enemies, and may we merit to witness their destruction.
http://www.koltorah.org/volume 14/27_Tzav-Purim.htm (http://www.koltorah.org/volume 14/27_Tzav-Purim.htm)
Rabbi Menachem Genack states that what most people did not realize during the time in which these events took place was that Hashem was guiding all of these incidents with a hidden hand. Hashem’s subtle coordination of the events is expressed in the Megillah in that the name of Hashem is not written even once in the entire Megillat Esther; it is the only book in the entire Tanach to not include Hashem’s name.
However, our Mesorah teaches us that the commonly used word in the Megillah, Hamelech, does not only refer to king Achashverosh, but also refers to Hakadosh Baruch Hu, Who has controlled all of the world events with His hidden hand throughout history. This differs greatly from the worldview of Amalek, and its descendant Haman. They believed in all of their evil and wickedness that G-d does not control anything, and that the fate of the world is based on pure chance.
-
While I might have some personal issues to go blow up arab muslim villages unprovoked, I wouldn't feel bad if it happened.
If it is really unprovoked, meaning :
(i) there is no legitimate target inside the village
(ii) the operation is not in retaliation to attacks made against Jews
then this is terrorism.
Btw, the bombings carried out by the Irgun in the 1930s in the colonial Palestine do not fit into this category because they came in retaliation against savage violence by the Arabs and they were motivated by the fact that the British did not protect the Jews, so I do not view them as terrorist actions.
Furthermore, during war and fighting, I wouldn't care if an arab muslim school were blown up if terrorists were hiding inside of them.
I would care. I am not saying that I would not do it ultimately, but it would be a moral dilemna. That is the typical situation in which Israel regularly gets nabbed because of the dirty methods of fighting of Arab terrorists. Should you cancel a planned operation because you know it will result in a bloodshed among civilians ? If you have a conscience, you can understand why one would answer yes to that question. On another hand, if you cancel the operation, you play the terrorists' game and you keep these bastards alive, thus endangering Jewish lives. In my opinion, there cannot be a systematic answer "yes" or "no" to that question, it is all a matter of circumstances and judgement.
If Israel sent a true message, our enemies would think twice about hurting a single Jew.
It would not deter our ennemies if we killed a lot of Arab civilians. Terrorists couldn't care less about their own people.
However, Israel should be as brutal as possible as far as targeted killings are concerned. This is more effective.
-
There is a tradition that the Resurrection of the Dead will start first in Hebron. And one day there will be JUSTIFIED dancing in the streets of Hebron....when Goldstein Hakodosh clambers out of his grave.....to finish the job!!!!
(http://img571.imageshack.us/img571/2035/goldz.jpg)
-
While I might have some personal issues to go blow up arab muslim villages unprovoked, I wouldn't feel bad if it happened.
If it is really unprovoked, meaning :
(i) there is no legitimate target inside the village
(ii) the operation is not in retaliation to attacks made against Jews
then this is terrorism.
Btw, the bombings carried out by the Irgun in the 1930s in the colonial Palestine do not fit into this category because they came in retaliation against savage violence by the Arabs and they were motivated by the fact that the British did not protect the Jews, so I do not view them as terrorist actions.
Furthermore, during war and fighting, I wouldn't care if an arab muslim school were blown up if terrorists were hiding inside of them.
I would care. I am not saying that I would not do it ultimately, but it would be a moral dilemna. That is the typical situation in which Israel regularly gets nabbed because of the dirty methods of fighting of Arab terrorists. Should you cancel a planned operation because you know it will result in a bloodshed among civilians ? If you have a conscience, you can understand why one would answer yes to that question. On another hand, if you cancel the operation, you play the terrorists' game and you keep these bastards alive, thus endangering Jewish lives. In my opinion, there cannot be a systematic answer "yes" or "no" to that question, it is all a matter of circumstances and judgement.
If Israel sent a true message, our enemies would think twice about hurting a single Jew.
It would not deter our ennemies if we killed a lot of Arab civilians. Terrorists couldn't care less about their own people.
However, Israel should be as brutal as possible as far as targeted killings are concerned. This is more effective.
1. I'll give you an example..There were a couple of settlers who planned on bombing an Arab Muslim girl school. They failed and were caught in their attempt. Personally, I would not subscribe to the point of view of doing that unprovoked. However, if they had been successful, I would have refrained myself from rebuking their actions. Rather, my only comment would be that, it is better to achieve a goal by following the law rather than breaking it. At the same time, I will not be sad for the arab muslim school girls since in my mind, they are rodfim. There would be no chance they would be our friends in the future, but rather, pursuers of Jewish blood directly or indirectly.
2. If there was a terrible murdering terrorist hiding amongst civilians and he was a dangerous man about to kill other Jews, whether it would be a targeted killing or destroying a whole structure, I'm for killing him one way or the other. My issue with targeted killings is that it puts important Jewish soldiers in danger if they are on the ground. But in a time of war, such as the Lebanon war, in my opinion, Israel should have indiscrimenantly flattened many of those villages rather than put Jewish men in danger.
-
I never said that we should let Muslim Nazis murder us !
By willing to give up lives of Jews for the Arab enemy speculating (a very contemptuous speculation) that there are traitors for the Arabs, you let Jews die for the sake of others, this is not Judaism, this is "the Just War" of the Catholic Church, this is anti-Jewish, immoral and self-hating, and this is called treason.
http://www.theobjectivestandard.com/issues/2006-spring/just-war-theory.asp
What I meant is that the worst thing my ennemy can do to me is not to take away my body but to take away my soul, that is, to have me renege on all the principles I stand for. We will not defeat Nazis by becoming Nazis ourselves. Quite the opposite, that would mean they have won.
So now you compare between Jewish self-defense and killing of our enemy to murder of Jews. Get some mental help.
I do not respond to insults.
Not an insult but a question, would you answer or not?
Be kind to the kind and cruel to the cruel - that is judaism.
I can only repeat myself : it is an elementary principle of justice that those who should be punished are those who are guilty. All-out indiscriminate revenge is not justice.
First you say you don't even know what Amalek is, and you allow yourself to ignore it?!
G-D wiped off the entire Amalekite people, with no exception how many "moderates" or "good" Amalekites there were. By being part of a hostile nation, they're considered enemy, get it through your head already.
Don't mix Judaism with Christianity.
I can live without a finger. If that could allow to save the life of someone who does not deserve to die, I have no problem with that, even if he is an Arab.
So the life of a non-existent Arab who doesn't deserve to die worths much more than yours.
Really, you would be a good Pastor.
I am not a bigot, that's all.
So thinking insanely and facing the truth and fight against the enemy nation, with self-respect and value of the lives and destiny that G-D gave to you to and your fellow Jewish brothers, this is bigotry?
You worship the "other" and have no value for your own life and your own people's lives. I can't understand why do you even bother considering some Arabs enemy just because they threaten your life, I thought you would give up on your life for the other?! and that it is good to commit suicide in order to save the life of the other?!
You ignore Jewish history better than a Communist, ignore the story of Dina in Schem, ignore the story of Amalek, ignore the story of King Saul's war on Agag, ignore Halachot Milhama of the Rambam, ignore everything. and then people wonder why the Jewish people have been murdered so easily.
-
I'm really sick of you, Ya'akov. All you've done here is bashing people's pride, you attacked me for willing to destroy Germany (what's more rational than that?) even after I gave you an explanation why Judaism not only allows that but commands that, you attacked the Serbs for committing "crimes" against the Nazi Albanians and Croats (it's not like I care about the Serbs, I'll be honest, but at least they're not our mortal enemies like the Croats and the Albanians), you talk so much about Judaism without knowing basic stuff in Judaism, please, at least be honest, and don't speak in the name of Judaism, because you don't know anything about it.
Rabbi Kahane answered your so-called arguments in this debate.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pyZ9zMr0ufI
-
Ron,
I think you are a little off base on some of the things you are saying here...
The issue with Schem and Dina was seen by their father as a big mistake. The Rabbis do not suggest that that episode is the way to deal in such a situation.
Also regarding Amalek... As I stated in some of my postings, at this time there is nobody today who we identify as the actual Amalek. There are those who act like Amalek and we must oppose them, but to say that the command to destroy Amalek is a clear case of killing all Arabs is not supported by anything I have heard any Rabbi say.
The Torah does promote the concept of tempered War... We are supposed to offer a peace before we go to war, we are supposed to allow an exit route for those who want to flee from the war. In cases of wars of conveniece there are three classes of people who can be excused from military duty...
I will bring you proofs of these concepts of a Jewish war... I don't know about the Christian idea, but it seems to me that they were pretty brutal when they went to war during the Crusades and the Inquisitions...
http://www.jewishanswers.org/ask-the-rabbi-category/the-land-of-israel/page/6/?p=1580
War and Murder
Torah has valued human life above all and under every circumstances we should try to save human as it is said to save one human being is like to save entire entire mankind. On the other hand, the laws of war of Deuteronomy says that when we go to war with faraway nations we are to give people chance to surrender and if they won’t we are to kill all the men in it. So how can we justify killing all the men just like that when we consider human life above all ? In self defense its proper to kill but for territorial expansion why should we shed blood? I am sure that G-D too wouldn’t allow us to shed innocent blood.
Hi,
Thanks for asking this important question. The first thing that needs to be said is that we think of all wars as equal. That is not true. We cannot equate a war that G-d commanded us to fight and a war that we choose to fight. If you learn the Torah’s perspective on warfare you will see that warfare in Torah law is totally different from warfare in the non-Jewish world. That is not possible to understand unless you go very in depth into the Torah’s perspective. To help you do that, here is a link that will describe the concept in great detail. I give this information over in a class format and I find that if you study it well it will give you a great overview of “Jewish warfare.” http://www.nerleelef.com/mar3.pdf
Next, let me just say that we are not talking about the modern concept of “holy wars” where people think that they know the will of G-d. The Torah’s concept of war is that G-d commands the Jews to do certain things because in His wisdom this is what needs to happen to bring balance to the world. There is a commandment in the Torah to completely destroy the nation of Amalek. This nation, according to the Torah, is evil through and through. There is no way that anyone from that nation can survive and the world be a safe place. King Saul almost destroyed this nation once but left the king alive for one night. He was wrong and he lost his kingship over that. The results of that night were that the king had relations with a woman, the child grew up and his ancestor ended up being the evil Haman and, according to many Hitler was also a descendant of Amalek.
http://www.aish.com/tp/b/lp/48952216.html
LAWS OF WAR
What follows are 3 laws concerning the Jewish people waging war (excluding a war of liberation of the land). Two of these laws are in this Parasha, followed by one in the next Parasha, and interrupted by the law of the "broken-necked calf."
LAW #1: When the soldiers are assembled to join the battle, they are first asked if anyone had recently gotten married, built a new house, planted a new vineyard, or was afraid of his misdeeds. Those who replied positively were exempted from military duty. The concept is that they would make bad soldiers due to the fact they would always be focused on "who will take my wife, house or vineyard if I don't return?" The sinner has his embarrassment alleviated by grouping him with the others.
LAW #2: When besieging a city, if you must cut down trees to build a platform to attack the city, do not cut down fruit trees. This is environmentalism in the Torah! This is the general prohibition against wasting food or any commodity. (Remember the starving children in Africa and finish your spinach!) The Torah also compares people to trees in the power of growth that they share.
LAW #3: The captive woman is discussed in next week's Parasha.
I think you should remember that Jews should not insult another Jew... I know you get excited in these kinds of situations, and I understand what you are trying to say.
I don't think he has said anything too out of line. Dont you think we should not personally attack another for having a slightly different understanding than yourself?
One more link:
http://www.vbm-torah.org/parsha.60/48kitetz.htm
c. OFFERING PEACE BEFORE WAR
(20:10) "When you approach a city TO WAGE WAR AGAINST IT, you shall PROCLAIM PEACE TO IT."
What is the reason for this mitzva? We may perceive in it some pragmatic logic: if surrender may be achieved peacefully, why wage war? The Sefer Ha-chinukh (#527) detects a different pragmatic reason:
"This (a peaceful surrender of the enemy) holds benefit for us, in that our king would thus have slaves to serve him and to pay him a permanent tax... By killing them there is no benefit, if they are prepared to remain subservient to us, and so it would be a matter of corruption and would represent cruelty on our part, such that it would be a disgrace for anyone to hear of it."
According to these pragmatic reasons, this mitzva is aimed at promoting the victory of the Israelite army without any cost in blood.
But an examination of the style of the verse immediately reveals the paradox that underlies its words: You are approaching a city TO WAGE WAR AGAINST IT, and I command you TO PROCLAIM PEACE TO IT! Furthermore, note the difference in the participle: proclaiming peace TO it is the opposite of war AGAINST it.
The way in which the Rambam formulates this mitzva (Hilkhot Melakhim 6:1) indeed points to a fundamental moral principle that underlies it – a perception which has nothing to do with military, political or economic pragmatism:
"War is not waged AGAINST ANYONE IN THE WORLD unless peace is first offered; neither in a voluntary war nor in an obligatory one... and it is forbidden to violate the covenant and to cheat them once they have surrendered peacefully and accepted the seven Noahide laws."
