:dubious:
Cite?
I studied under several rabbis for quite a few years and never, ever, ever heard anything like what you’re suggesting.
All of them? Even the large percentage of secular Israelis?
Providing cites for your claims would be a good place to start.
It is what I’d heard, but I couldn’t find a cite, so take it for what it’s worth.
In the long run, Gandhi believed, nonviolent resistance always works because violent oppressors simply can’t sustain their control of unwilling subjects indefinitely.
[/QUOTE]
Actually, Gandhi is wrong in this. Hitler could have made more ovens and sorted the problem out once and for all. That is why what will work for one society will not work in another. It depends what society you place Israel in. IMO, Israel would stop shooting if the Palestinians did the same and would be more than willing to negotiate a reasonable settlement that both sides could live with. Unfortunately, if one side wants the other destroyed then it makes negotiations difficult.
I’m not villifying anyone. But, if you choose to elect terrorists as your representatives then you should not be surprised that others no longer wish to talk to you, or send you money, or sympathize with your plight. Look, if you elected someone who went out and acted in a manner that you had no, or little, idea they would then you have a reason to be upset and you shouldn’t be blamed (help responsible) for that choice. But if you elect someone knowing full well what they stand for, then you have no one to blame but yourself for the fallout. The talk now is that they could lose hundreds of millions of dollars of aid from the EU, UN, and the US. I feel for them, but it’s not as if you needed to be Mohammed to figure this out beforehand.
Almost all of those “quotes” are total inventions and not found in the Talmud. The rest are misquotings and taken so far out of context that they have totally twisted their meanings.
It’s also worth pointing out that there is hardly a unified religious set of beliefs within most sects of Judaism, let alone between sects. The idea that, for example, Reform Jews would approach Israel from the same religious perspective as Ultraorthodox Jews is laughable… if you know anything about Judaism, that is.
Ok, let me rephrase. Is there any group that currently exists, that the Palestinians could elect that you would not consider a terrorist organization?
Erek
Useless Git:
The set of “Jewish laws” you have posted is lifted straight from white power and anti-Semitic literature.
Including the order.
I can’t find any of these almost definitely false “laws” on any other site besides racist or white-power sites. Therefore I am calling you on this. Prove to me, Useless Git, that these come from the actual Talmud (by linking to an actual online Talmud translation, not a racist site,) and I will believe you.
Until then, you’re a liar.
I think he is, the people in this site already dealt with this anti-Semite glurge:
http://www.daveneta.com/no-random-act/cracks.htm
Lots more in the link, and to counteract that silliness from the believers of that “world church” here are some real Talmud quotes on Gentiles:
Really Useless Git, check the end of the movie Shindler’s list, if there was any truth to what you posted, Oskar Schindler would never had been honored that way.
And who is the World Church of the Creator? They changed their name, but they still remain a white supremacist group.
Mmm, add anti-Semitism, and they do look like Nazis, talk like nazis… but they don’t goose-step, so I guess they are not :dubious:
They are now called now the Creativity Movement:
http://www.adl.org/learn/Ext_US/WCOTC.asp?xpicked=3&item=17
Useless Git: I if I had used such a rotten source for a cite, I would take a shower.
There is no ad hominem in my post–unlike your claim that I am using ad hominem. I pointed out that your sources were continuing a myth, making no observation that you were deliberately in error or deficient in your presentation. Your tendency to go personal throughout this thread, however, is not helping you make your points.
You also keep conflating issues in ways that make it look like you are simply throwing posts at the thread, for example: in response to my post regarding the aftermath of the Deir Yassin massacre, you posted
The phrase “did nothing” was, in context, clearly a statement regarding the Israeli efforts to persuade the Arabs to not flee their homes in the face of apparent Israeli brutality–instead, they welcomed the panic. The 40,000 refugees being permitted to return over the course of the next 20 years has absolutely nothing to do with the actions of the Israelis at that time who were quite happy to see the Arabs fleeing in the face of apparent brutality–as noted by Menachim Begin and David Ben Gurion, among others. You have no reason to post that except to cloud the issue.
As to the crux of our dispute about the flight of Arabs: In the first half year of the war, (November 1947 - April, 1948) approximately 60,000 Arabs appear to have fled the country. Many were from the city of Haifa where particular conditions resulted in wealthy Arabs fleeing in a way that induced a panic flight by nearly all who could manage it just before the outbreak of hostilities. Over the next six months, there was a small steady flow of refugees from areas threatened by direct combat, prior to Deir Yassin.
In the month following Deir Yassin, prompted by fears that the massacre would be repeated, (and with no evidence that they were lured away by Arab state promises), over 300,000 fled their homes for Arab controlled lands.
In July, when the towns of Lydda and Ramle were captured, between 50,000 and 60,000 Arabs were forced out of their homes and similar events happened on a smaller scale throughout the campaign. (The 350,000+ inspired by Deir yassin or directly moved from Lydda and Ramle account for half of the estimated refugees without involving a single Arab statement.)
