Brits find bones of murdered Jews at bottom of well from 10TH century

[muman613]

I don't think people of English descent need to be ashamed about something that happened hundreds of years ago. They couldn't possibly have committed that crime because they weren't born then.

The better response to this is to encourage people not to be anti-Semitic today rather than throwing a guilt trip on people who aren't anyway.

Antisemitism is taught and it is very probable that a person brought up in an antisemitic household will grow up antisemitic. This is one reason the Torah, in the 2nd of the '10 commandments' says that Hashem loves the righteous to the 1000th generation while he curses the wicked to the third or fourth generation. Children often do continue the sins of their parents...

2nd Commandment:
"For I the Lord your G-d am a jealous G-d, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children of the third and fourth generation of them that hate Me; and showing mercy unto the thousandth generation of them that love Me and keep My commandments."

http://www.torah.org/learning/pirkei-avos/chapter5-21a.html?print=1

With this in mind, we can gain an understanding of one of the most widely misunderstood concepts of the Torah. For as long as there have been skeptics, people have naively (or willfully) misunderstood Judaism as a religion of strict justice, commanded by a wrathful G-d of vengeance. Does not the Torah state, "For I, the L-rd your G-d, am a jealous G-d, visiting the iniquity of the fathers on the sons, on the third generation and on the fourth generation to those that hate Me" (Exodus 20:5)?

At a relatively young age, I recall reading a book on ancient history which defined Judaism (at least ancient Judaism -- maybe some folks have come along and *improved* upon it since then!) as a religion of grim and compassionless justice, in which if a man sins, G-d not only punishes the sinner but his son as well. (I guess "Love your fellow as yourself" (Leviticus 19:18 -- that's The Tanach) was somehow only discovered by the Christians.) (Incidentally, even at that young age my religious upbringing was healthy enough for me to realize I was basically reading patent rubbish. Sad that much of the unsuspecting public is not so well-equipped.)

For starters, I would suspect nothing short of willful misrepresentation here. The following verse in Exodus continues: "And {I} do kindness for two thousand generations for those who love Me and for those who observe My commandments." On this the Sages observe, rather matter of factly, that G-d's kindness is 500 times greater than His justice (Mechilta there).

However, even this aside, this is a concept which requires examination. G-d does seem to carry over sins -- as well as mitzvos (good deeds) -- from one generation to the next. What could the justice be behind that? How could the hapless son somehow be faulted for the sins of his wicked father?

The first relevant observation is that the Talmud makes it evidently clear that children are rewarded or punished only if they continue in their parents' path (Brachos 7a). G-d does not reward or punish because of ancient history -- because of a past the children had no knowledge of nor control over. The children must follow their parents' good or evil ways, at least indirectly giving it their tacit approval.

Even so, this topic is far from concluded. Even if the son does continue in his father's path (and let's face it -- that's what the son grew up with -- he had far less ability to decide than the rest of us), why is he punished (or rewarded) beyond what he himself does? Can I really be punished for someone else's sins?

[Aces High]

I don't think people of English descent need to be ashamed about something that happened hundreds of years ago. They couldn't possibly have committed that crime because they weren't born then.

The better response to this is to encourage people not to be anti-Semitic today rather than throwing a guilt trip on people who aren't anyway.
[/quote

Rubystars, that comment wasn't meant for you, in particular.  Don't take it personally.  We just read a horrible story about what what the British Bastards did to the Jews- throwing an entire Jewish family down a well- to their deaths.   So try to understand where we are coming from, and the anger that it invokes.    And don't get so upset over every last comment you read.  If you were Jewish, you might say the same thing.  Britain today, is an extremely anti semitic country.  Read the article on Aruts sheva, about the British and their antisemitism which continues to this very day!

[Rubystars]

I don't think there's any such thing as an anti-Semitic gene. It's a problem that affects pretty much every nation including anti-Semitic Jews.

[muman613]

I don't think there's any such thing as an anti-Semitic gene. It's a problem that affects pretty much every nation including anti-Semitic Jews.

I didn't hear anyone suggest that. But certain peoples have more of a proclivity to be antisemites due to their heritage...

[Rubystars]

I didn't hear anyone suggest that. But certain peoples have more of a proclivity to be antisemites due to their heritage...