The Sefer Ha-chinukh, in his first reason for this mitzva, regards it as being of fundamental moral importance:
"Since mercy is a good quality, and it is appropriate that we – of holy seed – conduct ourselves accordingly in all matters, therefore [we act with mercy] even towards pagan enemies."
Thus we understand that the mitzva of offering peace, which precedes any war whatsoever (including an obligatory war, even a war against Amalek!), also includes – like the speech of the officers to the nation in the previous parasha – a subdued protest against war. But the protest in the previous parasha was directed at the suffering of Israelite casualties, whereas the protest in the present parasha is directed against the suffering of the enemy. Spilling the blood of the enemy should be avoided if possible.
-
I would also like to add the following:
The current situation in Israel is beyond the point of offering peace. Originally I believed that Israel should not have given up Gaza, Gush Katif, and the other concessions... In retrospect all those give aways was for naught.
I think that Rabbi Kahanes idea of relocating those arabs to an arab state sounds like the only rational idea. If they don't want to move, move them physically, as they did the poor Jews who were evicted from their homes.
But I don't think that we should round them all up and put them in ovens... That idea sounds too much like what the Nazis did to the Jewish people. I agree that we should not become that which we hate.
"You shall not aggrieve a stranger or oppress him, for you were strangers in the land of Egypt" (Exodus 22:20)
-
Ron,
I think you are a little off base on some of the things you are saying here...
The issue with Schem and Dina was seen by their father as a big mistake. The Rabbis do not suggest that that episode is the way to deal in such a situation.
The Rambam ruled that Schem and all of his fellow residents of the city deserved death for violating the Seven Laws of Noah. He writes, "(הם) חייבין להושיב דיינין ושופטים בכל פלך ופלך לדון בשש מצוות אלו (מצוות בני נח), ולהזהיר את העם; ובן נוח שעבר על אחת משבע מצוות אלו, ייהרג בסיף" (ט',י"ג).
Thereby, he justifies the actions of Shihttp://www.etzion.org.il/vbm/archive/beshiv/66beshiv.rtfmon and Levi "ומפני זה נתחייבו כל בעלי שכם הריגה שהרי שכם גזל, והם ראו, וידעו, ולא דנוהו".
The MaHaRal and others also praise Shimon and Levi for their actions.
Also regarding Amalek... As I stated in some of my postings, at this time there is nobody today who we identify as the actual Amalek. There are those who act like Amalek and we must oppose them,
It's a well known fact that every nation that declares mortal war on the Jewish people is considered Amalek in the essence. Agag the King of Amalek and his descendant, Haman, are examples. The Gaon from Vilna said it very clearly - the German people are descendants of Amalek and they should be eliminated.
http://www.yeshiva.org.il/midrash/shiur.asp?id=4465
http://www.etzion.org.il/vbm/archive/beshiv/66beshiv.rtf
but to say that the command to destroy Amalek is a clear case of killing all Arabs is not supported by anything I have heard any Rabbi say.
What's not clear about - Masechet Sukka paper 52 page 2:
"אמר רב חנא בר אחא אמרי בי רב ארבעה מתחרט עליהן הקב"ה שבראם ואלו הן גלות כשדים וישמעאלים ויצר הרע גלות דכתיב (ישעיהו נב) ועתה מה לי פה נאם ה' כי לקח עמי חנם וגו' כשדים דכתיב (ישעיהו כג) הן ארץ כשדים זה העם לא היה ישמעאלים דכתיב (איוב יב) ישליו אהלים לשודדים ובטוחות למרגיזי אל לאשר הביא אלוה בידו"
The Ishmaelites are worthless, they have no right to exist.
-
I would also like to add the following:
The current situation in Israel is beyond the point of offering peace. Originally I believed that Israel should not have given up Gaza, Gush Katif, and the other concessions... In retrospect all those give aways was for naught.
I think that Rabbi Kahanes idea of relocating those arabs to an arab state sounds like the only rational idea. If they don't want to move, move them physically, as they did the poor Jews who were evicted from their homes.
Rabbi Kahane chose the "moderation" interpretation of the Ba'Midbar (Numbers) 33:53:
And ye shall drive out the inhabitants of the land, and dwell therein; for unto you have I given the land to possess it.
וְהוֹרַשְׁתֶּם אֶת הָאָרֶץ וִישַׁבְתֶּם בָּהּ כִּי לָכֶם נָתַתִּי אֶת הָאָרֶץ לָרֶשֶׁת אֹתָהּ.
Rashi interpretates it as "expel them", the Yerushalmi as "eliminate them", and Sforno as "exterminate them" (I think).
But I don't think that we should round them all up and put them in ovens... That idea sounds too much like what the Nazis did to the Jewish people. I agree that we should not become that which we hate.
So now you compare between murdering Jews like that and killing Nazis like that?
-
Ron,
Maybe I havent told you but my hebrew is not that good... Could you provide references which have been translated... Google did not translate that yeshiva site very well..
-
Megiddo Jail near Yokneam, where the worst Arab killers are housed, also has a separate section for Israeli soldiers who are jailed for things like going AWOL, stealing jeeps, insulting officers etc.
The biggest loss to the Jewish People was when Esav left us. If Esav had remained a loyal Jew, we could have conquered the world.
The Romans and Germans are descendants of Esav. They would have become the Fighting Arm of the Am Yisrael. Soldiers like them didn't dance while on active duty and in uniform......ever!
(http://www.freeimagehosting.net/uploads/fad7d06fe1.jpg) (http://www.freeimagehosting.net/)
As R.Kahane writes, serving in Zahal is as much a mitzva (defending the Am Yisrael positive mitzva number 195) as putting on Tefillin, and is to be viewed with the same reverence and kovod...not irreverent frivolity!
And besides, whilst dancing they were eminently ambushable by a Hebron Fatah terrorist, the same as the 12 poor dozing Israeli soldiers who were gunned down by one arab with a carbine in 2002, or the 6 soldiers who were gunned down in their tent by a hang-glider terrorist in 1986 because the dozy Israeli guard ran off!
I agree with you 100% Wonga...your assesment is correct. These soldiers are an absolute disgrace to us, anyone that doesnt understand this is confused.
-
Ron,
Maybe I havent told you but my hebrew is not that good... Could you provide references which have been translated... Google did not translate that yeshiva site very well..
Idk where I can find this article in English if that's what you mean
-
Ron,
Maybe I havent told you but my hebrew is not that good... Could you provide references which have been translated... Google did not translate that yeshiva site very well..
Idk where I can find this article in English if that's what you mean
I think I understood some of that Yeshiva site... It was saying that Rambams view is not the only one... Or something to that effect.
Here is some of the translation:
Moreover, the need to remember that which Amalek did to us today is because that is the seed of Amalek with the same aspirations for brides Israel, and therefore the Torah commandment to wipe Amalek is a "rising Loorgach early kill him." הוכחה לדבר מהרמב"ם שהזכיר מצוות מחית עמלק כמצווה שהיא אקטואלית גם בזמן הזה, למרות שלכאורה שלא ידוע לנו מי משתייך לעם עמלק, ומדוע לא כתב שכבר אבד זכרם כמו שכתב לגבי שבעת העממים, וז"ל (הלכות מלכים פרק ה הלכה ד): Maimonides proof that reminded staff to Amalek mitzvah is mashed also relevant at this time, although apparently we do not know who belongs to the people of Amalek, why not write the memory as already lost seven peoples who wrote about the late (Laws of Kings Chapter went to d):
"מצות עשה להחרים שבעה עממין שנאמר החרם תחרימם, וכל שבא לידו אחד מהן ולא הרגו עובר בלא תעשה שנאמר לא תחיה כל נשמה, וכבר אבד זכרם". "A positive commandment to boycott the boycott said seven Ammin Ataharymm, and all who came near him and killed one of them goes without being said do not live every soul, and lost memories."
משמע שמצוות מחית עמלק שייכת גם היום, הא כיצד? Amalek commandment therefore belongs mashed today, huh how?
הרב יוסף בר סולוביציק זצ"ל אמר בשם סבו הגדול רבי חיים מבריסק זצ"ל שכל מי שאנו מזהים אותו כשונא ישראל הרי הוא מזרע עמלק, ועליו אמורה המצווה הזאת, ולכן לא אבד זכרם. Rabbi Yosef Bar Sulovicyak zt great grandfather named said Rabbi Chaim Brisk blessed memory, who we recognize that it hates Israel and it is the seed of Amalek, and needs to this commandment, and therefore not lost their memory. קשה לקבל את הדברים כפשוטם, שיהיה מצווה למחות את כל מי שאנו מזהים כשונא ישראל כדין עמלק אנשים נשים וטף, אלא נראה לפרש כוונתו שהתורה חידשה שיש מציאות של עמלק ששונא את ישראל ללא סיבה ניגלת לנו, (כמו עמלק שבתורה שיצא למלחמה עם ישראל כשהם בדרך ואינם מאיימים עליו ללא כל סיבה). Difficult to accept things at face value, it commands all those who protest that we properly identify Amalek hates Israel men, women and children, but his intention seems to interpret the Torah has renewed reality of Amalek hates Israel for no reason Niggli us, (as does he in turn went to war with Israel when they are on the way do not threaten him for no reason). הזיהוי הזה של שנאה עיוורת יעזור לנו להבין שיכולה להיות שנאת ישראל, שאינה בגלל סיבה זו או אחרת, ולכן הפתרון לכך לא יהיה על ידי שנשנה משהו בהתנהגותנו אליו, כמו שחשבו יהודים בתקופת ההשכלה, שאם יתנהגו כגויים תפחת האנטישמיות כלפי היהודים, ואדרבא זה הגביר את השנאה כלפינו, וכמו שאמרו כמה ממנהיגי ישראל שמדינת ישראל היא התשובה לאנטישמיות, והיא הופכת אותנו כביכול לעם "נורמלי" ככל העמים שיש לו מולדת וממילא לא ישנאו אותנו, והנה התברר כמה אין זו הסיבה אלא להיפך מכך, שכן היום מדינת ישראל היא הסיבה הגדולה ביותר לגילויי האנטישמיות. This identification of blind hatred that can help us understand to be hatred of Israel, not for one reason or another, so this solution will not by anything we change our behavior to it, like Jews during the Enlightenment thought that if the Gentiles will behave less anti-Semitism towards the Jews, on the contrary it increased the hatred toward us, and they said some of the leaders of Israel and that Israel is the answer to anti-Semitism, and makes us a people supposedly "normal" people as a homeland he has not hate us anyway, when it became clear how this is not the cause but the opposite result, because Israel is today the biggest reason anti-Semitism. אלא שצריך לומר, שיסודות השנאה נובעות משנאת עולם לעם עולם, ועל זה נצטווינו לזכור את שנאתו של עמלק, שנאה שעודנה קיימת ולא אבד זכרה. But to say, elements derive from the hatred of the world hate the people of the world, and that we were ordered to remember Amalek's hatred, hatred still exists and lost her memory.
לפי זה אפשר להסביר, מדוע היה צריך לחכות לציווי של הנביא שמואל לצאת למלחמה נגד עמלק, (שמואל א פרק טו) "כֹּה אָמַר ה' צְ-בָאוֹת פָּקַדְתִּי אֵת אֲשֶׁר עָשָׂה עֲמָלֵק לְיִשְׂרָאֵל אֲשֶׁר שָׂם לוֹ בַּדֶּרֶךְ בַּעֲלֹתוֹ מִמִּצְרָיִם: עַתָּה לֵךְ וְהִכִּיתָה אֶת עֲמָלֵק וגו' ". This can be explained by, why he had to wait an order of the prophet Samuel to go to war against Amalek, (Samuel Chapter of Tau) "Thus said the Czech - I ordered the letter which Amalek did to Israel, which had a way of Egypt, HE: Now you smite the Amalek et cetera. " משום שצריך לזהות אותו כעמלק, ואין זה קל כל עיקר, מפני שעמלק הם עם של שבטים נודדים בנגב, שאין להם מקום קבוע, אנו מוצאים אותם בדרך כלל סמוכים לישראל להצר להם, ולכאורה חל עליהם הכלל של "כל דפריש מרובא פריש" כמו שקרה לכל העמים שסנחריב הגלה אותם ממקומם, ובכל פעם הם מופיעים בלבוש אחר, כגון לפני כניסת ישראל לארץ (במדבר פרק כא) "וַיִּשְׁמַע הַכְּנַעֲנִי מֶלֶךְ עֲרָד יֹשֵׁב הַנֶּגֶב כִּי בָּא יִשְׂרָאֵל דֶּרֶךְ הָאֲתָרִים וַיִּלָּחֶם בְּיִשְׂרָאֵל וַיִּשְׁבְּ מִמֶּנּוּ שֶׁבִי". Properly identify him because Amalek, it is not easy at all, because Amalek are the migratory tribes of the Negev, who have no fixed place, we usually find them adjacent to Israel to narrow them, and apparently applied the rule of "all Edfris Ruba Parrish" as happened to Sennacherib peoples exiled them from their place, and every time they appear in a different dress, such as before the Israel Land (Numbers Chapter XXI) "and hear the Canaanite king of Arad that sat in the Negev in Israel came through the site and fought in and sat him in me." ופירש רש"י "יושב הנגב - זה עמלק, שנאמר (במדבר יג, כט) עמלק יושב בארץ הנגב. Rashi interpreted "sitting in the Negev - that Amalek, as it says (Numbers XIII, Dutt) does he sit in the Negev. ושנה את לשונו לדבר בלשון כנען, כדי שיהיו ישראל מתפללים להקב"ה לתת כנענים בידם והם אינם כנענים, ראו ישראל לבושיהם כלבושי עמלקים ולשונם לשון כנען, אמרו נתפלל סתם, שנאמר אם נתון תתן את העם הזה בידי". And change the language to speak the language of Canaan, to be in Israel to pray Loakab"ah they are not Canaanites Canaanites, saw Israel Lbushim clothing Amalekites tongue and language of Canaan, they told us pray just said, given that people will give their hands. " וכיון שהם משנים מקומם ולבושם אי אפשר לזהות אותם כעמלק בלא הוראת נביא. And when they change their place and dress you can not identify Amalek without teaching them a prophet. [/uote]
-
This is G-d's gift to humanity right here:
(http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/2007/06/28/nyregion/hasidim.span_cityroom.jpg)
Anything and everything should be done to keep them safe and their future secure. To sit back and do nothing while your enemy is developing an atomic bomb is not looking out for their interests.