Later, when the Haganah was about to capture the city of Haifa, Arab leaders told the remaining civilians in that city to flee in preparation for the particular battle over that city. While setting terms of surrender that the Arabs declined, the Jewish leaders did attempt to persuade the Arabs of that city to stay put, on the grounds that the battle would not be fought in the city. This incident appears to be the source of nearly every claim that the Arab leaders told people to get out and return when the Jews had been destroyed or that Jews pleaded with them to stay.
Sources for this information include Simha Flapan’s The Birth of Israel: Myths and Realities, Pantheon, 1987, and Benny Morris’s The Birth of the Palestinian Refugee Problem Cambridge University Press, 1987.
As to the “strategic” nature of Deir Yassin, aside from its value in frightening the Arab populace, it had none, being a declared neutral sister village to the Jewish occupied Givat Shaul
The “Talmud Quotes” that Useless Git posted are either outright fabrications or completely misread the meaning of the text.
For example, the quotes from Libbre David, Baba Necia, Schabouth Hag. 6d, Szaaloth-Utszabot, The Book of Jore Dia 17, Simeon Haddarsen, fol. 56-D and Gad. Shas. 2:2 are outright fabrications as no such books exist.
Midrasch Talpioth is an obscure 18th century Kabbalistic work that has no authority whatsoever and it is doubtful that even one in two hundred Orthodox Jews would know that it exists. I also doubt you’d find a copy in any Judaic bookstore today. In addition, the quote is probably a fabrication as the name of God used in the quote is not one that Jews would use.
The rest of the quotes are either purposely mistranslated or take the statement severely out of context. For example, take the quote from Avoda Zara which (supposedly) states: “A Gentile girl who is three years old can be violated.”
In fact, it says no such thing. The context of the discussion there concerns certain bodily discharges that render a person tamei (ritually unclean). The general rule in Jewish Law is that intercourse with a girl under three years old is not considered intercourse with all the ramifications that are attendant upon it. For instance, if a person were to (God forbid) rape a girl under three, she would still be considered a virgin in Jewish law.
The law in Leviticus states that a woman who experiences a discharge is tamei for a period of at least seven days. This law applies to Jewish women and non-Jewish women. However, such a discharge can only counts from when a girl is three years old - a similar discharge at a younger age does not render a girl tamei, since she her intercourse prior to that is not considered an intercourse. This state of tumah (ritual impurity) can then be passed to other people and foodstuffs via contact.
The topic of the discussion at hand is whether gentile children have this impurity. The general rule is that since they are “eligible” for this type of tumah at that age, that they may have it. Please note that these rules are moot in our post-Temple period and has no bearing on any non-Jews today. But it in no way states that Jews have permission to rape three year old girls. That’s just patently false as (despite the false quote from Gad Shas), it is forbidden for a Jew to have sexual relations with a non-Jew - period.
As for the others, they simply don’t exist; For example the quote from Avoda Zara 26 (“The best of the gentiles should be killed”) does not exist (although the page and work do); or twist the meaning completely away from the context of the statement.
A fellow in Australia named David Maddison set up a site to combat these “quotes” and other antisemitic literature out there.
Zev Steinhardt
I don’t know enough about Palestinian politics to comment on whether there was a party who ran in the election that would be considered not a terrorist organization. If there isn’t what does that say about Palestinians?
This seems to be true.
If you really want to examine your quotes, you might want to open a separate thread on them in GQ (although it might bounce back here pretty quickly)–they really are false.
If you want to defend those quotes, open a separate thread either here or in the Pit, but be prepared to be grilled thoroughly. I am not sure where you stumbled across them, but I can assure you that the vast majority of them are anti-semitic inventions and the few that resemble actual quotations have been distorted or ripped from their context.
Tom, I’ll respond to your post in the detail it deserves, but it’ll take me some time.
For the rest of the folks in this thread: I was just talking with my girlfriend who made me aware that there have now been recent statements by memebers of Hamas, as relayed by NPR, stating that they are no longer interested in violence and that they want peace. No cite at present, but I will try to dig one up tonight and tomorrow.
If this is true, it presents a picture of division within Hamas’ ranks and a chance of negotiating with a faction that has already renounced terrorism.
Curiouser and curiouser.
Tom and any others interested in a fairly objective history of those early days:
Here is a good review of the origins of the refugee issues which documents the lack of sainthood by either side. In short, there was indeed encouragement to leave from Arab leaders and by the previous departure of leadership, and there were actions taken by individual Jewish groups that encouraged the flight. And again that there is no doubt that roughly equal numbers of Jews were forcibly dispossesed from Arab territories.