You could argue along the same lines that Jews raised in the USA have more of a proclivity to be extreme leftists, but that doesn't mean that being Jewish makes someone a leftist or that all Jews in the USA are leftists. I would agree with you that someone raised in an anti-Semitic environment is more prone to be an anti-Semite though.

[muman613]

You could argue along the same lines that Jews raised in the USA have more of a proclivity to be extreme leftists, but that doesn't mean that being Jewish makes someone a leftist or that all Jews in the USA are leftists. I would agree with you that someone raised in an anti-Semitic environment is more prone to be an anti-Semite though.

And this is what we have been trying to say... The British have a history, a very long history, of Jew hatred. I doubt that it is coincidental that till this day there is a very clear antisemitic bend in British thinking. Just read the BBC for instance and realize that the British will always have a problem with the Jewish people.

I also agree that there are good English and bad English, and I hope that one day they can erase the bad reputation they have.


Aish.com has this on British Antisemitism :

http://www.aish.com/jw/s/48898202.html

Last year the number of anti-Semitic attacks in England rose alarmingly by over 40% -- the steepest rise in Europe -- to its highest level ever. But it is not the level of street attacks that I find most frightening. Rather it is the openly expressed loathing for Israel and Jews among a large swath of Britain's elites. It was the complete collapse of German elites before Hitler and his lumpenproletariat followers that allowed Hitler's rise to power in the most civilized nation in Europe. The German elites were infected with the same anti-Semitism as the uneducated sign painter.

http://www.shemayisrael.com/orgs/baiskaila/html/editor_s_preface__the_making_of_a_martyr.html

The first recorded case of what was to become known as the “blood libel” can be found in the chronicles of English history. In 1144, the Jews of Norwich were officially charged with abducting, torturing and murdering a Christian child in order to use his blood for Passover. Just two years later, reports of this incident spread rapidly among the knights and peasants massing in France for the start of the Second Crusade.
.
.
.
In 1255, all the Jews of Lincoln, England, gathered for a wedding. The next day, the body of a boy named Hugh, who had been missing for a month, was found. He had probably drowned in a cesspool, but the Jews were accused of abducting him, hiding him for a month and fattening him up. It was charged that the wedding party was really a celebration of Hugh’s crucifixion and that everyone had partaken of his blood. Nineteen Jews were hung without benefit of a trial.

More blood libels followed in London and Gloucester. By a decree signed on Tishah b’Av, July 18, 1290, all Jews were banished from England, not to be legally readmitted until the middle of the nineteenth century. Even in their absence, however, the blood libel accusation was perpetuated and the deleterious image of the Jew reinforced. A century after the banishment of the Jews of England, Chaucer wrote The Prioress’ Tale, which centered around “Jew demons” who were handmaidens of the devil and murdered Christian children.

See this for a complete history of Jewish persecution over the centuries : http://www.simpletoremember.com/articles/a/HistoryJewishPersecution/

[Kahane-Was-Right BT]

I would not put Americans in the same basket as the British (as far as antisemitism is concerned).

But I didn't say that!

[Kahane-Was-Right BT]

You know, in the country I was born and raised in (usa), once a year we celebrate the fact that we are not british.   And here there are people in love with brits to the point that they want to excuse their behavior just because it (some of it!) happened a long time ago?

[Kahane-Was-Right BT]

I don't think people of English descent need to be ashamed about something that happened hundreds of years ago. They couldn't possibly have committed that crime because they weren't born then.

The better response to this is to encourage people not to be anti-Semitic today rather than throwing a guilt trip on people who aren't anyway.

I think this line of thinking is ridiculous.  First of all the things I mentioned aren't all hundreds of years ago. Some are not even 100.  But that argument has no relevance even if they were all hundreds of years ago.   If the person lives in some other country (like the example hotspot mentioned), he comes from this cursed wretched british stock from hundreds of years ago.   He comes from that culture which was undeniably evil and collectively did terrible things.

If a kid is born into a gangsta rappa family, you don't think he should be ashamed of the evil culture he comes from, dissociate from it, and try to undo its wrongs?      "Well biggie smalls was so many years ago anyway, so I'm proud my family is full of gangsta rappers."     "Well louis farrakhans comments about jews were from so long ago therefore I am proud to associate with nation of islam."    Or for a german - " family murdered one third of the jewish people but hey that was over 6 decades ago!"   Nothing to be ashamed about in his past or where he comes from?  Since when is where a person comes from not important to people.