NEVER AGAIN! Please let's not forget the past!
-
I'm really sick of you, Ya'akov. All you've done here is bashing people's pride
you talk so much about Judaism without knowing basic stuff in Judaism, please, at least be honest, and don't speak in the name of Judaism, because you don't know anything about it
...this is anti-Jewish, immoral and self-hating, and this is called treason...
Get some mental help.
You worship the "other" and have no value for your own life and your own people's lives.
You ignore Jewish history better than a Communist, ... ignore everything.
All that is nothing but smear and insults. As I said, I do not respond to that.
Really, you would be a good Pastor.
You should not insult the righteous Gentiles on this forum.
For the rest, I have already explained myself in this thread and in previous ones and there is no point in repeating what I have already said.
-
Ron there is a way to get your point across without insulting people. Read what I wrote. No where did I insult yaacov.
You insult the true enemy; but the one who doesn't know or understand, you explain to convince which you sort of didn't,but with the insults
-
While I might have some personal issues to go blow up arab muslim villages unprovoked, I wouldn't feel bad if it happened.
If it is really unprovoked, meaning :
(i) there is no legitimate target inside the village
(ii) the operation is not in retaliation to attacks made against Jews
then this is terrorism.
Btw, the bombings carried out by the Irgun in the 1930s in the colonial Palestine do not fit into this category because they came in retaliation against savage violence by the Arabs and they were motivated by the fact that the British did not protect the Jews, so I do not view them as terrorist actions.
Furthermore, during war and fighting, I wouldn't care if an arab muslim school were blown up if terrorists were hiding inside of them.
I would care. I am not saying that I would not do it ultimately, but it would be a moral dilemna. That is the typical situation in which Israel regularly gets nabbed because of the dirty methods of fighting of Arab terrorists. Should you cancel a planned operation because you know it will result in a bloodshed among civilians ? If you have a conscience, you can understand why one would answer yes to that question. On another hand, if you cancel the operation, you play the terrorists' game and you keep these bastards alive, thus endangering Jewish lives. In my opinion, there cannot be a systematic answer "yes" or "no" to that question, it is all a matter of circumstances and judgement.
If Israel sent a true message, our enemies would think twice about hurting a single Jew.
It would not deter our ennemies if we killed a lot of Arab civilians. Terrorists couldn't care less about their own people.
However, Israel should be as brutal as possible as far as targeted killings are concerned. This is more effective.
1. I'll give you an example..There were a couple of settlers who planned on bombing an Arab Muslim girl school. They failed and were caught in their attempt. Personally, I would not subscribe to the point of view of doing that unprovoked. However, if they had been successful, I would have refrained myself from rebuking their actions. Rather, my only comment would be that, it is better to achieve a goal by following the law rather than breaking it. At the same time, I will not be sad for the arab muslim school girls since in my mind, they are rodfim. There would be no chance they would be our friends in the future, but rather, pursuers of Jewish blood directly or indirectly.
2. If there was a terrible murdering terrorist hiding amongst civilians and he was a dangerous man about to kill other Jews, whether it would be a targeted killing or destroying a whole structure, I'm for killing him one way or the other. My issue with targeted killings is that it puts important Jewish soldiers in danger if they are on the ground. But in a time of war, such as the Lebanon war, in my opinion, Israel should have indiscrimenantly flattened many of those villages rather than put Jewish men in danger.
On example 1 : I disapprove of this planned bombing because I disagree with the chosen target. But I would have hated to be in a position where I would have to condemn this operation because I support the settlers' movement and there is already enough bashing of Israel in general and of the settlers in particular. I guess that if I had to take a public stance I would very briefly say that I do not support this attempted operation but that is an isolated incident and that it does not change the fact that Jews have every right to live and build in Judea and Samaria. And I would spend time recalling many instances where settlers have been treated unfairly by the Israeli government and by the media, to put things in perspective.
On example 2 : I would also be in favour of killing the beast if indeed I have enough evidence that he is about to kill Jews, even if that involves killing Arab civilians. But I would only do that as a last resort, if any other option is not available.
Also, as I mentioned in a previous post, I agree with you that too many Israeli soldiers have died as a result of trying to protect Arab civilians, especially during the first Lebanon war where Israeli soldiers were sent like sitting ducks in some places, and I strongly condemn that. What I would do on the ground is the following :
1) Encircle the village and seal it
2) Create a corridor to allow for the flight of non combatants
3) Call for all non combatants to leave
4) Once the rats have been trapped, flatten the whole thing
What if Arab civilians are kept hostage by the terrorists ? If there is no way to rescue them without sacrificing Israeli soldiers and if the place needs to be cleaned without the possibility of postponing the operation, then I would order to flatten the place all the same. A war is a war. We should avoid killing non-combatants whenever it is not necessary. But if that implies sacrificing Israeli soldiers, of course I choose to kill Arabs, all of them, whether combatants or non-combatants.
-
Second, I would never embark on a campaign of extermination of any given group of people based on a doubtful interpretation of the Bible. Judaism teaches me to be fair and critical.
Are you a practicioner of "emergent" or "postmodern" Judaism (I don't know if those exist, but they are unfortunately very real in Christianity) that teaches that we cannot know the Bible and cannot know what G-d wants us to do?
-
Listen, ever since I joined this forum, you have shown constant hostility toward me.
I do not like the way you talk to me and I am not entitled to respond to your sarcasms.
Your malevolence is blatant.
-
Since I forgot to quote, to avoid any misunderstanding, my previous post was directed at DBF.
-
Ron,
I think you are a little off base on some of the things you are saying here...
The issue with Schem and Dina was seen by their father as a big mistake. The Rabbis do not suggest that that episode is the way to deal in such a situation.
Incorrect.
As Ron has already pointed out, major rishonim held that the Shechemites were hayav mita (guilty of the death penalty) for breaking one or another of the 7 noahide laws. There are disagreements about which of these particular laws they broke (perhaps it's more than one!). What Yaakov was against was the ANGER employed by his sons and/or the possible danger they put him in. Not necessarily what they did and not that the Shechemites didn't deserve it. Big difference. And the Torah leaves off the dispute with their retort to their father saying along the lines of "Should our sister be treated as a harlot" - which is hardly an unambiguous ending from which to draw a conclusion on who was correct in the dispute. Perhaps the Torah leaves off with that ambiguous conclusion so as to point to us there is validity in both sides of the argument. But no one is saying the shechemites were innocent. Yakov is NOT saying that according to the rishonim. And the rishonim understood the Torah, unlike present-day liberal rabbis and certain kiruv promoters of "feel-good" Judaism. These rabbis need to learn the facts and not speak about what they don't know.
-
Megiddo Jail near Yokneam, where the worst Arab killers are housed, also has a separate section for Israeli soldiers who are jailed for things like going AWOL, stealing jeeps, insulting officers etc.
The biggest loss to the Jewish People was when Esav left us. If Esav had remained a loyal Jew, we could have conquered the world.
The Romans and Germans are descendants of Esav. They would have become the Fighting Arm of the Am Yisrael. Soldiers like them didn't dance while on active duty and in uniform......ever!
(http://www.freeimagehosting.net/uploads/fad7d06fe1.jpg) (http://www.freeimagehosting.net/)
As R.Kahane writes, serving in Zahal is as much a mitzva (defending the Am Yisrael positive mitzva number 195) as putting on Tefillin, and is to be viewed with the same reverence and kovod...not irreverent frivolity!
And besides, whilst dancing they were eminently ambushable by a Hebron Fatah terrorist, the same as the 12 poor dozing Israeli soldiers who were gunned down by one arab with a carbine in 2002, or the 6 soldiers who were gunned down in their tent by a hang-glider terrorist in 1986 because the dozy Israeli guard ran off!
I agree with you 100% Wonga...your assesment is correct. These soldiers are an absolute disgrace to us, anyone that doesnt understand this is confused.
Really, you agree with him that you'd rather have gentile European nazi beasts serving as the "armed wing" of the Jewish state's army rather than Jews fighting? You agree with him that Jews are mystically inherently incapable of fighting or discipline, but goyim are supermen and should be employed to do work for us? You agree that a Jewish "brand" of nazism where we simply tell nazis what to do and they listen to us, that that is a good thing? What kind of self-hating insanity is this and how can you possibly agree?
-
Yaacov I guess you are a little more moderate than me. But you are entitled to your opinions. In time as you survive in JTF you'll move a little more to the right like I have.
-
Yaacov I guess you are a little more moderate than me. But you are entitled to your opinions. In time as you survive in JTF you'll move a little more to the right like I have.
"Survive" in JTF, you are right Dan, that is the proper word to use !
-
Ron,
I think you are a little off base on some of the things you are saying here...
The issue with Schem and Dina was seen by their father as a big mistake. The Rabbis do not suggest that that episode is the way to deal in such a situation.
Incorrect.
As Ron has already pointed out, major rishonim held that the Shechemites were hayav mita (guilty of the death penalty) for breaking one or another of the 7 noahide laws. There are disagreements about which of these particular laws they broke (perhaps it's more than one!). What Yaakov was against was the ANGER employed by his sons and/or the possible danger they put him in. Not necessarily what they did and not that the Shechemites didn't deserve it. Big difference. And the Torah leaves off the dispute with their retort to their father saying along the lines of "Should our sister be treated as a harlot" - which is hardly an unambiguous ending from which to draw a conclusion on who was correct in the dispute. Perhaps the Torah leaves off with that ambiguous conclusion so as to point to us there is validity in both sides of the argument. But no one is saying the shechemites were innocent. Yakov is NOT saying that according to the rishonim. And the rishonim understood the Torah, unlike present-day liberal rabbis and certain kiruv promoters of "feel-good" Judaism. These rabbis need to learn the facts and not speak about what they don't know.
I hope you are not saying that the Torah penalty for rape is death, or annihilation? What the Schemites were guilty of is not protesting that Schem raped Dinah... So to translate that into Halacha does this imply that anyone who witnesses rape, and doesn't report it, is guilty of death and annihilation?
I understand the lesson of this episode in the Torah, but I dont see how this applies to practical Halacha...
-
This discussion of this episode I understand:
http://www.torah.org/advanced/mikra/5757/br/dt.59.1.08.html
"CURSED BE THEIR WRATH"
Chapter 34 of Sefer B'resheet records what is undoubtedly one of the most violent and morally troubling chapters in Biblical history. Here is a brief recap of the events which transpired in Sh'khem:
The family of Ya'akov enters the city of Sh'khem and Dinah, the one sister among eleven brothers, is forcibly taken by Sh'khem, the prince of the city-state after which he is named. Sh'khem rapes her and, through the august agency of his father, appeals to her brothers to allow her to become his proper wife. The brothers speak b'Mirmah (deceitfully? cunningly?) with Sh'khem and Hamor, his father, and convince them that the only way for Dinah to marry Sh'khem is if the prince and all of his townsfolk become circumcised. The townsfolk are convinced to undergo this painful operation - evidently motivated by economic gain (vv. 21-24). On the third day, with all the males in pain, Shim'on and Levi kill all of the males in town, after which the brothers pillage the town and take their sister back to safety. Ya'akov chastises them for their actions, which they defend on grounds of concern for their sister's honor.