And here is a concise history of the region. In short, the British mandate of Palestine originally also included what is now Jordan but that was soon made into a seperate Arab country. For the remainder the British desired to create “self-governing institutions in Palestine, as required by the mandate. The Jews were alarmed by the prospect of such institutions, which would have an Arab majority. However, the Arabs would not accept proposals for such institutions if they included any Jews at all, and so no institutions were created.” From the 1920s on various massacers against the Jews became the norm. Certainly the excuse was the percieved fear of dispossession, as Tom allows, but “economic, population and other indicators suggest that objectively, the Arabs of Palestine benefited from the Mandate and Zionist investment. Arab standard of living increased faster in Palestine than other areas, and population grew prodigiously throughout the Mandate years.” In the 30’s Jewish return from Europe increased and this was met with widespread rioting called “The Arab Revolt” which was spearheaded by an Arab family desirous of personal power. They killed both Jews and Arabs who got in their way. Jewish responses included “both defensive measures, and … random terror and bombings of Arab civilian targets, perpetrated by the Irgun (Irgun Tsvai Leumi or “Etsel,”). Etsel was the military underground of the right-wing dissident “revisionist group” headed first by Vladimir (Ze’ev) Jabotinsky, who seceded from the Zionist movement, and later by Menahem Begin.”
It goes on and is a good fairly balanced/objective read. Neither side was full of saints. What can be said consistently is that Palestinian best interests would have been best served by compromise at virtually every step of the way. In retrospect, every possible opportunity for peace that was passed by by the Arab side would have given the Palestinians situations that today would be called victories.
Now can we get back to current events?
Finn, Hamas is clearly willing to continue peace for now. They are unwilling to renounce it for all time or to state that their long term goal of ridding Palestine of the Jews has changed … peace for now is a short term tactic according to press releases. Bluster away, so long as you actually keep to the Roadmap and to providing security in actuality. Call Israel’s forthcoming unilateral disengagement (if it comes to that) a victory for Hamas if you like. Just deliver the security and calm and maybe eventually pragmatism will win out. I am encouraged by the moderate responses made by the quartet today, creating that golden bridge for Hamas, and by floats of pragmatism by Hamas officials. Even Rice did not rule out humanitarian aid finding its way through non-Hamas channels. But speaking of Rice … what is up with that this was unexpected stuff. Is that a Bush administration theme to not prepare for any eventuality other than the one you hope for?
Here’s a recent article that outlines Hamas’ position. We will not sell our people or principles for foreign aid.
That they had their land stolen from them by the British, given to the Israelis, and have been rounded up into open prisons called “refugee camps”, and they feel they have no other way to gain their own sovereignty. They didn’t want an Israeli state formed on their land before 1948, and they still feel cheated by the western nations that formed one despite their protestations.
That’s what it says to me at least.
Tom, actually, before I leave the historical background entirely, I’d like to disabuse you of another myth that you seem to have accepted (given your Native American analogy). There is no evidence that Palestine had been an ancestral home for generations for many Arabs who were then displaced by Zionists than there is that Palestine was devoid of Arabs before Jews returned. Real numbers are not available but a critical discussion and evaluation of these pre 1948 population numbers is available.
I remember a report on a Native Indian band on the east coast of Canada. It showed the utter poverty that they lived in. There was no plumbing and people had taken to using the windows as a toilet. The band wanted the government to move them to a new site where things would be better. I remember distinctly them showing a bucket of filthy water. Right next to the bucket was a mop and a broom. What is said to me is that they expected someone else to pick up that mop and broom. The problem with the plumbing was that it wasn’t buried deep enough to stop from freezing. It seems that seeing there was no employment there, that someone could spend the time to dig the plumbing deeper. They expected someone else to do it for them.
My point is that if you live in a refugee camp for decades, not for months, but decades, it no longer is a camp but your home. If you still think of it as a camp it is because you haven’t done what is necessary to change things for the better. Blowing up your neighbors won’t help. It just shows you expect someone else to do things for you instead of doing it yourself.
I understand what you are saying. I agree with that sentiment as well, I’m not making the argument that the Palestinians are blameless. I am only making the point that neither side is right or wrong, they both just have what they want and what they want conflicts. However, Israel has been trashing infrastructure, building settlements in between the cracks between camps and some Palestinian refugee camps are isolated from one another and it’s difficult to get from one to the other like from Gaza to the West Bank.
And to bring it back to the topic, Hamas is one of those few organizations that actually has been doing it themselves, they’ve been building that infrastructure. One day these people will wake up to globalisation and realize taht the whole idea of nations is becoming increasingly nebulous as economic interests traverse the vast global network. However, you can’t expect someone isolated in a refugee camp to understand this concept. But rather than realize it we very well might fight Armageddon over these issues, which I think would be very unfortunate. So I’d rather trust Hamas for the ten years, and see where it leads, a lot can change in 10 years, especially if people start to be more content.
Erek