[Kahane-Was-Right BT]

I don't think people of English descent need to be ashamed about something that happened hundreds of years ago. They couldn't possibly have committed that crime because they weren't born then.

The better response to this is to encourage people not to be anti-Semitic today rather than throwing a guilt trip on people who aren't anyway.

Let's also acknowledge that my comment and now your response had nothing to do with Amalek.  I think you brought it up because you are really defensive about defending your "race."

[Kahane-Was-Right BT]

http://www.torah.org/learning/pirkei-avos/chapter5-21a.html?print=1

Very good point.

[mord]

Amalake were not Europeans or progenitors.They were Semitic Canaanites

[Yaakov Mendel]

 
If you look at recent history, the tragic consequences of the British opposition to the creation of the state of Israel and to Jewish immigration in Palestine in the 1930s should not be underestimated : if the state of Israel had been created just ten years before 1948, there would have been no Shoah. But, while the Nazis came to power and began to carry out their agenda toward Jews, the British closed the doors of the land of Israel that they occupied to European Jews who needed to flee. These bastards even fired on Shoah survivors who had lost everything and who were desperate to reach Israel after WWII !
Today, the British are probably the most anti-Israel and pro-Arab people in Europe - although the other European countries are very bad too, and they are probably the biggest dhimmis too - a lot of them love Islam.
However, in terms of hatred and persecution of European Jews living inside their borders, the Germans, the Ukrainians, the Russians, the Poles, the Romanians and the Spanish have been far worse than the British on a historical perspective. For the last two centuries, Jews have been free and safe in Britain, at least until the development of radical Islam on Britain's soil.

[Rubystars]

I think this line of thinking is ridiculous.  First of all the things I mentioned aren't all hundreds of years ago. Some are not even 100.  But that argument has no relevance even if they were all hundreds of years ago.   If the person lives in some other country (like the example hotspot mentioned), he comes from this cursed wretched british stock from hundreds of years ago.   He comes from that culture which was undeniably evil and collectively did terrible things.

I was talking about the well thing. I don't think anybody today should be guilty about it because they obviously didn't do it and you don't even know for sure if the people were Jewish.

If a kid is born into a gangsta rappa family, you don't think he should be ashamed of the evil culture he comes from, dissociate from it, and try to undo its wrongs?      "Well biggie smalls was so many years ago anyway, so I'm proud my family is full of gangsta rappers."     "Well louis farrakhans comments about jews were from so long ago therefore I am proud to associate with nation of islam."    Or for a german - " family murdered one third of the jewish people but hey that was over 6 decades ago!"   Nothing to be ashamed about in his past or where he comes from?  Since when is where a person comes from not important to people.

It just seemed weird that you should think anyone who had English ancestry should be ashamed of having English ancestry because of this well incident.  I'm not going around telling all the Italians they should be ashamed of being Italian because Nero persecuted Christians.

Of course how someone is brought up affects them but I think where I didn't understand you was connecting anyone in the modern world to assign guilt for something that happened in the distant past.

[Rubystars]

Let's also acknowledge that my comment and now your response had nothing to do with Amalek.  I think you brought it up because you are really defensive about defending your "race."

Well the reason I am is because white Americans are losing while others like illegal immigrants are gaining power.

[Kahane-Was-Right BT]

I was talking about the well thing. I don't think anybody today should be guilty about it because they obviously didn't do it and you don't even know for sure if the people were Jewish. 

Oh, I was mostly talking about other things.   This well thing just added icing on the cake, but in reality, it could have been nothing at all (maybe this was a gentile family in the well), but still the Brits expelled Jews on numerous occasions in history and treated them like garbage.  And today they love them some Muslims, mmm hmm.

It just seemed weird that you should think anyone who had English ancestry should be ashamed of having English ancestry because of this well incident. 

That wasn't what I said.  I mentioned several huge historical factors.  If this well thing really happened as the researchers think it did, it's only one solitary act among many and among a culture that bred it.   But without the well, people should be ashamed of the actions of the British in history.

[Kahane-Was-Right BT]

Of course how someone is brought up affects them but I think where I didn't understand you was connecting anyone in the modern world to assign guilt for something that happened in the distant past.

Guilt wasn't the word I used.   I don't understand how anyone can be proud of British heritage given the evil things they have done in history, that's all.   Even moreso for a German.