As mentioned, this narrative is troubling on many levels. To paraphrase a contemporary writer, whereas Ya'akov's children had a golden opportunity to begin to fulfill their mission of teaching the world the way of Hashem, to do justice and judgment; (B'resheet 18:19), they squandered this chance and sullied their reputation in the eyes of the neighboring peoples by acting both deceitfully and violently, destroying an entire city in response to a crime committed by one citizen - albeit the prince. Avraham's protests of will you also destroy the righteous with the wicked? (ibid. v. 23) seem to have been inverted by his elect progeny. In addition, if we look further into the Torah, we see that rape of an unmarried woman is not considered a capital crime - rather it is a case of criminal assault (along with a fine, represented here by the word Mohar). How could Shim'on and Levi act in this manner?
Conventional understanding holds that Ya'akov's chastisement was directed against all of their actions - the deceit, the polis-cide and the pillage of the town. We are even more confident that Ya'akov was violently opposed to their behavior when we read of his deathbed charge, given to them nearly fifty years later in Egypt:
Shim'on and Levi are brothers; instruments of cruelty are their swords. O my soul, do not come into their council; to their assembly, let my honor not be united; for in their anger they slew a man, and in their wanton will they lamed an ox. Cursed be their anger, for it was fierce; and their wrath, for it was cruel; I will divide them in Ya'akov, and scatter them in Yisra'el. (B'resheet 49:5-7)
If we look into the analyses of the Rishonim, we will find that a much more complex picture unfolds before us; indeed, a careful read of both texts (Chapters 34 and 49) provides us with ample reason to reexamine our assessment of the behavior of Shim'on and Levi in Sh'khem. Due to space limitations, we will limit our reassessment of "the tragedy in Sh'khem" to information which can be inferred from the text itself. Interested readers are encouraged to look at the comments of the Rishonim through Ch. 34 (notably the Ramban at 34:13; note his critique of Rambam's explanation).
"HAKH'ZONAH...?"
There are several indications that Ya'akov was not opposed - in principle - to the decision (and its implementation) taken by Shim'on and Levi. In addition, we have several textual indications that the Torah itself gives their approach the stamp of approval.
First of all, let's look at Ya'akov's deathbed charge to these two brothers:
... for in their anger they slew a man, and in their wanton will they lamed an ox...
Although there are opinions in the Midrash which interpret this statement as a reference to Sh'khem, simple "P'shat" does not support this read. How could Ya'akov be referring to the death of dozens (or hundreds) of people as they slew a man? In addition, what is the reference to an ox here?
There is one statement in the Midrash which addresses this problem - but the solution offered there is hardly a critique of the brothers' behavior:
Did they only slay one man? Doesn't Scripture state: they slew all the males? Rather, they were only considered by haKadosh Barukh Hu as one person. (B'resheet Rabbah 99:6)
In other words, if this is a reference to the slaying of the entire male population of Sh'khem, it isn't as grievous as all that, as their lives weren't worth much in the eyes of G-d (see the additional prooftexts brought in that selection).
Again, the straightforward reading is a reference to the killing of one man and an ox. We will soon discover who these might be.
...Cursed be their anger, for it was fierce; and their wrath, for it was cruel...
Note that Ya'akov does not curse their actions - rather, he curses their anger (or so it seems - but see the first comment of Hizkuni to 49:7.). If he were morally opposed to their behavior in Sh'khem, doesn't the actual slaying and pillage pale in significance next to their anger? Why mention that here?
[There is one other problem here, one which is beyond the scope of this shiur. Subsequent to Ya'akov's deathbed charge to his sons, the Torah states:
All these are the twelve tribes of Israel; and this is it what their father spoke to them, and blessed them; every one according to his blessing he blessed them.
(49:28) How can we understand Ya'akov's words to Shim'on and Levi - along with his harsh words for Re'uven - as part of a blessing? Perhaps we will take this up when we get to Parashat VaY'chi.]
Indeed, one comment in the Midrash Rabbah contrasts the violent act which earned them this curse (?) with their valor in Sh'khem!:
...[Ya'akov] began calling out Shim'on and Levi are brothers... you acted like brothers to Dinah, as it says: two of the sons of Jacob, Shim'on and Levi, Dinah's brothers, took each man his sword.. but you did not act like brothers to Yoseph when you sold him. (B. Rabbah 99:7 - this Midrash can be associated with the comment in Midrash Rabbati of R. Moshe haDarshan, to wit: the each man to his brother mentioned in 37:19 at the sale of Yoseph refers to Shim'on and Levi; not coincidentally, Yoseph's abduction and sale took place in the Sh'khem region.)
Indeed, many Mefarshim maintain that the entire deathbed-charge of Ya'akov to Shim'on and Levi is only a reference to their role in the sale of Yoseph - who is also known as an ox (see D'varim 33:17).
...
-
Re: "Your malevolence is blatant "
One can not convince fellow Yehudim and other members here on the forum to accept a different position in a argument or debate by being resorting to "in your face" responses.
There's a time and place for that style of bluster, and it should be reserved for dealing with Israelis inside Israel, or for nazioid trolls.
There's an old saying: "You catch more flies with honey than vinegar !"
Another great old saying: "If you want to win an argument, first agree with your opponent, and then slowly walk them over to your side".
-
Here is the 'conclsion' of that discussion of the episode of the rape of Dinah... It supports KWRBTs opinion that the action was justified but the manner it was carried out was questionable...
...
V
YA'AKOV AND HIS SONS
We will first address the dispute between Ya'akov and his sons regarding the proper tactics in response to the rape of Dinah; resolving this question will provide us an approach to the other two.
Although a full treatment of this topic is beyond the scope of this shiur, we have to approach any differences in attitude which surface between Ya'akov and his children against the backdrop of their substantially different backgrounds and experiential matrices.
Whereas Ya'akov grew up knowing grandfather Avraham (Yitzchak was 60 when Ya'akov was born; hence Avraham was 160 at the time; therefore Ya'akov was 15 when Avraham died) and, of course, knowing father Yitzhak (according to Seder Olam, Ya'akov was 63 when Yitzhak sent him away to Lavan). Conversely, Ya'akov's sons never knew great-grandfather Avraham - nor did they even meet Yitzhak until he was quite aged and, from all textual and Midrashic evidence, quite incapacitated (see, inter alia, Rashi at B'resheet 28:10).
Ya'akov grew up in Eretz K'na'an, but had to spend the last twenty years (at least - see BT Megillah 17a) "on the run". In addition, before his fleeing to Aram, his life seems to be one of isolation, save his relationship with mother Rivkah. Our story (Ch. 34) rests somewhere along the continuum from Galut (exile) to Shivah (return) - and therein lies the rub. Ya'akov's children, although born and raised in what proved to be an environment of enmity, had a full family support system, as well as being brought up as the children of a wealthy and powerful member of Lavan's household.
In sum, Ya'akov was an Eretz-Yisra'eli who had been in galut for a substantial time - and who had a clear and direct connection with Avraham and Yitzhak. His children were born in Aram and had never tasted the pain and loneliness of exile - and they had had no direct encounters with the first or second generations of the clan.
As such, Ya'akov's response to the rape of Dinah has to be understood against this background. Both grandfather Avraham and father Yitzhak had experienced similar difficulties with local chieftains: Sarah was taken to Pharaoh's palace (Ch. 12) and to Avimelekh's rooms (Ch. 20). Rivkah, although never taken from Yitzhak, was presented as his sister out of the same fear of the local ruler and the general lack of morality (Ch. 26).
Here, Ya'akov, who had not yet encountered such a threat, was faced with a hauntingly familiar scenario - with some significant differences. Dinah was not falsely presented as a sister - she really was an unmarried sister! She was taken to the house of the local ruler, just as in the cases with Avraham - but here's where the similarities end. Whereas God had intervened on behalf of Avraham both in Egypt and in G'rar, the rape of Dinah was carried out with bestial success.
Ya'akov had every reason to consider as follows:
If father Avraham, for whom God was prepared to intervene to spare Sarah, and who was only wandering through that land, was prepared to "play the game" and not belligerently confront the locals - how much more so in this case. After all, God has not intervened to help us here; and these are my permanent neighbors, with whom I must be able to get along. If it was important to exercise restraint in galut - as I have with Lavan and, just now, with Esav - how much more so in the Land where I intend to establish my roots.
The brothers (note that Shim'on and Levi are only singled out in describing the slaying; all of the brothers participated in the cunning negotiations as well as the pillage of the city), coming from their critically distinct upbringing and experiences, viewed the situation and the appropriate response quite differently. The non-confrontational attitude which both Avraham and Yitzhak had adopted while traveling (see our analysis of the role of deception while traveling in the last two shiurim - available here and here. ) was only appropriate for a land you intend to leave - ultimately, if the locals think you weak, it will have no deleterious effect on your own well-being. That is not the case, they argued, in a land which you intend to settle. If the local peoples think of our daughters as "fair game", we will never gain their respect - or fear. Our lives will be a long series of attacks and oppression. It is better, goes the argument, to make our stand her e and now and let everyone know that we are not to be trifled with.
We now understand why Ya'akov did not originally take up arms - and why he was perturbed by their approach. It was not a moral opposition, rather a disapproval of their tactics which lay at the heart of his chastisement.
Both of their positions are easily in their respective arguments:
Ya'akov:
You have brought trouble on me to make me odious among the inhabitants of the land, among the K'na'ani and the P'rizzi; and I being few in number, they shall gather together against me, and slay me; and I shall be destroyed, I and my house.
The brothers:
Should he deal with our sister as with a harlot?
When we are talking about an individual who violates a young woman, the Torah does not consider it a capital offense; it allows for recompense and amelioration of the situation with a large fine as appropriate for a case of criminal assault. When, on the other hand, we are dealing with an attack which challenges the dignity and honor of the people of Yisra'el, that is a different matter entirely.
The Torah not only provides support for the brothers' position in the description of the ensuing travels which were "trouble-free", the Halakhah itself seems to lend support to this position:
Rav Yehudah stated in the name of Rav: If foreigners besieged Israelite towns... with the intention of taking lives the people are permitted to sally forth against them with their weapons and to desecrate the Shabbat on their account. Where the attack, however, was made on a town that was close to a frontier, even though they did not come with any intention of taking lives but merely to plunder straw or stubble, the people are permitted to sally forth against them with their weapons and to desecrate the Shabbat on their account. (BT Eruvin 45a)
-
We should look at the bright side! :)
For three days those schmucks were hurting so bad that they wished they were dead! >:(
And at least they died circumcized! :::D
And the local butcher who was the "mohel" earned enough money cutting meat that week to make a down payment on a very nice camel complete with awning! ;D
-
Ron,
I think you are a little off base on some of the things you are saying here...
The issue with Schem and Dina was seen by their father as a big mistake. The Rabbis do not suggest that that episode is the way to deal in such a situation.
Incorrect.
As Ron has already pointed out, major rishonim held that the Shechemites were hayav mita (guilty of the death penalty) for breaking one or another of the 7 noahide laws. There are disagreements about which of these particular laws they broke (perhaps it's more than one!). What Yaakov was against was the ANGER employed by his sons and/or the possible danger they put him in. Not necessarily what they did and not that the Shechemites didn't deserve it. Big difference. And the Torah leaves off the dispute with their retort to their father saying along the lines of "Should our sister be treated as a harlot" - which is hardly an unambiguous ending from which to draw a conclusion on who was correct in the dispute. Perhaps the Torah leaves off with that ambiguous conclusion so as to point to us there is validity in both sides of the argument. But no one is saying the shechemites were innocent. Yakov is NOT saying that according to the rishonim. And the rishonim understood the Torah, unlike present-day liberal rabbis and certain kiruv promoters of "feel-good" Judaism. These rabbis need to learn the facts and not speak about what they don't know.
I hope you are not saying that the Torah penalty for rape is death, or annihilation?
Did I say that? No. You just said that, Muman. Please read carefully.
The Ramban, Rambam, and others discuss which of the noahide laws the Shechemites violated. Off the top of my head without getting out the sources because I don't have time right now, one of them suggested they were guilty of the commandment to set up courts of law because they did not hold criminals accountable and they let shechem rape with impunity. Another opinion said they were collectively guilty of kidnap (theft) for allowing it and harboring the criminal. They were also apparently idol worshippers as evidenced by the idols removed from there afterward by the sons of Yaakov. So there are disagreements about which specific commandment they were over on, but it seems to me valid to suggest that they were quite guilty in a combination of things. But it is the violation of the 7 basic laws which carry the death penalty.
So halacha lemaaseh? I'm not a posek, but I know that gentiles have to set up courts of law and try criminals (which civilized gentile countries do), and Jews can also convene a court of law and punish criminal acts made against Jews as well which we do today in our own state. However today we do not employ the death penalty, but this may change in the future. Gentile countries, however, do employ the death penalty for certain severe crimes.
-
Also I'm pretty sure the Maharal praises Shimon and Levi if I am remembering correctly. Or that might have been Malbim. Yikes, clearly I need to brush up on this episode.
-
Also I'm pretty sure the Maharal praises Shimon and Levi if I am remembering correctly. Or that might have been Malbim. Yikes, clearly I need to brush up on this episode.
Yes it was the MaHaRal
המהר"ל - בדעה כי "מותרים ליקח נקמתם מהם". נכון כי במלחמות בין עם לעם, יש לפנות תחילה בדרכי שלום, אבל לא כאשר קדם לכך "מעשה נבלה".
-
I realize this thread is completely off topic but I hope that we can learn what the halacha is from these articles and the associated discussions. I am bringing something which supports your statements concerning Maharals opinion on this episode:
http://www.koltorah.org/ravj/Halachic_Perspectives_on_Civilian_Casualties_2.html
Halachic Perspectives on Civilian Casualties - Part 2 of 3
by Rabbi Chaim Jachter
Last week, we began a discussion of what might be the most important Halachic/ethical issue facing Medinat Yisrael and the civilized world: the question of harming civilians while attacking enemy forces. The survival of Medinat Yisrael and the entire civilized world might depend on this issue, as contemporary radical Islamic terrorists' modus operandi is to shelter themselves among civilians. In this way, they seek to take advantage of western sensibilities that are offended by harming civilians in battle. Our point of departure to resolving this quandary was the dispute between the Rambam, the Ramban, and the Maharal as to how to evaluate Shimon and Levi's killing the adult male population of Shechem in the wake of the capture and rape of Dinah (Bereishit chapter 34). The Rambam supports their action, arguing that the people of Shechem deserved to be punished due to their failure to punish their leaders for abducting and raping Dinah. The Ramban, on the other hand, maintains that Shimon and Levi were not justified, as the males of Shechem did not deserve capital punishment for this failure. The Maharal claims that although the males of Shechem were innocent, Shimon and Levi were justified in killing them, because in a war between nations, one does not distinguish between the innocent and the guilty.
Applying the Different Views
The Rambam and the Ramban argue as to whether Halacha considers an entire population responsible for the evil perpetrated by its leaders. As we discussed last week, it is difficult to discern whose opinion is endorsed by the Chumash. Indeed, Rav Shaul Yisraeli (Teshuvot Amud HaYemini 16) concludes his discussion of this debate, "In practice, there is insufficient basis to permit action against an entire community that has failed to execute its duty and remove murderers from its midst so long as it is reasonable to excuse them with the claim of fear, pressure, and the like."
However, prominent Poskim such as Rav Yaakov Ariel (Arachim BeMivchan HaMilchamah p. 83), Rav Dov Lior (Techumin 4:186), Rav Hershel Schachter (BeIkvei HaTzon p. 207) and Rav Asher Weiss (Minchat Asher Devarim 217-222) rely upon the Maharal's interpretation of the Shechem episode to allow harming anyone who belongs to an enemy nation during wartime. Rav Yitzchak Blau (Tradition Winter 2006 p. 11) argues, though, that "Maharal is a decidedly minority viewpoint with regard to that story and thus is a shaky leg upon which to build a far reaching position." Rav Dr. Neriah Gutel (Techumin 23:32) expresses similar reservations about applying the Maharal's principle in practice. We will seek to demonstrate why the Maharal is a most solid source and most definitely does not constitute a "shaky leg" upon which to base a resolution to our question.
Support for the Maharal
The Maharal's approach to the Shechem incident is endorsed by Rav Zalman Sorotzkin (Oznayim LaTorah, Bereishit 34:25), a leading mid-twentieth-century Halachic authority and Torah commentator. Furthermore, Rav Gutel (Techumin 23:34-35) convincingly demonstrates that the Netziv (Bereishit 9:5 and Devarim 20:8) believes that one is not punished for killing non-combatants during the course of battle. Thus, although the Netziv does not seem to subscribe to the Maharal's interpretation of the Shechem episode, he nonetheless agrees with the principle regarding killing civilians during wartime. In addition, Rav Schachter (ad. loc.) argues that the Netziv (commentary to Kiddushin 45a) articulates a principle that accords with the Maharal's approach.
Thus, even if the various commentators do not share the Maharal's defense of Shimon and Levi, they do not necessarily reject the underlying principle. They may believe that killing Shechem and Chamor would have sufficed to rescue Dinah and that waging war against the entire town was therefore uncalled for. In other words, the war against Shechem was unjustified, but in a just war one may attack without distinguishing between the innocent and guilty if it is impossible to wage war effectively in another manner.
Furthermore, Rav Asher Weiss notes that the Radak (Divrei HaYamim 1:22:8) also subscribes to the Maharal's principle. In his explanation of why David was disqualified from building the Beit HaMikdash due to the "blood that he had shed," he writes that David had killed non-combatants in the course of battle. However, he adds that David was not held accountable for their deaths, "since his intention was to eliminate evildoers so that they would not harm our nation." For further explanation of why this nonetheless would disqualify him from building the Mikdash, see Rav Elchanan Samet's Iyunim BeFarshiot HaShavua (1:68-69).
Furthermore, Rav Schachter (ad. loc.) argues that a principle presented by the Minchat Chinuch (425:3) also accords with the Maharal's approach. The Minchat Chinuch asserts that the rules forbidding endangering oneself do not apply in a situation of war. If a war is mandated by the Torah, then by definition, explains the Minchat Chinuch, it demands from soldiers to endanger their lives since, unfortunately, this is the normal course of war. Similarly, argues Rav Schachter, the Torah expects that we endanger the lives of civilians while waging a just war if this is necessary to achieve success. Rav Schachter notes that Rav Yitzchak Zev Soloveitchik (in his commentary to the Haftarah of Parashat VaYishlach) and Dayan Ehrenberg (Teshuvot Devar Yehoshua 2:48) concur with the assertion of the Minchat Chinuch.
Rav Shaul Yisraeli (ad. loc.) notes that "We do not find the obligation in war to distinguish between blood and blood (combatants and non-combatants). In the course of war, when laying siege to a city and the like, there is no obligation to make such distinctions." Rav J. David Bleich (Contemporary Halakhic Problems 3 p. 277) echoes this observation: "Not only does one search in vain for a ruling prohibiting military activity likely to result in the death of civilians, but to this writer's knowledge, there exists no discussion in classical rabbinic sources that takes cognizance of the likelihood of causing civilian casualties in the course of hostilities legitimately undertaken as posing a halakhic or moral problem." The vast response literature and that an assertion such as this made by Rav Bleich carries great weight.
Accordingly, we see that far from being a "decidedly minority viewpoint," the Maharal constitutes a mainstream and normative concept that is appropriately applied by the aforementioned leading Poskim. This is hardly surprising in light of King Shaul's warning to the Keini to evacuate their homes lest they be harmed in the course of war with Amaleik (Shmuel 1:15:6). We see that Shaul was prepared to endanger civilians in the course of war (and therefore told them to leave), and he was not censured for this by either the Tanach or Chazal. Both Rav Ariel (Techumin 4:190) and Rav Bleich (ad. loc.) cite this as strong support for the principle articulated by the Maharal. Moreover, this precedent extends the principle to harming even another nation living in proximity to the enemy if no viable alternative exists.
The Maharal and Imitating Hashem
We can further support the opinion of the Maharal from the principle of "Acharei Hashem Elokeichem Teileichu" (Devarim 13:5). This principle obligates us to imitate Hashem's actions. Chazal (Sotah 14a) offer such examples as "Just as Hashem visits the sick, we too should visit the sick" and "Just as Hashem buries the dead, we too should bury the dead." Rav Yosef Dov Soloveitchik in particular was fond of presenting further examples, such as "Just as Hashem is creative, we too should be creative" (see Ish HaHalacha pp. 84-85).
I would suggest that the Maharal's principle also constitutes an example of imitating Hashem. The Gemara (Bava Kama 60a) states, "When permission is given to an angel to destroy, it does not distinguish between good people and bad people." Rashi (commenting on Bereishit 6:13 s.v. Keitz Kol Basar) writes that whenever there is immorality, utter destruction comes to the world and kills the good with the bad. Note that had we not distinguished ourselves from the Egyptians (see Rashi to Shemot 12:6 s.v. VeHayah), our firstborns would have suffered the same fates as those of the Egyptians.
It seems obvious that Hashem, Who is good and merciful to all (Tehillim 145:9), would punish the good along with the bad only if no alternative exists. Similarly, when waging a legitimate war against a nation that has perpetrated evil, we may, or perhaps must, punish the innocent along with the guilty if no other viable alternative exists in order to wage a winning campaign.
The Maharal and the Geneva Convention
Rav Yisraeli and Rav Gutel note that Halacha seems to require conforming to the Geneva Convention and the norms of civilized countries regarding the ethical manner of waging war. This appears to apply even if the convention contradicts Halacha, just as we were required to honor the treaty we signed with the Givonim (Yehoshua chapter nine) despite the fact that it violated Halacha (see Rambam Hilchot Melachim 6:5).
Rav Yisraeli notes, however, that this applies not to the theory or rhetoric of the Geneva Convention, but rather to the manner in which it is practiced by civilized countries. This is similar to the idea I heard Rav Mordechai Willig cite in the name of Rav Aharon Kotler and Rav Moshe Feinstein that the rule of Dina DeMalchuta Dina (the obligation to honor the laws of land in which we reside) applies to the law as it is practiced and not as it is written. For example, Rav Kotler permitted driving sixty two miles-per-hour in a fifty five mile-per-hour zone, since the police did not issue a ticket for traveling at less than sixty three miles-per-hour.
Regarding warfare, liberal Harvard Professor Alan Dershowitz writes ("The Case for Israel" p. 167): "Although collective punishment is prohibited by international law, it is widely practiced throughout the world, including the most democratic and liberty-minded countries. Indeed, no system of international deterrence can be effective without some reliance on collective punishment. Every time one nation retaliates against another, it collectively punishes citizens of that country. The American and British bombings of German cities punished the residents of those cities. The atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki killed thousands of innocent Japanese for the crimes of their leaders. The bombing of military targets inevitably kills civilians."
We may add the following examples to Professor Dershowitz's list: The Allied blockade of the Central Powers to force them into submission via starvation and the doctrine of Mutually Assured Destruction, which prevented Soviet nuclear attack during the Cold War and which was predicated on the threat of collective punishment on a massive scale. I would argue that the practice of Allied forces during World Wars One and Two establishes the norm for how civilized nations should practice the principles articulated in the Geneva Convention when fighting an evil and tenacious enemy that is bent on annihilating its opponents. This standard is very much in harmony with the Maharal's principle of conduct during warfare.
Conclusion
Rav Ariel, Rav Lior, Rav Schachter, and Rav Weiss are without a doubt fully justified in following the principle articulated by the Maharal, which has a rock-solid basis in Tanach, Chazal, Rishonim, Acharonim, and basic Hashkafic principle. Thus, Halacha permits waging war without regard for civilian casualties if the war is justified and no viable alternative exists with which to wage a successful battle. Next week, we shall discuss the application of this principle to the current struggle of Israel and the civilized world against militant Islamic terror. We will focus on the critically important question of whether we should sacrifice "small" numbers of our soldiers in order to avoid large numbers of enemy casualties.
-
Esav is Halachically considerd a "Yisroel Mumar". His descendants, just like the Ten Lost Tribes, long ago lost their Jewish status, and according to the Talmud have today the Halachic status of complete goyim.
But they were "blessed" by Yitzchok that they would "live by the sword".
The Romans, Spartans and Germans, all warrior nations, were descendants of Esav.
If they had done teshuvah, eg when the Roman Emperor Antoninus (=Marcus Aurelius) became a talmid of Rebbe, and converted to Judaism, he could have Judaized his legions, and instead of Rome becoming Xtianised & enemies of Judaism, they could have conquered the world for the G-d of Israel, & world history would have been totally different.
(http://www.uncp.edu/home/rwb/roman_legion2.jpg)
Really, you agree with him that you'd rather have gentile European nazi beasts serving as the "armed wing" of the Jewish state's army rather than Jews fighting? You agree with him that Jews are mystically inherently incapable of fighting or discipline, but goyim are supermen and should be employed to do work for us? You agree that a Jewish "brand" of nazism where we simply tell nazis what to do and they listen to us, that that is a good thing? What kind of self-hating insanity is this and how can you possibly agree?
-
Here is some information regarding what Wonga has said... I have not read about this but this lecture by Rabbi Wein discusses the Roman Emperors relationship with the Jewish people:
http://www.rabbiwein.com/Marcus-Aurelius--Great-NonJews-in-Jewish-History-P669.html
The Talmud records the long-standing friendship between Judah the Prince and the Roman emperor Antoninus, but whether Marcus Aurelius was Antoninus himself or just a successor is a matter of some debate. Either way, his philosophical writings show that he identified with Jewish values. Rabbi Wein discusses the life and contributions of this rarity of Roman leaders: an altruist who admired and favored the Jewish people.
http://www.ou.org/about/judaism/rabbis/hanasi.htm
Yehudah, who had been circumcised, was given temporarily to the wife of the governor, while the Roman child, who of course was uncircumcised, was held by the Jewish mother, completely fooling the authorities, including the governor himself. Later, when that Roman child grew up to become Marcus Aurelius, an enlightened and compassionate ruler, he and Rebbi became close friends, which redounded to the benefit of the Jewish People.
http://www.shechem.org/machon/schwarz/palestine/period1.html
-
Esav is Halachically considerd a "Yisroel Mumar". His descendants, just like the Ten Lost Tribes, long ago lost their Jewish status, and according to the Talmud have today the Halachic status of complete goyim.
That's because they are goyim. What other status would they have? We don't even know who descends from Esaw. But whoever they are, no one ever thought that his sons were included within the 12 tribes of Yaakov because those are the sons of YAKOV, which is his brother, not him. Thus the Jewish nation descends from Yakov, not Esaw.
But they were "blessed" by Yitzchok that they would "live by the sword".
[/b]
And, your point?
Once again you weave fairytales and mystical nonsense out of the facts until our minds are in the sky and the facts have lost their meaning. What you say in this post has nothing to do with reality.
The Romans, Spartans and Germans, all warrior nations, were descendants of Esav.
You know that for a fact? No, you don't.
If they had done teshuvah, eg when the Roman Emperor Antoninus (=Marcus Aurelius) became a talmid of Rebbe, and converted to Judaism, he could have Judaized his legions, and instead of Rome becoming Xtianised & enemies of Judaism, they could have conquered the world for the G-d of Israel, & world history would have been totally different.
Now you are reading a midrash literally like a simpleton and distorting its meaning. Actually, I wonder if that is even a possible reading literally?! He became Jewish? The midrash I have seen does not say this. I'm not sure what you refer to... But certainly The Talmud DOES NOT say this ! Why would Chazal leave that out? Many reasons, but primarily because 1. It never happened, and 2. Even if it did (unlikely), it's irrelevant. Yet even though Chazal considered it irrelevant, you make it relevant to such an extent that you weave a life philosophy out of it. Fact is, irrelevance isn't the issue here because according to the Talmud what you claim never happened.
Really, you agree with him that you'd rather have gentile European nazi beasts serving as the "armed wing" of the Jewish state's army rather than Jews fighting? You agree with him that Jews are mystically inherently incapable of fighting or discipline, but goyim are supermen and should be employed to do work for us? You agree that a Jewish "brand" of nazism where we simply tell nazis what to do and they listen to us, that that is a good thing? What kind of self-hating insanity is this and how can you possibly agree?
[/quote]
-
Here is some information regarding what Wonga has said... I have not read about this but this lecture by Rabbi Wein discusses the Roman Emperors relationship with the Jewish people:
http://www.rabbiwein.com/Marcus-Aurelius--Great-NonJews-in-Jewish-History-P669.html
The Talmud records the long-standing friendship between Judah the Prince and the Roman emperor Antoninus, but whether Marcus Aurelius was Antoninus himself or just a successor is a matter of some debate. Either way, his philosophical writings show that he identified with Jewish values. Rabbi Wein discusses the life and contributions of this rarity of Roman leaders: an altruist who admired and favored the Jewish people.
http://www.ou.org/about/judaism/rabbis/hanasi.htm
Yehudah, who had been circumcised, was given temporarily to the wife of the governor, while the Roman child, who of course was uncircumcised, was held by the Jewish mother, completely fooling the authorities, including the governor himself. Later, when that Roman child grew up to become Marcus Aurelius, an enlightened and compassionate ruler, he and Rebbi became close friends, which redounded to the benefit of the Jewish People.
http://www.shechem.org/machon/schwarz/palestine/period1.html
And did you notice that what you wrote here contradicts what wonga is claiming?
-
Here is some information regarding what Wonga has said... I have not read about this but this lecture by Rabbi Wein discusses the Roman Emperors relationship with the Jewish people:
http://www.rabbiwein.com/Marcus-Aurelius--Great-NonJews-in-Jewish-History-P669.html
The Talmud records the long-standing friendship between Judah the Prince and the Roman emperor Antoninus, but whether Marcus Aurelius was Antoninus himself or just a successor is a matter of some debate. Either way, his philosophical writings show that he identified with Jewish values. Rabbi Wein discusses the life and contributions of this rarity of Roman leaders: an altruist who admired and favored the Jewish people.
http://www.ou.org/about/judaism/rabbis/hanasi.htm
Yehudah, who had been circumcised, was given temporarily to the wife of the governor, while the Roman child, who of course was uncircumcised, was held by the Jewish mother, completely fooling the authorities, including the governor himself. Later, when that Roman child grew up to become Marcus Aurelius, an enlightened and compassionate ruler, he and Rebbi became close friends, which redounded to the benefit of the Jewish People.
http://www.shechem.org/machon/schwarz/palestine/period1.html
And did you notice that what you wrote here contradicts what wonga is claiming?
I did not realize the story of Marcus Aurelius... That was my only point for posting this information. Regarding his main thesis, I don't necessarily agree.
-
Here is some information regarding what Wonga has said... I have not read about this but this lecture by Rabbi Wein discusses the Roman Emperors relationship with the Jewish people:
http://www.rabbiwein.com/Marcus-Aurelius--Great-NonJews-in-Jewish-History-P669.html
The Talmud records the long-standing friendship between Judah the Prince and the Roman emperor Antoninus, but whether Marcus Aurelius was Antoninus himself or just a successor is a matter of some debate. Either way, his philosophical writings show that he identified with Jewish values. Rabbi Wein discusses the life and contributions of this rarity of Roman leaders: an altruist who admired and favored the Jewish people.
http://www.ou.org/about/judaism/rabbis/hanasi.htm
Yehudah, who had been circumcised, was given temporarily to the wife of the governor, while the Roman child, who of course was uncircumcised, was held by the Jewish mother, completely fooling the authorities, including the governor himself. Later, when that Roman child grew up to become Marcus Aurelius, an enlightened and compassionate ruler, he and Rebbi became close friends, which redounded to the benefit of the Jewish People.
http://www.shechem.org/machon/schwarz/palestine/period1.html
And did you notice that what you wrote here contradicts what wonga is claiming?
I did not realize the story of Marcus Aurelius... That was my only point for posting this information. Regarding his main thesis, I don't necessarily agree.
But what he claims about Aurelius is not said by the Talmud, is not said by Sherira Gaon in his extensive iggereth, which I have learned, and it is not said in the ancient midrashim. There is no reason to believe Marcus Aurelius "converted to Judaism" or became a "talmid" of Rebbe!
-
That Emperor Antoninus (aka Marcus Aurelius) became a ger is stated in the Yerushalmi Talmud Megilla 72.
That Emperor Nero became a ger is stated in the Bavli Talmud Gittin 56.
That Onkelos, nephew to Emperor Titus, became a ger, ibid.
"The great kingdom of Rome was built by Zepho, son of Eliphaz, son of Esau" (Yelamdeinu, Batei Midrashos 160).
(http://www.multi-fill.com.au/spqr.jpg)
Yitzhak's blessing to Esau "thy dwelling will be the fatnesss of the earth" (Breishis 27:39) is that his descendants would inherit Italy (Rashi).
-
That Emperor Antoninus (aka Marcus Aurelius) became a ger is stated in the Yerushalmi Talmud Megilla 72.
That Emperor Nero became a ger is stated in the Bavli Talmud Gittin 56.
That Onkelos, nephew to Emperor Titus, became a ger, ibid.
"The great kingdom of Rome was built by Zepho, son of Eliphaz, son of Esau" (Yelamdeinu, Batei Midrashos 160).
(http://www.multi-fill.com.au/spqr.jpg)
Yitzhak's blessing to Esau "thy dwelling will be the fatnesss of the earth" (Breishis 27:39) is that his descendants would inherit Italy (Rashi).
Sounds like you're saying the whole roman empire was Jewish. Without a doubt you are misinterpreting these statements which are not historical. Rav Sherira Gaon makes no mention of this. He mentions the positive relations between Rebbe and the emperor which enabled his compiling of the mishna by easing the pressure on the Jews and the edicts against the chachamim. That's it.
Also when I said it wasn't in the Talmud, I was referring to the Bavli, however I have not seen the Yerushalmi you reference. I hasten to add that if it does say what you claim, it is probably not meant literally because no outside evidence corroborates this. On instinct, I am sure it is midrash (like the tale about Nero certainly is) and it is not telling over "history" because that was not chazal's concern with midrash. But I will have to look into it to see what is being said. Maybe aurelius was an actual ger according to one tradition. We shall see.
Also, I'm not sure why it's relevant to say here that Onkelos was a ger. Everyone knows and accepts that. And there were many gerim in those times. But Onkelos was not the Roman emperor which would be quite a remarkable thing that perhaps history might slightly take note of if it happened.
In any case, all of this departs from the point of what I was saying which is that there is no question that non-Jews/Europeans (even descendants of Esav if you want to call them that) are non-Jews and Jews are Jews. You are conflating Europeans with Jews for some strange reason. Jews are supposed to have their own nation and with that nation they can provide for themselves, defend themselves, do all the things that all men are capable of. We do not need to farm out anything-other-than-learning as if we are incapable to live on our own and with G-d's help. There was a time when the great chachamim worked for a living and learned trades, and fought in battle, and they would think you are nuts for saying these things. But you see the present-day reality when many so-called "learners" are uneducated or unemployed and incapable of other things. The reality is that they are capable, they just don't know it, and like you, they have been led to believe that those things are not for them because they are supposedly "goyishe" things not Jewish things. What a scandal. Why do you buy into such garbage and propagate it here? Why do you buy into the myth that Jews are defenseless and helpless and weak and cannot fight, and why do you propagate it here?
-
Yitzhak's blessing to Esau "thy dwelling will be the fatnesss of the earth" (Breishis 27:39) is that his descendants would inherit Italy (Rashi).
Yes, Esau/Edom is traditionally associated with Rome, however it is insane to think that every European descends from Romans or that chazal meant this in a genetic way and that all Europeans descend from Esav. If you think logically about it for even half a second, you would realize that the Fall of the Roman empire was caused in large part due to invading Huns and other barbaric peoples, and these are likely the ancestry of the Germans and other peoples. So obviously not all Europeans came from Romans. Chazal do not speak in terms of genetics. They meant that Rome took on Esau's identity. You make europeans into Esavian-infused supermen of "master race" like the master race of Hitler y''s, whom you admire so much, spoke about.
And everyone knows that Ibn Ezra argues with other rishonim and even with chazal by saying that Edom's descendants cannot be identified as the Roman empire. It may be because he was also understanding it as a literal genetic descending and in that case he is right to argue. But it seems to me that people who understand chazal that way are getting twisted and confused. Chazal do not care about genetics, the concept didn't exist. Probably people in Ibn Ezra's day had similar misunderstanding and so he is combating that. By associating Rome with Esau, chazal make a political statement and indicate the relationship/interaction between the empire and the Jews. You twist it into some kind of an anachronistic racial theory, and not only that, you make europeans a "superior race!" Can that possibly be further from what was intended?
-
"It is soul shattering to hear anyone express doubt over any teaching of Chazal, whether in Halacha or Aggada. One who denies a teaching of Chazal is unfit to serve as a witness!" (Chazon Ish).
Without a doubt you are misinterpreting these statements which are not historical....it is probably not meant literally because no outside evidence corroborates this......+it is not telling over "history"
So you prefer the unreliable historical records of anti-semitic gentiles over Chazal?! Woe on you!
-
Yair Davidy of Jerusalem, who is a shtickel Kahanist, presents much cogent Chazal, historical, and prophetic evidence that many European nations are in fact of Ten Lost Tribe ancient Israelite origin in his books and site www.britam.org
(http://britam.org/pics/yair2.jpg)
-
"It is soul shattering to hear anyone express doubt over any teaching of Chazal, whether in Halacha or Aggada. One who denies a teaching of Chazal is unfit to serve as a witness!" (Chazon Ish).
Without a doubt you are misinterpreting these statements which are not historical....it is probably not meant literally because no outside evidence corroborates this......+it is not telling over "history"
So you prefer the unreliable historical records of anti-semitic gentiles over Chazal?! Woe on you!
This is bogus.
Saying that you misinterpreted chazal is not the same thing as "denying a teaching of chazal!" When you distort what chazal said and misunderstand it, it is YOU who is denying chazal and making a mockery of them, just like the Rambam explains when he speaks about the proper way to understand midrashic statements.
You think that chazal were sitting there recording "history" and writing it down. Only an ignoramus thinks that.
Don't make stupid accusations.
-
Yair Davidy of Jerusalem, who is a shtickel Kahanist, presents much cogent Chazal, historical, and prophetic evidence that many European nations are in fact of Ten Lost Tribe ancient Israelite origin in his books and site www.britam.org
Even if that is true, and I'm sure you will believe it whether it's plausible or not...
The 10 tribes were NOT from Esav, they were from Yaakov!
-
Read Davidy's Britam articles: not all European nations are of TLT origins.
Eliphaz, Zepho, Amolek and other Edomites went on to rule Rome, Carthage, Botzrah, Mocha, Sparta, Thrace, Tyre, Anatolia and Germania.
Their military prowess was renowned, fulfiling Yitzchok's 'blessing' to Eisav of "You will live by your sword".
Talmudic Aggadta is not Midrash. The next thing is that you'll say the Halachos in the Talmud 'aren't literal' and 'they don't really mean it that way'.
What is "Midrashic" about the Gemara that Nero became a ger?
Do you have trouble literally accepting the Gemara on the same page that Titus was punished by a gnat that flew in to his nostril and destroyed his brain?
Do you believe that the Nachash in Gan Eden walked and talked and spoke Hebrew?
Do you believe that Balaam's donkey spoke Hebrew?
Do you believe that the giving of the Torah on Mt Sinai by G-d to the Am Yisrael in 2448AM was an actual event that occurred in actual historical reality?
Or will you say again that "it's not literal because no external evidence corroborates it"?!
Are you a Reformist or Conservative? Or extreme 'leftwing' Moderdox?
-
Listen, ever since I joined this forum, you have shown constant hostility toward me.
I do not like the way you talk to me and I am not entitled to respond to your sarcasms.
Your malevolence is blatant.
As soon as you joined this forum, you started making absurd left-wing posts (i.e. "Serb extremism").
-
Listen, ever since I joined this forum, you have shown constant hostility toward me.
I do not like the way you talk to me and I am not entitled to respond to your sarcasms.
Your malevolence is blatant.
As soon as you joined this forum, you started making absurd left-wing posts (i.e. "Serb extremism").
Just because you disagree with my posts doesn't make them absurd.
About the Serbs : I have already explained myself several times, I do not want to go over that again. You want to make me look like an ennemy of the Serbs, although I am not.
But whatever I say every time I explain myself on this topic, you just won't listen. You bear a grudge on me and there is nothing I can say that will change your mind.
For the last time, I admit I made one or two comments about the war in the Balkans that were hasty and superficial - but none of them was outrageous. I am fully aware that I am not an expert on that subject and, since my initial superficial remark, I never talked about that subject. So why do you keep harassing me with this ?
-
Just because you disagree with my posts doesn't make them absurd.
About the Serbs : I have already explained myself several times, I do not want to go over that again. You want to make me look like an ennemy of the Serbs, although I am not.
But whatever I say every time I explain myself on this topic, you just won't listen. You bear a grudge on me and there is nothing I can say that will change your mind.
For the last time, I admit I made one or two comments about the war in the Balkans that were hasty and superficial - but none of them was outrageous. I am fully aware that I am not an expert on that subject and, since my initial superficial remark, I never talked about that subject. So why do you keep harassing me with this ?
It wasn't just that, you have made a lot of left-wing posts, like the ones in this discussion currently.
-
That "British Israelite" theory has long been discredited.
It originated in the UK in the 1800's when Imperialists ruling the world sought to "justify" their enslavement and "rape" of Asia and North America by trying to "prove" that they were in actuality the nation Israel.
The unfortunate remnants of "British Israelism" survive today in the fringe lunatic groups calling themselves the "Christian Identity" Movement - claiming that only the pure Aryan races are the true Jews, and that all the other Jews who've been around since time immemorial are merely "imposters".
I've read Davidy's "research", which is really little more than a collection of neologisms at worst, and absurd folk tales at best.
Not a single shred of credible documentation to be found anywhere, yet Davidy goes on lecture tours and speaking engagements "proving" he's found the Lost Tribes in the white people of Western Europe.
His "proofs" are based on such ridiculousness as claiming that Britain is a Lost Tribe of Israel - the "proof" offered being that since the first four letters of the English word 'Britain' spell "Brit", which when pronounced in Hebrew means 'covenant', this "proves" that the English actually are one of the Lost Tribes of Israel.
Huh?
Pure foolishness by a pseudo-scholar unable to distinguish between documentable evidence -vs- mere hearsay.
It is not to the credit of the State of Israel that so many wild eyed "frum fakirs" have made it their home - the place is literally crawling with "Illiterati".
-
Just because you disagree with my posts doesn't make them absurd.
About the Serbs : I have already explained myself several times, I do not want to go over that again. You want to make me look like an ennemy of the Serbs, although I am not.
But whatever I say every time I explain myself on this topic, you just won't listen. You bear a grudge on me and there is nothing I can say that will change your mind.
For the last time, I admit I made one or two comments about the war in the Balkans that were hasty and superficial - but none of them was outrageous. I am fully aware that I am not an expert on that subject and, since my initial superficial remark, I never talked about that subject. So why do you keep harassing me with this ?
It wasn't just that, you have made a lot of left-wing posts, like the ones in this discussion currently.
O.k., well, don't worry, I got the message : you don't like me, to put it mildly... I guess that I'll be on your list when you wage your all-out war of extermination against "Amalek".
-
Whilst I don't agree with all his conclusions, this is not the 'British-Israelitism' of the Victorians, & Davidy's stuff is far from being discredited, he being an Orthodox Kahanist Jew, and bringing full support from Chazal, especially the prophecies about the world-rulership of the tribe of Ephraim & the return of the TLTs
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=36IZAtL4e_c
So who do you believe the TLTs are: the Falashan negroes?! The American Indians?! The Japanese?!
-
Megiddo Jail near Yokneam, where the worst Arab killers are housed, also has a separate section for Israeli soldiers who are jailed for things like going AWOL, stealing jeeps, insulting officers etc.
The biggest loss to the Jewish People was when Esav left us. If Esav had remained a loyal Jew, we could have conquered the world.
The Romans and Germans are descendants of Esav. They would have become the Fighting Arm of the Am Yisrael. Soldiers like them didn't dance while on active duty and in uniform......ever!
(http://www.freeimagehosting.net/uploads/fad7d06fe1.jpg) (http://www.freeimagehosting.net/)
As R.Kahane writes, serving in Zahal is as much a mitzva (defending the Am Yisrael positive mitzva number 195) as putting on Tefillin, and is to be viewed with the same reverence and kovod...not irreverent frivolity!
And besides, whilst dancing they were eminently ambushable by a Hebron Fatah terrorist, the same as the 12 poor dozing Israeli soldiers who were gunned down by one arab with a carbine in 2002, or the 6 soldiers who were gunned down in their tent by a hang-glider terrorist in 1986 because the dozy Israeli guard ran off!
I agree with you 100% Wonga...your assesment is correct. These soldiers are an absolute disgrace to us, anyone that doesnt understand this is confused.
Really, you agree with him that you'd rather have gentile European nazi beasts serving as the "armed wing" of the Jewish state's army rather than Jews fighting? You agree with him that Jews are mystically inherently incapable of fighting or discipline, but goyim are supermen and should be employed to do work for us? You agree that a Jewish "brand" of nazism where we simply tell nazis what to do and they listen to us, that that is a good thing? What kind of self-hating insanity is this and how can you possibly agree?
No I agree with wonga's point that these poor sad dancing soldiers were behaving in a very pathetic and unfitting way as soldiers of the Israeli people. I served in Hebron as a foot soldier and we would never behave like these dumb soldiers did. Why were they dancing and making a mockery of their patrol duty? How does this behaviour contribute to the safety of the Jewish Hebronian community? And the fact it was posted up on youtube for the whole world to see is a disgrace as well and make the I.D.F look less intimidating which will in turn equal more violence against Jews.
-
Yair Davidy of Jerusalem, who is a shtickel Kahanist, presents much cogent Chazal, historical, and prophetic evidence that many European nations are in fact of Ten Lost Tribe ancient Israelite origin in his books and site www.britam.org
(http://britam.org/pics/yair2.jpg)
He has tapes http://britam.org/videoclips.html
-
Re: "Whilst I don't agree with all his conclusions "
Then you agree that he draws conclusions without proof and without documentation.
Such ideas are called "conjecture" and are not conclusions.
And you can be a Kahanist, or Orthodox, or any other thing, and still have no credibility when it comes to historical research.
His "beliefs" are almost word for word the lectures of the late Herbert W. Armstrong's World Wide Church of G-d.
Thanks for agreeing.
p.s.-- and I don't "believe" in anything except Ha'Shem.
p.s.s. -- and for every Rabbi who asserts a certain "point of view", there is an equal but opposite point of view from another Rabbi insisting that all others are wrong.
Proper documentation and credible research are required to "convince" me, especially when it is so obvious that someone hasn't the slightest idea of what they are claiming.
I have read all of Davidy's material, and heard him interviewed on Arutz Sheva, and spent time on his website, and he has absolutely no credibility.
None.
Whatever else he might be, he is not someone to be taken as a serious scholar either of Jewish or world history.
-
Re: "One who denies a teaching of Chazal is unfit to serve as a witness!" "
Fine.
Then don't call him up to the witness stand.
You would have had a great time during the Spanish Inquisition.
-
Re: "especially the prophecies about the world-rulership of the tribe of Ephraim & the return of the TLTs"
Oh!
Well now that you mention "the prophecies about the world rulership of the tribe of Ephraim and the......"
Why didn't you come up with such "hard clad proof" earlier?
Now I believe it!
Anyone daring to question any of it is an enemy of G-d and obviously not Orthodox and obviously not Kahanist!
Thanks for setting me straight!
-
Davidy's '110 proofs' certainly provide food for thought http://www.britam.org/ListofProofs.html
The Ten Lost Tribes went somewhere, and it is predicted that they will return.
Although it is hard to swallow that yer average uncircumcised, beer-swilling, uncouth, foul-mouthed, rednecked, antisemitic Scottish, English, Aussie, Kiwi and Yank, could be of TLT origin, if the TLTs exist anywhere at all on the physical plane, I'd prefer them to be of the white rather than pigmented nations!
-
Golani Zionist,
The world doesn't ridicule the IDF and Israel is not in danger of attack because a couple of soldiers decided to dance around for thirty seconds to pass the time. The IDF is a joke because everybody knows that it (and Israelis in general) would bend over backwards to avoid harming a hair on an Arab's head.
-
It should surprise no one to learn that the 10 Tribes were murdered off, sold into slavery, died of every disease known and unknown, and were forcibly assimilated and forcibly converted to the prevailing beliefs of their captor nations. That being a high probability, there are some cases known which seem to have more to their claims than mere anecdote. The Pashtun tribesmen of Afghanistan claim to be direct descendants, call themselves Israel, and wear blue and white prayer shawls and fringes. Most of them look just like other Jews, and it is easily believable that they made their way to Southwest Asia and were eventually forced to convert to Islam. There is a community of Jews living off the coast of Libya claiming to be direct descendant Cohanim who spend all their time making Temple items in preparation for their Return. Other remnant groups undoubtedly remain scattered around the globe. That being said, it is difficult to accept that Angles, Saxons, and Celts who worshipped trees, had women priestesses and spoke a language totally unrelated to any Semitic language, are the "long lost Jews". It just doesn't add up. There's not a scintilla of evidence linking them to the Middle East. Same goes for the Teutons, Franks, Schots, Slavs....there is just nothing that link them to Jewish roots. Their religions and cultures are forms despising all things Jewish. The Irish are fond of sitting around inventing stories about how they are the Lost Tribes, and how they have Leprechauns, and how.....this and that....when they're not getting s-itface drunk and beating each other up. Germany as well as Italy weren't even nations until the nineteenth century. Both were nothing but disunited duchies and loose confederations -- and there were Jews living there rooted and settled since Roman times! It only makes sense that Jews rooted in a land for over a thousand years would know if their adapted hosts were in fact their kin! The Italian people today today have no relation whatsoever to the original Romans. The Romans were descendants of the Etruscans, a distinct ethnicity which founded Rome, and who no longer exist. Early in English history King John expelled all the Jews from Britain. That Edict is still Law and still on the books. The act of fellow Jewish Tribesmen? I don't think so. Danes and Norsemen the Lost Tribes? Worshipping Odin and Loki and death and war? Doesn't sound like the Lost Tribes to me. Virtually all the peoples of Europe today are the resettled remnants of the migratory barbarian invasions which followed the Fall of the Roman Empire. Goths, Visigoths, Vandals, Ostrogoths, Jutes, Vikings, Franks, Teutons, Normans, ....these are the peoples of Western Europe today with white skin. Russians are a mixture of Viking migrants and native Slavs. They have no relationship whatsoever with the ancient Jews or any other Semitic peoples. Even the ancient Egyptians were displaced by Berbers and Arabs and other invading peoples. If the Lost Tribes of Israel are prophecised to make a metaphysical and supernatural Return to unite with their remaining brethren in Eretz Yisrael, then I am all for it and I actually believe it. However, scholars from every country in the world have been searching worldwide for evidence "proving" the existence of the Lost 10 Tribes, and ALL of them have come up with little but scant evidence; most of it anecdotal folk legends and the like. Furthermore, most of the investigative research into the 10 Lost Tribes done by Western Christians is based on terribly flawed translations and misinterpretations of the Jewish Scriptures; enabling them to "force fit" their findings to make them "prove" what was untrue from the start. There is a wide chasm between METAPHYSICS and HISTORY. Metaphysics is entirely unprovable and must be accepted and believed based on doctrines and scriptures which themselves bear little in the way of documentable proof. History, on the other hand, is that which can be concluded by the study and analysis of documented and verifiable records compiled by historians, governments, writers from the period, cross references and analysis of other fields of study such as language patterns, cultural changes, etc. .
-
Golani Zionist,
The world doesn't ridicule the IDF and Israel is not in danger of attack because a couple of soldiers decided to dance around for thirty seconds to pass the time. The IDF is a joke because everybody knows that it (and Israelis in general) would bend over backwards to avoid harming a hair on an Arab's head.
Well it wasnt a couple of soldiers, it was a whole squad (kita). Look I agree with you as well but lets face it, they looked really fruity dancing around insync like that. Its obvious that they rehearsed and planned it. Holding hands and skipping looked GAY!
-
Re: Teachings of Herbert W. Armstrong and his Worldwide Church of G-d :
British-Israelism
Armstrong was a proponent of British Israelism, (also known as 'Anglo-Israelism') which is the doctrine that people of Western European descent, especially the British Empire (Ephraim) and the United States (Manasseh), are descended from the 'Ten Lost Tribes' of Israel.[2] (The United States and Britain in Prophecy). Armstrong believed that this doctrine provided a 'key' to understanding biblical prophecy, and that he was specially called by God to proclaim these prophecies to the 'lost tribes' of Israel before the coming of the 'end-times'. -- source: Wikipedia
Armstrong taught that the United States, the British Commonwealth and several countries situated in northwestern Europe were delineated in the end-time prophecies of Genesis 49. He claimed the chapter described the national characteristics of contemporary descendants of Jacob -- later renamed Israel by God -- thus revealing where the Lost Tribes of Israel are currently situated. In his early broadcasts Armstrong also explained that God was building a family.
-- source: Wikipedia
A major component of Armstrong's theology was that America and Britain and people of certain other European countries including France, Norway, Belgium, Sweden, and others are primarily composed of the descendants of ancient Israel.
-- source: Wikipedia
Brit-Am variant
Brit-Am, sometimes confused with British Israelism, is an organization centered in Jerusalem, and composed of Jews and non-Jews. Brit-Am, like British Israel, identifies the Lost Ten Tribes with peoples of West European descent, but does so from a Jewish perspective quoting both Biblical and Rabbinical sources. The evidence that Brit-Am relies upon is Biblical in the light of Rabbinical Commentary but is supplemented by secular theories that posit the Lost Tribes / Scythian / Cimmerian connection, which they then believe to have become various Western European nations.[38] An example of Brit-Am scholarship may be seen from its treatment of Obadiah 1:20[39] where the original Hebrew as understood by Rabbinical Commentators such as Rashi and Abarbanel is referring to the Lost Ten Tribes in France and England.[40] Brit-Am also believes that "Other Israelite Tribes gave rise to elements within Finland, Switzerland, Sweden, Norway, Ireland, Wales, France, Holland, and Belgium" and that "The Tribe of Dan is to be found amongst part of the Danish, Irish, and Welsh." Brit-Am also believes that the Khazars were descended from the Ten Tribes and quotes Jewish and non-Jewish sources that were contemporaneous with them.[41] -- source: Wikipedia
Other variants
Other organizations teach other variants of the theory, such as that the Scythians / Cimmerians consisted in whole or in part the Lost Ten Tribes. One such theory posits that the lost Israelites can be defined by the Y-DNA haplogroup R, which consists of much of Europe and Russia,[42] which is in contrast to British Israelism and Brit-Am, which believe the Israelites became only Western Europeans. It should be noted that the genetic findings postulated by this and other theories are typically inconsistent with the findings of generally accepted research in archeology, anthropology and population genetics. -- source: Wikipedia
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ten_Lost_Tribes (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ten_Lost_Tribes)
-
I don't get the point of this thread
-
Read Davidy's Britam articles: not all European nations are of TLT origins.
What makes him an authority? He is simply someone speculating thousands of years later.
Talmudic Aggadta is not Midrash. The next thing is that you'll say the Halachos in the Talmud 'aren't literal' and 'they don't really mean it that way'.
Is it possible you are this much of an ignoramus or are you purposely trying to waste my time?
Talmudic "Aggadta" as you call it IS midrash. It is called Midrash Aggada ! In contradistinction to halachic statements of hazal which are referred to as "midrash Halacha."
What is "Midrashic" about the Gemara that Nero became a ger?
It's a story, and there's a meaning behind it, however I'm not an expert on every single Talmudic passage because I have not learned them all, but I'm sure with enough depth of study one can arrive at the message being presented there. To take the stories of hazal literally makes a mockery of Chazal and the Rambam writes this explicitly. You ever bother to read Rambam's intro to Perek Helek? Certainly when other evidence contradicts the historicity, there is reason to believe Chazal spoke to convey a message, and often they do speak in such parables. As a general rule , they are almost never "recording history" - That's simply not their function nor was it their interest to do so. Contrast the Talmudic literature with Tanakh and you will see quite plainly that Chazal did not have interest in recording history. The Tanakh on the other hand did.
Do you have trouble literally accepting the Gemara on the same page that Titus was punished by a gnat that flew in to his nostril and destroyed his brain?
There is no "trouble" involved. One simply uses his brain and understands that chazal were not recording history, were not teaching science, but were doing something else entirely. From that starting premise, one then appreciates and delves into the depth of the things they said, their deep wisdom, and how rishonim and aharonim have understood their messages over the ages.
Do you believe that the giving of the Torah on Mt Sinai by G-d to the Am Yisrael in 2448AM was an actual event that occurred in actual historical reality?
Of course, and did I ever say otherwise? NO. You are conflating the issues because you are an ignoramus and have no understanding of the functioning of the Oral Law. You should really spend time in a yeshiva and learn about these things (most yeshivot are unsuitable for doing so. I am NOT referring to learning 10 blatt of baba kama over a year and a half, I AM referring to learning about the big picture from real chachamim who know what they are talking about and can show you in the sources the basis for the things they are saying). But you certainly should learn about these things before you start throwing accusations at people. Your method of attack destroyed the second Temple as the Netziv explains. You think everyone who has a different approach from you is a heretic.... The only problem is, that my approach is shared by any non-ignoramus.
I recommend this site as a starting point:
www.hashkafacircle.com
And the "Reshimu Journal" they publish is also very good. I know they don't teach these things in the average yeshiva/kollel.
Are you a Reformist or Conservative? Or extreme 'leftwing' Moderdox?
No. Quit labeling people. This is silly. You just don't like the fact that learned people don't make chazal into a fairytale. They also don't make the Chumash into a fairytale. Get used to it.
I am not associated with any of those so-called "movements" you refer to.
-
Whilst I don't agree with all his conclusions, this is not the 'British-Israelitism' of the Victorians, & Davidy's stuff is far from being discredited, he being an Orthodox Kahanist Jew,
A person can be an "Orthodox Kahanist Jew" and still believe in theories which are not plausible, and possibly promote wacky incorrect ideas based on misunderstanding. Case in point in this very thread.
Joining the banner of Orthodox Kahanist Jew does not make one correct in all his beliefs or infallible.
-
In Islam, everyone is part of the jihad--man, woman, infant. These animals send their toddlers out into battle hoping that they will be martyrs. They put their infants in harm's way so that they can be inadvertently hit by an Israeli bomb or bullet and they can be martyrs for the cause as well.
If what you are saying is that there is hypocrisy on the part of Arab terrorist leaders to blame Israel for deaths of Arab children during Israeli operations of self-defense, then I agree with that. They obviously cannot on the one hand promote martyrdom of their children and on the other hand pretend to feel sorry for the death of Arab children during confrontations with the Israeli army.
These "innocent children" dance around in the streets and throw candy around when Jews get blown up or maimed or when American/British soldiers are dragged through the streets of Iraq and burned alive. As far as I am concerned they deserve the same fate as Adolf Hitler himself.
Don't forget that Arab spawn hate us just as much as their parents do. As soon as they know what a Jew is, they think "kill, kill, kill". Ten Israeli soldiers were murdered in Jenin in 2002 by a child suicide bomber.
I don't feel sorry for any of them, infants on up.
It is true that it would naïve to view all Arab children as entirely innocent.
However, you cannot blame a 5-year old child for what has been imposed upon him to do by adults. He is just too young to be fully aware of what he is doing and thus to be held responsible for his actions. Those responsible are the sick perverted adults who use children to achieve their murderous goals.
More importantly, it is a fact that there have been a number of Arab children who were killed during confrontations between Tsahal and terrorists who were innocent inasmuch as they never took part in any action designed to harm Jews and they were simply too young to be blamed for anything. But even when the bullet is an Israeli one, those who are responsible for these deaths are the Arab terrorists for two main reasons : (i) if the Arab terrorists did not try to kill Jews all the time, no Israeli operation of self-defense would be necessary; (ii) if the Arab terrorists did not use dirty methods of fighting within densely populated areas, there would be no collateral damage.
-
This Hellenized concept has absolutely no place in Judaism
May I kindly suggest that you take a closer look at what Judaism truly is...
Huh?
Then what did the Maccabees fight against? They fought against Hellenist Jews and Hellenist Syrian-greek occupiers! I'm not following what you are saying here.
There is a misunderstanding here. Of course I know who the Maccabees fought against. What I was saying is that if you take the liberty to kill someone who is innocent, then you commit murder, and the prohibition of murder is certainly not a hellenized concept that has no place in judaism, it is a basic commandment of the Torah !
-
I found the following comment by Rav Chaim Navon which I found relevant to this thread, or rather to what this thread has become !
"Torah law requires us, when laying siege to an enemy city, to leave one side open and unguarded, in order to allow the enemy to run away. The Ramban explains this mitzva in the following manner:
We are commanded that when we lay siege to a city to leave one side without a siege, so that if [the inhabitants] wish to run away they should have an escape route. For in that way we will learn to conduct ourselves with compassion even towards our enemy during wartime. There is also another advantage, in that we allow them an escape route, and so they will not come out in force against us. (Ramban, Addenda to Sefer ha-Mitzvot, positive precept, no. 5)[8]
While the Ramban also sees in this mitzva wise military strategy, not to press one's enemy when his back is against the wall, he primarily views it as a moral commandment, teaching us to show compassion even to our enemy in a time of war. Here we are dealing not only with civilians, but even with combatants who have decided to run away.[9] "
The whole link is : http://www.vbm-torah.org/archive/halak66/13halak.htm
-
Re: "I don't get the point of this thread "
Now you're confusing the issues! :::D
-
Davidy seems to have already written an interesting direct rebuttal of Massuh on his site http://britam.org/blog.html entitled "The Jews Need Joseph: A Debate Amongst Jewish Patriots!" , showing that Massuh's history is wrong and in it stating that "MassuhDGoodName seems to be one of those people who do not want to believe, who have prior prejudices, and will always be prepared to deny what truths we may present them."
-
Davidy seems to have already written an interesting direct rebuttal of Massuh on his site http://britam.org/blog.html entitled "The Jews Need Joseph: A Debate Amongst Jewish Patriots!" , showing that Massuh's history is wrong and in it stating that "MassuhDGoodName seems to be one of those people who do not want to believe, who have prior prejudices, and will always be prepared to deny what truths we may present them."
Wow! Maybe you are Davidy!
-
"MassuhDGoodName seems to be one of those people who do not want to believe, who have prior prejudices, and will always be prepared to deny what truths we may present them."
Yeah! That's me! :P
I don't listen to schwartzes - I bullwhip them! :laugh:
But as for "...will always be prepared to deny what truths we may present them."
Someone apparently refers to themselves in the 3rd Person Plural as a monarch addresses their subjects! :o
-
Re: ""MassuhDGoodName seems to be one of those people who do not want to believe,"
Most definitely! ;D
Massuh believes in Ha'Shem -- all others must pay cash! :P
How 'bout if Massuh just decides to "believe" everything he hears and everything he reads? :o
That work for you and the other Rhodes Scholars?
Did you know that in fact, the white man was invented in a test tube millions of years ago by the renowned Black genius and scientist Yakub! It was a laboratory experiment went awry! That's why the white man is now the devil! Just ask all the Nation of Islam shvoogs that believe everything they hear and everything they read -- It's all TRUE because The Reverend Elijah Muhammad SAYS SO! And the fact that they SO DESPERATELY WANT TO BELIEVE IT! -- well...that's the PROOF!
[On the other hand -- Massuh is willing to strongly "reconsider" his position for 15% of all gross receipts taken in for sales of Davidy's tapes and books. For an additional 35% of the gross, Massuh will become a "believer"! ... Over 50% - Zealot!]
:::D